I am afraid that I disagree with Sen. Jim DeMint about Ron Paul.

expanding_man

DeMint understands that Paul is a real small government advocate and that we shouldn’t alienate his supporters.

He is the only candidate left with even a slim chance of beating Romney when it’s all said and done. Not a great chance, but a chance. The rest of the candidates are all walking dead.

Yes, that includes Perry, the candidate that I supported until I accepted that he cannot win now.

I don’t like a number of Paul’s policies one bit. However, I’ll take him over Romney any day. I know what I’m saying may be unpopular around here and I accept that. The bottom line is that DeMint is right on this. These are tough times!

Adjoran

There is probably not enough time to get on most state ballots and he doesn’t have the organization set up for it. Remember Perot had “United We Stand” set up and gathering petition signatures as a dry run a year before the election. The LP is going with Johnson.

Besides, several states have “sore loser” laws prohibiting ballot access to those who lost a party primary.

AND it would not help Rand’s career, either.

The Paul voters may be divided into two basic types. You have the Paulbots, diehards who would vote for Paul if he called for a New Auschwitz, they don’t care – but will vote for no one else, period. They do not consider themselves Republicans.

The rest are those who like the fiscal stuff and liberty rhetoric but ignore the nonsense because they know he can’t win. They are protest voters who couldn’t find a fit. Most or all of them are at least potential GOP votes in the fall.

I do agree all candidates should be required to pledge NOT to run an independent or third party campaign for the office when they file in a state for the GOP primary or caucuses. But a Ron Paul run of that sort is the last of my worries at this point.

jakeofalltrades

But Moe never said here that he expects a third-party run. He did correctly state that some are expecting it.

michaelvcowan

I understand disliking a candidate. But I don’t understand the continued personal attacks by E. E. and other’s who contribute to this site.

When you refer to a candidate as “crazy,” “lunatic”, “insane,” etc, etc. Several things happen – afterall, you are at that point contributing to a tabloid and not a legitimate news source. For one, you lose any objective journalistic credibility. You become a simple pundit propagating rhetoric instead of facts.. Another thing that happens is you indirectly attack that candidate’s following. This is a sad consequence of poor journalism. Bad ideas are one thing, but personal attack disenfranchise a host of honest, hard-working Americans. Or as Newt put it, non-decent Americans who chose to follow Ron Paul.

And what do your attacks say about the military? Is anyone disputing the Paul campaign’s assertion that active military contributions are going to Ron Paul more than twice that of all other GOP candidates combined?

“Summing up, Paul?s military-connected contributions for the three months more than double such contributions to all the other Republican presidential candidates?and they also exceed Obama?s.

We rate his statement True.”

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/jul/23/ron-paul/ron-paul-says-members-military-have-given-him-far-/

Whether you mean it or not, a personal attack against a candidates also attacks the hard working Americans that support that candidate. Are you calling the military men and women dumb, crazy, lunatics who’ve been brainwashed by the crazy man? I think that you and Erick do, on a regular basis.

Let’s look at the other donors.

Here is a graph of billionaires who’ve donated to campaigns complied by the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/billionaire-donors/2011/12/05/gIQAa3spXO_graphic.html

Telling. How many of the 1% contribute to Ron Paul? 0.

So who is giving him money?

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?type=C&cid=n00005906&newMem=N&cycle=2012

At the bottom you will see that 95% of his contributions are from individual donors to the tune of $12 million+. These represent literally millions of people giving $20 at a time. All of whom you call crazy lunatics.

Are you sure you want to continue to disenfranchise millions of potential readers with your personal, and often outrageous mis-informed attacks?

I’d hope writers here could attempt to contain their hatred and simply stick to reporting the issues.

Otherwise, you’re just part of the problem – big Media. I seriously think that the normal, hardworking American’s who support this man will no longer allow the media to pick more moderate GOP candidates. Lest we forget that Mr. Romney on his best day, lost to Mr. McCain. God help us.

veto

I have listened to the Laura Ingraham show now for almost 5 years because well I like her But the interview she had with Jim Demint I thought was pretty sobering on what’s going on within the party.

Paul is not going to win, we all know this. And I think most of his supporters including Paul know it as well. But I thought Demints comments on how he doesn’t mind to have these arguments between conservatives and libertarians that they both want smaller government, whereas they’re was no room for moderates and liberals because we are going broke. I didn’t see anything wrong with this comment. I mean don’t we have to numbers to be Obama? In the end doesn’t a nuts vote count the same as one of ours?

And although I have my idea like many do what America should be his talk with Laura was sobering to me. Basically they were both saying the youth is speaking and how much longer can we put our fingers in our ears ignoring them? They were not endorsing Paul or saying they agreed with his FP, they were asking how can they get these votes in the republican party?

