Ron Paul Booed in South Carolina Over Crazy Foreign Policy Ideas (Video)

Crazy Uncle Ron got booed last night in South Carolina for his naive foreign policy ideas. The Southern audience did not appreciate Paul’s “let’s just ignore those Islamic terrorists who have just slaughtered thousands of Americans” approach to foreign policy.
Via HillBuzz:
Read more

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • RedBeard

    Paulian drones, complete with mindless recitations of parrot-like talking points, are gathering outside, and will be here shortly.

  • More Liberty

    I know.. How dare Ron Paul believe that endless wars aren’t awesome. I mean…we’ve got endless supply of young men and money.

  • Talking that junk in South Carolina?

    Situational awareness FAIL

  • bg
  • cal riflin

    …Just Dr. Ron bein’ Dr. Ron!!

  • Han Solo

    That was disgusting actually. The crowd booed Paul for advocating the golden rule. Basically, in Republican-land, the golden rule has been changed to “Do unto others before they can do unto you”. What great Christians.

  • burt

    Ron Paul is NOT a Republican. He is finally being treated like the trash he is. His donations come from the far left. In the general election the money will go to Obama and his media friends will disappear. They we’ll have better things to do.

  • bg
  • bg


    re: #8 January 17, 2012 at 9:07 am bg

    btw, Jesus was no pacifist..

    [We are commanded to hate what is evil and cling to what is good (Romans 12:9). In doing so we must take a stand against what is evil in this world and pursue righteousness (2 Timothy 2:22). Jesus did this and, in so doing, spoke openly against the religious and political rulers of His time because they were not seeking a righteousness from God, but rather of their own making (Luke 20:1-2, Romans 9:31-33). Zeal for God’s righteousness consumed Jesus, and He was not afraid to stand up against those who opposed and dishonored His Father (John 2:15-17, see also Numbers 25:11). “Those who hate Him He will repay to their face by destruction; He will not be slow to repay to their face those who hate Him” (Deuteronomy 7:10). “While people are saying, ‘Peace and safety,’ destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape” (1 Thessalonians 5:3).]


  • Newt- “Jackson had a pretty clear cut idea about America’s enemies… Kill them!” Power statement, was brilliant!

  • logan

    Ron Paul’s approach makes complete since to anyone with a working brain in their head. If we continue to mess with terrorists then terrorists will continue to mess with us and cause even more American deaths. HE IS SAVING LIVES. RON PAUL 2012

  • @logan “If we continue to mess with terrorists then terrorists will continue to mess with us” Not if they’re dead…. problem solved.

  • Old One

    Ron Paul is indeed the batty old uncle that shoud be kept locked in the attic.What a lunatic.

  • Skip

    Well, Logan, I have a working brain, but Paul’s policy doesn’t make “since” to me.

    Paul’s neo-liberal rebranded version of Bryant’s and McGovern’s isolationism would have lost the Cold War. Period.

    His “blame America first” attitude and conspiratorial fluff harken back to such conservative heavyweights (irony!) as the La Follettes and Nye.

    History (and reality) are a biatch.

  • Mike Stites

    this website is a joke i just left a HUGE well versed FACT BASED argument FOR Ron Paul and they wont post it… this website is just as bad as the MSM

  • Militant Conservative

    Here is the scenario that will prove whether Ron

    Paul loves America or himself. When he does not

    get the republican nomination. Does he shut up and

    Sit down? Or run a third party challenge. The later

    Will give us Obama, proving his non love of

    America, just self adulation.

    Powder is dry

  • Conservative to the Core

    Thanks to Operation Chaos II the South Carolina primary results will be meaningless. It is an open primary so Ron Paul fans can flood the polls PLUS Stephan Colbert is encouraging people to vote for Herman Cain.

  • bg


    Han Solo #6 January 17, 2012 at 8:55 am

    did Jesus condone drugs and pedophilia #130, hypocrisy or racism??

    how about Sharia?? don’t believe so, but there you go anyways..

    not to mention his anti-American ‘TRUTHERISM’, the coddling of our self
    declared enemies ala Obama, ie: Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Muslim
    Brotherhood, whom are already operating w/in our own government.. 🙁


  • Skip

    Right, Conservative to the Core. If you can’t win primary, have your army of kool-aid quaffing zombies hijack it for you.

    And you dingbats whine about “rigged elections”?

  • bg


    logan #11 January 17, 2012 at 9:24 am

    is that you Barry??

    because that’s truly twisted logic..

    so, you believe that those who have sworn to the world & Allah
    to kill all infidels (Muslims included) FOLLOW THE GOLDEN RULE??

    well isn’t that precious, not to mention f’n DEADLY you (fitb)!! *sigh*


  • Logic

    You people wouldn’t know INTEGRITY if it slapped you in the face!

    The man CARES LESS about who is audience is – he simply TELLS THE TRUTH and has said the same thing for 30 years. His stance is very clear – if we go to war, DECLARE IT CONSTITUTIONALLY.

    Why is this so hard for faux-conservatives to understand? READ THE CONSTITUTION!

  • RedBeard

    Shorter Ron Paul: “If we ignore evil, it will go away and not hurt us.” Yes, sure, that’s worked really well throught history, hasn’t it?

