Perverts for Ron Paul???????

For starters, the title was chosen to attract a response. I don't think all people who support Mr. Hof's business choice are perverts.

Being a solid republican I will back whomever the Republicans put up as their candidate. But, as of yet I am still not a Ron Paul fan. AND articles like this do not help.

www.cbsnews.com...
www.foxnews.com...
digg.com...

I agree with what most of you are going to say, as long as no campaign finance laws are broken, who cares where the money comes from. BUT, I am also a conservative both socially and economically. How is support like this supposed to help Mr. Paul win over the social conservatives of the party, a group that he surely will need to get the nomination. Money raising, does not gaurantee winning any nomination. For him to be nominated he needs the social conservatives. I think he can get the nomination with out the radical religious aspect of the party, something I am not part of, but us social conservatives need to know more than just anti-abortion.

Granted Mr. Hof is a small business owner, something I am very much in favor of, but its almost like he is seeking free publicity by joining the rank and file followers of Mr. Paul.

I am looking for responses from people to tell me why Ron Paul is better that Rudy Guilliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney and Mr. Huckabee. Please do not compare him to the Democrats, nothing you say would ever allow me to vote for one of "them" any way.

Remember, I am a social and econimc conservative. Please tell me why Mr. Paul should be my choice. I will not bash anyone's opinion or speak ill of any response as long as they are well thought out, and no lies or inaccuracies are used.

Thank you.


Personally, I like traits of all of the nominations, just wish I could role them up into 1 and get a solid nomination.

How is Rudy Giulliani a Republican?

He is for gay marriage and is pro-choice... You asked how Ron Paul is conservative, I'm asking you how is Giulliani even a Republican..

What lame attempt at a controversial title.

As much as I respect those who don't agree with Ron Paul, this kind of petty slandering, even so much as a title like this is really annoying and quite childish. I mean, seriously. Grow up. I don't understand how he's in the wrong morally. He's been married to the same woman for over half his life. He's never flip flopped on the issue of abortion. Has openly talked about his Christian beliefs. What isn't "socially conservative" about this man?

Yup, pervs for Paul. Somebody tried to claim David Duke's support or Paul as sign of Paul's inherit racism blah blah blah

Paul has never pretended to be one of these "Bible thumping" "God hates 'SNIP'" brand of "conservative" (I use the term as loosely as possible in this case).

Paul's support comes from people who still believe the Constitution is the law of the land, the Bill of Rights are not suggestions, and government has no place in a persons wallet, home or bedroom.

That's a conservative. Not these jackasses trying to shape the nation into a Christian "Caliphate." You want to live your life pious and holy good for you. It's your right to live your life as you see fit. The caveat is that it is also everyone else's right as well. Provided none of you infringe on anyone else's rights in the process.

Sorry if liberty offends you. It happens.


Mod edit to remove an offensive term

[edit on 12/8/2007 by benevolent tyrant]

[edit on 12/8/2007 by benevolent tyrant]

Deadflagblues:
Wait a minute. I never meant to accuse anyone of being a pervert, and I admitted in my opening sentence that I chose the title name to garner responses. I know nothing about Ron Paul and would like to be informed by people who do follow the man. What I mean by that is, tell me what he stands for and give me proof of what your saying. There is more to being socially conservative then being married to the same woman (un-like Thompson and Guiliani) and being anti-abortion (unlike Guiliani).

SpeakerofTruth:
If you want to compare Rudy Guilliani to Ron Paul, go ahed and do it. But don;t answer my question with a question about Guilliani, start your own post about that. break down the 2 men and compare them. Don't leave the post hanging.

I am still open to whom I am chosing. Back in May I was all for Fred Thompson getting into the race, but he has been thje most UN-responsive guy out there.

Thisguyis right here:
Liberty has never offended me. I would lay my life down to protect the liberty and freedoms we enjoy here in this country.

reply to post by traderonwallst


Here's his main webpage:
www.ronpaul2008.com...
Check the 'Issues' tab in the upper left hand corner.
The most excellent way to see what a candidate stands for is to hear what he has to say for himself... and I am rather surprised that you, a republican, have not investigated Ron Paul by now... Have you only heard of him recently?

If you want a quick and gutted synopsis...

A Ron Paul presidency will:
-----------------------------------
*End the IRS
*Stop the central bankers 'inflation tax'
*Stop unconstitutional spending leading us into bankruptcy
*Stop the financial dependency on China, Saudi Arabia, and other foreign governments
*Oppose trade deals and groups that threaten American Independence (including GATT, NAFTA, NAU, WTO, CAFTA, ICC)
*Protect our privacy and stop the national ID card
*Protect our Constitutional rights and end the "Patriot" Act.
*Secure our borders and protect illegal immigration
*End 'birthright' citizenship for illegal aliens
*Bring our troops home from no-win "police actions"
*Let Americans keep more of their own money (hey, it's what the flyer said, and if he abolishes the IRS and the Federal Income Tax it is bound to happen)

I hope I have been of service to you. (^_^)

LOL

Do you support your local grocery store?
DO you keep them in business, paying the employee's salaries by shopping there?
Does this business take money from the so-called "perverts" in your town?
You bet they do.
Will you shop there tomorrow? or the next day? yep, you will.

reply to post by traderonwallst


This guy is a good man. He's personally pro-life, but wants the people to decide on a local level what is "right and wrong" on the issue. He's a Christian, but he says that shouldn't play a role in governing. He's been committed to the same woman for half his life. He was an OBGYN and his job was to bring life INTO this world.

Have you seen this from any other major candidates?

You have Romney flip-flopping on abortion every 2 years, or when it is convenient to get a swing vote. Guiliani who is pro-choice with multiple failed marriages.

Look at the two front runners and the direct contrast of their previous actions and lifestyles compared to Ron Paul's. If you're worried about the individual morality of your candidate, Ron Paul is seemingly the way to go.

Though, he isn't a federalist, so even though you'd probably want him to enforce these qualities on the entire nation, it will be up to us to make a change on the state and local level! That's where we all come in, and there isn't anything more important than the people's commitment to their country and determining their own fate through democracy. It's going to be a big step, and if you think you're ready to be responsible for you and yours, Ron Paul is the way to go.

Faith in people and their local government is the only way to operate. Let us determine our own fate and the direction of our communities that we live in!

i just want to add something...some people might think that the number of marriages a candidate had has nothing to do with his ability to run the country. i say it's a great measure of how a candidate handles conflicts. someone that is hard headed and refuses to listen to other viewpoints will probably have failed marriages and by extension, you wouldn't want him dealing with other nations with that sort of personality. someone who has had one marriage probably has better negotiation skills and is able to peacefully resolve conflicts.

Definitely shows some degree of integrity doesn't it? I don't even believe in marriage and I think it's an important issue because "morality" is shoved down our throats. Just proves that he's not going to give up on something he believes in, not even some 50 year old coot. If he says it, he means it, and that's the type of people we need running our government on local, state, and federal levels.