-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Daniel Larison writes “Huntsman lost almost all ‘primary voters who are tired of a hyperinterventionist foreign policy’ once he took an ultra-hawkish position on Iran.” Certainly Ron Paul, with his actual opposition to the war in Iraq and any subsequent preventive war against Iran, has a stronger case to make to such voters. But I can tell you anecdotally there are still antiwar Republicans who think Huntsman’s comments on Iran are just positioning and like the idea of a candidate with a more mainstream image than Paul.
Whether this is a large enough group to mean anything is another story. It’s worth noting that Huntsman also has an anti-Romney ad, taking on two of the three candidates with a good chance of finishing in the top tier in New Hampshire while hoping the Iowa results take care of the third (Newt Gingrich). Larison should remember from the Chuck Hagel experience that respectable-sounding realists get all kinds of benefit of the doubt, even when they are not timely opponents of any large war.
View all comments (139) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/12/30/more-on-huntsman-vs-paul
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
YSBA| 12.30.11 @ 3:56PM
Certainly Ron Paul, with his actual opposition to the war in Iraq and any subsequent preventive war against Iran ...
Actually Paul's position is that if Iran is a threat to the United States then we should declare war constitutionally, go in and win the war and then get out. Check this one out, for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LfsP85mQoI
Occam's Tool| 12.30.11 @ 7:03PM
And then he sets the bar for declaring war insanely high.
Ron Paul supports Bradley Manning. He targets StormFront and Spotlight supporters for fundraising. He's a scumbag. 'Nuff said.
Jack in Wi.| 12.30.11 @ 7:59PM
Occam is the racist of the site, forever calling for genocide and mass murder. Occam shame on you for calling for war crimes. Planning for and pushing agressive war is a major war crime that many Germans got hung for. May I hope the same happens to those pushing a third world war which will happen if we attack Iran. Blessed are the Peace Makers. Pray for Ron Paul as he works to stop the warmongers, who want nuclear genocide, and worldwide financial collapse.
Sean| 12.30.11 @ 11:10PM
We know one thing. Occam would never pick up a rifle and go fight Iran.
Dai Alanye | 12.31.11 @ 10:35AM
"...Paul's position is that if Iran is a threat..."
IF -- the biggest word in the English language under some circumstances. I predict Ron Paul will never come to the conclusion that Iran is a threat, for the simple reason he's an isolationist pure and simple. Let's also remember that Captain Ron had to be drafted into the Air Force, never having the nerve to volunteer to defend his country.
He only voted for the resolution to invade Afghanistan at the last moment, having become convinced it would be political suicide to vote against it. We should probably refer to him as Ron I. Paul from now on, the I standing for IF.
Clint| 12.30.11 @ 4:11PM
Dr.Ron Paul,
" I will ask Congress For A Declaration of War against Iran, if necessary."
Watch This Short Video About Iran & The Middle East.
http://digitaljournal.com/article/316304
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 8:28PM
Where does it say in the Constitution that Congress must use the words "Congress declares war on XYZ" and not, say, "Congress authorises the POTUS to use whatever legal force necessary, including military force, against XYZ"?
I'll tell you. It doesn't. Of course, Ron Paul probably thinks that JFK discussed that "clause" with Khrushev on that phantom phone call that supposedly ended the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Clint| 12.30.11 @ 9:33PM
Dr.Ron Paul's Foreign Policy Advisor Michael Scheuer, Former CIA Chief of The bin Laden Unit,
" On Iran, The President should:
1.) Explain to the American people that Iran is no threat to the United States unless we or Israel attack it first, and then it would be a serious threat to U.S. access to energy and would likely stage terrorist operations in the continental United States. [The last thanks to 30-years of federal immigration policies that leave us without knowledge of who is in the country or what they are capable of doing.]
2.) Publicly state that there will be no U.S. surprise attack on Iran, and no U.S. attack at all on Iran unless the president asks for a formal declaration of war and the Congress votes its approval in a constitutional manner.
3.) Call in Israel's ambassador to the United States and tell him that we understand that Israel believes Iran is a threat to its survival, and that we agree that Israel has every right to defend itself. If Israel believes it must go to war with Iran, then so be it. But also tell the ambassador that if Israel attacks Iran, the U.S. administration will declare U.S. neutrality in the war and immediately cut off military and financial support to all combatants in the war.
4.) Speak to the American people and tell them to expect to be brutally propagandized by U.S. citizen Israel-Firsters through AIPAC, their ubiquitous media shills, and the men and women they own in the U.S. Congress and federal bureaucracy. Urge Americans to ignore this effort by U.S. Israel-Firsters to get them to send their soldier-children to fight in a religious war in which the U.S. has no genuine national interest at stake, and in which U.S. participation would further bankrupt the country, require the reintroduction of conscription, and put America at war with all of the Muslim world -- Shia and Sunni -- for the foreseeable future."
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Smear Bund Boy.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 6:43AM
Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam! Spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam. Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Spam spam spam spam!
aware| 12.31.11 @ 7:50AM
Article 1 section 8. Anything else you want to tell us?
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 8:31AM
So, you are arguing that an AUMF is unconstitutional?
