Mike Pence isn’t on here, so this poll is completely irrelevant

If the 2012 election had gone right those two would’ve been senate majority leader and senate majority whip. They should’ve been made senate minority leader and senate minority whip.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

Dave keep in mind he talks about a lot of the issues his dad does. The only difference is he does it in a way not to tick off the conservatives that could never vote for Ron. Not to mention he doesn’t give the impression he is crazy!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

We should have a balance budget. Are you saying that Ron Paul was wrong on that?
Are you saying that Ron Paul was wrong with the damage that a federal reserve that decides to print $85 billion dollars of new money a month doesn’t need some type of regulation?
Those are two things that Ron Paul is right on and I spent last year telling those people who wanted to vote for Ron Paul that he couldn’t win.
If you’re saying that Rand is wrong like his dad I guess that you don’t want a balance budget and for the federal reserve to keep printing money every month to cover Obama’s deficits.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

What 4% of CPAC attendees approve of Obama? And why are they at CPAC? Unless they are media, but I didn’t think they got to vote. Maybe a few curious libs.

That sort of language absolutely does not belong on this website. If you want to say a former Congressman and Presidential candidate should walk off a cliff and stop breathing, take it elsewhere. RedState can do can do better than posters who use language like that.

It would behoove you to stop slandering not only Paul, but also your fellow conservative Walter Hanson who neither disrespects you nor deserves such insulting treatment. Get your attitude fixed or get lost.

@redstate-f418c86d3f63c4cd4a21ec97b4f43117:disqus

This perticular website bans Paul supporters, and denegrating Ron Paul is not regarded as a fault…

Okay, I’ll go out on a limb and say that Ron Paul has yet to be right about anything… other than no one has ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

Seventh actually. Other is first. Over a third of conservatives don’t want anyone on the list. As I said before, that’s a great sign.

What 4% of CPAC attendees approve of Obama? And why are they at CPAC?

The media people there to cover it.

gone broke

Check out my posting history, folks. I’m far from a Paultard. Last year who did I vote for when the only candidates left were Romney, Paul, and Santorum? Perry. The guy that had already dropped out, because I refused to vote for a non-conservative in the primary. Apparently my years reading Redstate have mistakenly given me the belief
that conservatives are capable of a higher level of discussion.

Ayup.

I have different concerns.

They are of course, based on Ron’s ideology… Namely statements that the CIA needed to be ‘taken out’ (exact words) and the military reduced by 80%.

These speak to very specific viewpoint – one commonly shared by actual domestic terrorist groups & the ‘lunatic fringe’ of both the left & right – that the US military & our intelligence agencies are a ‘threat to freedom’ just waiting to oppress us.

I find it very hard to believe that Ron did not indoctrinate his son in this same twisted, anti-American philosophy that he pushed in his own political career.

So when I see elements of that ideology seeping out from underneath Rand’s carefully prepared ‘mainstream’ veneer… I am further convinced that he is just as crazy – and just as much outright opposed to the Constitution & the US government as it has existed since 1789 (or 1865 in the south)….

Dave:
So let me get this straight. So your opposition to Ron Paul on having a budget be balanced isn’t that he was trying to get the budget to be balanced, but the fact that he might cut defense too much. Okay at least he is for a balanced budget. There are 55 democrat senators and one stupid President who doesn’t want to balance the budget.
Okay so have you ever heard of the Weimnar Republic. That is what is going to happen to the United States at the rate the fed is printing phony money.
And if you haven’t noticed the reason why Obama and those 55 democrat Senators feel no pressure to do real spending cuts (you know the rest of the budget which you seem to want cut) because the federal government gets $85 billion a month which they can’t borrow like a normal citizen does.
As for you thinking the filibuster was a phony stunt so when a President expresses a thought that he can do something which is obviously unconstitutional it shouldn’t be challenged. If you haven’t noticed that is why the catholic church has to sell birth control today. If you haven’t noticed that is why the democrats think we don’t have the right to carry guns anymore. If you haven’t noticed that is why we can’t get coal mined to generate electric power anymore.
Oh that’s right I guess you think the President can use a drone on the building you’re in.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

It is quite obvious you have a few screws lose, but I figured you could read. Let me copy and paste my comment again, read it slow, ask if you do not understand something in the sentence, then maybe you will get the point.

