Ron Paul? No Way!

Texas Congressman Ron Paul’s national poll figures have been hovering at 10% for a while and he’s experienced a recent surge of popularity in Iowa throughout the last week. The most recent PPP poll, which was released yesterday, had Paul in the second spot, having received 21% of the votes which is just one point less than Gingrich, the current front-runner.

The fact that approximately a tenth of the Republican Party has chosen Rep. Paul, the perennial candidate, as the candidate of their choice, is a clear indicator that the other candidates are lacking. Although it’s possible that many have done so jokingly, to express their disappointment in the field, it seems as though a considerable percent are serious or somewhat serious in their plans to pull the lever for Paul.

Many Paul supporters explain their decision to support Paul with the response that since it’s anyways impossible to agree with a candidate 100% they will simply continue to disagree with his foreign policies while agreeing with his domestic policies which are more important right now.

Although it’s true that it’s just about impossible to find someone that you will agree with on every topic and we therefore have to support the candidate whose ideology is closest to yours, one also has to recognize that certain matters are crucial for a country to exist. Domestic policy is certainly extremely important especially with the havoc Obama has wrought, yet foreign policy is equally as important. One can have a booming economy, but if its military is weak, what will prevent it from being overrun by evil terrorists? Specifically in such tumultuous times with Iran eight months from developing nuclear and countless Arabic countries undergoing radical revolutions, we need a leader that will reaffirm America’s image in the world as the outstanding and powerful country it is.

Paul has said at more than one occasion that he has no issues with a nuclear Iran. A vote for or against Ron Paul is therefore essentially the difference between lifting the blame off the terrorists’ shoulders and claiming that we’re the ones to have provoked them, or blaming Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda who’ve actually taken credit for the attacks and hate us for who we are no matter what we do.  By supporting Ron Paul, one aligns themselves with the truthers, and with Paul’s warped ideology that if we keep to ourselves then no one will seek to harm us, which happens to be exactly what we were doing when we suddenly got hit with 9/11. If you stand with Ron Paul, that defines you as one who is for the shrinking of our defense system, the shutting down of many federal agencies including the F.B.I., C.I.A., Homeland Security, and FEMA.

Ron Paul’s refrain that America simply doesn’t have the money to fight the war on terror which is bankrupting the nation, can be clarified with the following;

A multi-millionaire is hurrying to a business meeting with a briefcase full of cash late one night in a deserted neighborhood when a shadow jumps out, waves a handgun and barks, “Money or life!” Would anyone in their right mind in such a situation begin bargaining to keep a portion of the money so that he won’t remain completely penniless? Or would one give up his entire fortune and be thankful to come out of such an ordeal with their life intact?

Osama Bin Laden has clearly expressed his hatred towards all Americans and infidels and his desire to wipe us out unless we accept the Koran. Although he’s now dead, Al Qaeda is not, and his followers and admirers still believe in and practice jihad. Paul’s argument that we can’t afford this fight is pretty pathetic, for when it comes to one’s survival no price is too high.

Come to think of it, the U.S. is actually more like a parent whose child is being held for ransom but has no money. Every parent would borrow and beg until he had the necessary funds so he can save his child. So too, although the U.S. is deeply in debt and is borrowing   from China and others, when it comes to the safety of its citizens, money is not what should be the deciding factor. Additionally, our debt is in existence way before we have retaliated against the Islamic terrorists, and is mainly because of several domestic programs that the Democrats have implemented and are spiraling out of control. So if it’s the economy and the debt one truly worries about, the proper place to start is at the core of the problem.

Ron Paul believes that our support of Israel is detrimental to Israel and America, because it infuriates the terrorists and gives them a reason to attack. We see how much Obama’s apology to the Muslim world has accomplished on that end! Ignoring terrorists or attempting to appease them has never worked and will never work. In order to keep evil in check we must confront evil head-on and remain on a constant alert .

Ron Paul’s foreign policy is to treat good and evil equally. That is similar to giving the same medication to a healthy individual, a kid with an ear infection, and a patient battling cancer.

Conservatives are not against government, they are against BIG government.

No government = lawlessness.

Big government = oppression.

Small government=individual freedom and safety for citizens.

Ron Paul supports no government.

Barack Obama supports big government.

Conservatives support small government.

Simple enough?

 



(76 Posts)

Leave a Reply