Warrior | 12.31.11 @ 3:04PM
"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;" Pretty clear what they believed the President would need a military for. The Constitution only called for a Navy. The Founding Fathers never planned for a standing Army which is why there can only be appropriations for two years.
If you would like to argue that in these modern times, you need more than a Navy to protect the interests of the "Union" then you should petition your representatives for an amendment to the Constitution. When you authorize the use of military force, you have sanctioned an act of war.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 5:04PM
Warrior, I know that.
Bruno's Pet| 12.30.11 @ 4:35PM
I will make a preemptive surrender to Iran since we are just experiencing blow back from our evil deeds in 1953. I will decide on what we should allow them to do us and put this out into the private sector for bid. That way an American company could profit from terrorism instead of just the terrorists. I will be bringing jobs back to America that have previously been going to Pakistan, Yemen, and other peaceful Muslim states. I plan on being one gigantic reset button of the overcharge variety. Secretary of War Milo Minderbinder will be firmly in charge of all these activities. If somebody is attacking America it is blowback for something we did. There is really no such thing as evil just human beings making rational descisions to defend themselves from previous American evil. The second after the Founders signed that Constitution things started going to hell. Right off the bat that damn Washington was using troops to collect taxes and then Adams participated in our first undeclared war. Who the hell did those guys think they were, the Founders or something? There are a lot of discussions to be had on when we went bad and what did we know. I won't stop until the only clean patriots are yours truly, Bruno's lover, Ron Freaking Paul and my son Rand Paul Un. Of course I will not be too hard on my wacky followers. I have been sturying how the Reverend Wright deals with his congregation for guidance. It is getting better and better every day. For the first time I am proud of my country.
Clint| 12.30.11 @ 6:11PM
You Israel Firster Smear Bund Boys Blow Bibi.
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Smear Bund Boys.
Bruno's Pet| 12.30.11 @ 7:28PM
That is no way to talk to your master, Clintie. I sentence you to be treated like mittens romney. Have you noticed that you longer make any sense? That is to be expected when you worship me, President for Life Idi Amin Dada Ron Freaking Paul Il. If you improve your attitude I will give you back your citizenship and make you a Paulbot First clASS.
Clint| 12.30.11 @ 9:36PM
You're Bibi's Mastrabater Brunhilda BibiBot.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 4:44PM
Ron Paul: All Aboard! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Haaaa! Mental Wounds Still Screaming! Driving Me Insane I'm Going Off The Rails On My Crazy Train! (And I Want To Take You Along For The Ride)
http://predicthistunpredictpas.....ha-ha.html
Enjoy!
Tom| 12.30.11 @ 5:58PM
Speaking of music videos, here is an appropriate one for Herr Doktor Nutjob:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnzHtm1jhL4
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 6:13PM
Purrfect. I'll try to use it in one of the next pieces. The Paul Pot is a fount of inspiration so it shouldn't be long. :-)
Clint| 12.30.11 @ 6:18PM
We Are Being Set Up By Israel Firster RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooges For The Ruling Elites' Frontman Mittens Romney.
These Are The Israel Firster RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooges Who Gave Us The Serial Traitor To Conservatism, John McCain Of McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy,McCain-Lieberman,Gang Of 14, Opposing Bush Tax Cuts Of 2001 & 2003,TARP.
Now They Are Trying To Give Us RomneyCare,TARP, Cynical Flip-Flops On Abortion, Gays, Refuses to Sign Pro-Life Pledge, Illegal Immigrants, "Little Chain Saw Al" At Bain, Crony Capitalism Campaign Money Trail.....
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 6:37PM
"We Are Being Set Up By Israel Firster RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooges For The Ruling Elites' Frontman Mittens Romney."
Yeah, that looks exactly like what I am doing:
Mitt Romney: Flip-Flopping Away, Flip-Flopping Away. You Know The Weaker Your Foundation, The More You'll Be Flip-Flopping Away.
http://predicthistunpredictpas.....-flip.html
Dude, my objections to Ron Paul, who was born while FDR was serving his FIRST of four terms, have nothing to do with an allegiance -- which I do not have -- to any other candidate. I agree with him on probably 90% of the issues, but the chasm created by the remaining 10% is too deep and the bridge too tenuous, which reminds me of your grasp of reality.
I am a libertarian, not a Conservative nor am I a Republican. BUT, I CANNOT SUPPORT HIM. Rand? Yes. Ron? No.
Cynthia F'ing McKinney? Seriously?
"The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa."
OK, guys, altogether now:
And, then Clinty woke up in New Hampshire and South Carolina!
Clint| 12.30.11 @ 9:22PM
Dudess Isreal Firster WeSit Too Much You're A Neo-Libertarian Israel Firster Smear Bund Girlie .
Dr. Ron Paul Supported All Third Party Candidates In Protest To The "Democrat Light Party The Fop GOP Had Become,Liar Israel Firster Smear Bund Girlie.
"Neolibertarians are fiscal libertarians who support a strong military, and believe that the U.S. government should use that military to overthrow dangerous and oppressive regimes. It is their emphasis on military intervention that distinguishes them from paleolibertarians (see below), and gives them reason to make common cause with neoconservatives."
The Tea Party Steps On The Neo-Libertarian Israel Firster Smear Bund Girl.
