Comments on: OLD-FASHIONED HORSE RACE

By: LD-11

LD-11 — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 08:37:58 +0000

Von,
I appreciate your thoughtful post, but Ron Paul does not in the least live up to Reagan’s views of foreign policy. In fact, Reagan was more Jeffersonian in that he believed that “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” were truly universal and not only applicable in the United States. There are millions around the world – specifically in Eastern Europe – who are today gratefully free because of the foreign policy of Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan understood that as more people around the world are free, the better it is not only for them but for the United States as well. I am certainly not advocating meddling in the affairs of everyone around the world, but Ronnie understood that at times it becomes necessary to act.
In regards to your statement about our Founding Fathers’ view of “power rest[ing] within the body of the people,” that is true to a certain degree. However, our Founding Fathers had a very leery view of the masses, and thus our system has a series of filters to refine public opinion. This is the hallmark of a republican (not Republican) form of government. The people’s views are filtered through their representatives, and in turn the opinions of our representatives are filtered through the bi-cameral nature of our Congress as well as the through the executive oversight of Congress (i.e. VP is the President of the Senate). It is a very brilliant design, and while many or our representatives have strayed from our ideals as the people, the solution is to vote them out of office. The solution is not to give more power to the masses (not that you were suggesting that)…pure democracy does not work, as can be evidenced in ancient history. Not that your post advocated for a direct democracy system, but too often libertarian rhetoric has undertones of a revolutionary, “more power to the people” philosophy without really considering what that statement means or understanding the intent of our Founding Fathers.

By: ron

ron — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 20:55:07 +0000

I am supporting Gov. Huckabee.
The misinformation being spread about regarding his views of taxation have been repudiated over and over again.
I think he is the only person who can attract a following which beat the Dems.
The Guv is the only consistent pro-life candidate in the group. He is the only one whose lifestyle epitomizes the values that conservatives hold dear. His experience as a govenor qualifies him to run the country.
He is his own person and not another Bush.
I am supporting Gov. Huckabee.

By: Von Kidd

Von Kidd — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 16:45:25 +0000

I believe that 10 term Texas Congressman Dr. Ron Paul is the candidate who best represents Reagan-esqe principles, and definitely the Jefferson-esqe principles of Liberty and limited government powers.
Dr. Ron Paul is a military veteran, having served as an Air Force flight surgeon. He is a devout Christian and pro-life, and in his career as an obstetrician, Dr. Paul has delivered over 4,000 babies.
Concerning Dr. Ron Paul’s Jefferson-esqe principles of Liberty and limited government powers, the Ten Commandments are all about Human Rights, after a reverence for the Creator. It was Thomas Jefferson who authored the Declaration of Independence. “…We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness – That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed,…”. The idea that all power rests within the body of the people, and that the primary purpose of government is as a servant of the people to secure and protect the rights of the individual is also expressed in the Preamble to The Bill of Rights (yes, The Bill of Rights has its own preamble, but it is usually omitted in copies). “(The)Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declatory and restrictive measures should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficient ends of its institution:…” This means that The Bill of Rights are the “further declaratory and restrictive measures” on the Constitution, and is preeminent in importance to the Constitution, and that the Constitution is subordinate to and interpreted within the context of the Bill of Rights.
Anyone who has read the most significant passages of Thomas Jefferson’s voluminous writings will recognize the Jeffersonian origins of the ideas of Dr. Ron Paul. Dr. Ron Paul wants to restore America’s Free Republic with its Bill of Rights and Constitution, putting our statist government back within the Constitutional limits that our founding fathers set for it. The unintentional omission by our founders of a Constitutional ammendment chaining our judiciary from mischief and putting checks and balances upon it to bring it into submission to the Constitution, which was pointed out by Thomas Jefferson, can also be easily remedied.
In Freedom and Liberty,
Von Kidd

By: Tom Buggeln

Tom Buggeln — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 16:42:50 +0000

Len:
Interesting and for the most part, thoughtful analysis. However, I believe your animosity towards Ron Paul trumped your logic.
You begin by tagging him with the “libertarian” label which contains some truth, but that doesn’t make the Congressman less Conservative. Check his voting record and compare it to the track records of Rudy and Mitt!
Then we’re advised that his fund raising success is due to the Pat Buchanan “wing” of the party, i.e “paleo-cons”. Now :ibertarians and Trads are two different species. Ludwig Von Mises and Russell Kirk don’t exist on the same philosophical planet.
Besides, I rather doubt that Pat could mobilize over 35000 people to fork over four and quarter million in a 24 hr. period anymore!
What does unite them is the belief that U.S. foreign policy should be rational, realistic and as a priority, representative of U.S.interests in the Mideast as well as the rest of the world.
This is NOT the party of Woodrow Wilson or FDR.
You’ve been spending too much time courting Neo-Cons Len!
It’s about time you got de0Hannitized and returned home!
As Ever!
Tom Buggeln

By: Lorna J. Bennett

Lorna J. Bennett — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 05:56:48 +0000

I’ve been leaning toward Romney because he personifies the wholesome, moral, educated image necessary for our President. He has execuive experience needed for the office. However, I’m considering Huckabee for the same reasons, but he is so refreshing.
I also saw more of Hunter last night on the Glenn Beck show, & his views are right in line with mine. We esp. need to listen to him about the danger from China, which holds so much of our debt, & the continued disaster re. our Mexican border. We just can’t allow the Dems to re-take the White House, or we will be joining the “Global Downfall”
May God Help us!

