Still On The Fence?

Still on the fence about Ron Paul?  Then read this piece from Dr. Voddie Baucham.  Below is just one of the reasons he gives and since I think the monetary issue is “THE” issue I’ve highlighted his comments here.  I know, I know, some will say, “Well, what about abortion”?   Yes, abortion is a great evil, but last I checked the federal government does not compel or coerce any woman to kill her own child.   On the other hand, the federal government does compel and coerce us to accept their paper as legal tender.  Besides, had abortions continued to be regulated at the state level, which they were prior to 1973, and despite the bloviating of that theocratic fascistic boob in Moscow,  there is no telling the countless lives that could have been saved (but then having abortions legalized by the federal  judiciary has provided a vehicle for all sorts of statist faux-Conservatives, including the current crop of Republicans running for the nomination, to wrap themselves in an issue in order to get votes without ever having to do anything).  Or, maybe your concern with Paul is his foreign policy, which in some ersatz-Christian circles means “support for Israel.”  Well, Voddie’s got your answer to those questions too.  So here is just a taste:

I support Ron Paul because he has a constitutional view of money. He is the only candidate consistently to confront the Federal Reserve Bank (which is not federal, has no reserves, and is not a bank), and address the issue of fiat currency (a.k.a. unjust weights and measures; Lev 19:36; Prov 16:11), which debases the dollar, manipulates business cycles, creates inflation, and always benefits the rich at the expense of the poor and disenfranchised. And he talks about the issue in just those terms.

Congressman Paul is also the only candidate who has a budget that will cut a TRILLION DOLLARS in spending in year one.[7] He is the only candidate who has committed to defund and eliminate expensive, unconstitutional agencies. This is crucial for a country headed for an economic cliff. Our debt is larger than our GDP and we simply must address it NOW (Luke 14:28)! This is arguably the most important issue we face, and while others want to tinker with the status quo, Dr. Paul wants to do the hard thing; the right thing; the biblical thing; the constitutional thing.

About these ads
Explore posts in the same categories: Politics

40 Comments on “Still On The Fence?”

  1. Hugh McCann Says:

    Now HERE’s a description:
    the bloviating… theocratic fascistic boob in Moscow

    a) Medvedev?
    b) Putin?
    c) Gorbachev?
    Oh! THAT Moscow…
    d) Doug Wilson*

    * Who thus described reality in the film ‘Collision’: Sh*t happens?

  2. Matt Anderson Says:

    Wow, did I really just catch Doug Wilson defending “logical precision”? I think I heard someone on this blog once describe Wilson as “slithery” I frankly can’t think of a better word for him.

  3. Hugh McCann Says:

    Sean,

    Not to play the boob’s advocate, but what of his (and Piper’s*) point about a strong pro-life stance, that it’s a must-have for a candidate?

    Wilson may be many bad things, but he may also be like like a broken clock: right twice a day.

    * “I believe that the endorsement of the right to kill unborn children disqualifies a person from any position of public office. It’s simply the same as saying that the endorsement of racism, fraud, or bribery would disqualify him—except that child-killing is more serious than those.”
    ~ http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/one-issue-politics-one-issue-marriage-and-the-humane-society

  4. Sean Gerety Says:

    While I would agree that even rape and incest are not reasons for abortion and are in fact reasons why those crimes are so heinous and deserving of the severest punishment (death), I don’t think Ron Paul can be even considered remotely pro-abortion. I also don’t think it’s wise to make the perfect the enemy of the good and that, believe it or not, there are more important issues than abortion for reasons I’ve already given. Besides, the magic underwear wearing Mitt Romney says he’s pro-life. Should conservative Christians vote for him (see Voddie’s reason number one)?

  5. Steve M Says:

    Wilson writes, “A is A means that A is not something else, like B, for instance. And those who want it to be something else, or a little bit fuzzier for them, are trying to escape accountability. They don’t want to be held to the terms of the argument — whether we are talking about their own argument or someone else’s.”

    Isn’t he writing about the position he himself takes in “The Great Logic Fraud”?

    It seems that the pot is pompously declaring the kettle to be inconsistent.

  6. Hugh McCann Says:

    Steve M,

    More, more. What was DW’s position in Logic Fraud?

    Perhaps he’s seen some light? Otoh, of course, for his camp, “Law is Law means that Law IS something else, like Gospel, for instance.” ;)

  7. Pht Says:

    I’m curious what everyone’s thoughts are here on Ron’s comments about iran and the like.

