Why Our Troops Are Supporting Ron Paul

Why Our Troops Are Supporting Ron Paul December 28, 2011

…is abundantly documented in stories like this one on the immense toll our chickenhawk pols inflict on their helpless experimental human subjects as they see how much abuse an all volunteer military can endure in their little Great Society building projects abroad.

And now a million of them are jobless and our Ruling Elites thank them by scheming to cut their benefits.

It is far more than our fat, dumb and happy nation deserves that these grossly overburdened human beings don’t launch a coup against our obscene Ruling Class who shovel them around like concrete.

"It is great website, thanks for pointing it out."

Ignatius: A Brief Introduction to the ..."
"Ok, I misunderstood you. I apologise. You said that Catholics did not worship a God ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"The references may be clear to you. My point, obvious, is that English-speaking readers are ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • George Washington

    Ron Paul 2012 Please

    Track Record and Substance OVER Flip Flopping Rhetoric.

    Thank you!

  • anonoped

    A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Peace.

    A vote for any other, including Obama, is a vote for endless war, assassinations, life in detention without charge, crushing debt and enough deficit spending to enslave Americans for generations.

    • Thomas R

      Non-intervention isn’t necessarily the same as “Peace” because the world extends beyond the US borders. There are times interventions can stop or prevent wars.

      Paul is not going to win this time anymore than he did the previous times he ran and the reason isn’t because some loathsome “Ruling Class” brainwashes people. It’s because a majority of people don’t believe his positions and won’t vote for him. The percent of Republicans who say he is “unacceptable” is generally higher than the percent who say that of almost any other candidate.

      http://www.gallup.com/poll/151325/republicans-gingrich-romney-acceptable-nominees.aspx

      His”ceiling”, highest possible support, is fairly low. I will admit it’s higher than I think it has any reason to be, libertarian non-interventionism is not that common in the US, but still not high enough to make him plausible. There’s a reason Robert Taft never became President either.

    • kenneth

      I voted for Obama last time, but Paul makes more and more sense as I see events unfold. Our military has nothing whatever to do with defense anymore. It is an instrument for maintaining the economy of permanent war to enrich the ruling class. We’re now selling billions of dollars of weapons to Iraq – to a regime which WILL become the new “Butcher of Baghdad.”

      Our taxpayers will foot the bill, of course, but a few well-connected guys will keep the profits. And when the Shia regime becomes too bloody or insolent to tolerate anymore – as they surely will in 20 or 30 years time, well that’s no problem either. We’ll have another trillion-dollar war – all funded by high-interest loans paid by the stupid taxpayer. Our young people didn’t die in Iraq or Afghanistan for anything noble. They died because it was good for the business model of those who sent them to die.

      We’re also right on schedule for a full-blown war with Iran. My money says next year at this time, at the outside.

      • Asclepius

        A fast-food culture expects fast-food wars.

        And that’s why our guys didn’t die for anything noble. That’s why a lot more Iraqis will die in the future. And that’s precisely why politicians and the media lose wars.

  • Richard C.

    Why should we believe that our troops are supporting Ron Paul? Because he raised more money from the military than the rest?

    Fundraising has not been proportional to popular support as measured by polls. In the 3rd quarter, Paul raised more than Cain, but Cain soared to the lead. Go figure.

    Ron Paul has a relatively small and intense following, but until his supporters’ claim of military support is backed up with poll data, it may be exaggerated.

    So don’t base a lot of your bloviating on campaign spin, OK?

    • Maiki

      Well, you need to consider “strong support” — which garners donations and a slow and steady rise in polls vs. “weak support” — which garners a surge for the latest Not!Romney candidate and disappears overnight when a new one comes around.

      Ultimately, the race will be decided by what the hordes that go to the polls decide to do on the day — of course — many of those will be undecided that will pick their flavor of the day. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a different metric to measure those giving candidates strong support.

    • daddysteve
      • Thomas R

        He wasn’t disputing Paul has received more money from the military than other candidates, he was disputing that this means he has more support. Your source didn’t address that unless I missed something.

        • bruce

          I can understand those who don’t believe the troops are behind Paul. The donations are one part of the evidence. You may have missed the march on Washington on Presidents day, but when thousands of us Vets and active duty military march on the RNC you will then have your other piece of evidence. The seriousness of the oath of office and the non-interventional policies of Ron Paul are the key reasons. None of the other candidates, including Obama have upheld their oaths and therefore do not qualify for any public office.

