Ron Paul in the debate TONIGHT!

[PaladinX13]

Why Hasn’t Rudy Giuliani Read the 9-11 Commission Report?

May 16, 2007

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

ARLINGTON, VA – During the "First in the South" GOP debate in South Carolina last night, one thing was made clear: Rudy Giuliani does not understand how to keep America safe.

When Congressman Ron Paul, who has long served on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, explained how 50 years of American interventionism in the Middle East has helped compromise our national security, Giuliani interrupted saying he had "never heard anything so absurd." This statement is particularly troubling coming from the former mayor who tries to cast himself as a security expert, since Dr. Paul's point comes directly from the bi-partisan 9-11 Commission Report.

"Rudy Giuliani has tip-toed around the issues of abortion, guns and marriage. The only issue he has left is security, and he doesn't even get that right," said campaign chairman Kent Snyder. "It is clear from his interruption that former Mayor Giuliani has not read the 9-11 Commission Report and has no clue on how to keep America safe."

 

[TheOtherOne]

And he’s going to go on Glenn Beck tonight to talk about it. I guess it’s true, there’s no such thing as bad publicity; it seems to have gotten him an extended interview on CNN.

Paul cancelled his appearance on Glenn Beck. Maybe a sign he's pulling out of the race?

Too bad because he's the only one with the cajones to not chant the usual "They attacked us because of our freedom" mantra.

 

[helpless]

The Unpatriot Act

Congressman Ron Paul praised two landmark votes in Congress that could mark a turning point in the battle to protect civil liberties threatened by the Patriot Act. Paul has been an outspoken critic of the Patriot Act since its hasty passage in the weeks following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The Act endangers civil liberties by easing federal rules for search warrants, allowing warrantless searches in some instances, allowing expanded wiretaps and Internet monitoring, and even allowing federal agents to examine library and bookstore records. Yet despite these serious constitutional questions, few if any members of Congress read the 500-page Patriot Act prior to voting on it!

However, the House of Representatives recently passed two amendments to the annual Justice department funding bill that show many in Congress are having second thoughts about the Patriot Act.

One amendment, sponsored by Congressman Butch Otter of Idaho and cosponsored by Paul, denies funding for the Justice department to execute so-called “sneak and peek” warrants authorized by the Patriot Act. “Sneak and peek” warrants enable federal authorities to search a person’s home, office, or personal property without the person’s knowledge! This secrecy upsets decades of legal precedent requiring that an individual be served with a warrant before a search. The House voted overwhelmingly not to fund this overzealous federal police practice.

The House also unanimously passed an amendment prohibiting funds for the Justice department to force libraries and bookstores to turn over records of books read by their patrons. Librarians around the country have led the charge against this provision in the Patriot Act, arguing that Americans have always been free to read whatever they choose without being monitored by government.

The battle against the Patriot Act has only just begun, however, as the Senate could strip the new restrictions passed by the House. Both the administration and congressional leadership continue to support the Act, despite public outcry against it and growing opposition among rank and file members of the House. Paul and hundreds of his House colleagues now hope to capitalize on their momentum by working to repeal all or part of the Patriot Act itself.

July 25, 2003

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

 

[PaladinX13]

Strict constitutionalists (emphasis on Right to Petition for a Redress of Grievances) discussed this very issue only days prior:
http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/Update2007-05-07.htm

 

[the pistolero]

Your New York "Republicans" would run as or vote for Democrats in Texas.

And very likely get their tail ends handed to them. A Giuliani clone running as a Democrat for the Texas Legislature is probably every Texas Republican's dream, at least the ones running outside the districts of people like Lon Burnam or Senfronia Thompson.

 

[longhorngunman]

Ya'll are right, there is no real difference between Rudy or Hillary, or McCain/Romney vs Hillary. There is a BIG difference between Fred Thompson and Hillary or Duncan Hunter or Hillary, especially for those who are pro-gun. Ron Paul never had a chance and he buried himself completely out of it last night. If he'd shut his trap about his kooky foreign policy views and just espoused his limited government domestic policies he'd won many voters and helped shape the debate, now he's just officially the GOP's version of Dennis Kucinich.

 

[araiford]

Last night may well have been Ron Paul's YARRRRRR! moment.
I hope Fred runs.

 

[budney]

If he'd shut his trap about his kooky foreign policy views...

Meaning that it's just plain kooky to say, "I think we should mind our own business and not bomb tens of thousands of innocent Muslims into oblivion"? What a freaking whack-job he is.

--Len.

 

[Geister]

Ron Paul never had a chance and he buried himself completely out of it last night.

Ron Paul never had a chance and Fred Thompson does? They aren't even that different and Paul has done WAY better than I thought he would. I didn't expect him to be so popular in the polls. Fred Thompson hasn't even bothered to get into the ring yet.

If he'd shut his trap about his kooky foreign policy views

What's so kooky about backing off our friendship with the Israelis? Our massive support to them hurts us in the long run. The Muslims attack us because we give them a motive to do so.

 

[Geister]

This is irrelevant past the primaries though. If Rudy gets the republican nomination, then not going to the polls to vote will almost guarantee hilary or obama becomes the next president. no one likes voting for the "lesser of the two evils," but you also don't want to be stuck with the "worst of the two evils." and there is a clear "worst" imo.

AGAIN, after me and several other people have repeated ourselves on this board, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE between Hillary and Rudy, especially on the gun issue?

Do ANY of you honestly think he's going to veto gun control bills that Hillary would approve?

And PLEASE stop with the Obama bit. He doesn't have a chance against Hillary. It would be political suicide to run him.

 

[telomerase]

his kooky foreign policy views

Most Americans have never read the various foreign aid budgets... and if you don't do that, then your foreign policy views are kooky.

The first step is to stop funding our enemies. The American taxpayer has paid to build up Al Quaida, yes, but that's minuscule. We also paid for Mao, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Castro... every bad guy since Hitler (the German taxpayer paid for him honestly).

It's pointless to argue about strategies for "benevolent intervention" when our actual interventions include things like giving North Korea and Pakistan their nuclear reactors. Socialist dictatorships, contrary to what they taught me in high school, are not "efficient" or "economically productive". Without our aid they'd be broke and no threat.

I have no beef with people who want to get rid of bad regimes... except when they think that we should pay for them while we pretend to oppose them.

 

[Geister]

I'm sorry, but Ron Paul reminds me of Jimmy Carter in disguise... and I have no use for either.

You seriously need to take some government college courses...

 

[Geister]

Most Americans have never read the various foreign aid budgets... and if you don't do that, then your foreign policy views are kooky.

It has nothing to do with foreign aid budgets. We've played world police for decades. Everyone in America that doesn't live in a rock knows it.

Paul suggested that we knock it off.

Unlike some on this board, I don't believe that most Americans are stupid and buy into the "they're killing us for our freedom" line.

 

[telomerase]

It has nothing to do with foreign aid budgets. We've played world police for decades.

Yes, but we play world police against the very same regimes that we create and subsidize! Even the North Korean reactors came straight from the US taxpayer.

Interventionists and anti-interventionists alike BOTH have to figure out how to stop the US government from funding kleptocrat dictators... then taxing us for more "defense" against those dictators.

 

[longeyes]

The American people are waiting for a nationalist. A tough nationalist.

The first Republican who really and fully gets that will go far.

 

[Geister]

Yes, but we play world police against the very same regimes that we create and subsidize! Even the North Korean reactors came straight from the US taxpayer.

Yeah, but there's a difference between police actions overseas to end conflicts that have nothing to do with us and sending a check to North Korea. Both I'm against, but I think the former is going to cause more resentment from foreigners.

 

[tasco 74]

wow 215 replies.... i did get to see ron paul for the first time in that debate..... ya he looked like a kook! i'm starting to believe ALL the politicians in the country need to be fired and we start over..... couldn't be any worse that what we have now...................................

 

[Geister]

You want to fire Ron Paul from office based on how he looks? Wow, that's pretty respectful of you, considering how he's one of the few in Congress that's supported your gun rights.

 

[xd9fan]

tell again how Ron Paul "messed up"??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy4Eugc0Xls


The only thing Rudy has is that he was Mayor during 9-11.......ok what else? When you get passed the emotional patriotism(which nationalist love to use...against people)......what does he have????

 

[budney]

The American people are waiting for a nationalist. A tough nationalist.

Um, that's what the Germans wanted in the 1930s. Be careful what you wish for. (Scariest of all, I think you might be right. *shudder*)

--Len.

 

[Lew]

Wow, big thread. I'm pretty disappointed in a lot of people on here. Any sign that Ron Paul is rocking the political boat, and you start wringing your hands and looking for someone who plays into the mold. Oh no, he didn't say that! He didn't actually say that America has made...gasp...mistakes!

Come on! That's why he needs to be elected! We're so far from our constitutional foundations, that they're becoming foreign to us. You're waiting, biding your time for the one true savior, and you're missing what we have right now. You can disagree with Paul on something. That's okay. For crying out loud, look at what else there is!

Paul is the only man taking the High Road. I just made my second monetary contribution to a freer America. What have you done?

 

[Autolycus]

It was nice to see Ron Paul tell it how it is. Unfortunately I think that the majority of audience members were NEO-Conservatives. I hope they dont buy into that matra about the actual reason Al Queada attacked us is that they hate our freedoms and rights. It really is not true? Why dont we stop supporting Israel and other states? Why not leave them be? How about America polices America and protects America rather than anyone else?

 

[xd9fan]

Yeah that would mean the National Guard would be.....get ready...National
Not International.

 

[StopTheGrays]

But the NEOCONs do not care. They like the Patriot Act. It allows them to root out the traitors to the cause and send them to secret prisons. Be a darn shame when Clinton wins and the NEOCONS become the traitors to the cause. I will really hate to see that.

Name 3 people the NEOCONS have sent to a secret prison who are traitors to the cause...whatever that is?

 

[JWarren]

Quote:
The American people are waiting for a nationalist. A tough nationalist.

Um, that's what the Germans wanted in the 1930s. Be careful what you wish for. (Scariest of all, I think you might be right. *shudder*)

I personally would LOVE to see a candidate running who is a strong nationalist. Nationalism is often associated with racial characteristics such as White Nationalist, Black Nationalists, Asian Nationalist, etc. However, that is short-sighted.

Incidently, Fascism isn't Nationalism, either. While Germany did spring from a deep well of nationalism, that nationalism is born of racism. The USA cannot make any claims to a particular lineage or racial aspect as part of its national identify. I'd like to see a nationalism that understands that our representatives in government are ACTUALLY REPRESENTING the interests of US Citizens. Anything less than that is treason.

A candidate that firmly supports the citizens of the USA is long overdue.

-- John