Ron Paul publicly names neoconservatives

NeedKarma · May 15, 2008, 03:48 AM

This man has courage. The U.S. needs a guy like him to clean house. A great mixture of history lesson and wake-up call.

NeedKarma · May 15, 2008, 04:39 PM

Neither was Fred Thompson qualified. But his supporters have dried up and gone away; Ron Paul seems to have a lot of fervent believers in his ideas.

magprob · May 15, 2008, 08:52 PM

Ron Paul told the dirty truth in the video. Our government has been overthrown from the inside. It is like the cartoons we used to watch as children. The evil ruler that only wants to take over the world and pillage and plunder for their own gain. Any one that can't see that is the real jerk here.

tomder55 · May 16, 2008, 01:13 AM

yeah that Jewish lobby again.

tomder55 · May 16, 2008, 02:58 AM

Quote:

His explanation for his vote to me is logical.
And whats with all these resolutions anyway. Is that not a waste of parliamentary time or what. A resolution offering condolences?? What the??

Here is some more waste of parlimentary time that Paul found it in his heart to support:

a resolutions to congratulate the University of Kansas football team for a swell season and winning the 2008 FedEx Orange Bowl

a resolution to the Louisiana State football team for winning the 2007 Bowl Championship Series

a resolution to congratulate the New York Giants for their come-from-behind victory in Super Bowl XLII.

He also voted for a resolution supporting the public display of the 10 Commandments in courts and government buildings . Not that I disagree ;but isn't his argument that these resolutions are empty gestures?

It was acceptable to give kudos to football teams but it was not in his heart to express sadness for the plight of the Burmese burdened by the combination of a natural disaster and a tyrannical government. Not only that ;he went out of his way to support the military tyranny under the guise of lame isolationism.

This is not new for him . In April he was the lone dissenting voice when Congress condemned the Chinese repression of Tibet.
House passes Chinese crackdown resolution - CNN.com

NeedKarma · May 16, 2008, 03:55 AM

But back on topic, here is more information on neoconservatism that you may find interesting:
Neoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

POLITICS: What Is a Neo-Conservative Anyway?

Hoover Institution - Policy Review - Neoconservatives and the American Mainstream

tomder55 · May 16, 2008, 04:47 AM

Let's see ;former Democrats who got tired of the parties head in the sand defeatism . a ''liberal who was mugged by reality''. yeah that about describes it That would be me. But I'm not a Trotskyite .I'd say I was closer to Wilsonian because I do not see governement control as the solution as the commies do.

Do I think Democracy should be promoted world wide ....of course ;as well as free market capitalism being the best means to prosperity. So did JFK . I guess he was a neo-con too..

I do not think you will find any of the neo-cons who would argue for Marxism so the charge that they are a bunch of Trotskyites is a slander. The fact that the founders of the movement eventually rejected their socialist past is not proof that today's neo-cons are socialist.

magprob · May 16, 2008, 06:44 AM

Dodgie at best. It's hard to nail one right between the eyes since they are always moving.

speechlesstx · May 16, 2008, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skell

And whats with all these resolutions anyway. Is that not a waste of parliamentary time or what. A resolution offering condolences?? What the?? Im sure that means a lot to the kid with one shoe. But before you jump down my throat, yes i do know that the US has contributed aid. Im not saying they have done nothing. But a resolution offering condolences offer little more help than does Paul's speech. Just get on with the help and spare the rhetoric.

Skell, perhaps if the resolution was targeting the U.S. instead he would have been happy to support it?

Skell · May 18, 2008, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

Here is some more waste of parlimentary time that Paul found it in his heart to support:

a resolutions to congratulate the University of Kansas football team for a swell season and winning the 2008 FedEx Orange Bowl

a resolution to the Louisiana State football team for winning the 2007 Bowl Championship Series

a resolution to congratulate the New York Giants for their come-from-behind victory in Super Bowl XLII.

He also voted for a resolution supporting the public display of the 10 Commandments in courts and government buildings . Not that I disagree ;but isn't his argument that these resolutions are empty gestures?

It was acceptable to give kudos to football teams but it was not in his heart to express sadness for the plight of the Burmese burdened by the combination of a natural disaster and a tyrannical government. Not only that ;he went out of his way to support the military tyranny under the guise of lame isolationism.
[/url]

You'd have to agree that resolutions such as these make a bit of a mockery of the whole darn thing dont they? What a waste of time and money! What a joke!!

speechlesstx · May 19, 2008, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Neither was Fred Thompson qualified. But his supporters have dried up and gone away; Ron Paul seems to have a lot of fervent believers in his ideas.

They haven't "dried up and gone away," but they do realize the futility in supporting a candidate that's withdrawn from the race - unlike Paul's "fervent believers."



At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you will be able to: Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+ topics. Accept money for answers that you provide. Communicate privately with other members (PM). See fewer ads. Sign Up!