“Just because he says one thing that sounds right, we can rest assured
that everything else in the comment is a bunch of lying crazy man BS. So
yes, his version of a balanced budget was always wrong and the fact
that while he was talking about balancing the budget, he was quite busy
gathering in the earmarks.”

that’s good to hear actually. Makes me fell better about the outcome. Also I suppose that the CPAC poll is pretty meaningless for prediction of who will win the primary so that is also good.

If cPAC is such a joke then I don’t see why it should be given any attention really.

I guess you and I are of that same generation, but whether we will be “in charge” I kinda doubt. There is no “in charge” except for the people who get elected, who are the establishedment. And until more of our generation actually runs for office and wins, we are irrelevant. Sucks but true.

I’m a good example. All I can do about politics is argue about it on Internet and try to convince the people I know, my family, friends and church. I live in a purple state so I have that responsibility. But can I actually run? I’ve got to work to help pay my tuition, I have to study, etc. Who has time IRL to do more than that?

We aren’t going to be leading anything for a long time and that’s just how it goes.

what a very unwise introductory post.

The Federal Reserve ‘creates’ money for the US economy to use in-general, through private banks.

It exists to maintain an adequate money supply (something that has been a very difficult job since 2007. Inflation has been too low & we have come very close to a deflationary spiral (eg, a depression) once), not to ‘give the government money to spend’.

The fact that as a side effect of maintaining a supply of money for the entire economy, a part of that supply is available for the government to spend is just that – a side effect.

If the FED did not produce enough money, the first people to ‘run out’ and not be able to spend, would be individual citizens.

Not the government.

The notion that monetary policy can restrain government spending ignores the reality of the private-sector economy (namely, that zero-savings is the rule of the day)…

Any ‘restraint’ of monetary policy would hit US long before it hit Uncle Sam.

Power:
Um you think I can’t read. Get real!
You said that Ron Paul is always wrong. You even wrote in your rant that Ron Paul is wrong when he speaks.
If you didn’t then go back and read the post that I respond to.
So Paul speaks for a balance budget (you might not like the methods that Paul uses to get the balanced budget because I don’t) but it’s a step closer to creating a good budget compared with the disaster that Obama and the 55 democrat Senators want to give us. Given the premise you put forth that Paul is always wrong then you’re saying that Obama and those 55 Democrat Senators are right.
The point that you try to defend yes the budget can be balance, but just not how Paul wants it to be balanced doesn’t matter. You just undermined the argument which you were so passionetly made that Ron Paul is always wrong.
You went off on me like you thought I was one of those Paul robots that thought everything he supported is right. I didn’t vote for Paul in 2012 and I was arguing with those Paul supporters because of that.

What you did for the person who thought I had a screw loose was throw out an argument that the budget shouldn’t be balanced. Sounds like you only think it when you’re the person who has that.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

Dave:
Lets try this again because my previous effort didn’t get posted.
If you follow the history of the Wiemar Republic which you didn’t after the Wiermar Republic was paying the war bills (that is a different issue how bad they were) the Wiemar Republic didn’t have the money to pay for the stuff that they wanted to spend money like college professor salaries. They decide to vote the salaries and then printed money to allow those salaries and other things to be paid out. That eventually destroyed the entire economy. What allows Obama to keep up all of the spending which he is trying to maintain is the Fed immediately hands him another $85 billion a month. I take it you don’t have credit cards. If you did then you manage them right. So if your credit card company offers you $2,000 to charge you don’t charge $2,000 and then want another $1,000. If you’re like millions of Americans who have the $2,000 limit and won’t be given $2,100 they don’t spend the money.
So when you say that no nation has harmed itself you ignore the Weimar Republic and the African countries that have done it in the past.
What Paul was asking about was the question of tatics. Lets use a fictional example for a moment to make the point. In one Tom Clancy story the President has ordered a secret war on the Columbia Drug Wars. Blowing up their factories where they make their drugs is okay, but was it okay when they use a missile to kill a bunch of druglords even though it killed lots of kids (remember this happened at a birthday party for a kid)? There is suppose to be a line and Paul was trying to ask where is that line? That’s not stupid to ask when the President and his AG were trying not to say what that line was.
Especially after it became public knowledge that the President thought he could do it on American soil.
And you’re missing the point. When the Democrats think that the government can take guns they also think they can take healthcare (remember Nancy Pelosi laughed at the thought it can be ruled unconstitutional). The only way to start making the case that the big things are wrong is to lay the foundation where you can take the priniciples of the argument and then ask something like, “okay you agree with my reasoning on drones so why doesn’t that reasoning apply to guns or healthcare?”
There are over 60 million voters who currently believe enough in the things that the Democrats do to win elections. We need to convert 3 million or more.
You start that conversion process by saying what is a principle and stand for it. Because of what Paul it will be easier to stand up on guns and healthcare which you care about.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

