Ron Paul on Sarah Palin.
Ron Paul. You just gotta love him. OK, I know you don’t really. And yeah, there are a ton of things I disagree with him about completely, and a couple I agree with. But there’s something I just like about him. I can’t explain it. I remember watching a couple teenage boys last fall, climbing up a huge snow pile off the side of the Seward Highway. The thing was probably 40 feet high, and they hoofed it all the way up so they could stick a Ron Paul sign on the top, like it was the political Mt. Everest. Then they ran, slid and tumbled to the bottom, high fiving each other, full of exuberant energy. I remember wondering what on earth Ron Paul must have thought of Sarah Palin. Here’s a partial answer.
As for soon-to-be departing Alaska Governor Sarah Paul dismisses her supporters as “more establishment, conventional Country-Club type of Republicans.”
“I wonder whether she’s energizing the 15-20 year olds,” Paul muses. “That would be a question I would have. Because she doesn’t talk about the Federal Reserve and some of these issues. She doesn’t talk too much about personal liberties, civil liberties, getting rid of drug laws, attacking the war on drugs, punishing people who torture.”
Nope. Can’t recal Palin ever addressing these issues very much. Don’t remember any teens risking life or limb, climbing mountains to put Palin signs on the summit. I think if Sarah Palin stood up there in her last week, and gave a rousing speech about the Federal Reserve, or how we have to punish people who torture, half of the state would be peeling their chins off the pavement, and the other half would just keel over. And yes, the running theory by some Palin fans as to why Ron Paul would dis the shiny new Republican Party hood ornament? He’s jealous.
[Off topic posts go on The Open Thread. Thanks!]
The difference between Ron Paul and Sarah Palin:
One tells the truth and has integrity and the other doesn’t.
the “jealous” argument will soon become null and void. Who would be jealous of a quitter? Who twitters? And is bitter?
Not I.
It is just so middle school. Ooooh they all hate me because they are jealous.
I was talking with the author of this story – Daniel Libit – this morning. I observed that at Tea Party rallies there are a lot of Ton Paul and Sarah Palin supporters. Some are the same. Some aren’t. For instance, Paul has many Libertarian supporters, so does Palin, but Palin’s are universally Christians or Christianists or Xianists, where Paul has attracted a good number of Atheists and hard-nosed agnostics. Atheists and agnostics don’t seem to give Palin much credibility.
The issue of Paul and honesty relative to Palin came up too, speaking to Libit, with Palin severely lacking in that department. I called her the biggest pathological liar in recent American political history.
Hey… even nutjobs have moments of clarity. Why would Ron Paul be any different?
As for those tea parties… they are about as useful as Sarah Palin for governor.
Ron Paul can hold a hearty discussion and knows, at least, what he is talking about on a vast array of topics. Palin uses word salad to avoid letting her “knowledgelessnesses” get in the way, also, too.
Great ghost picture a few posts back, truely beautiful.
Ripley… are you suggesting Palin is a bitter twitter quitter??
Well she sure doesn’t seem bitter about twitter, just about being called a quitter.
Ron Paul is one of the few conservative voices I still have respect for. The reason he isn’t a golden boy of the party, is that he stands by his principles and is not willing to do the dirty back room deals that McCain was.
And we know where/what/who the dirty back room deals got McCain.
Country first, oh look at SP’s a$$!
I don’t much like Ron Paul, but he is far more realistic on the wars (he’s strongly anti-war), the war on drugs, getting screwed up bankers out of managing the economy and illegal Israeli expansion (paid for by you and me), than is President Obama.
The Federal Reserve-”does it really matter?”
Basically, right-wingers of all persuasion have one concern in common: will the little nitwit (Palin!) be able to dupe 51% of the voters on election day?
I supported Ron Paul in 2008 and I still support him today. He is a man of principle and he talks about the things that are important, not the things that make good talking points. If Sarah was half the “small government” proponent she claims to be, she’d do well to follow Ron Paul’s example. But that would require actually developing principles and standing by them in spite of political consequences …
Plus, can you imagine Sarah Palin trying to understand, let alone explain, the reserve system of currency??
Ha, ha, ha; he’s JEALOUS?!?! Those people must be more delusional than we suspected!
I don’t agree with Ron Paul or his politics, but he at least has a political
stand. I am very sure he has done his homework and he can speak
on matters of importance needed by someone who is seeking office. Agree
or disagree, it is what he believes in; unlike Palin saying whatever will garner
popularity.