I am still voting for Perry but they made good points, and trust me I have listened to Laura Ingraham for a long time now for her to say that was probably incredibly hard. I don’t think she would have said it if she earnestly didn’t think the party needed to work with libertarians in order to beat Obama.

Anyway that’s what I took from the interview.

sulmak

by endorsing Romney if he wasn’t his first choice? Honestly, I hear people saying that DeMint might endorse Romney just because he said it look like he might place first in SC.

texasref

Just to add to your sentiments, which I share completely…

DeMint says, “I think more than anything else right now is we need someone with a certain level of courage who is willing to say no and tell the truth.”

In other words, but for Paul’s foreign policy, DeMint would be endorsing him.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/12/sen-demint-i-really-dont-want-ron-paul-to-drop-out/#ixzz1jHkV8DIb

texasref

Um, that would be me, so hopefully the no-Paul-support rule differentiates between the basic types. A rapid Paulbot I am not. Just trying to find an acceptable, electable candidate with enough support in the polls and enough ability to raise money who will shake things up in Washington in a way that Romney most certainly will not and in a way that Newt had a chance to do but underachieved.

murray

It is one thing to disagree with Jim DeMint, or Ron Paul for that matter.
But, DeMint IS in the TeaParty caucus, lets not forget that.

Fact is, not only do so many bloggers here really oppose Ron Paul, not Red State is even saying Ron Paul should be excluded from the debates?
What kind of value is that? Its almost censorship.
That is NOT conservative, if you mean by conservative that you uphold traditional American values.
THere is a reason why freedom of speech is listed in the first amendment, it is a core value of our republic.

It is NOT conservative to tell others what to do or think, because freedom of action = pursuit of happiness, and freedom of thought = freedeom of conscience.

At times, the change in the Republican Party away from TRUE and old-fashioned Republican values, as you will find in all of what Howard Buffet or Robert Taft stood for, or quite a bit of Goldwaters, and certainly also of what Reagon stood for, is being questioned by this “new” Republican contingent.
Yes I write new, because it does rather neatly ooint to NEO.

Why is it so hard to see that the neo movement was created by former Trotsky-oets, of which Irving Kristol is just one egreious example?

I sometimes wonder if the ‘”red” in this web site is not the color of a recently departed ideology rather than of the Republican Party?

Much, not all of course, of Ron Paul’s conservatism is of the old variety. And that old variety is the AUTHENTIC conservatism of aWashington or Jefferson or Jackson.

We need to get back to OUR roots, and not support a maybe-former pro-abortionist, pro-mandatory-healthcare, pro-moneyprinting, anti-free market (bailouts are not free market) candidate.

Aaron Gardner

..

bgintn

One of only four House Republicans to request any earmarks.

It appears, from the way he operates, that he doesn?t want to do his own dirty work. He makes spending requests and votes against them while other lawmakers support the measures, bringing the money to his district anyway.

There are far simpler ways to make his point if he really thinks the earmark system fosters corruption. One obvious example: he could abstain from earmarks altogether.

As for earmarks, the congressman requested at least $157 million for fiscal year 2011, and another $398 million for fiscal year 2010, according to his congressional Web site. The provisions included $2.5 million for a ?Historic Downtown Redevelopment Project? in Baytown, Texas; $8 million for replacing recreational fishing piers damaged during hurricanes; and $18 million for ship canal operations and maintenance.

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1033&Itemid=68

Not only is there no mention of any sort of spending like we see with earmarks in the Constitution, they fly in the face of our very system. They are spending without legislation. They are extremely deceptive spending where these riders are added to completely unrelated bills and often not even in the bill text that is voted on. This way, a museum may be funded within a transportation bill- but funding for the museum is never voted on. It is just a rider to spend the money for that added at the end.

He is like a thief who wears gloves so his finger prints won?t be on the robbery.

Ron Paul has to take responsibility for the newsletters that bear his name, or at least acknowledge negligence as the former head of the company that produced them.

Paul insisting he knew nothing about them. It?s hard to believe that a man who wants to oversee the entire U.S. government would provide zero oversight of his publications, or even bother to read them from time to time. Either he is lying or is not fit to be President, is it both?

Bill S

.

murray

crazy?
what is crazy about reducing the overbearing federal executive apparatus by 5 departments?
…bycutting spending by 1T dollars per year?
…by supporting states’ rights?
(just that one alone on abortion for ex.: how many millions of babies could have been saved, if all those mainly red states would have been free to ban abortion? True the lib-coasts wouldn’t have banned it , but 20-30 states sure would have done so)
…by opposing the military-industrial complex?
(Eisenhower opposed it,, was he not a good Republican, or was he crazy?)
…by opposing militarism, the other necessary ingredient for the military industrial complex?
(Pat Buchanan oppses the current militarism, is he crasy, or not a good conservative?)

