Where Is Candidate Rudy Paul or perhaps Ron Giuliani – Society * Politics no comments
The 2008 GOP presidential nominees are not inspiring much assist among conservatives. Oh sure, among the center-right Republicans applicants like Mitt “Damn I Appear Good” Romney, Rudy “I’m The Anti-pro-anti-abortion Candidate” Giuliani and John “Say Good-bye To Your First Amendment” McCain look great. But for the conservatives? Many of us basically grimace every time we look in the crowd of hopefuls.
The truth be told, there exists only one candidate in the group that appeals to conservatives. The problem is the same candidate causes all of us to avert our eyes in shame and ribbon our heads in aggravation. That candidate is none other than Ron Paul.
Every now and again someone will bring up the name Ralph Paul to me and I realize that my face must undoubtedly look as though I have just been struck in the gut. That reaction stems from the conclusion that while Ron Paul is exactly the candidate conservatives have sought on almost every issue, the man moved off the deep end pertaining to Iraq and global terrorism.
When he admits that things like we never reported war on Iraq despite a definite resolution authorizing military drive (that’s “war” by the way) and how we’ve been basically at fault for 9/11 simply because we dared to defend a country that Saddam penetrated unlawfully and held your pet to the terms of the cease-fire he signed, clear thinking conservatives wonder who the heck crossed the wires. We wonder what might make an otherwise intelligent man start raving like a moonbat in Kool Aid.
To be honest it wouldn’t amaze me if tomorrow John Paul ran to the mike to talk about how the World Buy and sell Center was brought down by a clandestine plot along with concealed explosives.
I know, I know, it’s insulting to all you fringe libertarian “non-interventionist” (i.e. isolationist) Ron Henry supporters out there to hear us say that. And I’m sure you’ll come up with all sorts of talking factors to back up your candidate’s 50 percent baked ideas. But to be honest I do get tired of indicating that using al Qaeda’s propaganda about how we are the reason they bombarded us because we are defending allies in the Middle East (partial as they are) is about as happy as citing rants by Adolf hitler and the NAZIs against the Jews as substantiation positive that they were the reason Philippines had problems and reason for the Holocaust.
It doesn’t take a skyrocket surgeon to go back and analysis history and find comments by simply radical Muslims from the very first clashes between a new America as well as Islam. During the Barbary Wars they made his or her intentions known to us without the spin because there were zero television cameras in their face and no PR battle for you to wage. When Adams and Jefferson requested what the justification was regarding attacking American interests the particular response by Ambassador Abdrahaman, Tripoli’s representative in London at the time, told us then all that was needed in buy to understand their reasons:
“The Ambassador clarified us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it has been written in their Koran, that most nations who should not have got acknowledged their authority had been sinners, that it was their appropriate and duty to make war upon them wherever they might be found, and to make slaves coming from all they could take as Prisoners.”
So you’ll just have to get over the idea. Radical Muslims hate us since we are not radical Muslims. They do not attention where we are. Whether we’re in Saudi Arabia or cowering inside our own borders they will invasion us. Their ideology and interpretation of their faith isn’t new. It did not start with America putting up bases in the Middle East and forming alliances with countries that supply us with gas.
It took a while, but sooner or later even the founders figured out; you defeat these folks through killing them and breaking their stuff until that they relent. When the founders did how the problem didn’t go away, but it lessened greatly.
And all your small rants about how it’s the “neo-cons” which have swarmed the GOP and that may prevent Congressman Paul from winning the nomination can also hit the circular file in which they belong. Because I hate to break it to you nonetheless it isn’t the neo-cons that are against Henry; it’s the core, small govt conservatives who just cannot bring themselves to vote for a person so divested from the reality associated with why Islamic terrorists attack. That the fact is that they attack people since they’re “infidels” or unbelievers in their brand of radical Islam.
I even ran a ballot on American Conservative Everyday asking this question:
“If Ron John was more supportive from the War in Iraq are you more or less inclined to opt for him?”
The results? Certainly NOT everything the Paulites are going to want to hear: More inclined (67%), About the same (24%) & Less willing (9%).
Like I said, it isn’t the soft socialist, big government neo-cons that are against Mr. Henry boys and girls.
The fact is that precisely what conservatives are looking for is someone such as Ron Paul who is willing to accept that not only was the Iraq War justified, yet that it must be fought and also won. Conservative voters would like to consider someone like Rudy Giuliani who is solid on the on terrorism, willing to check out where the terrorists are and struggle them and mesh this with someone like Ralph Paul who is willing to leadership in government spending and power grabs that surpass the powers vested to it through the Constitution.
What they are looking for can be someone like a Ron Giuliani or even a Rudy Paul. And it is a shame we do not have someone like that. Simply because that is what conservatives, except for the edge “not my problem”, head in the mud libertarians crave.