I seem to recall that Ron Paul raised huge money for his campaign….wasn’t it millions in a couple of days? I don’t think Sarah’s PAC and defence fun were anywhere near his money-making capabilities.
Irishgirl
“Sarah’s PAC and defense fun” That is what $arah thought, too. It was for fun,right?
“Because she doesn’t talk about the Federal Reserve and some of these issues. She doesn’t talk too much about personal liberties, civil liberties, getting rid of drug laws, attacking the war on drugs, punishing people who torture.”
He’s right and I applaud him for pointing it out. She doesn’t talk about anything other then energy. There’s alot more to running the country then just energy and winking. And if she did talk about those issues, I would be one of those ‘pulling my chin from the pavement’.
lol…..booboodog….I must learn to proofread. It was a good slip to make though.
Like AKM I don’t agree with Ron Paul on some issues, others I do. I will say this, however, I found Ron Paul & Dennis Kucinich to both be men of principles. During the Republican debates Ron Paul was the only one I could stomach…I found it bothersome that in those debates Paul was overlooked as was Kucinich & Gravel.
It’s always “they’re jealous” or “they’re afraid of her.” These people simply can’t make room for the idea that there’s nothing there to envy or covet–and certainly not to fear.
Loved the story about the kids climbing the snow bank to place a political poster, then sliding down and high-fiving! Made my day!
It’s funny the subject of what SP has not bothered herself with has come up, for just last night I was watching a show on the life of Michael J. Fox, and seeing him visiting a hospital and Iremember thinking, this is something SP could and would not probably do. How cooincidental that AKM has given us some of the things Ron Paul came up with that she didn’t address. We’ve been so busy with her outrageous, unethical and sometimes barely legal activities, that we forgot what she hasn’t done. I’m still smouldering about the Medicaid situation up there!
During the election run-up, I was pretty impressed by Ron Paul.
He struck me as being someone who either a) was honest and sincere or b) was sufficiently capable of pulling the wool over my eyes as to make me believe he was honest and sincere. Either way, he impressed me.
In fact, if I had been an American voter, he would have been a clear frontrunner – miles ahead of Obama.
For me, Obama has turned out to be a great disappointment. I appreciate it’s still “early days”, but my impression is that it’s just “business as usual” at the White House – only the “bedside manner” has changed.
I’m absolutely no expert. I live half a world away, and I get most of my information from the internet (CNN being the only available alternative.)
I would be very happy to hear your comments on both Ron Paul and Barack Obama.
Am I a million miles away from reality in my impressions? Don’t worry – I won’t get upset if you tell me I am… I’m aware of the limitations in my understanding (and, unlike some others, I have a thick skin!)
Ron Paul is a known anti-semite. If you go the website of the Anti Defamation League and do a search, you will find some interesting articles. I am NOT a fan of Ron Paul in any way.
http://www.adl.org/?s=topmenu
While I was there, I looked up out of curiosity Sarah Palin. They have articles listed about her church being involved with Jews for Jesus. That is the only reference they have about her. Jews for Jesus are kind of ridiculous, if you believe in Jesus, you simply aren’t Jewish, period. They are one strange group.
Also many white supremacists seem to flock to Ron Paul. I don’t know why, but they do………
Lisabeth–I didn’t know that! Thank you.
I sure would have picked Ron Paul over McCain but AKM somethings I agree with others are too far out for me.I have a young friend who is a Paul supporter as is his family and I will say this you can’t change their minds.This young man actually believes that the reason for the gun registration is so the government can come take your guns away and he too bought new guns or I should say his father did.To me that’s just crazy
Maybe if Paul had run as a third party he would have done better with some people anyway. I know for Clintons second term I voted 3rd party as I did not like any other choices.The man is very good friend wit McCains ex wife
“…getting rid of drug laws…”
?!?!
I like Dr. Paul’s stance against the bush wars. There are the troubling racist and bigoted writings from his past which he blamed on an unnamed ghost writer. (Not my fault. sound familiar?) I don’t recall him actually disowning any of these writings in a more meaningful way. I’ll have to add that he is no Pat Buchanan (no redeeming values).
Ron Paul is a perennial presidential candidate with a loyal following.
Sarah Palin will become a perennial presidential candidate with a loyal following. Those are the only similarities I see.
@jojobo1….yes he is a good friend of McCains ex. In fact…he paid most of her medical bills incurred by the multiple surgeries required due to her terrible accident.