    I’m asking because I haven’t followed Ron very closely, and I don’t trust the legacy media – but from what little I’ve actually heard from him, he seems to be ignorant of the genuine threat that islam (as it exists in the Quran, hadith and sunnah) represents to america and the west at large.

  8. Steve M Says:

    If 2+2=4 with turnips but not unicorns, does A=A in an argument concerning unicorns?

  9. Steve M Says:

    Is the abstract concept that life begins at conception “real” like turnips or does it exist only in the mind like unicorns?

    Maybe Mr. Logic Fraud can answer.

  10. justbybelief Says:

    Pht,

    “legacy media”

    You must be a tech guy.

    “but from what little I’ve actually heard from him, he seems to be ignorant of the genuine threat that islam (as it exists in the Quran, hadith and sunnah) represents to america and the west at large.”

    I don’t think Ron Paul is ignorant of the threats of Islam. He simply does not believe that robbing the American people of their unalienable (God-given) rights will quell any threat that we face from them. If you want to understand Ron Paul, you must read the Constitution. The Constitution was written by “We The People” to form and direct the national government. When understood as intended it should become evident where the authority lies–with the people.

    When asked how his ‘faith’ would affect his presidency Ron Paul responded by saying that it is in how he lives his life and his obedience to his oath of office. What a novel ideal, a man of faith actually believes his oath means something! You will not get anything like this from any other candidate, not even the conservative icon Red Ronnie Reagan (RRR). I suggest that we look for more honorable men then RRR.

    The United States, expanding its empire, now has ~700 military bases abroad and is building more along with ~2,500,000 troops some in Muslim countries. We are responsible for many preemptive attacks on other nations. It should be noted that economic sanctions ARE acts of war. If you realize this you will understand that it was the U.S. that started the war with Japan in the 30′s. Pearl Harbor was simply a response to a war, started by the U.S. and the U.K. The economic sanctions on Iran, Iraq, Libya, and others represent war started by the United States and its allies. These are preemptive wars that WE have started.These policies are being implemented according to the Department of State document 7277 (THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM
    FOR GENERAL AND COMPLETE
    DISARMAMENT IN A PEACEFUL
    WORLD) released in 1961 and U.S.C. Title 22—Foreign Relations and Intercourse Chapter 35—Arms Control and Disarmament, Section 2551 and 2552. In these documents you will find that the U.S. is being used as an agent of the U.N. to disarm all countries and establish an international police force (army). The U.S. is now acting as the major player in this role. Everyone who swears an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution from the grunt on the ground to the president implementing this policy is in violation of their oath of office, whether acting in ignorance or knowingly.

    These acts by the United States not only violate the Constitution but also anger those whom they are perpetrated against. The documentation above constitutes a declaration of war on every nation and their right to protect themselves against aggression. Muslim nations have every right to kill our soldiers until our soldiers leave their lands. In other words, they have the right to defend themselves against our acts of aggression and our agenda to disarm them.

    Yes, Islam, according to its tenets is a religion bent on global domination, but so is Catholicism. For that matter, so is Postmillennialism. In fact the Pope has declared himself Lord over all the earth. He’s even declared himself Lord of my marriage. Is it any wonder than that the Catholic candidates are calling for war with Iran? They are competing tyrants.

    A ‘threat’ does not constitute an act of war, it does not even constitute a ‘state’ of war–the foundation of a declaration of war. So, we have no right to be in their lands. Not only is it a violation of their rights it is a violation of our own laws.

    Here’s a novel Idea, if we believe the adherents of Islam are a threat to us let’s not let them into the country and how about we secure the border.

    Abortion: The Constitution does not authorize the federal government to dictate ANY policy on abortion to the states. Congress, or the president, have the authority to bring errant judges, even judges on the supreme court into line when they legislate from the bench or cross constitutional bounds. So do the states. They/We simply have not been diligent in the protection of our freedoms.

    Eric

  11. Pht Says:

    Just by, I have read the constitution, and I have a some what decent understanding of it; but that is totally irrelevant to the question
    I was asking.

    To whit:

    “I don’t see Islam as our enemy,” Paul said. “I see that motivation is occupation and those who hate us and would like to kill us, they are motivated by our invasion of their land, the support of their dictators
    that they hate.”

    http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/08/27/paul-says-u-s-intervention-motivated-911-attacks/

    I don’t have a problem that he acknowledges that our actions,
    playing empire maker and the like in the middle east, can and have
    caused hatred towards our country. Of course we shouldn’t be
    fighting unbiblical and unconstitutional wars.