    We ignored the Nazis, and they just went away and joined garden clubs. Oh, wait, no they didn’t. We had to go over there and kill them.

    We ignored Imperial Japan, and they gave up on conquest and decided to go fishing instead. Oh, wait, no they didn’t. We had to go over there and kill them.

    We ignored the Barbary Pirates, and they then invited us to tea. Oh, wait, no they didn’t. We had to go over there and kill them.

    Reality is unpleasant, made far more unpleasant and dangerous by a goofball presidential candidate who won’t face it.

  • Perspective

    Ron Paul was booed when he entered the arena. He was walking into hostile neo-con territory. I’m not surprised at all that he was booed.

    BTW… It’s ironic that conservatives call libertarians “isolationists” while supporting immigration controls, sanctions, embargoes & trade restrictions.

  • I Like Ike

    “Preventive war was invented by Hitler. Frankly, I would not listen to anyone seriously who talked about such a thing.” -Dwight Eisenhower

  • TammyChicago

    #11 …”Ron Paul’s approach makes complete since to anyone with a working brain…”

    Well I’m glad he makes *since* to you………. he makes no SENSE to most of us. Typical Paulbot.

  • Finncrisp

    It has come down to what the meaning of “war” is. If there is an enemy who has sworn to kill me when the opportunity presents itself without provocation just because of who I am,
    do I wait until I am dead to resist? The Moslems want us dead! What part of that does Pathetic Paul not get? I can’t modify my behavior to appease this killer. He just wants me dead.

    As one says, this is not a negotiation.

  • TammyChicago

    Ron Paul subtext “Don’t punish serial killers. That is just going to piss them off. Now, instead really wanting to kill us……. they are going to really, really, really want to kill us.”

  • Flawed Logic


    It’s one thing to disagree with Ron Paul’s position. It’s another thing to misunderstand it. You are in the latter category.

    1. He is against pre-emptive war
    2. He is against undeclared war
    3. He is against police actions/nation-buliding/empire expansion
    4. He is against violating the sovereignty of other nations.
    5. He is against the NDAA and Patriot Act
    6. He is for a strong national defense
    7. He is for cutting military spending, not defense spending

    Summary: He is FOR the Bill of Rights, Constitution, and International law.


  • Skip

    So, #21, Logic, were Jefferson, Madison and Adams not following the Contsitution when they went to war against the Barbary Pirates, #1s and #2, and the French with only Congressional approval?

    #23, Perspective, were Jefferson, Madison, and Adams “neocons”? What exactly is a “neocon”?

  • Dr. Paul had his worst debate. He was on his heels and sounded whiny and crazy all night. Newt and Perry (my choice) chewed him to shreds.

  • Sasja

    He is a Nut! I’ve never known him to not sound whiny and crazy. As I posted a while back. If his family had any self-respect, they would have relegated him to the attic long ago.

  • Patty

    He is what I call that second helping you know you shouldn’t have had.

  • Flawed Logic


    “Neo-Conservative” defined:

    Neoconservatism is a variant of the political ideology of conservatism which rejects the utopianism and egalitarianism of modern liberalism but sees a role for the welfare state. Their main emphasis since 1990 has been using American power to foster democracy abroad, especially in the Middle East. They were notably visible in Republican administrations of George H.W. Bush (1989-93) and George W. Bush (2001-2009).

  • Skip

    Flawed Logic,

    Its one thing to be like some of Paul’s ideas, but its entirely another to drink the kool-aid to the lees:

    1. He is against any type of military action, unless the nation is “threatened”. His policies would have meant no support of Solidarity, no defense against communism abroad, which every conservative since Goldwater has supported.

    2. See above. Jefferson, Madison, and Adams sent US troops into battle without a formal Congressional declaration of war. Does Paul know the Constitution better than they?

    3. He parrots the leftist notion that we have an “empire”. To the Paul-bot, because Germany has 50 US military installations, Germany = “occupied”. Its sheer nonesense. Oddly enough, Germans haven’t been flying 747s into New York skyscrapers, despite being “occupied” by the US for 60 years and counting.

    4. He talks out of both sides of his mouth. Against pork, accepts earmarks. Wants to honor the “sovereignty of other nations” by not sending the US military, but is okay if civillian privateers go with issued letters of marque. Really?

    5. Well, can’t argue with you there, but Paul isn’t alone in this respect.

    6. Right. Now parrot the whole “he gets more donations from people who identify themselves with “military” as their employer schtick. Bare assertion fallacy.

    7. Tell me how cutting R&D (support of the “military-industrial complex!!!!”) keeps our armed forces strong, or ready.

    Yes, Paul’s foreign policy views are dangerous, which is why no conservative has ever held them. Paul’s views are McGovern’s and the La Follette’s views, repackaged by useful idiots into being called “conservative”.

    They’re not.

  • JustAVet

    Ron.Paul is a doddering old fool. A RINO of the highest order. Physically incapable of being the POTUS.

  • Abelard

    Uncle Ron wants the next war to be on our own soil.


    I’d just as soon have “away games” myself. War is messy.

