It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by truthseeker1984
If the mind of a Santorum supporter has been changed, what else can be done?
I plan on voting for Dr. Paul. I'm tired of the MSM brainwashing and influence over the American people. If the lefties and righties stopped their bickering for all of 30 seconds, they would realize how asinine their arguments are. Ron Paul is the only valid candidate for the job, and he's on the side of the Constitution and individual liberty.
I think I may make a call-in to both CNN and Faux News about my views on Dr. Paul, and grill them on why they refuse to give him any coverage, and then accuse them of being favoritists.
Thanks for the article. It gave me warm fuzzies.
Having lost my preferred choice for a presidential candidate on Tuesday,
I determined that after a suitable period of mourning and reflection
the only viable option was to shake it off and begin the search anew,
the presumptive, media-anointed frontrunner not being desirable or
While I didn’t find much to cheer about on the foreign policy portion of
his speech, it is on domestic policy that I find much agreement with
We now live in a post-9/11 America where our government is going to make us safe no matter what it takes. We are expected to grin and bear it and adjust to every loss of our liberties in the name of patriotism and security.
Though the majority of Americans initially welcomed the declared effort to make us safe, and we are willing to sacrifice for the cause, more and more Americans are now becoming concerned about civil liberties being needlessly and dangerously sacrificed.
Time is short, but our course of action should be clear. Resistance to illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of our rights is required. Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes.
But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty.
william ridenour voted Undecided
One thing bothers me deeply about this article: the common misconception that Ron Paul's foreign policy is problematic. Not so. He's for strong defense, but the neocon foreign policy is not one of defense. It is one of meddling-it is hegemonic, and it is driven by wild speculation and fear-mongering. Our writer has been brainwashed by Leo Strauss and the neocons under his tutelage. (As Robert Lewis Dabney was fond of saying, "Northern conservatism never conserved anything.") With the Neocons Dabney was more the vindicated; what he spoke he spoke as an objective observer, not out of sectional bias. The Neocon foreign policy has nothing to do with conservatism, but is a mere extension of the arrogant progressivism of Woodrow Wilson. You will note Reagan wanted smaller government. But his military aggression and military expansion caused massive growth in government, making his small government rhetoric mere theory that, in practice, failed miserably. Here is the conundrum that conservative must face and resolve if they are to remain true conservatives and constitutionalists: an out of control, no limit spending, aggressive military foreign policy will serve to destroy your goals to shrink government domestically. No government in history that has shown itself to be imperialist and aggressive abroad has carried on a minimal, humble, liberty-loving domestic policy. AGGRESSION ABROAD ALWAYS LEADS TO DESPOTISM AT HOME--AND GOVERNMENT DRIVEN TERRORISM. Why do you think Oblamer wants a domestic army at his disposal---which he will get if he wins a second term? Ron Paul understands this. He sees the incoherent nature of the Neocon agenda and knows its resulting evils--because he knows man and he knows history. Those bamboozled by Neocon propaganda and their progressivism in terms of foreign policy seem not to be able to see the incoherence and self-annihilating nature of their policies. What is possible? Either a humble, non-instrusive government with a defensive foreign policy, or a despotic government with an aggressive foreign policy. To repeat: No nation in the history of the world has been humble and liberty loving domestically and imperious and hegemonic abroad: You can't have your cake and eat it to. And up to now, the hornswoggled Neocon drone heads fail to see their jingoism and foreign policy aggression make up the plague of locusts that have voraciously eaten away at American Liberty. In a phrase: I'm sick of people impugning Dr. Paul's foreign policy while calling and thinking of themselves as conservative. NO ONE who embraces, at least in substance, a foreign policy and attitude toward other nations that is consonant with Wilson is a conservative, I don't care what they say. Saying it doesn't make it so.