    What I have a problem with is what seems to be ignorance on his
    part about the genuine threat that the ideology of islam (not “radical”
    or “islamist” islam, but islam from the original text sources for that
    ideology) poses to america and the west. Islam can not accept
    any other system as being above it; it can not accept the idea of
    allowing people freedom of conscience. I suspect he doesn’t
    understand this fact; which is why I was asking here if anyone
    knew otherwise.

    Islamic dawah (proselytization) is currently advancing here in the
    states; and the decent muslims (which seem to be most … we would
    call them the liberals of islam) make the sea that the more
    orthodox muslims “swim in.” it’s a genuine threat to our very
    system of government.

    You very correctly point out that romanism and some recon-posties
    pose a threat to our government… To which I inquire, do you think
    Ron recognizes this?

    No, no, I’m not asking for a perfect president, and I don’t expect one.

    This issue is one of two glaring problems I have with ron.

    The other would be his apparent wish to legalize drugs; and no, I
    don’t agree with the war on drugs; it’s not the right way to stop
    recreational drug use.

    Oh, and I’m not a tech guy … I use the term “legacy media” because
    it seems to be a more comprehensive way to describe the old media
    that is entirely leftist-controlled.

  12. justbybelief Says:

    Pht,

    “Just by, I have read the constitution, and I have a somewhat decent understanding of it; but that is totally irrelevant to the question I was asking.”

    I was pretty sure you had read the Constitution; however, what eludes many people, not necessarily you, is that the Constitution does not apply to us–the people or the states, we are the sovereigns. It applies to the national government. In swearing an oath to uphold and defend it local and state public servants are declaring their intention to keep the national government within its confines. This they have NOT done, but that is for another discussion.

    A discussion of the Constitution is relevant if it is being brought up in the course of a representative’s or president’s duty. Their duty basically consists in declaring war (congress) and putting down insurrection (the president). This is probably the context in which Ron Paul made his statements as he is running for president and is obviously a congressman. Though the tenets of many groups is global domination, if they are not in the process of insurrection or nationally in a state of war with us we are to allow them to live peacefully and not provoke them. We can even peacefully trade with them.

    I do not share the legacy-media talking point that Ron Paul is deficient in his understanding of Islam. My concern is what seems to be a naivety, if it is that, in many politicians concerning false-flag operations like 911. In other words, in many cases western intelligence has used patsies to provoke the war chant in the population against certain groups. Our real enemy is already in country, has been for a long time (since the founding), and is not domestic terrorists or Muslims, though, I do not deny the possibility. I do commend Paul for calling for a reinvestigation of 911.

    The M.O. of the statist is to perpetuate war because war is the means to bring about totalitarianism. In addition, in their thinking, the end justifies the means. That is, false-flag ops are good if used to bring about the desired end.

    Anyway, with minor exceptions, “Why Ron Paul?” was a good article and IMHO proves the case.

    Eric

  13. Sean Gerety Says:

    FWIW I think Paul’s handling of the Iranian question in last night’s debate was the best I’ve heard from him. His point, while I’m sure lost on many who have been beat over the head by the neo-con war drum, is that sanctions not only do not work but they have precisely the opposite effect. “Severe sanctions,” which all the other candidates advocate, have the predictable and psychological result of driving people to rally around the very radical leaders we’re trying to bully into doing what we want.

    Paul was also good when he said that if Iran really does pose a threat to us and our ally, Israel, then the case needs to be made to the American people and Congress should do it the right way and “declare war!” IMO there should never be another case where Congress “authorizes” the President to wage war. Cowards.

  14. Hugh McCann Says:

    Hear, hear, Sean! :)

    We think of JR’s piece from 22 years ago: THE MESSIANIC CHARACTER OF AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY.

    http://www.trinityfoundation.org/PDF/075a-MessianicCharacterAmericanPolicy.pdf

  15. Sean Gerety Says:

    Great piece Hugh and timely:

    This delusion, that the State or society, particularly the American State and society, must do God’s work on Earth, is the essence of political messianism.

    …The messianic dream that the United States is a chosen nation, a nation with the mission of bringing forth the Millennium, the golden age of peace, prosperity, and brotherhood, is a delusion of grandeur. An individual convinced that he had such a mission would either be elected Fuhrer by an equally demented populace, or confined to a rubber room. But when presidents and whole nations share the same conviction, few people see the meaning of the delusion. The mad never know they are mad.