  • Skip

    Thank you Flawed. Fortunately, no “neo cons” are running for office. Unless, of course you can point out where anyone has proposed an invasion and nation building scheme in Iran.

    As your link notes, they went out of vogue in 2009.

  • Patty

    Scatter brain, nervous, mouth speaks before he can think and words come out that are foreign.

    Has ideas but they are for another day, even though he believes now is the time. Confuses audiences yet he still mumbles on. Uncertainty if this is what Americans need when Americans need clarity.

    I do wonder why such an expensive Embassy was built in Iraq, though.

  • bg


    Logic #21 January 17, 2012 at 10:15 am

    30 years??

    yes, he’s been hiding behind the Constitution
    so long that his disciples believe he wrote it..

    but i’m open to facts, so please list Ron
    Pauls Constitutional accomplishments..


    oh yeah. US War Declarations

    btw.. the War in Iraq is an extension of the Gulf War, go figure..

    American Leadership & War


  • Flawed Logic


    I appreciate your thoughtful response. Consider the following…

    What proof do you have that he is “against any type of military action”? He has clearly stated that he supported Regan’s approach to the Cold War. How are Communists threatening us abroad LOL! The United States is in the process of being infiltrated and hijacked by Communists and Socialists as we speak!

    When it comes to a declaration of war, the difference here, as stated by a previous poster, is the definition of “war”. How would you compare the difference in the scope of military action against the pirates and the French to, let’s say, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Libya (w/o Congressional approval)?

    “Empire” isn’t simply established through sheer military occupation. Foreign aid, economic coercion, CIA intrusion/de-stabilization, etc. are also tools of empire.

    “Empire” (def) [noun] “A group of nations or peoples ruled over by an emperor, empress, or other powerful sovereign or government: usually a territory of greater extent than a kingdom, as the former British Empire, French Empire, Russian Empire, Byzantine Empire, or Roman Empire.”

    A case could definitely be made that we exercise such power over other nations economically and otherwise. Not to mention the fact the Congress continues to allow the Executive branch to operate with increasing dictatorial powers.

    I’m not sure of your point regarding “civilian privateers” but he has clearly stated that he accepts earmarks under the current system in order to return his constituent’s tax dollars back to their state and community. If you’re going to say this is somehow hypocritical, how can you POSSIBLY support any of the other political prostitutes running for President? Ron Paul shines on ANY issue of integrity you drum up.

    When it comes to the Military Industrial Complex, Ron Paul’s position is to “Cut” not “Eliminating”. Strong defense pre-supposes readiness. I live in the heart of the MIC and I can tell you, it’s wasteful BEYOND IMAGINATION!

    It’s clear that you consider Ron Paul’s positions dangerous, though you might not fully understand his positions. Regardless, do you consider FINANCIAL COLLAPSE a threat to our national security? Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate with rational, real-world proposals to deal with the debt, the economy, and our monetary system. Remember, the Soviet Union collapsed from WITHIN.

    Unfortunately, when the collapse happens, the troops will be coming home, like it or not.

  • Dan

    600,000 guns in America,300,000 citizens, why have we invaded these other countries and fought their citizens and because they fight back we label them terrorist.
    Wake up..

  • Flawed Logic


    Neo-con policies are alive and well in Afghanistan. Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have eloquently espoused their principles in the debates… “Spreading democracy… blah, blah, blah…”

  • Pingback: Ron Paul Booed in South Carolina Over Crazy Foreign Policy Ideas (Video) | Liberal Whoppers()

  • bg


    Dan #41 January 17, 2012 at 11:36 am


    my thought processing has passed that level of
    thinking so long ago, it just can’t go back!! 😀


  • Occidental Guy

    Ron Paul is a virtual ideological clone of Thomas Jefferson. Republicans who think he is a kook just demonstrate how far off the conservative rails the current GOP ideology has gone. It is no longer the party of populist American conservatism. It has become the party of Corporate Fascism and Israel-First Zionism.

    Paul was the only true conservative Republican on the stage last night. The others are Israel-first, Globalist NeoCons who get support from the increasing stupid GOP electorate who seem to be too busy watching NASCAR or whatever to have noticed the once paleoconservative GOP has been completely co-opted and ideologically transformed by a foreign government (Israel) and it’s tribal stooges on Wall Street and in the Media.

  • bg


    Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall
    pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend,
    oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

    ~ John F. Kennedy

    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We
    didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for,
    protected, and handed on for them to do the same.

    ~ Ronald Reagan

    “There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and
    resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes
    of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of human freedom.”

    ~ George W. Bush


  • Flawed Logic

    Quote from #24

    “Preventive war was invented by Hitler. Frankly, I would not listen to anyone seriously who talked about such a thing.” -Dwight Eisenhower

  • Jerry C

    Here I go again. I held my nose to vote for the “lessor” evil with McCain. Then low & behold, he was one of the two co-sponsors of the indefinite detention of american citizens bill! The GOP even said “our” candidate was Romney before the primaries. So, I am sick and tired of voting for who the GOP says is our “best candidate”.

    By default, I plan on voting for Ron Paul. I WILL NOT vote for Romney, Newt or any other RHINO. Ron Paul’s foreign policies may be out there and he’s way too anti-Israel for me, but at least I believe he cares about America (if there’s such as thing in a politician today).