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 10:47PM
I am no neo-libertarian. I didn't support the Afghanistan ground war or the Iraq war. You don't even want to know what I would have done to Tora Bora.
I don't believe in nation-building and Wilsonian foreign policy, whether practised by Shrub or Obama, but you are to bloody stupid to understand that.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 5:13AM
Then You're Irrelevant.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 4:18PM
" You're An Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad, " Me Zits-Me Munch".
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad,"Me Zits- Me Munch."
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 5:03PM
Who is "Me Zits-Me Munch"?
I hope that you are spreading your spam all over the internet. It is people like you that insure that Ron Paul will never be POTUS and for that, I thank you from the bottom of my cold, dark, black heart.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:20PM
That Would Be You. "Me Zits-Me Munch."
I Thank You From The Bottom Of My Bottom, Assface.
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 11:01AM
Not I.
Clint| 12.30.11 @ 6:14PM
Who Is This Cat Named Mittens ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1wPrsEP2nc
The Tea Party Steps On Mittens' Tail.
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 7:01PM
Who is this bloody, f*cking Paultard, who thinks The Paul Pot is going to be POTUS?
You need some new tinfoil. By the way, you never answered my question the other night:
Now that you Paulistinians, like Paulsamic Vinegar Mom, have "discovered" that vinegar can cleanse the sky of chemtrails, do you have any special uses for cottage cheese and Cheerios?
Drink that Paulaide, Clinty! Drink that Paulaide!
Clint| 12.30.11 @ 9:26PM
You Seem So Upset & PMS'Y Israel Firster Smear Bund Boy.
Here, Watch It Again.
Who Is This Cat Named Mittens ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1wPrsEP2nc
The Tea Party Steps On Mittens' Tail.
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 10:45PM
I'm not a male, Paultard.
I don't care who Mittens is.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 5:15AM
Then, You're An Irrelevant Troll.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 6:40AM
Nope. I am your eraser.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 4:02PM
Nope, "Me Zits-Me Munch", You're An Asser.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 6:22PM
Nope, I am going to wipe your vote off the map.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:23PM
You Don't Live In My State. You're Irrelevant To My Vote, Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad.
Wipe You Chin, Bibi Spilled On You.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 6:22PM
And, you are going take in and this ask if you can have another.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:26PM
That's What Bibi Told You, After He Spilled On You, Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad.
Bob Grant| 12.31.11 @ 12:29AM
Who knew Ron Paul could afford full time seminar bloggers.
Clint, how much is he paying you? Would flippin' burgers put you in a higher tax bracket?
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 5:21AM
What We Know Is That We Are Giving You RINO-CINO Apoplexy.
" ANKENY, Iowa – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul won another local tea party presidential straw poll in Iowa tonight, outshining his competitors in a display of growing organizational strength around the state.
This local win follows Ron Paul’s endorsement by two Buena Vista-area tea party co-founders, his endorsement bytwo Dubuque-area tea party founders, and his winning first place in the Dubuque Tea Party presidential straw poll.'
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 11:13AM
How can I be a RINO or CINO when I am a LIBERTARIAN, you 'tupid 'tard?
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 12:51PM
Because You're a Libturd, Israel Firster.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 1:20PM
I am not a Liberal nor am I an Israel Firster. That you are reduced to sputtering inaccuracies is just evidence of your intellectual pygmyism.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:28PM
You're An Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad,"Me Zits-Me Munch".
Oldefarte| 12.31.11 @ 3:37PM
And those endorsers celebrated in fine fashion too, huh????? :
http://youtu.be/a4-spBDcJyk
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:30PM
The Farte At The Mittens Cat Nip Festival.
http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/.....1/whoa.jpg
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:36PM
Ah !
Here's Farte At Mittens' Cat Nip Festival.
http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/.....1/whoa.jpg
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:31AM
Better 'mittens' than TOO SHORT SHORTS WHILE BICYCLING, right????????
Occam's Tool| 12.30.11 @ 7:09PM
Looked at you website, Resist, and noted something brilliant:
Yes, The G-d of the Copybook Headings by Kipling. This is very appropriate for a man who believes that all morality focuses on economic factors (The Gods of The Marketplace), and favors legalizing Marijuana and Heroin:
The Gods of the Copybook Headings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.
We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.
We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.
With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know." [Note Well, Paulbots, this paragraph---OT]
On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."
In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."
Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return! "
Occam's Tool| 12.30.11 @ 7:10PM
Sorry, Reist: "your website." G-d Bless and happy New Year!
Occam's Tool| 12.30.11 @ 7:11PM
Damn, that's "Resist." Time to go home. The Kipling verses, of course, refer to the idiocy that is Paul.
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 8:31PM
Kipling is brilliant. Happy New Year!
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 8:31PM
Kipling is brilliant. Happy New Year!
C Bowen | 12.30.11 @ 6:40PM
The Ruling Class is clearly anti-Paul, which is why Angelo Codevilla has been put into hiding.
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 7:30PM
I don't know how The Paul Pot keeps getting elected. He is a bloody nut and a bigot. If he won the nomination, imagine the visuals of at the debates: Obama v. The Paul Pot with his Life Alert button around his neck!