OUr current foreign policy of nation building and making the world safe for democracy is WIlsonion throuhg and through. Was HE a good Republican or conservative? Hardly.

So, please what exactly is crazy?
The whole kooky/crazy/cranky meme (to use that favorite word of the left for once) stems from the social-psychology line of thought, and the whole history of modern socio-anything and psychology is totally anti-conservative.

Bill S

Frankly, I don’t give a flying flip what you think about this site’s attitude towards Ron Paul. We’ve made it crystal clear what we think of Ron Paul’s and his acolytes, and that is not changing.

What I do care about is whether YOU are a Paul supporter. If you are, then you’d better own up to it now so I can put you out of my misery. If you’re not, then I suggest you stop looking like one, because you’re on the edge already, and you haven’t been here long enough to get the benefit of the doubt.

expanding_man

I don’t think you truly mean this. Perhaps you aren’t speaking literally here?

I can certainly see how folks don’t like legislators advocating for spending that is specific to their own districts, however earmarks are not a not a constitutional issue.

murray

Aaron, see my comment about the cranky part below. Hope you don’t fall for that meme for real.

As to the racist allegation:
How many other good conservatives of the past do you also have to disavow, if you actually believe these allegations?
One of DeMints successors, Strom Thurmond for example?
Or Trent Lott? Or Jesse Helms? Or Jerry Falwell? and so on?
That also was said about them.

Which conspriacy theories please?
While Paul has never said so, do you actually believe the Fed implementation was NOT a conspiracy? If so, you have no idea how that institution was brought about?
Or 9/11? Kean/Hamilton themselves have stated that there are incongruencies in the pre-commission explanation which need to be investigated, Paul said nothing else.

And by the way: 9/11 was undoubtedly a conspiracy, there is NO question about it!
When 19 men plan and exectue an attack in secret, that is the very definition of a conspiracy. What about all those who funneled the money to them via the Hamburg cell? conspiracy.

Bottom line, please give some concrete examples of:
the alleged racism?
the alleged crankiness (what exactly does that even mean)?
the indulgence in consp. theories?

I do not believe everything the left-liberal media dishes out, so I don’t cotton to their account of the newseltter distraction.

http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

I will be very, very happy to see it not happen – and I hold out the legitimate hope that Ron Paul will end up deciding that he does not want to wreck his son’s political career – but this is one time where I’d rather be pleasantly surprised. Bottom line is, Ron Paul does not have enough loyalty to the Republican caucus to be trustworthy in this regard.

michaelvcowan

Fortunately i havent been here long enough to drink your brand of kool-aid.

It does interest me how many posters here immediately stoop to personal attacks at the mention of Paul’s name. Forgive me for being new. If your post means that you will block me from your reading, by all means. I’d hate to rile you up further, which facts no doubt will.

http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

Most Reagan conservatives have deep yearning in their gut for smaller government. We especially want to see our Constitutional rights protected from a rapacious, Socialist regime like the one in Washington. Thanks to One-bama we have been driven to desperation and many voters are jumping into bed with Paul because nobody else is seriously pushing this issue.

Did I mention that we are desperate?

Desperate people do desperate things. I think DeMint reflects that desperation to the point that he can rationalize the presence of Ron Paul. Unfortunately Paul is so crazy the MSM will hold him up as a typical Republican and smear all the other candidates.

Paul must go.

carolynr

but just as the progressives left the Democratic Party…so too have the Moderates left the Conservatives…and they are not happy…and the voting pool is decreased…and that is not good news for Romney. Read the national blogs…and especially The State in SC…they are madder than heck. They don’t want Romney

gabs

and their guy is going to be Gary Johnson. He’s going to keep going in the Republican primaries till he runs out of money. He will do this especially because of how he has already done and how well he can expect to do in these proportional contests. Well enough to stay in debates, get coverage, collect delegates on the off chance of using them for leverage if the convention is brokered, etc. Since the Libertarians aren’t going to dump Johnson for him, the minute he leaves the Republican contest he drops off the radar altogether.

Bill S

Don’t tap dance now.

My post is very simple: If you comment or diary here in support of Ron Paul, you will be banned. Period.

So either get it out of your system now, or keep it to yourself.

texasref

doesn’t matter to me anymore. I am of the Rush Limbaugh school of thought on this…you will never get them to like you or to portray you fairly, so quit using that factor as a criterion for decision-making.