  • bg


    Occidental Guy #45 January 17, 2012 at 11:42 am

    ROT 😆 MBO!!

    Jefferson’s Opposition to Standing Army-Navy

    [As a matter of principle, Thomas Jefferson had expressed opposition
    to the concept of a standing army and navy in the years just after the
    nation’s founding. This was in spite of the fact that the Constitution
    to which he swore allegiance stated that the one essential element
    of the federal government was to provide for the national defense.

    square that circle for me will ya OG..

    America and the Barbary Pirates: An
    International Battle Against an Unconventional Foe

    [When Jefferson became president in 1801 he refused to accede to Tripoli’s demands for an immediate payment of $225,000 and an annual payment of $25,000. The pasha of Tripoli then declared war on the United States. Although as secretary of state and vice president he had opposed developing an American navy capable of anything more than coastal defense, President Jefferson dispatched a squadron of naval vessels to the Mediterranean. As he declared in his first annual message to Congress: “To this state of general peace with which we have been blessed, one only exception exists. Tripoli, the least considerable of the Barbary States, had come forward with demands unfounded either in right or in compact, and had permitted itself to denounce war, on our failure to comply before a given day. The style of the demand admitted but one answer. I sent a small squadron of frigates into the Mediterranean. . . .”

    The American show of force quickly awed Tunis and Algiers into breaking their alliance with Tripoli. The humiliating loss of the frigate Philadelphia and the capture of her captain and crew in Tripoli in 1803, criticism from his political opponents, and even opposition within his own cabinet did not deter Jefferson from his chosen course during four years of war. The aggressive action of Commodore Edward Preble (1803-4) forced Morocco out of the fight and his five bombardments of Tripoli restored some order to the Mediterranean. However, it was not until 1805, when an American fleet under Commodore John Rogers and a land force raised by an American naval agent to the Barbary powers, Captain William Eaton, threatened to capture Tripoli and install the brother of Tripoli’s pasha on the throne, that a treaty brought an end to the hostilities. Negotiated by Tobias Lear, former secretary to President Washington and now consul general in Algiers, the treaty of 1805 still required the United States to pay a ransom of $60,000 for each of the sailors held by the dey of Algiers, and so it went without Senatorial consent until April 1806. Nevertheless, Jefferson was able to report in his sixth annual message to Congress in December 1806 that in addition to the successful completion of the Lewis and Clark expedition, “The states on the coast of Barbary seem generally disposed at present to respect our peace and friendship.”]

    What Thomas Jefferson learned
    from the Muslim book of jihad

    [Ellison’s use of Jefferson’s Quran as a prop illuminates a subject once well-known in the history of the United States, but, which today, is mostly forgotten – the Muslim pirate slavers who over many centuries enslaved millions of Africans and tens of thousands of Christian Europeans and Americans in the Islamic “Barbary” states.]


  • bg


    Jerry C #48 January 17, 2012 at 11:58 am

    too funny..

    do you really expect anyone to believe that crap??

    it’s back to the Alinsky drawing board for you..


  • bg


    Flawed Logic #40 January 17, 2012 at 11:31 am

    please, tell me about Ron Pauls “plans”, how will they be executed / implemented, and what will the blowback, ie: unintended consequences, reap upon America/ns, and how will the new system run America’s engine forward to economic security, and how, in turn, will that ensure homeland security, iow: protect US from our sworn enemies??

    thank you..


  • bg


    ps re: #51 January 17, 2012 at 12:13 pm bg

    not to mention the very real aspect of a NUCLEAR ATTACK..


  • Skip

    Flawed, in response to Paul “supported Regan’s approach to the Cold War”, one only need look to Paul’s 1987 resignation letter to the DNC:

    “I want to totally disassociate myself from the policies that have given us unprecedented deficits, massive monetary inflation, indiscriminate military spending, an irrational and unconstitutional foreign policy…”

    How does Paul support what he calls Reagan’s “unconstitutional” foreign policy? Would Paul have supported the funding of Solidarity? (what business do we have in what type of government Poland has?) Calling the Soviets an “evil empire”? Invasion of Grenada? Support for anti-communist guerrillas in Agnola, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Iran, Laos, Nicaragua?

    I say “no”.

    Paul’s is not the foreign policy of Goldwater, or Reagan.

    The point being, Flawed, is what litmus test does the Constitution have for using the military with only Congressional approval? 500 troops? 10 thousand? For how long? Obviously, it is one of the abilities of the commander in chief, as Jefferson, Madison, and Adams all used it. So I’m not sure whey the “UnConstitutional” flage is thrown so flippantly.

    Great. So you are claiming we have an economic empire, and NOT a military one. Is that a bad thing?

    Regarding the “privateers”, Paul introduced the Letters of Marque act after 9/11 to go after bin Laden (not sure of the bill #), which would have allowed armed US citizens to go after him abroad. I’m not sure how this fits into Paul’s “respect the soviergnty of other nations” narrative. Would we want armed Chinese citizens going after Chinese dissidents who get political asylum here?