He was born when FDR was still serving his FIRST of four terms. I am not an ageist, but c'mon. Reagan was the oldest POTUS ever elected and he was 81 years old when he LEFT office after 8 years. Paul is already 76.
Paul: Not the Spirit of '76 we are looking for!
aware| 12.31.11 @ 8:05AM
You already proved you don't know what the Constitution says, now you prove you are an idiot. Your masters are not getting their money's worth.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 10:43AM
I have no master. Neither the Constitution nor Federal law describe, proscribe or stipulate what form a declaration of war must take. As they say, you can look it up.
I have a juris doctorate. Thanks for playing. :-)
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 1:00PM
You Already Had A Jury And They Made You See The Court Appointed Doctor, Libturd Israel Firster Nut Bag.
The Tea Party Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 3:59PM
Moron, it means that I have a law degree.
I am a libertarian, but registered as an Independent. Tell me, Clinty, as whose candidate did Ron Paul run in 1988?
A. Republican Party
B. Democratic Party
C. Socialist Party
D. Communist Party
E. Libertarian Party
If you answered "E," is Ron Paul a "Libturd"?
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:46PM
Like I Said, You Already Had A Jury And They Made You See The Court Appointed Doctor, Libturd Israel Firster Nut Bag.
The Tea Party Is Here And In Iowa.
Ronald Reagan,
" If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are traveling the same path."
Ronald Reagan,
"Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 9:25AM
Reagan would not endorse Ron Paul today, Clinty. You are kidding yourself. Paul compared him to Stalin.
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 11:28AM
Now,The Rest Of The Story Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad," Me Zits- Me Munch".
Dr.Ron Paul,
" The Assault on our Privacy
Our financial privacy has been attacked with restrictions on the use of
honestly earned cash, and bank surveillance that has sought to make every
teller a monetary cop.
In the name of fighting drugs, the central government has modernized its
vast computer network and linked it with data files in states and localities,
enabling the IRS, FBI and other agencies to construct dossiers on every
innocent American.
In the Washington, D.C., of 1988, anyone exercising the basic human
right to privacy is branded a possible criminal. This kind of 1984-think,
more appropriate to Soviet Russia than the U.S.A., has grown alarmingly since
Reagan came into office.
As human beings, we have the right to keep our personal and family
finances - and other intimate matters - secret from nosey relatives. Yet the
politicians, who are dangerous as well as nosey, claim the right to strip us
bare. This dreadful development is foreign to our Constitution and
everything America was established to defend. The politicians claim it has
nothing to do with taxing and controlling us.
In this, as in virtually everything else, the politicians are lying. In
fact, I believe that the drug hysteria was whipped up to strengthen big
government's hold over us, and to distract Americans from the crimes of
Washington, and the addiction to big government that is endemic there.
There is Another Way"
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:32AM
Just love them TOO SHORT SHORTS, right?????
aware| 12.31.11 @ 5:12PM
The clear intent of the founders was that the Executive be empowered to direct military operations AFTER Congress declared war.
As our Rulers see the Constitution just as you are here arguing, you are arguing in behalf of the Status Quo. Why would a "libertarian" argue on behalf of the State? And worse, in behalf of less restriction on what the State loves most, war?
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 5:32PM
I am not arguing on behalf of the state nor do I argue for war. It is what it is. Again, should Jefferson and Madison have been impeached or do you think that they, possibly, knew that the three words "declaration of war" were not necessary?
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 5:44PM
And, bear this in mind, the Barbary States (read: nations) had broken the Treaty of Tripoli and Tripolitania had formally declared war on the US. Congress issued the following authorisation:
Congress passed naval legislation that, among other things, provided for six frigates that "shall be officered and manned as the President of the United States may direct." … In the event of a declaration of war on the United States by the Barbary powers, these ships were to 'protect our commerce & chastise their insolence — by sinking, burning or destroying their ships & Vessels wherever you shall find them.'"
Jefferson and Madison were authorised by Congress to wage war against the Barbary States (read: sovereign state).
Madison, the Father of the COTUS, wrote that in the Federal Convention of 1787, the phrase "make war" was changed to "declare war" in order to leave to the President the power to repel sudden attacks, but not to commence war without the explicit approval of Congress. He must have authorisation. He does not need a formal declaration with the words "Declaration of War" in it.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 5:46PM
James Madison reported that in the Federal Convention of 1787, the phrase "make war" was changed to "declare war" in order to leave to the Executive the power to repel sudden attacks but not to commence war without the explicit approval of Congress. Here are the minutes from the Constitutional Convention:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18t.....es_817.asp
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:51PM
Neither Jefferson Nor Madison required us to follow the confusing dictates of the UN, since that is where the ultimate authority to invade Iraq is coming from — rather than from the American people and the U.S. Constitution.
Transferring authority to wage war, calling it permission to use force to fight for peace in order to satisfy the UN Charter, which replaces the Article I, Section 8 war power provision, is about as close to 1984 "newspeak" that we will ever get in the real world."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 9:23AM
This has nothing to do with the UN. Bush got prior authorisation from Congress for both Afghanistan and Iraq. Both Jefferson and Madison had prior authorisation -- NOT declarations of war -- for the Barbary Wars.
