If you think that Republicans have lost their way in general throughout the country, you ought to see what the anemic Republican Party did to support the good Republican candidates in Taxachusetts in 2010 — ALMOST NOTHING! The state party only helped the elitist rich boy Governor candidate who was opposed to reducing the state sales tax, which we had on the Ballot as an Initiative Referendum. Meanwhile, candidate after candidate who ran on their own for State Representative as Republicans were ignored by their own party. Miraculously, some of them did win, and we now have several terrific state legislators. Now the state Republican Party is trying to take credit for their victories, whereas that credit really belongs to the Tea Party and Libertarian activists.

You live in Massachusetts? My sympathies to you. It must be rough to be surrounded by Liberals.

Sounds like Paul is a libertarian rather than a conservative. If so, he is just as much a degenerate as any democrat.

He’s a constitutional conservative.

“Are you talking about the same Ron Paul who teamed up with a Democrat to write and introduce legislation for the legalization of marijuana?”

This is a bad thing? Ending the failed war on drugs is a good thing. Prohibition didn’t work with alcohol, and it hasn’t worked with drugs. Freedom doesn’t consist of dictating what people choose to put into their own sovereign bodies.

“Are you talking about the same Ron Paul that in the debates was so unsure of himself every sentence he made started out with “We could” or “We could try?”

Saying “we could” doesn’t imply that one is unsure of himself/herself.

“Are you talking about the same Ron Paul that didn’t have a clue that Polygamist (slavery for women) was being fought for in various states?”

This makes him not a good candidate?

“Are you talking about the same Ron Paul who believes that just letting people do what they want, won’t have a negative effect on others?”

It’s called freedom you depot. If it neither picks your pocket nor breaks your leg, then yes, people should be able to do what they want. The policy of the American government should be to leave it’s citizens free… neither restraining them nor aiding them in their pursuits.

“Are you talking about the same Ron Paul who believes so deeply in States Rights, that he ignores the states like California, who have proven they can’t be trusted with States’ Rights?”

It is sometimes said that a man can not be trusted with government of himself. Can then be trusted with the government of others? You are a blind authoritarian to think that we should abandon the 10th Amendment and States rights, by the (false) allegation that one can not be trusted with states rights.

Thank you, TML. Good comment.

I would like to add:
Crystal, what makes you come to the conclusion that Polygamy is slavery for women? Is somebody forcing these women into their polygamous arrangement or did they freely choose it? The only Force I see is your apparent attitude that you, and others like you, should be able to force you way on women who might otherwise choose to freely engage in a polygamous relationship.

Let me put it simply, would you like to be a brother husband? If You were indoctrinated with this as being a normal way of life would you be in a good situation to live your life forever in this manner. Also add lots of children which you have to be dependent on social services to provide for them. Would you like to be expected to deal with rape at a young age because some pervert decides it is time for this to happen. If you don’t think this is not a form of slavery then you might be the perverts taking advantage of children stuck in this life style. Rethink your downplay of the life some are subject to live in.

crystal,

You are full of it.I agree with Daveh. I do believe in the legalization of marijuana

That’s the same Ron Paul, a man of PRINCIPLES who refuses to condemn YOUR RIGHT to live your own way and believe whatever you please as long as you harm no-one else in the process.

It’s what’s known as LIBERTY and FREEDOM in case your public-school education failed to properly define the principles of our Founding Fathers…

“Are you kidding! ron paul is almost senile. He has too many anarchists tendencies. much better choice is either Bachmann or Palin or BOTH”

You must be senile if you think Bachmann is a good choice. She voted to extend the Patriot Act, the worst bill to trample the consitution in American history.

Bud,
Ron Paul is more logical at age 76, then most much-younger people are.
It used to be that people respected their elders for their wisdom. Now, it seems as if most young people want to throw them under the bus.