  • Ben Joseph

    Ron Paul is the “Philosopher” politician, the “political Prophet” of our day who speaks the truth to power. He’s educating us on another way to look at our present reality based on a solid grasp of our history and a legitimate reading of the Constitution; he is heightening our critical sense towards government policy, war mongering, powerful corrupt bureaucrats, corporations, banks and lobbyists. We need to hear carefully what he’s saying at this historical turning point.
    Two concerns remain; a doubt and a fear:
    1) The Ron Paul “newsletters” and that infamous content reported by the Media.
    Ron Paul and his staff need to give a much better and completely convincing explanation for those ugly comments than they have so far done to the satisfaction of his supporters and his opponents. I can’t understand why such a prescient, foresighted candidate did not see this controversy coming in campaign 2012 so as to prepare immediately to confront it. At the same time, I trust in Ron Paul’s high integrity and moral character and, therefore, do not believe those were his thoughts. But he needs to be more resounding and substantial in his clarifications.
    2)Ron Paul is criticizing, “poking at” a covered raw nerve and exposing the praxis of the powerful, the wealthy, the rulers of this world aligned with the Media. They’re trying desperately to manipulate Public Opinion to make it believe that Ron Paul is crazy, a cook, an old cranky man! But they can’t make him go away, even though the press has shamelessly ignored him until the issue of the “newsletters”. (NBC’s Meet the Press on Christmas Day shockingly ignored Ron Paul’s rise in the Iowa polls, barely mentioning his name; instead the program tried to paint Newt Gingrich as the new face, the underdog, the anti-establishment candidate!). Does anyone think these “rulers and powers of the world” will roll over and “allow” Ron Paul’s to continue to expose the insidious system to the light and to advance in polls? I fear that a man as prophetic as Ron Paul, like so many biblical and political prophets of the past, could be in danger of assassination. May God protect Ron Paul and the rest of us!

  • Ben Joseph

    Ron Paul is the “Philosopher” politician, the “political Prophet” of our day who speaks the truth to power. He’s educating us on another way to look at our present reality based on a solid grasp of our history and a legitimate reading of the Constitution; he is heightening our critical sense towards government policy, war mongering, powerful corrupt bureaucrats, corporations, banks and lobbyists. We need to hear carefully what he’s saying at this historical turning point.
    Two concerns remain; a doubt and a fear:
    1) The Ron Paul “newsletters” and that infamous content reported by the Media.
    Ron Paul and his staff need to give a much better and completely convincing explanation for those ugly comments than they have so far done to the satisfaction of his supporters and his opponents. I can’t understand why such a prescient, foresighted candidate did not see this controversy coming in campaign 2012 so as to prepare immediately to confront it. At the same time, I trust in Ron Paul’s high integrity and moral character and, therefore, do not believe those were his thoughts. But he needs to be more resounding and substantial in his clarifications.
    2)Ron Paul is criticizing, “poking at” a covered raw nerve and exposing the praxis of the powerful, the wealthy, the rulers of this world aligned with the Media. They’re trying desperately to manipulate Public Opinion to make it believe that Ron Paul is crazy, a cook, an old cranky man! But they can’t make him go away, even though the press has shamelessly ignored him until the issue of the “newsletters”. (NBC’s Meet the Press on Christmas Day shockingly ignored Ron Paul’s rise in the Iowa polls, barely mentioning his name; instead the program tried to paint Newt Gingrich as the new face, the underdog, the anti-establishment candidate!). Does anyone think these “rulers and powers of the world” will roll over and “allow” Ron Paul to continue to expose the insidious system to the light and to advance in polls? I fear that a man as prophetic as Ron Paul, like so many biblical and political prophets of the past, could be in danger of assassination. May God protect Ron Paul and the rest of us!

    • Thomas R

      “Ron Paul is the “Philosopher” politician, the “political Prophet” of our day who speaks the truth to power”

      This is part of why, in 2008 and to a lesser extent now, support for Ron Paul looks less like a reasoned positioned and more like a political cult. Like the Lyndon LaRouche people.

      Ron Paul is ultimately just some human being. He’s not imbued with prophetic wisdom now anymore than any other time he’s lost a bid to be President. He’s not “The Philosopher King” or the thing that will make your clothes whiter or whatever. I know you won’t believe that, but I feel it has to be said.