Those, who refuse to learn history and the law, are doomed to fall for Ron Paul's bullshit.
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:33AM
Next time we'll invade-bicycle Iraq in TOO SHORT SHORTS !!!!!!!!
aware| 1.1.12 @ 12:09PM
To argue that the Barbary "states" were "nations" is ridiculous. They were bandit conclaves like Port Royal or Tortuga in the 1500s. No matter how you stretch it the Barbary "wars" was not a war between nation states.
Again if Madison didn't need or believe in "declaration of war" why did he agitate for just that in 1812?
Again, your view is the view of the Powers That Be and mine is not in danger of becoming dominant, so don't worry.
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 6:30PM
Read the minutes from the Constitutional Convention and both were considered wars at the time.
aware| 1.2.12 @ 8:08AM
Read Federalist#69 and #8. Written to assuage just the fear of war lord you are advocating. I'm no fan of Hamilton but he was the point man on this for the Federalists.
Still wondering why the "Father of the Constitution" felt a declaration was needed in 1812.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 11:18AM
By the way, aware, wouldn't you agree that both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who is called the "Father of the Constitution," would probably have known what the drafters of the COTUS meant when they wrote that Congress must "declare war" in Article I, Section 8? I would think so. So, it is sort of strange that there were no DECLARATIONS of WAR for the First Barbary War and the Second Barbary War, rather (like both Afghanistan and Iraq), Congress granted prior AUTHORISATION for both.
Were those "illegal" wars? Were Jefferson and Madison "war criminals," too?
aware| 12.31.11 @ 3:54PM
Let's see, no army involved, no occupation, and other than burning a captured ship no "invasion". You call this a war? Pirate suppression much as we see on the coast of Somalia today.
If a declaration of war is not required why did Madison ask for it in 1812? Or why in 1898, 1917, or 1941?
If you think the founders weren't above ignoring the Constitution, study deeper. Men are men, even founders.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 5:02PM
Authorisation to use military force is constitutional. There is no language anywhere in the COTUS that says Congress must issue a "Declaration of War" using those exact terms.
Ask Jefferson, Madison, Congress at the time, the people living during that time, and historians why they called the First Barbary War a "war." Jefferson, Madison, Congress at the time, the people living during that time, and historians why they called the Second Barbary War a "war."
No, I don't think attacking pirate boats constitutes a war, but then, we never signed a treaty with them as we did with a sovereign nation, Tripolitania.
Since Jefferson and Madison acted waged war against"Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary"; Hassan Bashaw, Dey, Ottoman Empire without a formal declaration of war, should they have been impeached?
I know both were men, but Jefferson and Madison knew what the Founders meant since they were Founders. Congress authorised the Barbary Wars. I am going to go with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and not Ron Paul on this one. As old as he is, he wasn't around when the real giants were drafting the document.
PS: I will see what I can find on why Madison felt he needed a declaration. It might be because the war was to be fought on American soil and the declaration would make any aiding and abetting treason.
Nick| 1.1.12 @ 4:38PM
Aware,
"If a declaration of war is not required why did Madison ask for it in 1812?"
The better question to ask is why have the United States of America had over 2,000 military incursions in her history, and, only declared war eleven times?
To answer this question, read Emmerich de Vattel's The Law of Nations.
Also, the U.S. Marine Corps invaded Triploli during the First Barbary War (1801-05). You wrongly asserted that the Barbary States were not nation states. If this were true, then why did the U.S. have a consulate in Tripoli?
"On May 10, 1801, the Tripolitans declared war on the United States in their own picturesque fashion -- by chopping down the flagstaff in front of the American consulate."
- Nathan Miller, The U.S. Navy: A History, Page 46
aware| 1.2.12 @ 8:01AM
The Barbary States was a collective name given to a string of North African seaports stretching from Tangiers to Tripoli. These ports were under the nominal control of the Ottoman Empire, but their real rulers were sea rovers or corsairs who sallied forth from the coast cities to plunder Mediterranean shipping and capture slaves for labor or ransom.There was no "Barbary State".
As I said above, they were pirate conclaves and the fact that no declaration of war was called for proves this. There was no nation state to declare upon, unless upon the Ottoman Empire. The suppression of pirates is hardly war as some are trying to equate in a modern sense. They were no more "states" than the Comanche or Sioux were.
We had a consulate for the simple reason of paying tribute. Again it is a stretch to equate it to an embassy for diplomatic reasons. And in the end the tribute was resumed to buy protection. The piracy was not finally suppressed until France invaded in the 1830s.
Obviously Madison saw war with a real nation like Britain very different than pirate suppression or Indian wars. So I ask you why did he feel he needed a declaration? You have walked all around this question, but have not answered it.
But in the bigger picture, to accept your and Resist's point is to pave the way for military dictatorship. Read Hamilton's Federalist#69 which was the pro constitution party's explanation against just this fear. And why have the Art. 1 Sec. 8 defining CONGRESS' power if a president could initiate war at will? Why not have war power included in Art.2 which defines the executive?
I am much more with the anti Federalists, as history has proved them correct as to this and many other abuses of the alleged "Law of the Land". Their view of the State was, and is, far more accurate than the wishful thinkers on the Federalists side.