You’re right, we are desperate; desperate to avoid putting up a Massachusetts Moderate who will, as Erickson correctly pointed out, lose to Obama this November. If that means well-intentioned conservatives hold their nose and jump into bed with ANY of our other flawed but superior candidates, that doesn’t mean any of these other candidates should go until they’re ready to do so. Especially in the proportional delegate heavy early states through Super Tuesday.

Romney must go.

texasref

when Romney becomes the nominee and management forces me to remove my signature on pain of ejection.

marktx

There are two reasons why Ron Paul won’t run third party.

1) He wants his son to have a long career within the republican party.

2) Both Ron and Rand want to reform the republican party from within. Leaving the party would marginalize their opportunity to bring change to the party.

Tbone

nt

expanding_man

He’ll be on CNN and will be asked who he supports for the nominee. Better believe he’ll get asked about the Ron Paul comments.

Should be interesting.

tonotisto

‘m sorry but I can’t just “walk off” Demint endorsing Mitt Romney.

Bad enough that he won’t pick a Conservative.
But to chose a Moderate Progressive (Romney’s words, not mine)?

I already unsubscribed from Demint’s Pac Email and will not donate again (waitng for them to call me, so I can tell them why in 2 words).

But to endorse Romney? Then there is no Social Conservative segment of the Repub party.and this whole thing is a sham.

Wow, how quickly we are falling.

expanding_man

It was mild attack interview.It had two subjects: fiscal issues and who he supports for the nominee.

DeMint railed against deficit spending.
Host tries to bait him into saying he’ll cut Social Security and Medicare. DeMint won’t bite.

Host is mildly flustered by DeMint’s fiscal answers.

Talk then turned to Romney. DeMint says all of the candidates are better than Obama. Says he is not endorsing anyone. Repeats that we must listen to Paul on the Fed and defending our liberties, etc.

pttx333

will be endorsing Romney. Exactly what that means, I’m not sure. I AM upset with DeMint for dodging and tap dancing, though. What line of bull has he bought into? Furthermore, I refuse to listen to Paul about anything!! Bah!

expanding_man

After watching the interview. My takeaways were

1. that he’s the same limited government/fiscal conservative that he always has been.
2, He’s not endorsing anyone right now and sounded neutral
3. He likes Paul’s limited government/anti-fed views.

jakeofalltrades

for them to group together and force their banning when they start spouting off with their racism.

http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

I will ignore you.

carolina

The rest of his policies are a problem.
Paul has the support of folks who strongly believe in a sound currency and protecting our individual freedoms.
More than one thoughtful experienced politico has said that the GOP can’t beat BO without the Paul supporters.
I REALLY want to defeat BO. I think giving the Paul campaign a place at the table during the GOP convention would be a wise decision.
I trust DeMint and I’m glad to hear the voice of reason from him.

Scope

when we are being attacked from all sides, and we absolutely would be, if Paul isolates the US as a little island of utopia. Do you really believe for a second that with Paul’s foreign policy views that the rest of the world will make nicey nice with us if we get down on our knees and beg the world to be nice and friendly with us, and we promise to import their crack pipes or bongs? If you think for a minute that Obama has apologized to the dictators in the world, then you should envision that Paul will stand before them with not even underware on. Where in the heck is there any liberty in that when every US citizen is constantly on the alert from incoming from our enemies. Paul doesn’t deserve a seat at the Republican table, let alone any ounce of respect from any US citizen with a milimeter of sense. His economic policy is just as destructive if you listen to rational economists. Paul will take us back to the Articles of Confedertion as his hero Rathbard and Rockwell promote, which Washington said was a time of anarchy. The guy desperately needs to be put out to pasture. Problem is everyone wrote him off, until he built an organization that may now be threatening to the US.

neukm

True… and, but for a bit of ice, the Titantic wouldn’t have sank.

carolina

.

carolina

.

pttx333

” … until he built an organization that may now be threatening to the U.S.” My addition is this: With said organization to be run by his son, Rand.

That is what I foresee and what has been in the works for a long, long time. Nuts do not fall far from the tree.

jakeofalltrades

“The apple is not going to go flying miles from the tree.”

Scope

From what he said tonight on CNN, he thought Romney would make a great president, and then went into how great a president Paul would be also. DeMint has lost much of the conservative reputation he once had, by all but backing Mitt, even though unspoken. How do you get from Romney to Paul in the same sentence? From what I understand, DeMint only became conservative in the last few years. No question DeMint has had little say or sway in the Senate, with so many liberal republicans still warming their seats there, he has been pulled hard from the far right with Rand Paul, and from the leftist republicans. No wonder he is retiring after his term is up. I believe right now DeMint is having a hard time just getting along with the Senate republicans, and is trying to sit on the fence.

pttx333

flogged at any moment for my – gasp! – slam against – gasp! – Rand Paul, but that is exactly what it is, intentionally. You got it right – apples do not go flying off of trees, like nuts they just fall within a few inches of their original position in the tree. Unless there is a tornado or hurricane in the vicinity. But, I’m tellin’ ya, if they don’t watch Rand, there will be hell to pay down the road. That little dynasty must be stopped!

neukm

…and helped give us MAObama..