He is a known anti semite however….that is really bothersome.
As far as Jews for Jesus…..to me that is an insult to the Jewish people. Its not that they love the jews so much…its that they want to convert them, and they believe the entire thing has to do with the return of Jesus. I watched a doc not long ago, and one Jewish woman in particular impressed me. She is kind to them when they show up, but is confused by them, and does not trust them at all. This lady is an artist…truly beautiful work, and I wish I could remember her name, or the name of the documentary. Its worth watching, and I believe it was on PBS. It was very enlightening in terms of what Jews for Jesus really means.
The difference between Paul and Palin is that Paul is a good person. He may be a little quirky sometimes but a good person none the less.
@ jojobo1
I believe it was Perot that is friends with McCain’s ex.
BTW, I didn’t know Paul was a racist. I have only seen him in debates and on MSNBC interviews.
superbee…you are correct . It is Perot…not Paul.
im such a leftwing democrat that if my right breast wasn’t bigger than my left one i’d fall over on my side..but i do like ron paul…i have yet to hear one pearl of wisdom from sarah palins mouth….
Ron Paul is absolutely correct: Palin & Co. have declared themselves to be an Idea-Free Zone. No free/independent thinking allowed; just constant adoration of St. Sarah, Persecuted Martyr of Wasilla, and creatively manufacturing a new Faux Outrage Du Jour. They raise victimization to new heights (or depths, depending on perspective).
Ron Paul is NOT an anti-semite! This ridiculous canard is based on the idea that Ron Paul takes the Constitution seriously and therefore understands that the US government has no right to be funding Israel or any other foreign government for that matter.
As for any connection with white supremacists, the only possible explanation is that perhaps that group of people actually share some of his beliefs on limited government, 2nd amendment rights, etc., not because Ron Paul shares any of their racial hatred. Talk with anyone who has known Ron Paul on a personal level and you can be sure that he is one of the most decent, respectful gentlemen to ever sit in Congress.
First of all, I’m a long time fan of Dr. Paul, I only voted for Obama because the GOP wasn’t smart enough to nominate Ron Paul. (I would vote for a rock before any ticket with either John McCain or Sarah Palin.) The more thoughtful conservatives, and there are a few of us left, see her for what she is and understand her political rise–at least nationally–to be cynical identity politics.
And for the people who are theorizing about Dr. Paul being Jealous, I can only laugh. Go look at his 20+ year record in the House; go read and listen to his collective speeches. You may not agree with him, but he is a very thoughtful man who can make a strong, well-reasoned argument for his position. You don’t get the word salad that Sarah gives us. This is decidedly NOT a man who is jealous of a soon-to-be unemployed quitter.
I have libertarian leanings, but the fact is that too many American libertarians are all about the freedom to hate, carry guns, and get out of paying their fair share of taxes. That’s not about “do what you want as long as you are not hurting anyone else”. I wish Ron Paul kept better company.
Maybe Ron Paul finally read this :
Palin’s Resignation: The Edited Version | vanityfair.com http://bit.ly/qklag
Lisabeth, I searched for anti-semitic statements by Paul at the ADL site, but none turned up. I do agree that racists show up on pro-Paul sites and at rallies, but that’s very different from Paul making statements. I’ll do a bit of searching on the ‘net, but if you can contribute any facts to support your statement, I would appreciate it.
I found this on HuffPo: “The white nationalist and anti-Semitic support flowing to the Paul campaign reflects one of the difficulties facing candidates who do not fall into the midstream: that often their views on less controversial subjects like trade and the power of the federal government to take property through eminent domain also appeal to extremist groups.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/15/to-his-dismay-ron-paul-be_n_68575.html
Philip Munger
… Paul has attracted a good number of Atheists and hard-nosed agnostics. Atheists and agnostics don’t seem to give Palin much credibility.
The issue of Paul and honesty relative to Palin came up too, speaking to Libit, with Palin severely lacking in that department …
Any atheists/agnostics who find Ron Paul’s views on the separation of church and state agreeable aren’t paying attention. He is an evangelical Christian, and one of the things I picked up on about him early in his campaign in 2007 was his view that the constitution was “not meant to keep religion out of government.” He’s not as blatant as Palin’s militant church, but he’s no defender of C/S separation, either.