Nick| 1.3.12 @ 12:00AM
Aware,
"So I ask you why did he feel he needed a declaration?"
I have not "walked all around this question," I told you what the better question was, which you did not answer. Why has the U.S. Congress only declared war eleven times? We have been involved in over 2,ooo military incursions in our short history.
President Madison asked for a declaration of war because his administration thought they could annex Canada from the British. They thought the Canadians would jump at the chance to join the Union. They were wrong.
"And why have the Art. 1 Sec. 8 defining CONGRESS' power if a president could initiate war at will?"
The president can't initiate war at will. Congress has to fund it. And, Congress both authorized and funded Operation Iraqi Freedom. President Bush acted well within the constraints of the U.S. Constitution, as well as the Law of Nations.
Seriously, if you haven't read de Vattel's Law of Nations, I suggest you do so. If you have read it, I suggest you peruse it again. President Washington checked-out the New York Society Library's copy, in 1789, and never returned it:
http://theweek.com/article/ind.....a-timeline
Dai Alanye | 12.31.11 @ 11:14AM
Assuming Ron "If" Paul were to be elected President the following scenario is conceivable.
Paul declares on January 20 that the US will pull back all military assets to North America, leaving Guam and Samoa to be protected by the Boy Scouts.
After the pullback is well underway the Iranians attack Israel. Paul refuses to act, but Congress, under the authority granted by the Constitution, declares war.
President Ron "If" Paul, Commander in Chief per the Constitution, refuses to take military action. The House of Representatives impeaches Paul with a charge of treason, and the Senate convicts him. He is removed from office.
V P John Huntsman becomes President, immediately announcing a trip to Peking to confer with the leaders of China on how to pursue war against Iran. A motion to impeach is brought to the floor of the House...
I could go on, but what's the point? Republicans have too much sense to nominate Paul, and America would never elect him if he were nominated. If his followers are wise -- a questionable concept at best, I realize -- they'll be settling on their second choice right now.
Clint| 12.30.11 @ 9:52PM
Dr. Ron Paul,
" I’ve offered to ride a bicycle for 20 miles in Houston when the temperature is 100° and the humidity is 100% and I will go 20 miles with them and then we’ll decide who’s the youngest."
Then Let Your Mittens And The Pillsbury DoughBoy Mr. Neutered Take The Challenge, Israel Firster Smear Bund Boy.
The Tea Party Rebellion Has Made The Israel Firster Smear Bund Boys Suck O's.
Resist We Much! | 12.30.11 @ 10:44PM
Mittens isn't my boy, fool. I don't support any of the drivers involved in the clown car pile-up at the circus.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 5:22AM
Then You're An Irrelevant Troll.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 6:38AM
No, I'm not irrelevant. Guess why? My vote cancels out yours.
And, then Clint woke up in New Hampshire and South Carolina.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 12:56PM
That's Why We Tea Party Patriots Are Here To Vote Libturd,To Render Your Vote Irrelevant.
The Tea Party Steps On The LIbturd Israel Firster Troll.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 1:22PM
My vote erases your = I am relevant.
I am neither a liberal or an Israel Firster. OTOH, your intelligence was stunted at birth.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 3:55PM
" Romney Neck and Neck With Paul
More evidence that Iowa is now a two-man race—and that the Newt Gingrich bubble has definitively burst. Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are neck and neck, with Romney getting 23 percent of the likely caucusgoers and Paul getting 21 percent. Rick Santorum follows with 15 percent, Rick Perry with 14 percent, and Gingrich comes in fifth with 13 percent. The leveled field partly comes from a splintering of the Tea Party vote: Santorum gets 20 percent of their vote, Romney and Paul 17 percent, and Gingrich 16 percent."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 3:59PM
You're A Libturd, Irrelevant Troll Libturd, "Me Zits Me Munch,"
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 4:00PM
Clinty, just call me:
"Ms. Eraser"
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 8:14AM
I Call Ya " Asser Broad , Me Zits-Me Munch."
Oldefarte| 12.31.11 @ 3:34PM
And here's Clit's tea party in action:
http://youtu.be/a4-spBDcJyk
Bob Grant| 12.31.11 @ 12:17AM
I wouldn't vote for the guy simply because he's got two first names and no last. What's up with that?
But seriously. If indeed your quotes are accurate, add it to the list of reasons why he's not qualified to be president. What a ridiculous thing to say.
mike| 12.31.11 @ 7:34PM
Now that is real smart, Grant., idiot.
Oldefarte| 12.31.11 @ 3:35PM
And eat pie too:
http://youtu.be/a4-spBDcJyk
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:36AM
And ride that bicycle while wearing TOO SHORT SHORTS, right??????????
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 5:27AM
The Iowa Voters Disagree With RINO-CINO Boy.
" Ron Paul wins new poll in Hawkeye State
Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, bested former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in an American Research Group of likely Iowa GOP caucusgoers Friday. Mr. Paul’s lead is small, but the Texas congressman pulled in 21 percent of the votes to lead the GOP pack for the 4th time in less than a week."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Oldefarte| 12.31.11 @ 3:32PM
And here's Ronnie, Clit and their loons celebrating in Iowa:
http://youtu.be/a4-spBDcJyk
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 3:53PM
The Farte At The Mittens Cat Nip Festival.
http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/.....1/whoa.jpg
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:38AM
They like Ronnie's TOO SHORT SHORTS, huh????????