  16. Steve M Says:

    Pht

    You wrote of Ron Paul, “What I have a problem with is what seems to be ignorance on his part about the genuine threat that the ideology of islam (not “radical” or “islamist” islam, but islam from the original text sources for that ideology) poses to america and the west”.

    I contend that most of what passes for Christianity in the USA has done more damage to this country than Islam has. If this were, in fact, a Christian nation, “the ideology of Islam” would not represent much of a threat.

  17. justbybelief Says:

    Another point Paul has made which is lost on hearers is that economic sanctions ARE acts of war. The logical implications of this is that the U.S. and its allies have started this war and not only this war but many others as well.

  18. justbybelief Says:

    “But when presidents and whole nations share the same conviction, few people see the meaning of the delusion. The mad never know they are mad.”

    This preceding quote reminded me of another by George Orwell: “In times of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

    And, another: 2 Thess 2:9-12 “9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
    11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
    12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

  19. justbybelief Says:

    And another: “When a well-packaged web of lies
    has been sold gradually to the masses
    over generations, the truth will seem
    utterly preposterous and its speaker
    a raving lunatic.”
    – Dresden James

  20. justbybelief Says:

    Here’s the full quote:

    A truth’s initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie was believed. It wasn’t the world being round that agitated people but that the world wasn’t flat. When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic. – Dresden James

  21. Steve M Says:

    justbybelief

    Very thought provoking quotes!

    Your 2 Thess quote led me to this one. If Obama is going to quote Scripture out of context(i.e. Luke 12:48 And from everyone who has been given much shall much be required), let him quote this one:

    2 Thessalonians 3:10-12 10 For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone will not work, neither let him eat. 11 For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies. 12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread.

  22. justbybelief Says:

    Steve M,

    I’m unsure of your points within the context of the thread. Will you clarify?

  23. justbybelief Says:

    “Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.”
    – James Madison, writing to Thomas Jefferson, May 13, 1798

  24. justbybelief Says:

    “If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
    – James Madison, while a U.S. Congressman

  25. LJ Says:

    I have only eight signatures left to qualify to run as a Delegate in the Los Angeles County Republican Central Committee. This is my first and likely only stab at Politics.

    Yesterday I made about 200 calls at the Ron Paul campaign HQ (scored one Paul supporter who agreed to be a Delegate in Washington state, where we were calling). The place was ALIVE with activity. I sat by a nice young man barely older than my oldest grandchild; a UCLA Bruin so he was extra nice and well above average intellectually ;-)

    But what a group! I had to be at least the second oldest person there by a mile, and since the HQ is in Venice … well at first I felt a little out of place (a squared away middle aged white businessman) amongst the young folks dressed as the youth do with the hair, cloths, piercings, and tatts.

    But by the time I left I had a better understanding of something Dr. Paul has always said, LIBERTY BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER. I likely had very little in common with the majority of the young “Paulistas” but we got along fine and I think at the end of the day they were as comfortable with me as I with them.

    I doubt I’ll end up in Tampa for a number of reasons, but I’m going to take it as far as the Lord gives me favor. To Him be the glory.

  26. Sean Gerety Says:

    That’s a great story LJ.

  27. LJ Says:

    By the end of Church today, in the parking lot (of course), I secured all the signatures I need to qualify. Next is Delegate election then selection. Then we shall see what happens.

    Ron Paul 2012 for the Republic!

  28. pht Says:

    justbybelief Says:

    February 23, 2012 at 11:06 am

    I was pretty sure you had read the Constitution; however, what eludes many people, not necessarily you, is that the Constitution does not apply to us–the people or the states, we are the sovereigns. It applies to the national government. In swearing an oath to uphold and defend it local and state public servants are declaring their intention to keep the national government within its confines. This they have NOT done, but that is for another discussion.,/quote.

    Yep. And apparently, the 14th amendment, which has been used as a club against the states… isn’t an amendment.

    I gather it does not pass the constitutional requirements to have actually
    been put into the document. Some nasty history there; one I hope to
    read some time soon.

    Your comments about the context of the presidental duties, while appreciated
    doesn’t seem to apply to what appears to be an ignorance of the ideological threat that islam poses.

    I do not share the legacy-media talking point that Ron Paul is deficient in his understanding of Islam.

    Actually, the legacy media… and fox… are totally ignorant of islam, as it’s taught in the orig. documents, apparently (if they were, they’d be running in fear ).
    I don’t see how they *could* make that comment.