Power:
Yes or no did you write Ron Paul is always wrong?
Since I’m going by the post that you wrote the answer is yes!
Okay Ron Paul calls for a balanced federal budget. Since you believe that Ron Paul is always wrong you’re trying to make the case that the federal budget doesn’t have to be balanced.
I’ve called you on what you say is the truth.
So I’m sorry I’m only responding to your so called truth and your so called facts. I’m the person making sense.
Every term you have been applying applies to the person you look at in the mirror.
So before you post on Red State again a couple of friendly suggestions:
* Use just the facts (something that you have ignored here)
* Make sense (you dug yourself in this hole because your attack on Ron Paul went “too” far)
* Don’t throw out names. When you do that indicates you don’t think you’re winning the argument and doesn’t make you look again.
I can go on, but your reply post for those people who read it will only show just how much sillier you’re getting.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

Again, you are a moron, you are demonstrating your stupidity with the constant silliness you keep posting, and again, you really need to keep working on your reading comprehension. Since smarts seem to be something God did not give you much of, let me see if this can help you understand how when Ron Paul states something, he is always wrong and it has nothing to do with my belief on what needs to be done with the budget.

Now, go get someone who can explain this to you as I am sure your IQ will still not allow you to grasp what I am about to say.

Statement from Ron Paul: Shooting guns is great fun…….. Sounds right, huh? Anyone who has shot a gun would agree. If you are a moron, you would now state Ron Paul is right, shooting guns is such fun and is great. Problem is, as always, Ron Paul is wrong. Here is the rest of his statement.

Shooting guns is great fun especially when your target is fat humans as they can not move very fast as they are easier to take down than a fit human.

Same applies to his balanced budget comments, it starts out sounding right. We all agree a balanced budget is necessary. Problem is, Ron Paul is a liar, an earmark lover, wants to cut things that are moronic, is anti American anti military, and so on. So dummies like you hear the first line and start to drooling at the thought of fellatio with Ron Paul, but the problem lies with the rest of his statement, his plans, his so called reasoning, his anti American anti military views, his blatant anti Israel anti Jew stances, so at the end of the day, he is wrong every time he speaks.

Now either grasp simple logic without adding in your stupidity, or run along and find someone with a similar low IQ like yourself and play games with them.

Dave:
If as you claim you’ve studied the Weimnar Republic what drove France to come in and take assets which you blamed the problems for was because of the acts that Germany had done to buy hard currency with Marks. They just printed Marks thus causing the money to be worth less to France and England. That led England and France to take more extreme actions.
If we are having deflation as you claim then the price of gasoline should be dropping from something like $3.50 or more to $1.50. That’s not what is happening now.
If as Obama claims that if the government spends $85 billion less then we will lose 700,000 jobs why hasn’t employment jumped to 160 million.
Here’s the point you know what eventually happened because in part the money printing helped cover according to your own argument other stupid actions which helped to crash the economy. My point which you want to disagree (and it’s a free country) with is that if we continue to print that $85 billion we will damage the country. You seem to think that it is a good thing. When it does happen don’t argue that I tried to warn you.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

I would contend that Versalles doomed Germany’s economy to a dilemma of ‘inflation or deflation’, and that blaming ‘money printing’ is like blaming the existence of gravity for someone dying from a fall, and ignoring the fact that they jumped off a bridge….

Attempting to attribute gasoline prices to inflation ignores the fact that other prices have not risen.

It is not inflation that is driving up gas, it is an anti-oil administration’s policies driving up futures prices due to expectations of restricted future supply & higher regulation leading to higher costs…

If we were experiencing inflation, we would be seeing ALL prices rise at a more or less uniform rate (some lagging & leading due to elasticity, but all moving in the same direction). When you have most prices staying steady or falling, and only a few (fuel & highly-processed/’junk’ food) rising… You do not have inflation.

Finally, anything less than 3% inflation is unhealthy for the economy (it tightens credit availability, which inhibits the ability to finance new ventures & thus crushes growth). As is anything over 5%. We are at between 1% and 2%.

In a credit-based economy (which ours is, by the free market choices of our population), you must have inflation or the economy cannot grow.

Did that all make sense to you when you typed it?