He wants to let Israel defend itself but if attacked, he would help.

As I am not the one who made this statement, so see no reason for providing a link. I do not think that it has any basis in reality at all. Saying that Ron Paul would help defend Israel under any circumstances is nothing but wishful thinking.

1) My original entire quote points out that I am not a Ron Paul expert, and that I could be wrong. Still, to prove I am wrong in my asumption that he would protect Israel, you asked me to provide a link showing where RP said he would defend them. The implication is that if there is not a quote from RP directly saying that he would defend Israel, then he would not defend them. If that is the case, then no US President would ever have defended Israel because they have never been quoting saying that they would. But we know that not to be true, don't we?

2) I never wrote anything close to "defend Israel under any circumstances". In fact, I wrote the opposite, "IF they [israel] start something they shouldn't expect us to bail them out."

Anyway, RP isn't in the running anymore. The best I am hoping for is that some of his ideas concerning the national debt are adopted as part of the party platform for November.

None of the finalists in the rep field could have beat Obama. Certainly not Paul. Never ever.

The reps did have some people who could have beat Obama. For example, Mitch Daniels, Jon Huntsman, and Jeb Bush.

Edited June 21, 201214 yr by Jingthing

My original entire quote points out that I am not a Ron Paul expert, and that I could be wrong.

Yes it did, but it also gives the impression that Ron Paul would stick up for Israel if they were attacked and nothing he has ever said would lead me to think that is even remotely true. IMO a lot of people put words in Ron Paul's mouth and ignore what he has really said to make him sound more reasonable than he is and that makes him dangerous.

The good thing is that there is very little chance of him ever being elected as president after this run and that keeps his more wacky positions in check. His policies on the economy seem reasonable to me, but I do not pretend to know much about that.

Not very little chance. No chance. Bupkis.

And I agree Ron Paul is hostile to Israel.

And I agree Ron Paul is hostile to Israel.

Yes. One guy that used to work with him says that RP wishes that Israel did not exist and I think that he was telling the truth, Ron Paul's campaign denied it, but they also denied that he knew what was in those crazy newsletters and I can see no way that could be true.

Edited June 21, 201214 yr by Ulysses G.

Yep, Ron Paul is out. So this November we get two guys - Obama & Romney - who have no idea about the issues. Each of them needs advisers to tell them what to think. That's why they change positions so much. They need teleprompters, cue cards, debate coaching, etc.

Still, I give the edge to Romney because even figuring in Obama's 3.5 years as President, Romney is more qualified to lead. Obama hasn't led at all. In the healthcare debate he told Nancy and Harry to do the heavy lifting. You would think Obama would have picked up some on-the-job training but the only area he has improved in in almost 4 years is his golf handicap. The guy has been mailing it since he won. Take away golf days, vacation days, fundraising and campaigning days - and you wind up with a handful of actual working days.

I don't agree on Romney. I think that he does understand the issues and is a moderate which I prefer. I am not sure how sincere he is about the positions that he takes, but I am sure that Obama is not and that Romney is not going to support the Ground Zero mosque or Occupy Wall Street or giving terrorists trials in civilian courts or a bunch of other things that I consider to be against the best interests of the USA.

Edited June 21, 201214 yr by Ulysses G.

1 in 5 'Murcans won't vote for a Mormon for prez.

43 percent don't know Romney is a Mormon.

Hmmm.

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/06/21/mormons_for_president_gallup_poll_finds_17_of_voters_reluctant_to_vote_for_mormons_.html

The new Gallup shows that nearly 1 in 5 (18 percent) Americans say they would not vote for a qualified presidential candidate who happens to be Mormon. The figure is virtually the same as the 17 percent who responded negatively in 1967 when Gallup first posed the question, shortly after Michigan Gov. George Romney formed an exploratory committee for the 1968 Republican presidential nomination.

1 in 5 'Murcans won't vote for a Mormon for prez.

43 percent don't know Romney is a Mormon.

Hmmm.

http://slatest.slate...r_mormons_.html

The new Gallup shows that nearly 1 in 5 (18 percent) Americans say they would not vote for a qualified presidential candidate who happens to be Mormon. The figure is virtually the same as the 17 percent who responded negatively in 1967 when Gallup first posed the question, shortly after Michigan Gov. George Romney formed an exploratory committee for the 1968 Republican presidential nomination.

In mid 2008 what percentage said they would vote for the black guy?

Edited June 21, 201214 yr by koheesti

Things are getting desperate over at Obama campaign headquarters...

The Obama family, along with a cast of thousands, went from DC to Chicago last weekend to attend the wedding of the daughter of Valerie Jarrett. I wonder if Obama made a pitch at the wedding for the happy couple to forego their gifts and turn the cash over to his campaign?

Oh, by the way, the City of Chicago assigned 200 on-duty policemen to provide security along with the normal contingent of Secret Service personnel. These police officers were pulled off of their assigned posts from all over the city to perform this quite unnecessary duty.

In Chicago during the previous weekend, there were 9 people murdered and 46 wounded in scattered violence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2160499/A-White-House-wedding-Chicago-Obama-family-attend-marriage-ceremony.html

Any president deserves police protection. End of story.

Any president deserves police protection. End of story.

But what about the "GIFTS FOR CASH" idea?

