Iraq will lose this election for McCain

[flaja]

[quote=hrdman2luv;6599]

Originally Posted by flaja

Conservatives have always been against big government and un-constitutional agentcies. Conservatives believe that it's not the role of the federal government to spend you tax money on some one in another state. Especially, when our tax dollars are going to educate illegal aliens.
And the one thing that makes even more sense, is that someone in Washington DC, thinks they know more about my kids education in East Texas, than his own teachers.

You must be either the biggest fool or the biggest liar on the internet if you think Ron Paul isn’t an isolationist. He is (apart from Afghanistan) opposed to all U.S. troop deployments overseas without a declaration of war. He is opposed to foreign alliances. He is an isolationist.

[hrdman2luv]

[quote=flaja;6604]

Originally Posted by hrdman2luv

You must be either the biggest fool or the biggest liar on the internet if you think Ron Paul isn’t an isolationist. He is (apart from Afghanistan) opposed to all U.S. troop deployments overseas without a declaration of war. He is opposed to foreign alliances. He is an isolationist.

That sounded like a statement taken straight out of the John Dubya McCain play book. (written by karl Rove)

We aren't supposed to go to war without a declaration. We had no business going to Iraq. And we have no business in the middle east, other than trade and to visit. Thanks to Bush and the rest of the NEOCONS, travel in the middle east is too dangerous. And trade is impossible because of the sanctions that were placed on Iran. Which I might add, we have no business telling any country who can trade with who.
What Bush is doing is more isolationist than anything Ron Paul has done.
"Your either for us, or your with the terrorist".

Being that the president doesn't have the right to make us chose who's right or wrong. Especially since he has been wrong on so many things about the middle east.

[nohil-billy]

So who do you think Paul's running mate will be?

[Herb Schaffler]

"You must be either the biggest fool or the biggest liar on the internet if you think Ron Paul isn’t an isolationist. He is (apart from Afghanistan) opposed to all U.S. troop deployments overseas without a declaration of war. He is opposed to foreign alliances. He is an isolationist"

Ron Paul is for free trade and therefore, not an isolationist. A better term for his position on foreign policy is "non-interventionist".

[nohil-billy]

"Non-entity" says it better !!!

[Herb Schaffler]

"His opposition to a federal role in public education goes against 223 years of U.S. history and is not conservatism."

I thought that public education was always a matter of the states.

"Paul’s opposition to the military draft is not conservatism."

Reagan was also opposed to the military draft.

"It would also make federal court decisions on those subjects non-binding as precedent in state courts, and would prohibit federal courts from spending any money to enforce their judgments. Because the bill forbids federal courts from hearing "any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion," a practical effect of this bill might be that atheists could be banned from holding public office in Texas, as its state constitution requires the acknowledgment of a supreme being.[4] However, historically this technicality has not been enforced."

There's the issue of the 14th Amendment which allows the federal judiciary to intervene when states violate individual rights.

"Ron Paul’s support for offshore drilling and his general opposition to environmental conservation laws is corporatism, not conservatism."

It isn't corporatism, it's laisez faire capitalism. Ron Paul is opposed to subsidies for oil companies. Subsidies for oil companies is corporatism. We need to allow offshore drilling to break our dependence on foreign crude.

"If Paul isn’t a libertarian, why does he want to legalize drugs?"

Some conservatives like the late William F. Buckley was also for legalizing drugs and so was former Secretary of State George Schultz.

Actually, Ron Paul is a mixture of Pat Buchanan paleoconservative and libertarian, taking a paleoconservative position on some issues like opposition to NAFTA and opposition to abortion and immigration and taking a libertarian position on drugs. Concerning our interventionist policy, conservatives were once opposed to a foreign interventionist policy. See William Kaufman's upcoming book, "Ain't My America".

[nohil-billy]

Does wanting to legalize drugs make one a Libertarian? I've always had a theory that if marijuana was legalized and plentiful, people would be less likely to turn to cocaine, heroin, crack, or methamphetamines to get high. My reason for believing this is because I smoked a lot of pot when I was younger, but if I wanted to get high and had none I took whatever was available. I always thought that this position made me a social moderate. Is that the equivalent of a Libertarian? I may be in the wrong party.

[Herb Schaffler]

The libertarian position is that it's your body, not the government's. Conservatives who say people can't put this or that in their body because it's not good for them are just as bad as liberals as they are both endorsing a nanny state mentality.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by Herb Schaffler

"You must be either the biggest fool or the biggest liar on the internet if you think Ron Paul isn’t an isolationist. He is (apart from Afghanistan) opposed to all U.S. troop deployments overseas without a declaration of war. He is opposed to foreign alliances. He is an isolationist"

Ron Paul is for free trade and therefore, not an isolationist. A better term for his position on foreign policy is "non-interventionist".

The isolationists of the 1930s were not against international trade. Trade has nothing to do with isolationism. If you are not willing to intervene, you won’t be able to stave off any threats to your trade that foreign government or terrorist groups may try to pose. The U.S. once tried to have a non-interventionist but trade anyway policy. It ended on April 6, 1917.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by Herb Schaffler

The libertarian position is that it's your body, not the government's. Conservatives who say people can't put this or that in their body because it's not good for them are just as bad as liberals as they are both endorsing a nanny state mentality.

Not only are things like marijuana and cocaine not good for you, you pose a danger to society when you put these things in your body. This is why conservatives want these things to be illegal.