Weak.
Ron Paul is not opposed to foreign aid for Israel. He is opposed to foreign aid.
Your attempt to impose some other meaning on his opposition is like saying of a candidate who had announced his support of the right to free speech "So-and-so supports free speech for Communists". Well, the statement is true, as far as it goes, but it is misleading, because the implication is that the candidate somehow thinks that Communists are special, when actually, he supports free speech for everybody, including those with whom he disagrees.
Not just weak, Rich, but silly and offensive.
How many of the candidates running voted to subsidize the Jew-hating tyrannical regimes in Cairo and Riyadh? Ron Paul didn't.
How many of them voted to help out Saddam Hussein (during his war with Iran)? Ron Paul didn't.
This is typical of the simplistic mindset that says: If you don't favor robbing Peter to pay Pinchas, you must be antisemitic. That's just silly. It's also offensive.
Oh, please. You people are being dense.
It isn't just about opposing all foreign aid. The man blames our pro-Israel policy and other American foreign policy for Osama bin Laden's hatred of us and for 9/11. If you agree with that, that's not me who's being offensive. For some strange reason Paul's been attracting the Jew-haters (like the guys who did the ad, not to mention David Duke) and the Truthers, who think 9/11 was a government plot to get us into war. I wonder why that is.
These Israel supporters have no respect for anything. They're selfish. All they care about is Israel, and continued US tax dollars going to the nuclear armed state.
It's a fact that most of the hatred in the middle east for America is because of America's overwhelming support for Israel. Israel's PR reps in America, selfish shts that they are, will do anything to cover that up. They have no respect for anything, all they care about is Israel and themselves.
The plan to invade Iraq and transform the middle east into a democratic region was hatched by Jewish-Americans working for the Likud prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996. These same Israel-firsters (Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser) later went on to work for the Bush administration which adopted a strikingly similar plan. You greedy Israel-supporting Jews have hurt America enough. 3500 American kids have died for your selfishness. nearly a million Iraqis have died for your selfishness.
Enough.
And now of course, the Israel supporters are going to try to rewrite history, seeing as they have no respect for the truth or anything except their own race/country, and claim that Jewish Israeli supporters really weren't behind the war on Iraq.
Enough people have died for Jewish selfishness.
You should see how hard AIPAC pushed for the Iraq war and the sanctions against Iraq, and now the sanctions against Iran.
A Foreign Policy of Freedom
There is one and only one voice in Congress for a foreign policy of freedom, and it belongs to Ron Paul, who has stood alone for freedom for many years. Ron is the seemingly impossible: a voice for reason and truth in a den of thieves.
A Foreign Policy of Freedom is his 372-page manifesto, a collection of inspired statements to the House of Representatives that show him to be the most consistent and morally responsible politician, perhaps, in the whole of American history.
This book takes on a special significance with his 2008 run for the US presidency. Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., writes the introduction.
Recently, you might have heard Ron condemning foreign aid, the Iraq War, our vast and needlessly growing military budgets, bombings of this country and that, troops in most all countries in the world, and all the other meddlesome activities of the US empire. This foreign policy, Congressman Paul has pointed out, is contrary to American ideals, diminishes American liberty, and ends up making worse the very problems it seeks to alleviate.
But did you know that Ron has been delivering this message through thick and thin from his first day in Congress in 1976 until the present day? That's 31 years of prophetic warnings, 31 years of courageous stands against the tide, 31 years of being proven right by subsequent events. There are no flip-flops, backpeddles, regrets, or coverups. He has told the truth again and again, no matter what it cost him.
In the middle of the Cold War, he decried the endless streams of subsidies from the US to communist governments. At the same time, he stood firm against aid to insurgents seeking to overthrow those regimes. He sensibly pointed out that the Soviet Union would collapse if it had to face financial reality, and an end to US aid would make that possible. He has been a stickler on the power of the presidency, refusing to grant the president authority to start wars without Congressional approval.
Herein you will find a chronicle of hypocrisy. Paul condemned the policy that subsidized Saddam Hussein, and the policy that waged war on Iraq and killed Saddam. The same is true of Noriega in Panama and the "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan who later made up the shock troops of Al-Qaeda.
"Our experiment with foreign policy interventionism has failed, just as our experience with domestic economic interventionism has failed," he said in 1982.
He said the same in mid-1990s.
"War, and the threat of war, are big government's best friend," he wrote only recently. "Liberals support big government social programs, and conservatives support big government war policies, thus satisfying two major special interest groups. And when push comes to shove, the two groups cooperate and support big government across the board — always at the expense of personal liberty. Both sides pay lip service to freedom, but neither stands against the welfare-warfare state and its promises of unlimited entitlements and endless war."
In many ways, this book is a history of a quarter century of folly, told by a man who saw what others did not, and had the temerity to state his view publicly. No voice for peace has been as consistent in the demand that government stop its intervention across the board. No supporter of free markets has been so determined to apply the logic of liberty to all aspects of foreign policy.
This book makes Ron Paul's place in history. There has never been anything so forthright, truth telling, and ultimately devastating from a US politician. Not since Taft has there been a book like this, and this one makes Taft's own classic seems vague and abstract by comparison.
Thanks, Mike, for proving my case.
As a special prize for your spamming my comments section here with seven separate comments making the same sick argument, you get to be the first commenter I've banned in three years. Way to go!
Is Obama or the average Obama supporter a black supremacist because Farrakhan supports him? Do you honestly think that Ron Paul has any control over who his supporters are? He attracts people from all different backgrounds, because he is our last hope before we are absorbed into the North American Union.
BTW, it was Ron Paul who defended Israel's raid on the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981 when everyone including the Reagan administration condemned it.
Well, I could respond to the question of whether candidates are responsible for their extremist supporters, but there's a corollary to Godwin's Law that says that when someone mentions the North American Union, I get the hell out of here.
I'm not voting for Ron Paul because it is not expressly prescribed in the constitution.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
