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 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,
.

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.

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.

———–
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