Ron Paul

FTFY

Because our current conventional thinking on foreign policy has been a winner?

This is what the MSM does is say anything different is kooky or crazy when it's the act of doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results that is lunacy.

He had the best line of the night I thought.

Once again coming from the looney-liberal-leftist-BFD...

I have a lot of respect for Ron Paul in that he has held to his convictions and his positions for many years.  He does not lie or pander to popular themes to get votes and not live up to hollow campaign promises.  He is by far, the most honorable, straight-narrowed, honest and least flip-flopping of the Republican field.  He's also not afraid to appear on "enemy" talk-shows.  I love it when he appears on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.  Total polar opposites and Stewart has a world of respect for the man.

He has no chance of winning the nomination and he knows it.  His goal is to try and redirect the Republican Party back to their roots and original platform.  He's said that he's taking it all the way to the convention to try and implement change in the party and get them back on track.

agreed.. I laughed when the two other canidates talked about going to war with Iran, but the guy who thinks we should decrease our role in foreign governments is the odd one

I love his anti-war sentiments and the way he consistently points out the absurdity of his opponents' foreign aggression rhetoric. I also greatly appreciate his fidelity to our Constitutional principles and the way he skewers others who ignore Constitutional principles as a matter of expedience.

I don't agree with all of his convictions, but I appreciate that he has the courage to express them.

Keep on keeping on, Congressman Paul.

How is that a bad thing?  That is what has gotten us into alot of the messes we are in now.

double post

Another "check" in the Ron Paul win column:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ron-paul-challenges-candidates-to-bike-ride-118/2012/01/26/gIQALN2FUQ_video.html

Thing is, you can be respected for what you are good at doing while not being able to do something else.  I think that is ok.  Just because your smart and respected doesn't mean you would make a good president.  I see no conflict in that.

On the one hand, I think it's sad too, and a most unfortunate outcome of a strongly polarized bipartisan system.

On the other hand, we (as a nation) have conflicting expectations, which may in turn conflict with what the job of President is actually like. I'm sure all of us would like a President, and would like to think we ourselves would be the kind of President, to stick strongly to principles.

A lot of the time, actually being the President likely means making decisions that are an unhappy compromise between many different, often conflicting, sets of principles.

Well in the WH I feel he would be ineffectual because Congress would refuse to work with him. Not his fault.

Curious, what Presidents have we had in the last few decades that make you think of "intelligence and integrity".... or even "adherence to the Constitution" for that matter?

How does that differ from any other president, except when his party controls both the House and the Senate?  And even then, you have filibusters to contend with.

At least with Ron Paul, you'd never have to worry about Congress arguing whether or not he had authorization to send our troops into harm's way.  He wouldn't do it in the first place unless someone attacked U.S. soil.

As to your second question -- in my lifetime I'd say many are intelligent, few had integrity.  Reagan had the Iran-Contra scandal (and whatever his involvement, you better believe George H.W. Bush knew everything -- he was previously the Director of Central Intelligence).  And then when he became president he pardoned most of those involved.  Clinton had the Lewinsky thing and he made questionable pardons also.  George W. Bush had the Iraq WMD garbage and jettisoned a bunch of environmental protections right before he left office in a kickback to big energy.  Obama was in charge while our nation's credit rating got downgraded.  Yeah you can argue that's on Congress, but the president has a lot of leverage - he just didn't use it.

Wow that was a pretty good wall of text for me heh 

In other words it is easy to get people to agree on what they don't like and infinitely more difficult to get them to agree on what the solution should be.

Exactly.

The self-professed great minds of CoJ can rarely reach accord on any political or economic issue, and yet we lambaste our politicians for engaging in the same types of quibbling we do ... AND the ensuing failure to reach any kind of consensus, much less an implementable, effective one.

I never said there was a president in the past who made me think of intelligence and integrity, but I don't think anyone who made it to president is lacking intelligence.  All I am saying is just those qualities in itself is not enough to make a good president.

Because it is still two patries... and even if you do not have control, you still have some support. both parties would turn their back to him. President No would veto everything that came across his desk, and congress would just collect a pay check for four years. You would have 300 spin masters all pointing their finger at Paul.

They make a good start.

The problem is there isn't one. We have reached a cross roads. Those that think government is the problem, those that think it is the cure. There is no consensus with that, and there is no compromise to that. a lot of the big issues on the table now are just that... more government control, or less.

What we get in return is a water down compromised deal that does none of the solutions asked for, and does nothing to solve the problem it was designed to fix. Obama care is a great example. However it is another great opportunity to stick a bunch of pork on and attach riders to get the things they want when nobody is paying attention.

I certainly understand compromise. And there are thing that we can still compromise on and get some work done. But right now, I would rather have Paul stand his ground on his ideals that all the wishy washy sell outs we have now selling this country down the river.