As for his honesty, the only example I have that contradicts his reputation for honesty had to do with the issue of abortion. He described the experience of a physician friend who became an abortion doctor for the money, but then gave it up, and, according to Ron Paul, “Told me he just couldn’t take listening to babies crying in a bucket in the corner while everyone pretended not to hear.” So, unless I believe Ron Paul really had a friend who, along with the staff with whom he worked, routinely committed acts of murder in the name of medicine and greed, I’m left to believe RP is both capable and guilty of fabricating red-hot rhetoric on a hot-button topic.
RP is alot cooler than SP
For my part, I’m extraordinarily irreligious and well aware of Dr. Paul’s denial of evolution, his stance on the separation of church and state. He’s not freakin’ Jesus or anything; just a man, flawed and fallible, who happens to make a lot of sense on foreign policy, fiscal/monetary policy, etc. I wouldn’t want his full agenda to be implimented, but some of it would be nice.
He’s one of the few brave politicians who’s dared say that our way of life is unsustainable, and that takes balls. (That’s one of the main reasons, after all, that Jimmy Carter lost to Reagan.)
lisabeth & Laurie,
Lisabeth said:
“Ron Paul is a known anti-semite. If you go the website of the Anti Defamation League and do a search, you will find some interesting articles.”
I’m familiar with the ADL’s site, and some of the articles cited. I think people sometimes confuse his disagreements with many US policies toward Israel with what some inaccurately term “anti-Semitism.” Paul himself feels quite uncomfortable with some of his fringe support coming from people and from groups that definitely are anti-Semitic, but many Jewish intellectuals have countered these claims, and have come to Paul’s defense. One of the most notable is that by John Podhoretz, for Commentary Magazine, back in November, 2007:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/jpodhoretz/1311
“I’m inclined to think that Paul, who is not the most careful and prudent of speakers, is not an anti-Semite — because in a public career dating back 30 years he would likely have said something more explicit and unambiguous. Nor do I think he should be held personally responsible for the fact that he might be attracting extremist support from the neo-Nazi Right. He has not expressed their views and he is not his brother’s keeper.”
Having been unfairly labeled an anti-Semite myself, and having dozens of my Israeli Jewish and worldwide Jewish friends labeled “self-hating Jews” for views critical of continuing illegal Israeli expansion, I suggest you be more precise in your use of such a powerful term of disdain.
Ron Paul is not a great man, he is a racist, bigoted, anti-Semite who is a pro-secessionist, pro-militia, neo-Confederate goofball. His ideas are antithetical to constitutional democracy.
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca
Ron Paul, like Sarah Palin, has contempt for women and their choices )in that order).
Sarah doesn’t energize the young ones, its the old corrupt bastards who get “energized” when her greedy unfair-o-moans waft through the room.
Ron Paul, Mitt, Huck, and Sarah have effectively drawn and quartered the Oliphant.
All we need now is for someone to (figuratively) mount Rush’s head on a backboard so we can all play point guard and throw down some three pointers.
Sarah doesn’t energize the young ones, its the old corrupt bastards who get “energized” when her greedy unfair-o-moans waft through the room.
Ron Paul, Mitt, Huck, and Sarah have effectively drawn and quartered the Oliphant of the GOP.
All we need now is for someone to (figuratively) mount Rush’s head on a backboard so we can all play point guard and throw down some three pointers.
FYI re: Ron Paul – (and Pat Buchanan)
American Nazi Party Chief says Ron Paul is one of us
Bill White, commander of the American National Socialist Worker’s Party, aka The American Nazi Party, wrote the following on the Nazi Vanguard News Network:
Comrades:
I have kept quiet about the Ron Paul campaign for a while, because I didn’t see any need to say anything that would cause any trouble. However, reading the latest release from his campaign spokesman, I am compelled to tell the truth about Ron Paul’s extensive involvement in white nationalism.
Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.
I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy.
For his spokesman to call white racialism a “small ideology” and claim white activists are “wasting their money” trying to influence Paul is ridiculous. Paul is a white nationalist of the Stormfront type who has always kept his racial views and his views about world Judaism quiet because of his political position.
I don’t know that it is necessarily good for Paul to “expose” this. However, he really is someone with extensive ties to white nationalism and for him to deny that in the belief he will be more respectable by denying it is outrageous — and I hate seeing people in the press who denounce racialism merely because they think it is not fashionable.