Any president deserves police protection. End of story.

But what about the "GIFTS FOR CASH" idea?

That's some pretty brazen fundraising. What next, asking kiddies to crack open their piggy banks and forward the money? Those Nigerian scam artists must be kicking themselves that they didn't come up with this first.

Any president deserves police protection. End of story.

But what about the "GIFTS FOR CASH" idea?

I agree. It's a stupid idea.

Things are getting desperate over at Obama campaign headquarters...

`

I'm not doubting you but could you post a link to where that originally came from. It's just so hard to believe.

Those Nigerian scam artists must be kicking themselves that they didn't come up with this first.

Yeah, they just got schooled by the Kenyan scam artist.

Things are getting desperate over at Obama campaign headquarters...

`

I'm not doubting you but could you post a link to where that originally came from. It's just so hard to believe.

http://www.barackoba...stry-signup-HQB

The sad thing, is it has 27 million "Likes" on Facebook already.

Edited June 23, 201214 yr by koheesti

Think about it - a new married couple is just starting out and instead of buying them gifts they need in the middle of the "worst economic crisis since the Great Depression", Obama wants people to donate to his campaign fund - which is expected to reach $1,000,000,000. What's that the Brits say? cheeky?

Edited June 23, 201214 yr by koheesti

Real or not, I don't pretend to like everything Obama or his campaign organization has done. I just want him reelected because I think Romney is MUCH worse. This is going to be a negative election. People will vote for the less of two evils. Last time was a hope election. No reason Obama can't be elected with both kinds of elections.

Real or not, I don't pretend to like everything Obama or his campaign organization has done. I just want him reelected because I think Romney is MUCH worse. This is going to be a negative election. People will vote for the less of two evils. Last time was a hope election. No reason Obama can't be elected with both kinds of elections.

From Hope & Change to The Lesser of Two Evils in just 4 years. And straight from a die-hard Obama supporter. That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?

People will vote for the less of two evils.

Wish I could remember a time that was not the case.

Think about it - a new married couple is just starting out and instead of buying them gifts they need in the middle of the "worst economic crisis since the Great Depression", Obama wants people to donate to his campaign fund - which is expected to reach $1,000,000,000. What's that the Brits say? cheeky?

$1 billion expected by WHOM? an Amish milkmaid in Pennsylvania?

People will vote for the less of two evils.

Wish I could remember a time that was not the case.

i wonder why the Texan war hero "mission accomplished" didn't give it a try. isn't he entitled again after pausing? imagine the prestige gain for the Greatest Nation on Earth™ when national TV stations globally broadcast "our gallant armed forces converted Tehran, Ghoum and Busheer into parking places cause them Eightallahs wanted to kill my Daddy!"

People will vote for the less of two evils.

Wish I could remember a time that was not the case.

i wonder why the Texan war hero "mission accomplished" didn't give it a try.

It would still be the lesser of 2 evils vote

As I always said....to be truly democratic process they need a third box called

[x] NONE OF THE ABOVE

Anyway, RP isn't in the running anymore. The best I am hoping for is that some of his ideas concerning the national debt are adopted as part of the party platform for November.

I always thought it was a given RP would never get the Repub nomination.

After all he does not really gel with them & would threaten many of their pet pork barrels.

I just figured he ran because he knows that yet again he would not be invited to debates etc

in the final run in. But, I did think he was using the Repub nomination to get air time & get his message out.

As such did wonder/think he would run Libertarian again.

I would vote if he did....If not I am basically done with the USA for now

I did not want to be one who votes on the recipe he never has to eat

In Ron Paul's case I would though......Hell if RP got in I would move back

Edited June 23, 201214 yr by flying

Real or not, I don't pretend to like everything Obama or his campaign organization has done. I just want him reelected because I think Romney is MUCH worse. This is going to be a negative election. People will vote for the less of two evils. Last time was a hope election. No reason Obama can't be elected with both kinds of elections.

From Hope & Change to The Lesser of Two Evils in just 4 years. And straight from a die-hard Obama supporter. That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?

I never liked him much anyway, dudes. I like Hillary.

Real or not, I don't pretend to like everything Obama or his campaign organization has done. I just want him reelected because I think Romney is MUCH worse. This is going to be a negative election. People will vote for the less of two evils. Last time was a hope election. No reason Obama can't be elected with both kinds of elections.

From Hope & Change to The Lesser of Two Evils in just 4 years. And straight from a die-hard Obama supporter. That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?

I never liked him much anyway, dudes. I like Hillary.

Hillary is looking better to me with each passing day.

Real or not, I don't pretend to like everything Obama or his campaign organization has done. I just want him reelected because I think Romney is MUCH worse. This is going to be a negative election. People will vote for the less of two evils. Last time was a hope election. No reason Obama can't be elected with both kinds of elections.

From Hope & Change to The Lesser of Two Evils in just 4 years. And straight from a die-hard Obama supporter. That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?

I never liked him much anyway, dudes. I like Hillary.

Hillary is looking better to me with each passing day.

Me too. I saw a video of her on Charlie Rose with James Baker. She seems a lot more substantial these days.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJcHiPusTS0&feature=related

Clearly, Hillary would be a much more popular choice than Obama or Mitt. It's sad our system can't give the people more what they want and need now, which would be Hillary.