Scope

That is precisely what I have believed for a good while. Either he will not run third party in 2012 in order to keep the seat warm for Rand, or there may be a twist where Rand takes his place and organization, and runs third party in 2012. The Paul’s know that they have the “momentum” now with Ron’s showing in the polls. Why just give up all those kooks that follow them around like pavlov’s dogs. Why take the chance of losing all those young creeps that will age and maybe grow up in 4 years.

lightspeed

Should we give him a seat at the table? If you think Paul is different, Google “Ron Paul” with any of the following:

Newsletters
Lew Rockwell
Stormfront
Don Black
Political Cesspool
Truther
Racist
anti-Semite

Then tell me you want this guy influencing the Republican platform.

pttx333

tired of everyone talking about Rand this, and Rand that, and acting as if he is something to behold. Well, he’s something to behold, all right, I’ve seen the videos where even years ago he was rubber stamping what Dear Ole Dad was saying … every last word of it. Why did he have to go to KY to win a Senate seat? Easiest place to do so, wouldn’t ya think? Like I told Jake just above your post, this little dynasty must be stopped! It is a huge and grand Nazi-style train wreck!

Okay, now I’ll await my flogging …

turningtables

Sometimes even Kim Kardashian gets one wrong.

panzerbenz1968

That kind of rhetoric reminds me of my high school days; when I constantly heard from Democrats how Ronald Reagan was a loose cannon ready to push the nuclear button. One of the things that drove me to support him once I found out the truth!

panzerbenz1968

If we want to see a conservative sitting in the White House next time around, we need to work together, not tear each other apart.

michaelvcowan

Seriously? Is this East Berlin? I think I’d rather be banned for not opposing the free expression of ideas in a political forum. Was there some sort of End User Agreement that stated we need to denounce Ron Paul in order to sign up?

Seems the footnote to these posts reads, “Be respectful or be banned. No Profanity.” Does support of a particular candidate fall under being “disrespectful?”

Is RedState.com a serious political forum or is this Mrs. Doolittle’s 7th grade class?

I’m honestly shocked that as an avid daily reader of this site and dedicated listener to the show to discover this level of intolerance. Perhaps I made a mistake in signing up. Didn’t realize this was carry over from ICQ circa 1997.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Just watch me.

gekster

as you claim, then you would already know of the RP ban.
So you are being disengenuous.

http://jeffemanuel.net Jeff Emanuel

And yes, we do shoot Paultards on sight. Figuratively, of course.

Bang.

michaelvcowan

14. It is forbidden to attempt to discredit or bring disharmony to the site, the Republican party, any of its candidates, or the conservative movement by pretending to be something one is not and posting maliciously. The practices known as ?concern trolling? or ?mobying? are included in this ban.

Seems there are plenty here who break this rule. Like it or not, Ron Paul is a candidate of the Republican Party. Fringe as it may be. He has held that office for nearly 3 decades. . So to attempt to “discredit or bring disharmony … to ANY of it’s candidates seems either wrong by your standards or just hypocritical. If I’ve offended, it wasn’t my intent, but rather to raise the standard of sharing. Apparently that point is moot.

Who I support is my business. If my post was read it referred to the unintended disenfranchisement of hard working Americans like us when the media insists on reporting rhetoric over substance.

texasref

give me the name of a conservative candidate who has the fund-raising ability through Super Tuesday to challenge Romney for the nomination whose name is not Ron Paul, and I will support that candidate. In the meantime, I’d prefer you not lump me in with the ignorable Paulbots.

Caleb Howe

If you have a problem with that, go talk to the Paul supporters. It’s their single-minded, robotic cheerleading, their online poll gaming, and their inability to engage in reasoned discourse that makes the ban not a preference, but rather a necessity. If Ron Paul supporters want to know why they are not welcome at RedState, they shouldn’t ask us, they should ask other Ron Paul supporters. I’ve yet to see a Paul supporter play nice at RedState, ban or not. If they grow up someday, they can get back to us.

trickamsterdam

But by your comment you just confirmed the strength and logic of his (and DeMint and Ingraham’s) point. That is: those votes make winners.

PS- Paul doesn’t damage the R Party at all. He also doesn’t help it at all (or at least much). And the reason for this is neither the people who love him nor hate him view him as a true R.

michaelvcowan

Apparently I should lodge a complaint. Now you fellas line up nice and straight.

