Who do you want to see as the Republican Presidential Candidate?

[flo]

Chris, did you hear Paul speak at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition last weekend? If I recall correctly, 6 of the hopefuls were there and it was a chance for all of them to speak at length. I though Ron Paul started out well but after a while he just started sounding slightly looney. Maybe it's just me, I know he has a demented but extremely loyal pack of followers.

(as Herman Cain says, that last bit was a joke!!!)

[flo]

Originally Posted by Chris F

So I am curious just how do you and dethbob think he has no understanding and please cite specifics not speculation.

How the world works and the Constitution are two different things. I believe many of Paul's views are admirable but naive. Some of his ideas would not translate to being an effective world leader and could ultimately be dangerous (as dethbob said). The first issue that comes to mind are his thoughts on US/Israeli foreign policy.

OK, 3 posts in a row, I'm bowing out now ;-)

Originally Posted by Chris F

So I am curious just how do you and dethbob think he has no understanding and please cite specifics not speculation.

Here's a good example:

"It was absolutely not necessary," Paul said of the May 1 CIA-led Navy SEALs raid.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...in-laden-raid/

"Paul said the United States should have gone after bin Laden the same way it went after Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, architect of the Sept. 11 attacks, by working with the Pakistan government."

Does he really think Pakistan today is the same as Pakistan ten years ago? The best case scenario if he had been in a position to actually do what he says he would have done is that Bin Laden would be still alive, mocking our ineptitude from a new location. Worst case is that the SEAL team would have ended up getting beheaded on Al Jazeera. I’m not voting for that, thanks.

Originally Posted by flo

Oh come on, Chris, globalist war monger? If anything, we have a globalist war monger now - the guy who has unleased more targeted drones to kill people than anyone ever could have imagined.

I know Paul understands the constitution, my point is that the longer he talks, the more unhinged he sounds.

Gingrich is a noted historian, I'd say he is at LEAST as well versed in his understanding of the founding fathers as Paul, if not much more so. Many (or all) of the others may know as much about the constitution and our founding fathers as well but unless they point it out in debates, as Paul does, how are we to judge? That's why I try not to make a sweeping generalization.

Yeah ever since Nixon we have had globalist war monegers.

Originally Posted by flo

Chris, did you hear Paul speak at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition last weekend? If I recall correctly, 6 of the hopefuls were there and it was a chance for all of them to speak at length. I though Ron Paul started out well but after a while he just started sounding slightly looney. Maybe it's just me, I know he has a demented but extremely loyal pack of followers.

(as Herman Cain says, that last bit was a joke!!!)

Nope I did not that is why I was asking why you all thought he did not understand. In case you had a clip or something specific I could see. Ron Paul is a libertarian and I personally would not ever vote for him but at of the GOP choices he is the only one who would follow the US Constitution 100% and for that I owuld rather see him than any of the others. But I personally would not vote for him.

Originally Posted by flo

How the world works and the Constitution are two different things. I believe many of Paul's views are admirable but naive. Some of his ideas would not translate to being an effective world leader and could ultimately be dangerous (as dethbob said). The first issue that comes to mind are his thoughts on US/Israeli foreign policy.

OK, 3 posts in a row, I'm bowing out now ;-)

See that scares me. What you just said weather you meant ot or not was screw the Constitution being involved in everyone elses (world's) business is better than following the Constitution. Sadly many think like that and this is why America is going down the proverbial crapper.

Originally Posted by Dethbob

Here's a good example:

"It was absolutely not necessary," Paul said of the May 1 CIA-led Navy SEALs raid.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...in-laden-raid/

"Paul said the United States should have gone after bin Laden the same way it went after Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, architect of the Sept. 11 attacks, by working with the Pakistan government."

Does he really think Pakistan today is the same as Pakistan ten years ago? The best case scenario if he had been in a position to actually do what he says he would have done is that Bin Laden would be still alive, mocking our ineptitude from a new location. Worst case is that the SEAL team would have ended up getting beheaded on Al Jazeera. I’m not voting for that, thanks.

Because that is what the Constitution of the USA dictates. By your logic a president should be free to ignore the Constitution as long as the end justifies the means. Worst case scenerio with Paul as the guy the seal teams stays in America guards the coast and keeps any terrorist from bugging us. This is why the public schools have dumbed down so much over the years they need an undereducated electorate to continue the globalist mirage and make people think if we are not attacking someone we will somehow be less safe. Sad but true this what we have came to.

Originally Posted by Chris F

This is why the public schools have dumbed down so much over the years they need an undereducated electorate to continue the globalist mirage and make people think if we are not attacking someone we will somehow be less safe. Sad but true this what we have came to.

Sad but true this is what we have come to. Did your private school not tell you about spellcheck?

The Constitution allows the President to defend the Nation, even if the enemy doesn’t play by the rules. If you think staying in your square and not bothering anyone is a good way to stay safe, google ‘Maginot Line.’

[Play The Man]

Out of the current crop, I would consider myself a Perry supporter. He seems to have imploded with poor debate performances (reportedly; I haven't watched any debates myself). He has been in free-fall since he suggested that those opposing in-state tuition for illegals lack a "heart". I hope he makes a comeback. It looks like it is going to be Romney. I'm not that excited about Romney, but I will vote for him, and support him, against Obama.

Originally Posted by Dethbob

Sad but true this is what we have come to. Did your private school not tell you about spellcheck?

The Constitution allows the President to defend the Nation, even if the enemy doesn’t play by the rules. If you think staying in your square and not bothering anyone is a good way to stay safe, google ‘Maginot Line.’

give me a frickin break. That is the best you got. Whining like a little baby liberal about editing on a fan fourm. Please spare me you asinine comments. If you do not want to engage in a civil discourse then refrain from commenting. But if you want to be silly and trivial and can go down that road and you can ask others on this forum it will not be pretty.

BTW- I went to public school and am a published writer so didn't your schooling teaching basic reading comprehension?

I do not know about you but I do not have the time to edit and proof read every little thing I do. This is a fan page not the freaking National Review.

So if oyu would care to return to civility and actually discuss the topic at hand and not my typing then by all means make a post with defensible logic.