    Regarding the earmarks, there is no Constitutional duty for earmarking. Paul does it during the committee phase of ominibus spending bills and budgets.

    If “more conservative than thou” wants $4 million for migratory shrimp research for his district, he should write it into the bill, and vote for it, not vote against it and then gobble up the pork at the committee phase.

    There is a distinct difference between the legislative (where appropriations should occur) and committee (where legislators take pork back home) phases.

    BTW, there were 4 GOP reps who took earmarks in 2010, and they dropped by 30%.

    As far as “cutting” defense spending, where does R&D come into play? Do you think stealth technology, the predator drones just came into being?

    Yes, I do belive his foriegn policy to be dangerous, but like the other 80% or so who don’t like Paul as a candidate, repeat “I like everything he says, except his foreign policy”.

  • valerie

    I got an earful about this from San Diego Talk Radio (Yes, they have such a thing. I think it’s new.) I find it disturbing that Mr. Paul fails to make a distinction among countries on the basis of whether they have the rule of law.

    For example, a number of the Al-Qaeda team that attacked us on 9/11 had connections with Germany and Afghanistan. We didn’t need to invade Germany, or even send an investigate team. Germany is a functional nation with the rule of law. They could treat it as a criminal investigation, did so, and shared the results.

    Afghanistan was a failed state, with a lawless region, where Al-Qaeda could function at will, and there were not that many options to root them out, absent invasion.

    Pakistan, a state close to failure, was harboring Bin Laden. The US had already declared its intent to get this man, and stated its policy. What we did was an offense against a state’s sovereignty, yes. But the state was not properly capable of exercising its sovereignty. It was corrupt, divided, and incoherent to the point that it was sheltering a mass-murderer.

  • Skip

    Occidental Guy:

    Spoken like a true leftist. NASCAR?? Really?? Are you channelling Bill Maher or something?


    Take your Israel conspiracies back to the Stormfront boards, where you belong.

  • bg


    re: #51 January 17, 2012 at 12:13 pm bg

    re: sworn enemies..

    sorry meant to note:

    who are already working to collapse US from w/in..


  • valerie

    #48 January 17, 2012 at 11:58 am
    Jerry C commented:

    “Here I go again. I held my nose to vote for the “lessor” evil with McCain. Then low & behold, he was one of the two co-sponsors of the indefinite detention of american citizens bill!”

    Rest easy. I’ve read the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, and I can tell you that Rand Paul doesn’t know how to read legislation. That bill does not apply to American citizens. It says so, right in the section following the one that got Mr. Paul in such a high dudgeon.

    The National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 contains a background section (Section 1031) describing the underlying legislation (Public Law 107–40)

    This section explicitly does not change PL 107-40:

    “(d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is in- tended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.”

    or other existing law:

    “(e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”

    Section 1032 specifically provides that the NDAA 2012 does not apply to US citizens or legal residents:

    (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The require- ment to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
    (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The require- ment to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.”


    Lindsey Graham was right. This legislation does not apply to US citizens. It never did. Its purpose was to deal with the GITMO detainees, and it contains explicit language saying that it does not apply to US citizens.

  • bg


    valerie #54 January 17, 2012 at 12:17 pm

    you forgot Iran (also a failed state)..


  • RedBeard

    The great take-away from the debate is that Ron Paul is being viewed by more and more people as the nutball he really is.

  • Flawed Logic


    We may ultimately need to decide which is the GREATER, MOST IMMINENT THREAT – Pau’s foreign policy or FINANCIAL COLLAPSE.

  • usamopatriot

    I cut and pasted this comment from a thread on Hot Air. It’s a great refutation to all paulbots.

    “The problem with you Libertarians is that Closing Bases overseas is just the beginning. You will hit the local bases as well because The US military does not fit into the Libertarian World view of the Non Aggression Axiom at the core of your believes. Anywhere where any Authority exists Libertarians will be there to tear it down. That is not democracy, constitutionalism, conservatism, Objectivism, nor capitalism. It’s easy for allot of younger folks to fall for this cult in frustration with what they see happening around them but Libertarian are not a moral philosophical ideology, It’s an Anarchist political doctrine with no teeth. You share allot more with the ideas of the Left than anyone on the right.”

  • Skip

    Flawed Logic,

    Unlike Paul supporters, I will vote for the GOP nominee, even if it is not the candidate I agree with 100%.

    More than likely, the nominee will be decided before we vote in MO.

  • bg


    Obama & Paul, two sides of the same coin..

    Breaking The War Mentality

    by Barack Obama
    March 10, 1983

    [In 1933 the German establishment thought it could use Hitler to restore a modicum of order to the confused and confusing Weimar Republic. In fact, Hitler did strengthen the German establishment, but not exactly in the way the bankers and businessmen had wanted; and now, fifty years later, it is clear who was using whom. Nevertheless, the Western World did not complain in 1933 because Hitler, though a fascist and a totalitarian, was seen, like countless American puppet dictators today, as someone who leaves the established order in place.]

    (scroll down for more)


  • bg


    Flawed Logic #60 January 17, 2012 at 12:59 pm


  • Seth

    I have seen it said that in his 20 some years in Congress, only one bill proposed by Ron Paul has ever become law. If true, a record of monumental ineffectiveness.