    On 9-11: I can see that there might be a biblical case to have been
    made for going against the actual group that carried off the attack.

    I suspect there may not be a good biblical case for the “war on terror”
    with bullets and bombs. IMO, that war should be an ideological one.

    Steve M Says:

    February 23, 2012 at 1:52 pm

    Pht

    You wrote of Ron Paul, “What I have a problem with is what seems to be ignorance on his part about the genuine threat that the ideology of islam (not “radical” or “islamist” islam, but islam from the original text sources for that ideology) poses to america and the west”.

    I contend that most of what passes for Christianity in the USA has done more damage to this country than Islam has. If this were, in fact, a Christian nation, “the ideology of Islam” would not represent much of a threat.

    A hearty Amen; but I can’t stand the blindness of postmodernism towards the
    threats posed by ideologies that are totally contrary to our founding documents and principals.

  29. pht Says:

    … Must learn the codes to do quotes and such. That last post is a mess! Hope you guys can sort it out!

  30. justbybelief Says:

    Pht,

    “I gather it does not pass the constitutional requirements to have actually been put into the document. Some nasty history there; one I hope to read some time soon.”

    Yes, that’s right, the 14th amendment does not pass muster. It along with the Civil War were instrumental in destroying the Republic. It’s the amendment that subjected blacks, then the rest of us, to the national government. This amendment did not free anyone.

    It is not surprising that on the heals of the war of northern aggression that they would pass an amendment changing the tenor of the original constitution subjecting “We The People” to it rather than the national government. This is very easy to do once you’ve destroyed the opposition. Now, all power is consolidated in the national government.

    I suggest you read “The Real Lincoln” by Di Lorenzo.

    The way to enslave people is to unhitch them from their roots. A change of history here…A change of history there…Until now we have the national government’s mantra, “all federal law trumps state law.”

    On a personal note, I had been trying to trace the ‘fall’ of this country for quite some time. I first traced it to the Civil War, then, found, that the ideologies that led to that war were at work in the beginning and can be linked to the national bank (low and behold isn’t this what R.P. has been saying for a long time about the FED). I even see the forming of the national government by the Constitution as step in our demise. So did many of the anti-federalists. Some of the federalist were motivated by the same thinking that the Hebrews were deluded by when calling for God to give them a king.

    “Your comments about the context of the presidental duties, while appreciated doesn’t seem to apply to what appears to be an ignorance of the ideological threat that islam poses.”

    They apply quite well. Ron Paul doesn’t put all the answers to our problems in government. Ron Paul has stated many times that government alone cannot solve the problems of this country (This is a reoccurring theme: we don’t need a king or a strong national government in order to secure our liberties). I suppose this is why our founders limited government. If the government is not responsible for solving all the problems it is certainly true that the president alone cannot solve all the problems. His office is limited in its scope. Paul, acquainted with our founders, has intimated statements like the following by John Adams: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Out of this type of people comes adequate public servants. Since most Americans today, even Christian Americans, squawk like baby birds for government to do something it is not authorized to do, rather than depending on God, is it any wonder we’re where we are today playing right into the hands of those, who by Satan’s influence, seek our demise.

    The ideology that forms the basis of Islam did not destroy this country. Paul is trying to bring down the ideology that has brought this country to its knees, an ideology around since the founding. The ideology seeking to destroy this country is the same ideology that has called for our troops to plunder Muslim lands. Though Islam may pose a threat, it pales in comparison to the one Paul is attacking. The one Ron Paul is attacking has us in a choke hold and where gasping for our last breath. The spear-head of the ideology in this country that has us in our death throws is the Federal Reserve System and our obsequious boot licking spineless fawning legislature that does all its bidding.

    Do you want to know how far Washington D.C. has overstepped its bounds? Here goes. I went to the store today to pick up some canned-air to spray the dust out of my computer because the fan was squealing. I got to the clerk and she asked how old I was. I asked her why she needed to know that. She said that even though I looked old enough her register would not unlock until she put in a birthday for this particular product (This is the War on Drugs in action something else R.P. opposes). I asked her if she was serious about getting my age. She said she was. I said to her that I would not buy the canned-air and asked to speak to the manager. I was told by the manager that federal law required them to acquire I.D. before selling canned-air. I believe that this will only get worse. The mark in the right-hand or in the forehead does not sound as ‘unbelievable’ now as it did 30 years ago. Sometimes I feel like I live in a Felini movie.

    Vote Ron Paul 2012 and more importantly, may God take pity on us.

  31. LJ Says:

    JBB wrote: “The spear-head of the ideology in this country that has us in our death throws is the Federal Reserve System and our obsequious boot licking spineless fawning legislature that does all its bidding.”

    Now there’s a sentence

  32. LJ Says:

    A friend at church saw my comment above and wrote:

    On Feb 27, 2012, at 10:57 PM, “Patrick Parks” wrote:

    And WHY Mr. LJ, do you wish those words came from your intellect/mind?  Hmmm???

    I answered:

    The alliteration?  No, because I think the man is precisely correct.  The sin of deceit and cheating that is the Central Bank, the “Fed,” is at the root of our demise as a nation.  You well know that all sin leads to death and that nobody gets away with anything; that’s a given.  But sins often have consequences in this life and not just the next.  Cheating an entire nation with unjust weights and measures, I believe, is one such category of sin.  

    Sent from my iPad

    LJ

  33. Pht Says:

    —–
    justbybelief Says:

    February 26, 2012 at 11:50 pm

    Yes, that’s right, the 14th amendment does not pass muster. It along with the Civil War were instrumental in destroying the Republic. It’s the amendment that subjected blacks, then the rest of us, to the national government. This amendment did not free anyone.

    It is not surprising that on the heals of the war of northern aggression that they would pass an amendment changing the tenor of the original constitution subjecting “We The People” to it rather than the national government. This is very easy to do once you’ve destroyed the opposition. Now, all power is consolidated in the national government.

    I suggest you read “The Real Lincoln” by Di Lorenzo.

    —–

    http://www.constitution.org/14ll/817dyett.htm

    Searh for

    “Immediately thereafter each of the seceding states functioned as regular states in the Union with both state and federal courts in full operation.”

    To get to the pertient parts.

    I’d love to see if anyone had some historical research of original documents from the time on this topic. This is an argument that could be made with great force, if this was brought up and forced into the courts.

    —–
    justbybelief Says:

    February 26, 2012 at 11:50 pm

    … They apply quite well. Ron Paul doesn’t put all the answers to our problems in government. Ron Paul has stated many times that government alone cannot solve the problems of this country (This is a reoccurring theme: we don’t need a king or a strong national government in order to secure our liberties).
    —–

    Pht:
    Um, I wasn’t discussing what the proper means are to address the problem.

    The only thing I really wanted to discuss was wether the threat was percieved by RP or not.

    I suspect that due to some of the cross-national nature of the groups (CAIR, etc) that the feds *might* have some legit places to step in… but I’m not sure on that one.

    —–

    As for the threat of sharia (which is just the praxy to the doxy in islam) …

    http://shariahinamericancourts.com/

    Our post-modern mush-headed courts are already rolling over for it.

    I don’t mention it because I think it is the biggest threat; I mention it because it’s one that’s obvious, easily provable, and had we the spine to enter open and deep debate in the public square, we could squash it, quickly… and a some of the praxy to the orthodoxy … the actual behaviors… fall under our criminal codes.

    Otherwise, look at the past 1400 years of history and current events in europe to see what happens when this seed comes to fruition…

    —–

    I presume you mean by the biggest idelogical threat that thinking which has resulted in making the government into “god” because we tossed God out of our town square and politics (in any meaningful biblical form) a long time ago?

    And no, I don’t like hamilton either. He was trouble than and his thinking has given us all sorts of trouble now…

  34. Bob S Says:

    Paul has his problems. I would say the 7th and same sex homosexual marriages is one, if not that repealing DADT which Paul agreed with, means special rights for homosexuals. To be fair to the heteros, everything in the military becomes uni-sex, whether bathrooms, barracks or whatever.

    That said, on the 6th/pro life, 8th/FedReserve and 9th/oath to uphold the constitution, if not also the 10th/track record of no desire for personal/public power, Paul is right.

    IOW there is really only one candidate qualified/running. If you think he’s unelectable, you shouldn’t be voting.

  35. pht Says:

    Who said anything about unelectable?

  36. LJ Says:

    Well, here’s the skinny in my case. If I’m in for an inch I’m in for a mile:

    Candidate, 66th Assembly District, Los Angeles County Republican Central Committee, June 5, 2012 Republican Primary.

    I’m now officially accepting donations. Please send no more than your firstborn and no less than your next mortage payment. I PROMISE no chicken, no Pot!

    Cheers,
    LJ

  37. LJ Says:

    BTW, the inside fighting with Establishment Repubs has already started.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 82 other followers

%d bloggers like this: