Is Ron Paul's boat in Iowa being raised by Obama fans out to cause mischief? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 07, 2024, 10:31:51 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  Is Ron Paul's boat in Iowa being raised by Obama fans out to cause mischief? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Is Ron Paul's boat in Iowa being raised by Obama fans out to cause mischief?  (Read 4279 times)
M
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,491


« on: December 20, 2011, 05:35:12 PM »

God,

Some people just cant believe that Ron Paul has a following in the GOP itself. If you watch Fox, they treat Paul like some kind of interloper. Paul is for limited government and non-intervention. This is very old school Republicanism.

You mean like in the 1930's, when the GOP was keeping refugees from Europe out and insisting that Japan and Germany were not a threat?

Yeah, I'll agree with that. Since the early 1950's, though, he's as much an aberration on foreign policy as Lyndon LaRouche for the Democrats.

There are two Republican FP camps - the Reagan/GWB strong interventionist model, and the Nixon/GHWB pragmatic interventionist model. Noninterventionism is anathema to most Republicans.
Logged
M
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,491


« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2011, 05:55:09 PM »

God,

Some people just cant believe that Ron Paul has a following in the GOP itself. If you watch Fox, they treat Paul like some kind of interloper. Paul is for limited government and non-intervention. This is very old school Republicanism.

You mean like in the 1930's, when the GOP was keeping refugees from Europe out and insisting that Japan and Germany were not a threat?

Yeah, I'll agree with that. Since the early 1950's, though, he's as much an aberration on foreign policy as Lyndon LaRouche for the Democrats.

There are two Republican FP camps - the Reagan/GWB strong interventionist model, and the Nixon/GHWB pragmatic interventionist model. Noninterventionism is anathema to most Republicans.
Wasn't Robert Taft a Non-Interventionist?

He was, not to the extent of Paul though (supported NATO and the Marshall Plan). But in many ways he was the last of a breed, dying in 1953.

I can even extend my model backwards, with the pragmatists being represented by Ike and Vandenberg, and the hawks by Dulles and Goldwater.

But then, Democrats were divided in much the same way at the time. The 1950s was not a good time to be a noninterventionist. The advent of ICBMs, nukes, and space flight, combined with the failure of appeasement, WWII and the beginning of the Cold War, was enough to convince Americans as a whole that two great oceans were no longer a perfect defense against the troubles of the planet.
Logged
M
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,491


« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2011, 10:25:24 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

There are people called "Police" who "arrest" people who commit murder. There are no legitimate uses for guns.

You can't seriously be saying that all killings are morally equivalent. That would mean that an accidental killing, a self-defense killing, heat-of-passion manslaughter, and capital murder are indistinguishable.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 9 queries.