  • bg



    Winnin Our Future



  • #45, Jefferson disliked the Constitution. He was an anti-federalist. He thought that our Constitution gave too much power to the federal government and even doubted that the Louisiana Purchase was constitutional.

  • bg


    MikeSopes #67 January 17, 2012 at 3:43 pm

    perhaps, but as President, he was sworn
    to uphold it, it being the Constitution.. 😉


  • sissum71

    Hmmm… I wonder why Ron Paul is supported by the military more than ALL the others combined? Gee, they are the ones who actually know what is going on in these countries we invade. While Ron Paul haters sit on their fat asses and try to think of another place we can “protect”. Wonder why our CHILDREN who serve this country and DIE for this country support Ron Paul? Hmmm…maybe they know something, the haters don’t know! Hey, you guys just keep sending our men and women over there to be slaughtered and you can watch the highlights of the war on the news, as you stuff your faces and wait for American Idol to come on. Your complete lack of compasion and respect for the incredible men and women who have already died in this senseless war is disgusting. RON PAUL 2012 Soldiers of America I and many others hear you!!

  • Maybe him & Pelosi can Can hook up and create 1 brain cell between the two of them…..

    Vote for NUTZ & PUTZ/2012….

  • Seth

    So who says that Ron Paul has all of this great support from within our military? Ron Paul? Who is it that supports him, some Stormfront types in our military?

    Paul’s rants, and evasions, and semi-unintelligible answers are getting less and less rational, he is a candidate for a rubber room, and the more Paulians hijack discussions and insult people on them, the less support Paul will get from those who are not under his spell.

  • bg


    an amazingly fair & balanced expose so to speak..


  • Jay Tea

    The title of this article should read ” Ron Paul Booed in South Carolina Over citing the Golden Rule “

  • bg


    re: #72 January 17, 2012 at 5:10 pm bg

    In this 2009 video, Ron Paul accuses Israel of creating Hamas

    Ron Paul, Howard Gutman and George Soros

    [It was recently observed that Ron Paul was to the left of Obama on national security and the best evidence for that statement can be found when one year ago Ron Paul joined forces with Barney Frank on a proposal to gut national defense via a panel of experts, quite a few of whom were tied to George Soros.]


    At the beginning of this month, US Ambassador to Belgium Howard
    Gutman, an Obama bundler, accused Israel of creating anti-Semitism.
    George Soros said the same thing in 1999 and in 2003. And now Ron

    Ron Paul’s Soros Defense Plan

  • bg


    oops re: #74 January 17, 2012 at 5:21 pm bg


    re: #72 January 17, 2012 at

    In this 2009 video, Ron Paul accuses Israel of creating Hamas

    Ron Paul, Howard Gutman and George Soros

    At the beginning of this month, US Ambassador to Belgium Howard
    Gutman, an Obama bundler, accused Israel of creating anti-Semitism.
    George Soros said the same thing in 1999 and in 2003. And now Ron

    Ron Paul’s Soros Defense Plan

    [It was recently observed that Ron Paul was to the left of Obama on national security and the best evidence for that statement can be found when one year ago Ron Paul joined forces with Barney Frank on a proposal to gut national defense via a panel of experts, quite a few of whom were tied to George Soros.]


  • bg


    Jay Tea #73 January 17, 2012 at 5:11 pm

    The Golden Rule, uh, in what Century
    did our enemies they play that game??

    also don’t recall getting a calling card for 9/11, you??

    oh wait..


  • lulu

    This loser, Fricking-Carter number 2, should to ‘totalitarian arab islamic apartheid palestine’ to feel what it is like to be in non-free state. Why do you think there are almost no Christians in the Islamofascistic Palestinian areas?

  • lulu

    Soros applying the racist Arab “golden rule” of blaming the victim?

  • bg


    re: #76 January 17, 2012 at 5:30 pm bg

    enemies they play = enemies play

    and just in case you missed it:

    “On Moral Equivalency and Cold War History”
    Ethics & International Affairs, Volume 10 (1996)

    [Where does that leave us, though, with the new evidence we have about the victims of Stalin and Mao Zedong? One recent but reliable estimate suggests that Stalin’s domestic victims alone – when one totals not only the figures for the purges but also for the collectivization of agriculture and the famine that resulted from it – numbered about twenty million dead. This does not count the additional acknowledged twenty-seven million Soviet citizens who died as a result of World War II. But this is not the worst of it. Estimates of those who died in one single episode – the Chinese famine produced by Mao’s ill-conceived Great Leap Forward from 1958 to 1961 – now come to some thirty million, thereby qualifying the Chairman (whose image was once a popular adornment for t-shirts and dormitory wall posters in the West) as perhaps the greatest mass murderer of all time.


    Why didn’t the United States exploit its advantage to keep the Soviet Union from developing its own bomb? Or to avoid near-defeat in Korea? These are complicated questions, but one of the answers that comes up, when one looks at what American officials said to each other, is the conviction that a democracy could only use such a weapon as a last resort, and in self-defense.