Bill White, Commander
American National Socialist Workers Party
*********
This was written during the campaign after word began to circulate about RP’s anti-semitism and ties to White Supremecists and Paul, fearing a backlash had his spokesperson issue denials. Take note.
redwoodmuse
and more on RP’s policies etc. from the campaign. It’s good to research any politician – they all say what they need to say to get elected —and yes, I voted for Obama and I’m awfully disappointed….
————-RE: Ron Paul – more info
At the root of the Ron Paul “revolution” is the dismantling of Social Security and the Department of Education as well as other basic social programs, and the elimination of worker and environmental protections. Advances like single payer health care? No way. Ron Paul’s message is that you need to take care of yourself, and that there shouldn’t be such government programs, nor such interference with private profit. While he puts forward reasons for not supporting going to war abroad, his domestic policies would ignite civil war at home.
In addition to pretending he’s against all government, he’s for outlawing abortion and supports the continued ban on same-sex marriage. He was one of the original co-sponsors of the “Marriage Protection Act”.
He’s also a religious extremist who thinks that creationism should be taught in the schools.
On race, Ron Paul was one of 33 Congress members to vote against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, an act that was first passed to give Blacks in the south the right to vote. On a similar note, he says the Civil Rights Act violates the Constitution and impedes on individual liberties. Speaking of Blacks in Washington DC he states in campaign literature, “95 percent of African Americans in are semi-criminal or entirely criminal”.
No wonder the American Nazi Party has close relations with him. (see letter from Nazi Commander Bill White above). In addition, Ron Paul has the support of other white supremacists such as David Duke, and has knowingly taken donations from former KKK Grand Wizard Don Black.
——————————
it is up to us to pay attention to what a candidate is really about and not just fall for a pretty face or a ‘no war’ stance. IMHO.
redwoodmuse- who has gotten entirely too cynical about politics
Word up, redwoodmuse.
Political cynicism is your friend. Helps you keep your perspective in the proper place.
High five redwoodmuse
Phil Munger, your comments are off topic. As a Jew, I do find Ron Paul to be an anti-Semite based on my own readings. And my personal opinion is that he is anti-Semitic. And I also do not appreciate your anti-Israel comments appropriate on this thread. I was going to comment on that earlier but I was trying to be respectful to AKM and it’s off the topic.
Also I am not surprised people call you or accuse you of anti-semitism. I have no clue whether you are or not of course but your comments about Israel are biased and one-sided and fuel anti-semitism in others. Sorry, they do. I have an immediate immediate negative reaction to your comments which is why I don’t read your blog. You should not assume every liberal or progressive person agrees with you but all of this is also off topic. I wasn’t going to say a word but I don’t appreciate your talking against the anti-defamation league and telling me how I should talk about Ron Paul.
Ron Paul repudiated the newsletters a long time ago. As he should have.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/08/ron-paul-responds-to-new-_n_80513.html
Frankly, I think these kinds of smears are right on par with suggesting that President Obama is someone who “pals around with terrorists.”
lysistrata Says:
July 20th, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Ron Paul repudiated the newsletters a long time ago. As he should have.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/08/ron-paul-responds-to-new-_n_80513.html
Frankly, I think these kinds of smears are right on par with suggesting that President Obama is someone who “pals around with terrorists.”
———–
The posts say nothing about ‘decades old newsletters’. Repudiation in politics is often code for ‘oops, I got caught.’ And finally, it isn’t smearing if it is true. I read up on RP when I first heard about him, thinking he might have potential as a viable candidate I could vote for. It has been a long time since I accepted what a candidate says without checking on voting records, prior public statements, and any other background information I can find (such as where/who do campaign contributions from? )
As I checked into him, I began to see things that disturbed me so, I DID MY DUE DILIGENCE AS A CITIZEN and I followed threads to sites and publications I find repugnant and there I found a different RP from the populist poser who was attracting all the attention. These things can all be fairly easily checked by anyone who wants the truth and doesn’t just want to accept what is presented ‘because he said so.’
Campaign contributions from known white supremacists? Check.
Against choice for women while espousing individual rights? Check.
One of the original co-sponsors of the “Marriage Protection Act”? Check.
Thinks creationist should be taught in the schools? Check.
One of 33 Congress members to vote against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, an act that was first passed to give Blacks in the south the right to vote. Check.
Says the Civil Rights Act violates the Constitution and impedes on individual liberties? Check.
Racist quotes in campaign literature? Check.