Pick a topic, any topic Bud, in Ron Paul’s agenda, and I will gladly show you that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Here is Michele Bachmann’s issues page:
http://www.michelebachmann.com/issues/

From her health care statement — “I recently voted for the Ryan Plan to make sure that Medicare is secure for future generations – those now under 55 who are affected by the blueprint”.
I thought she was for Less Government?

From her military statement — “As Commander-in-Chief, I will do whatever it takes to fulfill the federal government’s foremost responsibility under the Constitution: to keep you safe in an increasingly dangerous world. I will uphold America’s values by standing shoulder-to shoulder with those who share those values and our interests and standing tall against those who don’t”.
Translation — continuing foreign involvement?

She seems to be doing a lot of double-speaking on her issues statements. There was a lot of wiggle-room in her statements. Of course, she was a lawyer, so I guess I should excuse her for that.

DaveH–Thank you for your post–you always did have common sense!

Thank you, Claire.

Ron Paul is not even close to being senile. You must be thinking of John Forbes Kerry-Heinz who is really starting to show his age and decline of reasoning ability.

At what point did John Kerry (snake-in-the-grass that he is) ever demonstrate the ability to reason???

bud

A much better choice is either Bachmann or Palin or BOTH? Are you nuts?

The smartest people can be uninformed in any … Yet nothing about Bachmann’s statement is factually true … rejecting the evidence that she’s nutty as a fruit cake.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schweitzer/a-measles-vaccine-for-mic_b_877531.html

Right on!!!

The theory that the Supreme Court has authority to interpret the constitution is fatally flawed. “The constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the Judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.” – Thomas Jefferson

That’s exactly what both the Court and Professional Politicians have been doing for 200 years and it’s time “We The People” called them on it!!!

Funny, I always thought he was to well dressed. Mike (post below) may have a good point.

Christin, you are 100% correct! I’ve no doubt Rick Perry is involved with Bilderberg, and is only speaking what voters want to hear. Too bad MSM won’t be airing any REAL info about Rick Perry (i.e.-his FORCING of the Gardisil immunization on young girls, etc.)
He is nothing more than another George W. Bush.

Ron Paul has been calling out the Fed on what it is for DECADES, yet Rick Perry gets ‘noticed’ for it? Wake up people!

Are you really interested in TRUTH?

If you are, go to the link below and start telling it…

http://peskytruth.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/rick-perrys-negatives/

Despite his many positive attributes, Perry would make a terrible President. His anti- science beliefs are wrong for the 21st Century. I realize that many here reject the reality of climate change because of a loathing for Al Gore, but the overwhelming majority of REPUTABLE scientists agree that it is happening. All any rational person has to do is look at satellite photos of the polar regions and receding glaciers and the truth is obvious to anyone who cares to see.

His fundamentalist beliefs about creation will make him unacceptable to many voters who understand that to compete in the global economy we need sound education based on state of the art learning and scientific evidence.

Yes, Perry is charismatic, a fighter, and telegenic, but his thinking is a bit too reactionary.

Whether most scientists outside climatology believe that global warming is happening is less relevant than whether the climatologists do. A letter signed by over 50 leading members of the American Meteorological Society warned about the policies promoted by environmental pressure groups. “The policy initiatives derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. They are based on the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuel and requires immediate action. We do not agree.” Those who have signed the letter represent the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists in the United States, of whom there are about 60. McMichael and Haines quote the 1995 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is widely believed to “prove” that climate change induced by humans has occurred.The original draft document did not say this. What happened was that the policymakers’ summary (which became the “take home message” for politicians) altered the conclusions of the scientists. This led Dr Frederick Seitz, former head of the United States National Academy of Sciences, to write, “In more than sixty years as a member of the American scientific community … I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report.”

Policymaking should be guided by proved fact, not speculation. Most members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believe that current climate models do not accurately portray the atmosphere-ocean system. Measurements made by means of satellites show no global warming but a cooling of 0.13°C between 1979 and 1994.5 Furthermore, since the theory of global warming assumes maximum warming at the poles, why have average temperatures in the Arctic dropped by 0.88°C over the past 50 years?

http://www.bmj.com/content/316/7138/1164.1.full

I have no argument with the statement that the climate is changing. When hasn’t it? What gets me is the further statements that people are causing that change and that we need to set up a system to have everyone pay us (the self chosen) so we can pretend to mitigate that change.