    But that in turn raises another interesting question of comparative morality: would an authoritarian system – one based on an ideology that explicitly justified any means necessary to achieve its ends, one that employed terror as a method of government, and one as casual about the loss of human life as were Stalin’s and Mao’s – have shown similar restraint had it got the bomb first?


    We need to be careful about the methodological metaphors we keep in our minds. Too much of Cold War history was written as if its major contenders were indeed featureless billiard balls, whose internal composition and character didn’t much matter. In retrospect, apples and oranges might have been the better metaphor: at least it would have allowed for irregularity, asymmetry, and the possibility of internal rot.]

    same holds true today more than ever..

    Golden Rule, indeed..


  • Beatrice

    Let me ask he crazy liberals. Is Israel not under bigoted Islamic led genocide campaign (from the Mufti al-Husserini and his henchman Shukairy, through Arafat, Hamas, Ahmadinejad/Hezbollah, etc.) since the 1920’s?

  • Joanne

    The American military has be do-gooders for too long. Stop buying oil from the Middle East – it just funds terrorism; stop interfering in muslims killing each other off – this is what they do; go to war to protect your own lives and sovereignty and those of allies – the rest can go to h*ll.

  • Joanne

    “The American military has ‘been’ do-gooders……..

  • Lisa Favara

    The CIA and foreign policy experts agree that they don’t hate us for our freedoms and that they do hate us for meddling in the middle east for decades. Us drone bombing them kills 1000 innocent civilians for every one bad person which incites immense hatred and creates terrorists faster than we can kill them which is why the war on terror is unwinnanble and will never end.

  • i wonder how much money ron paul gets from CAIR.

  • bg


    Lisa Favara #83 January 17, 2012 at 7:15 pm

    yah, that’s the ticket, wrong, but hey, Obama is a Christian,
    and Paul is a Conservative, and i have a bridge for sale.. /s/

    aah, kooliad koolaid still tastes great..

    gee, damn them damn infidels carpet
    bombing Islamists
    , they’ll pay!! /s/

    [According to Joshua Konyi, the commissioner of Pibor County and
    a Murle, 2,182 women and children and 959 men were killed, 1,293
    children were abducted and 375,186 cows were stolen.]

    aah, just like the good old says.. 😥


  • jp

    You Ron Paul kookbags are delusional !

  • Jacque

    This was just Fox being… well, Fox.

    4 South Carolinian Senators in total have now endorsed him (3 were after the debate).

    Freaking Fox and their hand-selected audiences. -_-

  • bg


    Jacque #87 January 17, 2012 at 8:25 pm

    God Help Us

    January 17, 2012

    Ron Paul Stops In Spartanburg,
    Gets Upstate Endorsements

    [“You can’t talk about any part of the system without talking about the
    deficit. We need to take a hold of the deficit. My modest suggestion is
    in the first year, cut $1 trillion dollars out of the spending,” Paul said.


    On Tuesday, Senators Lee Bright of Spartanburg, Kevin Bryant
    of Anderson and Danny Verdin of Greenville, endorsed Paul.]

    you know what the real big kick is, most of the other candidates have the
    same goals re: shrinking government, i mean, he certainly doesn’t hold
    the patten on his ideas, yet he has never accomplished one pertinent law
    after serving decades in Congress.. *sigh*


  • bg


    anyone know his choice for VP is??

    because if by some miracle should he win, and
    Obama doesn’t kill him off, i’m sure wining will..



  • Proud Paulbot

    @ Skip

    You are correct that an isolationist foreign policy would have lost the Cold War against Soviet Russia. However, we are no longer fighting the Cold War.

    Please see the following link:

    You will see that Ron Paul held strong against the Soviets by opposing the Nuclear Freeze, opposing SALT II, and supporting SDI. He is a foreign policy realist and did not want to unilaterally disarm against the Soviets because he did not trust them. The attempts to paint him as a pacifist are in many cases intellectually dishonest claims by those who would rather see a US currency collapse than admit that recent neocon foreign policy like the Iraq war was a failure.

    Why doesn’t he take a hardline stance against Iran? I guess it depends whether you seriously believe that the threat from Iran is comparable to the threat from the USSR.

  • Proud Paulbot

    @ Skip

    There were only 13 dissenting votes in the Senate against passage of NDAA.

    Every other Republican on stage AND President Obama agrees that we should keep the Patriot Act in its current form, with some saying it should be strengthened. Obama signed it into law in essentially its current form despite campaign promises to the contrary.

    President Obama also signed NDAA into law, with many of the Republican presidential candidates supporting this measure. I’m not sure if it was all, but I know Mitt Romney said he would have signed it, and he is the one looking like he will cruise to the nomination right now.

    Ron Paul takes the most principled stand on civil liberties while all other Republican candidates for president will, at best, hedge their bets. Opposition to NDAA should be a no-brainer.

    The people who wouldn’t vote Republican against Obama if Paul doesn’t get the nom isn’t because we aren’t team players. It’s because we find it unconscionable to vote for continued unjustified war and against civil liberties (even to prevent the encroachment of socialism). If a non-Paul candidate gets the nomination, we will lose these issues against the President.

  • Skip

    Proud Paulbot, thank you for the semi-reasonable response. But again, and intervention during the Cold War isn’t just as sweet? Paul would have been opposed to many of the interventions that weakened the Warsaw Pact in every corner of the globe.