No smears. Just looking at his record and judging him accordingly.
redwoodmuse
redwood moose: I have learned so much from your posts this evening. Thank you. I have to say, I am disgusted and dismayed by what I have learned about Ron Paul, and I find that you have provided ample evidence to back your posts.
I was NOT a Ron Paul supporter, due to differing philosophy regarding his economic policies – yet I DID consider him thoughtful and bright. Now I see him as another grave danger to separation of Church and State (big issue for me) and a racist/anti-Semite to boot. Your posts left a big pit in my stomach, but you have enlightened me.
ON TOPIC -
I have wondered what Ron Paul has thought about Palin. I was never a fan of his, but he did appear to be more honorable than Bush and Co. It is disappointing to think that Paul may be a racist.
OFF TOPIC, but in response to other comments:
56 LIsabeth Says:
July 20th, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Phil Munger, your comments are off topic… And I also do not appreciate your anti-Israel comments appropriate on this thread…Also I am not surprised people call you or accuse you of anti-semitism. I have no clue whether you are or not of course but your comments about Israel are biased and one-sided and fuel anti-semitism in others.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lisabeth – Phil Munger’s comments are no more off topic than yours. He was speaking in the context of Ron Paul, as are you. Just because you don’t agree with his comment regarding Israel does not mean that the comment is off topic. I also don’t appreciate the passive-aggressive manner in which you have basically called Phil anti-Semitic. He doesn’t like the policies of a GOVERNMENT. So what? It really gave me a sick feeling to read your comment and I don’t think that has any place on this site. A lot of people didn’t like Bush’s policies, but still liked Americans just the same.
Sorry AKM, but I got irked enough after reading the comment on my phone, to get out of bed, go into my office and turn on my PC.
I actually live in Ron Paul’s district, down here in South Texas where rednecks abound. Could be worse, I suppose. We might have someone like Michelle Bachmann.
Dr. Paul has been in the House for years and has been pretty much ignored by his fellow conservatives. I can’t think of one substantive bill that has Paul’s name on it. He routinely votes against projects and programs that would be beneficial to his own district, but for some reason we keep sending the guy back. Who ever said voters know how to recognize their own self-interest?
And maybe I am missing the point, but what does it matter if Sarah Palin doesn’t excite 15 year olds? Last time I checked, the voting age was 18. And of course Sarah can’t talk about the Federal Reserve, since she obviously hasn’t got the first clue about monetary policy.
Ron Paul is more libertarian and I like much of what he says, NOT all though.
I could be more fiscally conservative IF the GOP got rid of the fundie nuts and went libertarian on social issues: legalize pot and other drugs, let gays marry, let Roe stand, and I could maybe vote GOP occassionally.
Sad that we have just two parties that both have some good ideas but as a voter you almost have to choose based on your one most important issue. Like Christians voting GOP, which is NOT very Christ-like in taking care of our brothers, because of Roe and gays. I might not like teachers unions and too much litigation, but I can’t vote GOP because of social issues. sigh
We do need a third party, just not the Liars for Jesus party Palin wants,
.
As an early adopter of Mudflats back last September, I LOVE MUDFLATS, during the election it was my island of sanity, as my husband freely told friends (I think he was very thankful for Mudflats also as AKM and fellow Mudflatters kept me sane and easier to be around!!).
HOWEVER, I am feelilng a little uncomfortable that we not cross a very fine line and become a Palinesque feeding frenzy, and in the process, lose some credibility for the long list of legitimate criticisms she truly deserves. I am starting to feel tinges of a bunch of junior high girls ganging up on a girl they do not like, even if she has done things that are not likeable. There seems like a fine line that, when crossed, our ‘criticisms’ begin to seem, to me, like a bit of a feeding frenzy. Perhaps we could put our brains to work devising ways to communicate our concerns to those who do not agree with us in ways that they could understand, a la Abraham Lincoln, and our Obama.
Thanks all for everything.
I’ve been reading a lot about the political religious extremists lately but never though Ron Paul was involved. Little by little they will all be identified and hopefully frighten some voters against supporting them. They don’t want freedom for the nation, they want control. I think this is what nearly brought us to ruin with the Bush years. This is truly a wake up call.
Ron Paul is the most dangerous political combination possible: a dominionist and a sophomore who never got over his infatuation with Ayn Rand’s banal “philosophy”.
Paul/- Palin 2012?!!!
You know I had forgottne that Paul wanted to get rid of S.S. and that was one reason I would not vote for him Once I heard that I did not look any further