4. It is forbidden to single out a user for abuse or harassment for any reason, including being new to the site, being suspected of breaking site rules, or for supporting a particular candidate for office. If you suspect that a user is breaking site rules, contact the site or a moderator directly.

Can this reply serve that purpose Neil?

michaelvcowan

Nearly everyday since the Debt Ceiling “Hold the Line” issues back in the summer. Never in a million years would have guessed that you had an unwritten Ron Paul ban. Just seems, amazing. Clearly this is not at all what I thought it was. The irrational hatred of the man even runs against your own posted guidelines. Frankly, I’m stunned.

trickamsterdam

What in the name of Merlin…?

Samsara

for a third party run. This “nonpartisan? Americans Elect group is doing the leg work to make it nice and easy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_Elect

If it actually became a three way race, and no one gets a majority of the electoral collage, the House of Representatives will pick the President.

Ned Reck

At this stage in time… is a Pariah to us all.

I love the guy… but at this point in time… he needs to get outta the way.

If the pendulum was to swing… so farback his way… and he got elected.

We would have 20 years of real, conservative drought…

Don’t think we can stand that length of time.

Ned

lineholder

to some of the other candidates in the race?

Looking at what has been happening lately, other than the “electability” and “inevitability” memes, does any one REALLY know where Romney stands on issues, especially fiscal issues?

Then there’s Santorum, who may appeal to some SoCons, i.e. the ones who don’t really think it through and consider where the money is going to come from for Santorum’s grand social plans, but he doesn’t appeal to FiCons on any level at all.

Gingrich, Huntsman and Perry could all be presenting solid ideas to the general public pertaining to fiscal issues, but that hasn’t been the predominate message of late.

When it comes to those who are primarily interested in fiscal issues, it’s been Ron Paul who is drawing their notice. (It made me cringe a bit to even say that).

A wake up call may very well be what is needed.

michaelvcowan

Only you voiced it far better and without the uproar.

The GOP will need his supporters to win. Calling him a lunatic only disenfranchises millions of average people who want less govt in their lives.

Well said.

Bill S

It was posted in 2008 and has been in effect ever since.

michaelvcowan

I seemed to have overlooked it in the link you provided.

michaelvcowan

…. Do you suppose the ban would lift in March when this becomes a two man race between Romney and Paul, or will the site just devolve into a circle jerk discussion about how we need to rally around Mitt? Purely hypothetical of course.

Bill S

And I don’t really want to say “it’s not just you”

because…it is just you.

Vaya con dios.

turningtables

He just didn’t go for the full endorsement because he was afraid of being banned by the RS Kool-aid kids.

I swear… you’d think they’ve already resigned themselves to Romney and what he offers:

1. More of the same crap sandwich the GOP establishment has been handing us for years.

2. Another “McCain-style” Democrat-lite campaign

3. The inability to campaign on smaller government and against corporate welfare

4. Reductions in the level of growth, rather than true spending cuts

5. Blue state governor experience.

6. ROMNEYCARE

I’ve been reading at the site since ’04 admiring the conservative viewpoints and analysis. Always loved the principles I thought it stood for. Now I find its not so much that they “stand for” but rather just “espouse”.

I used to think that RS was a conservative force to be reckoned with for the GOP establishment. Not so much, huh.

Ahh i remember the good old days when RS writers would held the high hopes of changing the course of our nation. What an excercise in futility! They can’t sway the party away from the establishment candidates.

Makes me wonder if Redstate suffers from the same problem that the tea party has: being hijacked by the establishment and used when needed, disregarded when not.

Of course its obvious, Paul is the ONLY serious challenger to Romney at this point. He brings his own base, which will remain intact no matter how badly “Leon” wants to pretend otherwise. In a race that is so clearly driven by a single issue, the economy, Paul is the only guy with a plan. RS’s insistence on focusing on his foreign policy “shortcomings” is just plain SILLY!

The simple answer is to band behind Paul with a clear caveat: “There is no conservative mandate for his foreign policy plans,” It would send a clear message to the GOP establishment that you are tired of their squishy, Dem-lite approach, and that you are tired of their crap sandwiches.

or… just sit by idly I guess and hold your nose as you chew.

Just remember, you’ll never be able to shape the national debate if you settle for crap sandwiches from your own party.

TT

joshdunn

Romney didn’t get any less conservative between 2008 and the present.

joshdunn

I can live with Romney. I can live with Huntsman. I can live with Perry if I must.

But Gingrich has a long history of screwing party allies and party girls alike. Santorum repels voters the way Deep Woods spray repels mosquitoes.

Neither Gingrich nor Santorum will ever be president. Romney’s got a shot. I say we give Governor Romney a chance to take down Obama.

joshdunn

If he had stayed clean on race issues, Israel issues, and a few other issues, then his brand of libertarianism might be attractive to Republicans like me who are sick of paying to clean up other people’s messes.