Perry is not anti-science, he’s anti-PSEUDO-science, and that’s an entirely different thing. What he doesn’t believe in is MAN-MADE Global Warming, and you’ll have a hard time proving the existence of such a phenomenon if you care to quote “reputable” earth-scientists.

Of course, if “POLITICAL” scientists aren’t recognized in your world as professional liars, you and Al Gore are in synch so go right on believing whatever you want…

Iva: http://www.newsmax.com/InsiderReport/PerryVsRomney-on-Global-Warming/2011/08/21/id/408072

the climate is changing, man is here therefore man is changing the climate but dogs are here too why aren’t they to blame?

Then Rick Perry should have said it too Ben Bernacke’s face with your analogy. Rush Limbaugh never says anything to any one’s face either or does any other talking head whether left or right.

Bring on Ben Bernanke. I’m sure Governor Perry will be more than happy to tell him to his face…

What does Rush Limbaugh have to do with anything? Are you responsible for the nonsense “Tingle-Up-My-Leg Chris Matthews” says? Conservatives are also not responsible for what talking-heads on the right say.

Stick with the facts and stay on-topic…

wandamurline,
First off, let’s look at what Ms. Wasserman Shultz had to say.
“The gentleman from Florida. who represents thousands of Medicare beneficiaries, as do I, is supportive of this plan that would increase costs for Medicare beneficiaries, unbelievable from a Member from South Florida,”
Not exactly “vile” or “despicable”. You can disagree with whether or not the bill would have this affect, but other than that it’s not much of an “attack”. Now, how did the honorable Col. West respond? He sent out an open e-mail to members of House Republican and Democratic leadership! You know, “right to her face”.

“From: Z112 West, Allen
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 04:48 PM
To: Wasserman Schultz, Debbie
Cc: McCarthy, Kevin; Blyth, Jonathan; Pelosi, Nancy; Cantor, Eric
Subject: Unprofessional and Inappropriate Sophomoric Behavior from Wasserman-Schultz

Look, Debbie, I understand that after I departed the House floor you directed your floor speech comments directly towards me. Let me make myself perfectly clear, you want a personal fight, I am happy to oblige. You are the most vile, unprofessional ,and despicable member of the US House of Representatives. If you have something to say to me, stop being a coward and say it to my face, otherwise, shut the heck up. Focus on your own congressional district!

I am bringing your actions today to our Majority Leader and Majority Whip and from this time forward, understand that I shall defend myself forthright against your heinous characterless behavior……which dates back to the disgusting protest you ordered at my campaign hqs, October 2010 in Deerfield Beach.

You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady, therefore, shall not be afforded due respect from me!

Steadfast and Loyal

Congressman Allen B West (R-FL)”

And how is Col. West defending himself? He now claims that the e-mail was supposed to be private and that it was wrong for the Democrats to release it. Hmm, maybe he should have spoken to her directly instead of sending out a “private” open e-mail. Maybe if this was intended as a complaint to the leadership he should have written it as such. Maybe the Col. responded to quickly and without thinking ahead. Maybe the Col. is a bit too thin skinned for a soldier, let alone a politician.

Obviously, if it was a private comment in any form, she would have shared it like she did the private email. She is known for being inflammatory, and she ran into someone who wouldn’t put up with it. With Alan Grayson gone, the Democratic Party picked the next most partisan, antagonistic member as a representative.

Looks like Allen West is the one who is snippy and out of control.

What’s wrong with his email? As best I can tell he responded directly to fact-deficit innuendo rather than relying on “Weasel Words” to get his point across, and the female legislator is worthy of just such direct language.

Kudos to Col. West … keep giving it to them straight…