By: Nathan Briscoe

Nathan Briscoe — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 15:36:00 +0000

For the record, Rudy has claimed that he would nominate strict constructionist judges–this is the realized front in the war on antidemocratic abortion support.
Ron Paul appears to be taking votes away from the (young) Democrats. When he runs as an Independent, he just might take enough votes away from the libs to ensure their defeat.
Pat Robertson likely is recognizing Rudy’s military strength, but it would be naive to not assume that Romney’s Mormonism plays a large part in Robertson’s lack of support. Wrong or right–a Mormon will not win an election in today’s America even if he was a genetic clone of Reagan. If Romney wins the primary, we can say goodbye to a Republican presidency in ’08.

By: Benjamin Brookhart

Benjamin Brookhart — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 10:18:04 +0000

Len, I agree with you that the Republican party needs to unite and be energized if we are to win the next presidential election.
When the presidential race began, I wasn’t excited about any of the candidates. I believe that the center of the party and it’s strength can best be reflected in the model led by President Ronald Reagan. None of the candidates seemed to be close to Ronald Reagan in relation to the Republican Party.
After carefully weighing out the candidates, I came to the conclusion that Gov. Huckabee would be the most capable in unifying the party and appealing to voters outside of the Republican based on a conservative message.
Gov. Huckabee is the best communicator of all the candidates. In the debates, he gives the best answers. He is the only candidate that didn’t sling mud in the Oct. 21st debate. He is likeable and appealing. He sends a message that anybody can succeed from humble beginnings. He also has the most excutive expierance. Gov. Huckabee has made huge efforts to improve health care in his state and is the only candidate talking about improving the bridges, roads, sewer systems, and air traffic control.
Are there areas that concern me in relation to Gov. Huckabee. Sure there are. I don’t like the Fair Tax, but I do believe we need a Flat Tax. He doesn’t have a lot of foreign policy expierance, but he does seem knowledgeable about world affairs and is committed to supporting are troops and national interest in the war on terror in Iraq.
Ultimately in the end, I think Gov. Huckabee sends a positive message that appeals to voters. I think his ability to communicate is essential to winning the next election. Finally, the republican party needs the social conservative base and for them to be energized. Gov. Huckabee is who the social conservatives want.

By: Sherry Howell

Sherry Howell — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 06:30:25 +0000

Len, I know that Duncan Hunter is not very high up in the polls, but he is my choice for POTUS. He is anti abortion and stem cell research, he is anti trade with China, and he is pro fence on the border. He is prior military and his son is in the middle east right now. I don’t know why more people are not on board with him.
Thanks for your time.
Sherry

By: John Fillmore

John Fillmore — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 04:56:22 +0000

At what point do you succumb to the dark side?? The only Contender that has constantly talked the positive, visionary message about the greatness of America has been Governor Huckabee. He alone seems to want to keep the values and inspire others to what we can achieve. I do not trust John McCain anymore after the immigation issue , Thompson is just a “me too wanna be” and Rudy G. should be a conservative Democrat. Ron Paul does not motivate me beyond his stance and outspokenness on a few issues. We need the vision that R. Reagan gave us with the “city on the hill”, some home spun truth and basic core values. I wuld not give up hope on the race even in Mr Brownback has and I would encourage all to rally behind Gov H. let us send him some $$ so that he can get out of the second tier and start being noticed more on the national level. Look, the guy is running second in Iowa and the southern states. The pathetic press will keep him in the dark as long as they can. It is up to us to stand and raise our voices. I would hate to find that our disdain for the Rep party gives America to socialism and betrayal in 2008 if we do not unite. This is to dangerous of a time and freedom needs your voice and a few dollars.

By: Sam A Weathersby

Sam A Weathersby — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:56:01 +0000

Len, please do a bit more research before calling Ron Paul an isolationist. He is no more that than the Founding Fathers. He wants to do as they advised regarding trade & relationships. That is not isolationist, it is common sense. Using the term shows you may be a bit influenced by the MSM as when they did the same smear on Pat Buchanan. Why is protecting the USA & following the Constitution & Founder’s advice isolationist?
Also you may find that Ron Paul is gaining consensus daily. He just took in over 4 mil. in one day. From little guy we the people, not big donors & PACs that support the media’s anointed like Rudy, Fred T or Hillary.
I hope you run for Gov. again. I will still support you. I am just a bit take back by your seeming lack of knowledge regarding Ron Paul, based on your comments about him.
Thank you & god bless!