      • Ben Joseph

        From Wikipedia:
        Cult: 1. A system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.
        2.A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister.
        Substitute Political for religious.
        According to your way of thinking, we could say support for Obama also looks like a political cult; the same for John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Martin Luther King or any other political or social leader with enthusiastic supporters. The enthusiasts of Ron Paul do not idolize him in a personality cult; they agree basically with his message and political ideas regarding the constitution, Austrian economics, anti-war and anti-interventionism, etc. Many don’t agree with everything he says, i.e. the Civil War should not have been fought; his ideas on the Civil Rights Act etc. and are open to debating these questions. But his supporters respect him for his consistency, prescience and coherent philosophy and his audacity to articulate it without worrying about political correctness. On the contrary of what you affirm, his stimulating message appeals to reason; not to raw, irrational passion for his person. He himself, addressing critics and supporters alike, reminds all that he’s not perfect and will make mistakes. So, you’re right on, he’s just a human being.
        Ron Paul’s supporters come from all walks of life, genders, races, religions, economic, social and educational backgrounds. His message touch a common rational cord.
        He’s not “imbued” with prophetic wisdom as though it suddenly descended on him from “on high”, if that’s what you imply. Rather, Ron Paul, besides being a physician with a challenging intellect, has been a student and an avid reader and researcher all his life. His knowledge and wisdom was “acquired” (NOT “imbued”) by hard work, study and experience as would happen to any human being in search of the truth. Certainly over the past 15 years, if not longer, he has uncannily predicted the mess we’re now in which even some of his opponents admit; all you have to do is look at his past videos, conferences and essays before the crash of 2008. Once again, his prescience comes from study, reason and acquired knowledge; not from some celestial vision! He more than any other candidate has been able to articulate the fruits of his work, study and experience in a political position that appeals to reason as it confronts the circumstances of this moment in history.
        Do your own sincere research into American history and listen to what Ron Paul says before your write him off. “I know you won’t believe that, but I feel it has to be said”.

        • Thomas R

          “we could say support for Obama also looks like a political cult; the same for John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Martin Luther King”

          In a sense yes. I’d agree all those figures have a “political cult” element at least. Although I think I would treat King separately as he was not a politician or candidate for office.

          Possibly you’re not treating him in a “personality cult” way, but unless you were being humorous referring to him as a “The ‘Philosopher’ politician, the ‘political Prophet’ of our day who speaks the truth to power” is to me not sufficiently different than those who spoke of Obama in almost messianic terms.

    • Matt B

      Wow! Obama 2008!

  • Linda

    One thing about military support for any candidate—will the votes of overseas troops even be counted? It was a serious issue last election.

    • SKay

      You have a very good point.

  • MM

    Yep, a “philosopher” who allows racist screeds in his newsletters…

    • Thomas R

      Martin Heidegger’s running? I thought he was dead, and German.

      • MM
        • Thomas R

          I was being silly. Although for some reason the newsletter thing isn’t my main problem with him. Paul is a bit like Goldwater on some Civil-Rights issues so it’s not surprising he attracts racists, but I don’t know if I think of him as racist.

          Additionally “Philosopher” and “Racist” are, sadly, not mutually exclusive terms. Logician Gottlob Frege, several “Traditional School” members particularly Julius Evola (although it’s maybe a bit complicated with them), anarchist Mikhail Bakunin, and Schopenhauer by the looks of it.

  • Asclepius

    Ron Paul plays like an irresponsible kid who now wants to run from the responsibilities of the mess his friends got him into.

    Make no mistake about it: it’s a mess, but we got ourselves into it. Now it’s time to pay the piper.

    It has nothing to do, at this point, with being a chickenhawk, and everything to do with cleaning up our own messes. The reason I would never vote for Ron Paul is the same reason I think we as a country need to do serious penance for the Iraq war: we created a mess we didn’t have the balls to stick with and to clean up.

    If you’re against the war now, or were against the war when it started, that’s all fine and good. I don’t have a problem with you.

    If you’re against the war, and now want to bring our guys back through some isolationist Philosopher King, you’re like that kid who’d rather hide in the cupboard than face reality. And as you hide away and the situation devolves even further, you become morally culpable for everything that falls to crap around you.

    The bottom line here: Iraq will be in another war before too much longer, and it will be entirely our fault.