    Even the grandaddy of all sins, “Operation Ajax” was an attempt to limit the influence of the Soviets, in some ways. (This was also a bloodless coup that consisted of US convincing the Shah to dismiss his PM. Prertty common in constitutional monarchies, and legal per the Iranian constitution at the time)

    There’s a middle ground between Paul’s isolationism (yes, it is at least military isolationism) and Bush’s military interventionism.

    See “Reagan Doctrine”.

    You lost me with the whole “unjustified war” schtick.

    BTW, your link uses excerpts from “The Ron Paul Report” and “The Ron Paul Freedom Report” as proof of his anti-Communist stance. ORLY???? The same newsletters he didn’t write?? LOL.

  • DarkFutureAhead

    I don’t see anything wrong with the golden rule and America would be respected for it. we can’t afford to be policing the world, because were broke, were making more people hate us and our troops are risking their lives for nothing good. those people who booed, should be ashamed of themselves and will probably burn in hell with the devil for being cold blooded killers and authoritarians. I worry US foreign policy will be the end of the country whether by bankruptcy due to overexpansion or nuclear attack for doing something to another country, i am prepared to move back to Canada if i see any signs of war breaking out. Ron Paul tells the truth whether you like it or not and hes one of the things we just haven’t tried and we should cause everything else has failed and the other candidates are not different than bush or obama. when it comes to Israel they should take care of themselves and the greatest threat to them is USA telling them what to do, which overall is hurting their country and Iran is innocent, they haven’t done a thing to USA, so we have no reason to attack them. Its time for peace the war must end, or it will be the end for all us.

  • Skip

    DarkFuture, there’s nothing wrong with the “Golden Rule”, provided your opponents are playing by the same rule.

    They’re not.

    Ron Paul does not, “tell the truth”, he tells things how they see them, like anyone else.

    I happen to disagree with him. We aren’t hated for our “empire”. How many Germans have flown 747s into skyscrapers since 1945? Yet according to Paul’s view, we’ve been “occupying” them with our “empire”.

    He agrees with Islamists, and the implication is that we deserved 9/11 due to legitimate Islamist gripes.

  • tellitlikeitis

    Too scared to post my comment hey? Against free speech are you? I do not hate Americans but I do hate what the Us government does

  • tellitlikeitis

    Too scared of the truth are you to post my comment? Against free speech. I do NOT hate Americans but I do HATE what he US government does. Hope you don’t have more than 7 days worth of food at your house and enjoy getting fondled at airports

  • tellitlikeitis

    That’s a little bit better but how about the entire post? Your censorship is as bad as the SOPA! Don’t worry I’m not annoyed at your censorship I think it’s pathetic and funny that you support the idiotic warmongering anti-Paul posters on this site. The world thinks that the US is the biggest terrorist state on the planet (you are after all the only ones that have actaully used WMD) but we do recognise that it’s your government and NOT your people. I know and like many Americans in fact my wife lived in the US for many years so I don’t HATE Americans. I’ll repeat it again S..L…O..W..L…Y so you might understand. I like Americans but I HATE your government and when you continously bomb third world countries you may not feel so special when it’s poitnted out that’s it’s like punching a baby in the face. Just like when you bomb weddings and funerals! You will HATE your government too when your army drags you out in the middle of the night for a life long date with GITMO because you have more than 7 days worth of food in your house or if your are unfortunate enough to be missing fingers. I invite you to post my comment in it’s entireity to show your support for free speech and opposition for SOPA! Once again S…..L……O…….W……L…..Y. .. the rest of the WORLD thinks that your government is the biggest terrorist state on the planet but recognises that it’s not the people’s fault. Please do NOT embarrass yourselves any further by voting away any more of your civili liberties. Let us hope that liberty brings us together.

  • tellitlikeitis

    Thankyou. Credit where credit is due. You have done your part towards free speech. I do want to reiterate that I do NOT hate the American people but when the world sees such cheering for murdering of children in Third World countries as your fellow anit-Paul posters they see that as terrorism. Hopefully after November this year your country will get back on track and those people in other free countries (including my own) can be proud to be an ally with the US.

  • paul

    People don’t like Ron Paul cause they are simple minded sheeple. They like going to war cause it makes them feel safe and protected in their modest shoe box homes and their minimum wage jobs. Had they actually any brains at all they would see all the other candidates are white Obama’s and unlike Paul have no clear cut policy to run this country. I would feel much safer having all our troops at home in America protecting our borders that’s real national defense. But what can you expect from simple minded people they elect simple minded politicians and then complain the next four years about a recession and their liberties being taken away. Wake the hell up people Ron Paul is the only person willing to stand up for your freedoms and liberties. But i guess you all like being herded like sheep.

  • Skip

    I’ve been to war, dirtbag, Paul. What have you done, besides play MW3 in your mom’s basement?

    Your messiah has spent 24+ years in Congress, and had the massive acheivement of having two bills he sponsored passed.

    That’s leadership!

    You’re a Paul supporter because you have the political depth of a thimble, and have no grasp of US history.

  • Pingback: Middle East Current Events | Living History()