Oldefarte| 12.31.11 @ 1:02PM
Paul & Huntsman:
%%%RUB-A-DUB-DUB.....TWO ''''''LOSERS''''''IN A TUB%%%%
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 3:56PM
" Romney Neck and Neck With Paul
More evidence that Iowa is now a two-man race—and that the Newt Gingrich bubble has definitively burst. Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are neck and neck, with Romney getting 23 percent of the likely caucusgoers and Paul getting 21 percent. Rick Santorum follows with 15 percent, Rick Perry with 14 percent, and Gingrich comes in fifth with 13 percent. The leveled field partly comes from a splintering of the Tea Party vote: Santorum gets 20 percent of their vote, Romney and Paul 17 percent, and Gingrich 16 percent."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 4:00PM
Watch me vote and cancel out Clinty's vote!
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:39AM
Romney might pull ahead if he had some of those TOO SHORT SHORTS!!!!!!!!!
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 4:12PM
Watch " Me Zits-Me Munch" Try To Work The Voting Machine.
http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/.....erstar.jpg
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 4:47PM
1 man = 1 woman = votes cancel each other out
You are a real dumbshit.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:00PM
Duuuuuuuhhhhh !
You Ain't Registered In Iowa Or My State , So You're Just Talkin' More Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad Shuck & Jive Trash Talk.
The Tea Party Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 8:08PM
Don't worry. I have clones registered in every state.
Resist's Clone In Clinty's State Cancels Out Clinty's Vote.
Look, Mum! I Can Type In Title Case, Too, Just Like Clinty!
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 8:18AM
Yeah,We Know, They're Called Israel Firster Smear Bund Traitor Bastards, " Me Zits-Me Munch".
Apparently, " Me Zits-Me Munch" Is Upset & All Atwitter Because Tea Party Clint Is A Capitalist.
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 9:20AM
Nah, I am not upset. I am more of a capitalist than you will ever be.
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 9:49AM
You're An Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad And Ya Need A Shave.
http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/.....d-lady.jpg
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 11:02AM
Desperation is setting in for old Clinty.
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 12:03PM
Apoplexy Is Setting In For The Israel Firster Smear Bund.
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Smear Bund Agenda.
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:40AM
And some TOO SHORT SHORTS like Ronnie?????
Cpm| 12.31.11 @ 5:42PM
The only good thing about these early primaries is that Ron Paul will be out relatively quickly and then all this Ron Paul spam from the Ron Paul spambots named Clint and Jag from WI. will hopefully go away.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:08PM
" Here are the numbers for the "adjusted" CNN poll:
Paul 26%
Romney 22%
Santorum 14%
Gingrich 14%
So, both of CNN's headlines in reporting its poll were substantially driven by CNN's decision to exclude Democrats and independents from their polling.
It's certainly true that in any event, the gap between Paul and Romney is not large relative to sampling error, regardless of the composition of the electorate; and it's certainly true that Santorum has risen and Gingrich has fallen relative to previous CNN polling.
Nonetheless, it remains true that the stories CNN told by their headlines were substantially driven by their decision to exclude Democrats and independents from their polling, and therefore, it remains true that the CNN headlines were substantially misleading."
The Mainstream Media Smear Bund Agendists Get Caught Again.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:42AM
Ronnie is at 100% with the voters wearing TOO SHORT SHORTS!!!!!!!!!
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 6:08PM
"Mr. MADISON and Mr. GERRY moved to insert 'declare,' striking out 'make' war, leaving to the executive the power to repel sudden attacks."
- Minutes from the Constitutional Convention, 17 August 1789
The Framers' entire purpose by substituting "declare" for "make" was to prevent the Executive from waging war without authorisation and unilaterally. As you can see from the following quote, Charles Pinkney was in the minority arguing for the placement of unilateral power to make war to be placed in the hands of the President solely.
"Mr Pinkney opposed the vesting this power in the Legislature. Its proceedings were too slow. It wd. meet but once a year. The Hs. of Reps. would be too numerous for such deliberations. The Senate would be the best depositary, being more acquainted with foreign affairs, and most capable of proper resolutions. If the States are equally represented in Senate, so as to give no advantage to large States, the power will notwithstanding be safe, as the small have their all at stake in such cases as well as the large States. It would be singular for one authority to make war, and another peace."
- Minutes from the Constitutional Convention, 17 August 1789
Were those "illegal" wars? Were Jefferson and Madison "war criminals," too, Dr Paul? Did they commit impeachable offences? Not according to the minutes from the Constitutional Convention.
Madison reported that in the Federal Convention of 1787, the phrase "make war" was changed to "declare war" in order to leave to the Executive the power to repel sudden attacks, but not to commence war without the explicit approval of Congress.
The authorisations for the Barbary, Indian, Afghanistan, and Iraq Wars were all constitutional; therefore, the wars were constitutional. Bosnia and Libya? Not so much. Neither Clinton nor Obama sought approval from Congress.
Clint| 12.31.11 @ 7:15PM
" The process by which we've entered wars over the past 57 years, and the inconclusive results of each war since that time, are obviously related to Congress' abdication of its responsibility regarding war, given to it by Article I Section 8 of the Constitution.
Congress has either ignored its responsibility entirely over these years, or transferred the war power to the executive branch by a near majority vote of its Members, without consideration of it by the states as an amendment required by the Constitution.
Congress is about to circumvent the Constitution and avoid the tough decision of whether war should be declared by transferring this monumental decision-making power regarding war to the President. Once again, the process is being abused. Odds are, since a clear-cut decision and commitment by the people through their representatives are not being made, the results will be as murky as before. We will be required to follow the confusing dictates of the UN, since that is where the ultimate authority to invade Iraq is coming from — rather than from the American people and the U.S. Constitution.
Transferring authority to wage war, calling it permission to use force to fight for peace in order to satisfy the UN Charter, which replaces the Article I, Section 8 war power provision, is about as close to 1984 "newspeak" that we will ever get in the real world."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 12.31.11 @ 8:10PM
I agree with you that Ron Paul is ancient, but not even he was around when the Founders were drafting the COTUS. See the minutes from the Convention. I am right and you are wrong.
James Madison DESTROYS Ron Paul.
LMFAO!
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:43AM
Article I Section 8 also declares the need to wear TOO SHORT SHORTS!!!!!!!
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 8:22AM
AAAAAND,
Neither Was The U.N. Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad, "Me Zits-Me Munch".
That's Dr.Ron Paul's Whole Point Of Congress Surrendering It's Authority To The Executive Branch And The U.N.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 9:19AM
There's no surrender to the UN or the POTUS. The POTUS still has to get prior authorisation. Bush did. Clinton and Obama didn't. I did not support the Iraq War, but it was legal.
Once again, Dr Paul is wrong.
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 10:04AM
Do Your Homework Israel Firster Smear Bund Crank Lady.
" The resolution "supported" and "encouraged" diplomatic efforts by President George W. Bush to "strictly enforce through the U.N. Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq" and "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion, and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
You're An Argument Against Yourself, Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad.
Say Hi To The Crippled Russkie.
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On American Spectator's Resident Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad Crank Lady.
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 11:03AM
I have done my homework. The Authorisation was for MILITARY FORCE.
You are a real idiot.
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 12:00PM
Do Your Homework,Israel Firster Smear Bund Broad.
Iraq War Resolution :
" Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (1991), repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 (1991), and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949 (1994) ;
Whereas in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1), Congress has authorized the President 'to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677' ;
Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it 'supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),' that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and 'constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,' and that Congress, 'supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 ".
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The U.N.
Oldefarte| 1.2.12 @ 10:45AM
Say hi to the biclyler wearing those TOO SHORT SHORTS!!!!!!!!!!
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 9:35AM
Des Moines Register:
Ron Paul has gone cold in Iowa!
http://caucuses.desmoinesregis.....-hot-hand/
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 9:37AM
"Paul started the week neck-and-neck with Romney, but by Friday had dropped 13 percentage points under a barrage of negative advertising."
Don't you just hate when that happens, Clinty?
LMFAO!
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 9:53AM
DES MOINES, Iowa--The last Des Moines Register poll before Tuesday's Iowa caucuses shows Mitt Romney ahead of the Republican presidential field, with Ron Paul just 2 percentage points behind, within the poll's margin of error.
Here are the results:
Mitt Romney: 24 percent
Ron Paul: 22 percent
Rick Santorum: 15 percent
Newt Gingrich: 12 percent
Rick Perry: 11 percent
Michele Bachmann: 7 percent
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 11:04AM
13 is an unlucky number.
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 10:14AM
Aaaaand,
Just Like The CNN Poll That Was Heavily Criticized As Skewed And Underestimating The Support for Dr. Ron Paul. ,The Poll Only Polled Republicans, When 15 Percent of The Caucus Vote Has Been Independents And Democrats.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Resist We Much! | 1.1.12 @ 11:05AM
50% of caucus-goers are Christians that will be in church today. I wonder how many pastors will be preaching the praises of Ron Paul, hmmm?
Clint| 1.1.12 @ 11:39AM
The Christian Case for Ron Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPqG3fiff1g
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Oldefarte| 1.1.12 @ 12:29PM
"Too-short?????":
'.....At 76, Paul is older than Lake Jackson itself. Dow Chemical Co. created the city for employees in the 1940s, mapping out parts with a business-minded pragmatism......The Lutheran, Baptist and Methodist churches are lined in a row on Willow Drive because, said retired Dow employee Adrian Zambala, "that's the street where they decided the churches would go."....Residents tell stories of Paul biking around town in too-short shorts and know it's their congressman in the saddle from his habit of keeping one arm slung low to his side when he's worn out from pedaling......'
Oldefarte| 1.1.12 @ 11:24AM
If Paul becomes president, he'll appoint Clit as his Secretary of State, whereupon every foreign nation on earth will begin developing missles and WMD's in order to destroy the obnoxious US!!!!
Oldefarte| 1.1.12 @ 11:25AM
http://www.gocomics.com/glennmccoy/2012/01/01