But his hands are very dirty. He seems like a racist, anti-semite who yells the loudest when he’s making the least sense.

I admire the passion of his followers. But I believe that both the candidate and his followers (minions?) are misguided.

joshdunn

The gold standard? Suddenly I feel like I’m witnessing a rematch between McKinley and William Jennings Bryan.

I’ve got some concerns over fiat currency (that’s paper money not backed by any precious metal for you non-geeks). But not to the point that I’d ever consider scrapping our system to go back to a metal-backed currency. I think that if we were to do that, the shock to the economy would be widespread. It would cause panics and bank-runs. It is a fun exercise to consider the pro’s and con’s of both systems.

But, from a pragmatic standpoint, metal-backed currency is a non-starter for serious candidates.

turningtables

Do you think the dems and the MSM won’t paint as a racist?

The only one I can think of already left the race… and they painted him as sexist.

joshdunn

Some allegedly hate Romney because he is wealthy. Where were these people when Bush was running for president in 2000? Wasn’t Bush a multi-millionaire before he ran for governor in 1994?

Many people either hate or are uncomfortable with Romney because he is a Mormon. These voters are generally evangelical Christians who will enthusiastically vote for a Catholic such as Santorum or Gingrich, despite the fact that there are serious doctrinal rifts between evangelical Christians and Catholics.

But Mormons are absolutely unacceptable to some voters.

Ned Reck

Amen… my friend.

Ned

thosjefferson

Gingrich is the most unhinged, destructive Republican by far. At least Ron Paul supports capitalism and helps build the party instead of tearing it down for his own vanity.

turningtables

Which GOP candidate do you think will not be painted as a racist this cycle?

lineholder

Not maybe, might be, could be, or anything else. Simply NO.

I’m not interested in the type of change that Ron Paul is promoting, particularly in regards to foreign policy, any more than I’m interested in Obama’s great plans to fundamentally change this nation.

This race is not over by a long shot. And it is still possible that one of the other candidates in this race could present a credible challenger to Ron Paul on fiscal issues. What’s more, since none of the other candidates have Ron Paul’s extremist views on foreign policy, the probability would be high that voters focusing on fiscal issues would choose that other candidate over Ron Paul.

No. Not interested.

lineholder

He would set the Republican Party back years on end if he is nominated.

turningtables

Enjoy your crap sandwich.

It make for a fine feast as you dine one evening watching a moderate GOP squish preside over the final demise of our great republic.

Bon Appetit!

tonotisto

Old line.

He was choosing the lesser of 2 .

The same way that many -if- they pull the lever for Romney will be voting against BO, not “for” Romney.

FYI, this very seldom does this works.
When the base isn’t excited, the independents don’t follow.
Most independents are not independents at all, just sheeple waiting to be told who is the one.

lineholder

for all the extremism of other nations any day, turning tables. And I’ve got no desire to wonder day in and day out when an enemy may attack us and Ron Paul would sit back and do nothing because he sees this nation as guilty of provoking the attack.

I’ll go with that crap sandwich over what Ron Paul is offering, thank you.

turningtables

Calling for troop reductions in foreign lands doesn’t even come close to suggesting we sit back if are provoked or attacked.TOTAL BS argument.

So I guess foreign policy is your main issue then this cycle. You’re must have missed the memo: It’s the economy, stupid.

lineholder

but after Ron Paul made the comments he did about how he would have allowed the Holocaust to take place, and then listening to his continuous comments about his theories of how we provoke our enemies (who BTW are going to hate us and want to see our demise anyway regardless of what we do or say to placate them), if you think I’m foolish enough to just accept it on blind faith that the man would lift a single solitary finger to defend this nation if we were attacked, you’re wrong!

And like I said, this race isn’t even close to being over yet. The economic issues will come to the forefront soon enough, and we do have candidates in this race who are very much so capable of challenging Ron Paul where this matter is concerned. When they do, he will end up losing the FiCons who are currently in his support base, because he isn’t well-rounded.

acat

The evidence is pretty convincing, and not from a liberal media source either…. That ain’t paint, it goes all the way through.

Mew

turningtables

Is an automatic ban on crap sandwich-tards.

lineholder

Tread lightly or leave. Your choice.

acat

Mew

aesthete

It’s plausible that a man working as a physician and a Congressman would lose track of what is being done under his name, especially when his organization was basically a mess for all of his Presidential campaigns except this latest one. Additionally, Ron Paul believes and advocates for enough crazy things, that I doubt that he would do anything but loudly proclaim his racial views to the world if indeed he had those views. Instead, there is absolutely no verbal support on his part for racism, and condemnation of same dating back several years. I do think that the newsletters are concerning in that they present a rather appalling picture of what kinds of people Paul trusts (and stuff that he doesn’t pay attention to), and Paul’s mea culpa for the dreck in these letters is pretty weak. However, I don’t think that his public record or statements indicate a racist; merely a jaundiced ideologue.

progressivelibertarian

He is also one of the most futile members of congress, with only one (minor) bill to show for his 22 year tenure in congress. He apparently also stuffs pork for his CD in appropriations bills (which may explain why he gets re-elected) and then votes against those same bills. Paul has also been a stalking horse attacking every other candidate who poses a challenge to Romney, but hardly laying a finger on Romney, the very personification of the establishment that Paul is viewed by Paulbots as fighting against. Some kinda Hero!

Gingrich, who always supported Reagan unlike Romney, supports pro-growth capitalism.

Romney’s Bain brand of capitalism is a different kind of beast. Samuelson has a very good post about it:
January 13, 2012
Romney and ‘Private Equity’
By Robert Samuelson

‘He headed Bain Capital from 1984 to 1999. A Wall Street Journal examination of 77 Bain investments under his leadership concluded that, although they were collectively highly profitable, 22 percent ultimately closed or filed for bankruptcy.’
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/01/13/romney_and_private_equity__112755.html

Finally, Romney has been most negative and destructive presidential candidate over the last two cycles, carpet bombing both Huckabee and Newt mercilessly and thus poisoning the well. Newt made the strategic mistake of trying to stay positive in the face of Romney’s incessant attacks for 2-3 weeks too long; that proved to be his undoing (at least for now.)

Tbone

He is much more qualified than “Chop Shop Mitt”

Tbone

Don’t you know voting for Ron Paul is the 8th mortal sin?

Tbone

Ron Paul is Roger Rabbit personified.

powertothepeople

to think twice and breath deep prior to posting. I am no fan of Gingrich, but your comment above has to be one of the idiotic posts I have read in ages. I have read more intelligent posts on FDL or at KOS then what you just wrote.

But at least you ended on a good joke with the whole “Ron Paul helps build up the party instead of tearing it down for his own vanity.” I really hope that was a joke because if you were serious, RS needs to enact an IQ requirement for being a member and make you take the test.

acat

If you mean the GOP, then .. Paul’s a cancer and should have been drummed out decades ago…. or at least been assigned a minder to keep him away from cameras.

Mew

pttx333

elected. I’ve told this story here on RS before, but I guess you haven’t seen it. I lived in his district for many years, which is quite conservative. The reason he jumped parties from Libertarian ticket to Republican is because he figured out that by getting no action in the Libertarian Party that he can ride on the straight Republican ticket coattails! Of course, it took me a long time to figure out why … and was I horrified that I had been guilty myself by voting straight Republican Party ticket. I suppose there are many others who have never figured it out.

I cannot even begin to tell you what a sorry nutjob the man is. He will do anything, and I mean anything, to win. Sorry is what he is … sorry.

pttx333

number for a couple of days now, but I suppose no one else has seen it. PATHETIC!

jakeofalltrades

It would turn us into the Democrats we were founded to oppose.

neukm

…I’m just pointing out the faulty logic of catering to such a schizophrenic constituency.

carolynr

When I am on the phone bank…and I don’t go by the script…I have a conversation with people…that isn’t how they feel at all…and I am calling the Conservative section in SC….I know…I live in one in GA.

They do not like Romney. The man is NOT LIKEABLE. Then add to the mixture the blueprint for Obamacare and they are even madder. Top that off with his condescending RICH BOY attitude in that area…and they are DONE with Romney. They don’t mention his faith…they mention his trustworthiness. They like their ideas listened to…they have witnessed Romney too many times putting people down as though they don’t know what they are talking about.

Add my two cents…the man talks OVER THEIR HEADS. He is or tries to appear as a GEEK. The economy is my wheelhouse. Well…too bad I wasn’t there for that one…I’d ask him about the Big Dig in MA.

Gingrich is perceived as very smart and the solid Republicans are going for him. Because Santorum never fails to wear Jesus on his sleeve for the evangelicals…they split with Perry…who does not. This is my feedback from SC on the phonebank.

Oh…#1 ISSUE for Perry in Debates…Explain In-State Tuition and what you are going to do about illegal immigration. They do not want to hear ‘JUST SEAL THE BORDER…they want a plan. They know…that they are not ALL going to be sent back…but they want the law changed…and when it is changed…adhered to…THAT IS PERRY’S BIG NUT TO CRACK.

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

I am afraid that I disagree with Sen. Jim DeMint about Ron Paul.

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL