Iowa Gov. says ignore Ron Paul win
Two major polls now show Ron Paul atop the Iowa caucuses, and this has establishment RINOs scrambling even harder to black him out. The Iowa Governor says they will literally ignore a Paul victory:
“People are going to look at who comes in second and who comes in third,” said Gov. Terry Branstad. “If [Mitt] Romney comes in a strong second, it definitely helps him going into New Hampshire and the other states.”
Now how’s that for listening to the will of the people? Iowa, you’ve got a Governor who thinks that no matter how the vote turns out, he’s going to ignore you and dictate what candidate he thinks you should have.
And his criteria for this decision is his narrow view of the State’s reputation in view of the nation, not the will of the people. One of Branstad’s advisers, a lawyer, said a Paul victory woul be “mortal” for the State’s privileged position as “first in the nation” caucuses. Another establishment crony and former GOP state senator said “a lot of states that want to be number one [in the nominating process] will simply point to his winning and say, ‘Iowa’s irrelevant.’”
But the people of Iowa obviously see things differently. Two polls now show Paul in first place for the caucuses. Public Policy Polling shows Paul in first place with 23 percent, ahead of Romney who has 20, and Gingrich falling to 14. An Insider Advantage poll has Paul at 24 and Romney at 18. A third outlet, the New York Times, now shows Paul as the favorite with a 52 percent chance of winning the State.
So why are the big-shot Iowa GOP leaders out of step with the people? They say it’s because the people are uneducated as to the candidate’s views, but after a dozen or so GOP debates so far, how likely is that? We’re talking about people committed to voting in a caucus here after all—people who make a point to pay attention to the issues. They’re not uninformed.
Perhaps that’s what has the establishment so “positively apoplectic”—to use Jack Cafferty’s phrase. After all, Paul represents real change—real change—and that can be quite unsettling to career politicians. Cafferty adds, “That has to scare the h*ll out of both parties.”
The people are seeing this, and are responding positively to what everyone—even the Governor—admits is a campaign winning the old fashioned way:
“Dr. Paul is hands down the most authentic, principled candidate in the race, and we have run the best, most comprehensive campaign,” said Paul campaign chairman Jesse Benton. “Iowans will help further cement their national status by choosing Dr. Paul and proving that sincerity, seriousness, consistency and hard grassroots campaigning wins in Iowa, not glitzy, media-anointed, establishment front-runners.”
One former Bush supporter displayed just how far the establishment GOP is out of touch with the people. She says if Paul wins, “both Iowa and national Republicans wouldn’t think he represents the will of voters.” But since when does the very vote itself by those very voters themselves not represent the will of the voters? That is the very definition of the phrase.
When people are willing to turn definitions and logic on their head—to make them mean the opposite of what they mean—in order to avoid real change, you know they’re biased and beyond hope.
At least the polls are showing a greater number of Iowans don’t share that bias.
Continue Reading on www.politico.com
HEY TERRY BRANTAD! Open the U.S. CONSTITUTION and READ IT…
You RINO POS!
AMERICAN VETERAN
Sounds to me like Iowa needs to replace their Governor. Typical of our leaders today. If they can't cheat their way into office, they'll pretend an honest winner didn't win. I think the establishment and their bought off representatives had better get ready to find new jobs. The people are waking up.
Sounds to me like an Iowa governor has used intelligence to analyze this Paul guy's views and finds them seriously lacking; he's a frickin' anarchist! (no, I did not spell antichrist, for you Paulists who only see the surface of what you want to see, and don't look any deeper into their meaning).
Actually he's not an anarchist. Thanks for clarifying with me that you did not say antichrist, we "paulists" have trouble reading I guess. Where in any of his writings or speeches has he given an anarchist message? Were the framers anarchist? He specifically states that we are nation governed by laws and that the rule of law should be supreme. No need to lie Paul.
Send the Iowa governor to Russia or China. I’m sure he’ll be very happy there. Those countries ignore their people’s will as well. Seriously, Iowa should have a recall election for their governor-he is an embarrassment. Is it possible to impeach him? I’m now quite certain that he will be tampering with the voting machines. Pardon my “french”, but Governor Branstad is an establishment bag-lapper.
I find it strange Ron Paul endorses Iran having a nuke yet his supporters don't think anything of it. No one who has nukes goes around threatening to take nations off of the map. Get a clue.
Your comment is actually self-defeating: "No one who has nukes goes around threatening to take nations off of the map." Exactly. Iran would not threaten to do so either, even if it had nukes. It would be suicidal to the whole nation and they know it. Even Israel believes this: http://americanvisionnews.com/756/haaretz-iran-to…
Haaretz is a liberal Israeli publication. Very liberal. Using them as an example of the best in Israeli wisdom and what path Israel should consider would be like using the New York Times to map out the path for the U. S. I can't speak for Tony, but what I think he meant, was that when a mad man leader of a rogue country goes around threatening to wipe another country off the map, he should be taken seriously. It appears that you, along with the writers of the Haaretz article and many people, do not understand the mindset of people like Iran's leader. Such a person would not blink at sacrificing thousands or more of his people in the pursuit of wiping Israel off the map and ushering in the chaotic situation that they believe is necessary in order to bring forth the Mahdi. This is why Ron Paul's views are so dangerous. He is entirely clueless on these matters, along with all foreign matters. I appreciate his strong pro-life stance, but he also does not understand what unfettered drug use and "gay marriage" would do to the country. I am the farthest thing from a Rino but I have to agree with Iowa's governor. The voters of Iowa must be spending too much time out in the cold. Or something.
1. Israel's Prime Minister said that they can take care of themselves. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_ECgLpwPg4
2. He didn't threaten to wipe Israel off the map. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statement…
3. How can you say that Haaretz doesn't understand? Why don't they understand?
4. Why is it that only Neo-Cons have the clues? Do they have an army of Blue Dogs working for them?
Constitutional issues: Where are they in the constitution?
5. Drug use? How's the war on Drugs working? How'd prohibition work out?
6. I'm against a federal marriage amendment as well. Because it's not the governments role. Marriage licenses were created in order to keep blacks and whites from marrying.
We are the only nation to ever use it. We surround them. Their enemies surround them. Why are RINO's so naive and downright irrational about this? Why wouldn't they want to protect themselves. Our own DOD has stated that they only have military resources to defend themselves. Not launch an attack. There is no evidence that they are pursuing nukes, nor that they would use them.
Tony, did you not watch the final debate in Iowa? Paul specifically stated that he would prefer that Iran NOT have a nuke. He does NOT endorse Iran having a nuke.
But, think back now, who is the ONLY nation that EVER used a nuclear weapon, on civilian targets no less…(think Japan if this is too tuff for you)? YES, it is the old U.S. So, maybe we should give up ours?
Question: "Is Ron Paul ahead because of his stated 'platform,' or is he ahead because of the caustic negative ad campaign." I beleive it was Adolph Hitler who reportedly said "Tell a lie long enough and everyone will believe it." Once a seed of doubt has been planted it often bears fruit, regardless of its lace of truth.
Ralph, SHOW US THE LIE! ~ Making claims without backing them up with FACTS only displays your ignorance, my friend!
The Iowa Governor's comments are ill advised and sound rather ridiculous, BUT the fact is that Ron Paul cannot beat Obama. He looks somewhat flummoxed at hard questions in the debates. What will he do with a policy wonk like Obama? Obama will take him to the woodshed. Further, he is really not a Republican. He is a Libertarian and so much so that he could not possibly govern with a Democratic or Republican Congress. His supporters are throwing their votes away. Even if he wins in Iowa, he has no chance in other states. Having been born in Iowa and lived there in my early years, I have always felt that Iowans were a practical people, unimpressed with celebrity. However, the surge of support in Iowa for Ron Paul makes me wonder if they are as practical as I thought. We need someone who can beat Obama and Ron Paul simply can't do it.
I agree with you Allen. There are several aspects of Paul's positions that I endorse and approve, but overall I do not honestly believe that he would be able to withstand the onslaught of a well financed Obama offensive that will use whatever means it can to win. I am not sure how many individuals realize just how corrupt and zealous Obama's supporters are. These creatures will do whatever they can to perpetuate their fraud for another four years. Paul himself opens himself up to being very vulnerable in a presidential campaign and yes, he is libertarian which is certainly not a democrat or republican. Yet, I see in Paul many Jeffersonian principles and for that I do admire him. I do not agree with Paul on Iran though. We are talking about a rogue nation that is ruled by a militant theocracy dedicated to making this entire world as islamic hell and Paul's foreign policy ideas scares the hell out of me.
RPS, can you provide any evidence that Iran is looking to do that? And how is this propaganda any different than what we had with Iraq. They had no weapons and we invaded anyway. 9 years later we finally leave. For what? Soldiers dead, Money squandered. We murdered their people. We'll starve Iranian people with sanctions. What good can come from it? This is not a way to promote democracy. This is not a way to promote Christ. People on the right love to cater to Christians (so-called), but ignore the teaching of Christ.
RPS — Do not believe the myth…educate yourself on religion – particularly the topic of Zionism. Do not perpetuate the lies, and for God's sake – do not believe everything your "pastor" tells you!
It's rather annoying to be told that I'm throwing my vote away, when in fact, I'm voting with a clear conscience. I'm not voting for a lesser of two evils. I've never seen Dr. Paul back down from a tough question. In fact, the media commends him for saying what he really thinks. While one may wish he were more polished in his delivery, nonetheless, his message gets out. Moses said that he wasn't an eloquent speaker. So leadership has nothing to do with the way one delivers his message, but the message being delivered is what matters. He is not a Republican in the sense of what the Republican party is today. In fact Reagan can be quoted as saying that at the very heart and soul of Conservatism is Libertarianism. So why is it that if he wins in Iowa that it follows that he won't win anywhere else? Why marginalize a state's decision? Why do you feel that his message and ideals won't reach across state lines? His message resonates not just with Americans, but with other countries as well. Liberty and freedom are what people want. People should vote for who they want, not for who they're told to vote for, or who they think is the most presidential looking. Not for who they think will do best against an opponent. Should I discredit your vote? Ron Paul will and can beat Obama. It's in our nation's best interest that he do so.
Allen — you are part of the problem.
Actually, Ron Paul has the best chance of beating Obama – the key to winning an election is to 1) motivate your base and 2) get the swing vote. Ron Paul does both. He is is the most consistent supporter of conservative Constitutional values and is Pro-peace and civil liberties which are extremely attractive (and Obama's weak points for his base supporters) for independent voters. If you really want to beat Obama support Ron Paul in the primaries.
You should take another look – actually Ron Paul matches up the BEST against Obama – better than both Newt and Romney. It's Romney and Newt who couldn't beat Obama. Neither one of them would pull the independent or disenchanted democrat vote – only Ron Paul gets those voters.
Is there possibly some connection between Ron Paul's idea of legalizing pot, and his amazing support from college-age people?
Just asking —–
I have wondered this myself. His supporters appear to be mostly those of possible "draft" age, should the draft ever be re-implemented in this country, along with those who believe there should be no restrictions on porn, drugs, and marriage. I agree with the person who suggested that Obama would make mincemeat of him on stage. C'mon..great-grandpa up there, next to Mr. "Relaxed and confident because all I ever do is golf and vacation". I don't mean to be insulting. I think Ron Paul is a nice man. But he gives the appearance of an old man in need of a nap. He is not a republican or conservative. He is a libertarian. If the republicans want to hand Obama another four years and see America go the rest of the way down into the tube and life as we know it in this country to come to an end-go ahead, put him up there. And don't come crying to the rest of us when Obam finishes destroying America.
With the exception of Paul and Bachman, all of the leading Republican candidates are associated with individuals and/or organizations that are behind the scenes setting us up for one-world government, JUST LIKE obama! To be sure, there ARE a FEW other Republicans who have taken the high road (have abstained from things like CFR or Bilderberg membership, FOR EXAMPLE); however, they ARE NOT the ones IN THE LEAD. All in all, the Republicans ARE NOT REPUBLICANS ANY MORE; just Democrats with a different skin-deep PAINT JOB. Ron Paul is actually CLOSER to being the kind of Republican that Republicans USED TO BE than most of the current Republicans ARE.
Seriously? So, essentially what you're saying is that college-age people are too stupid to think for themselves, except when it benefits them in the sense that they would be able to purchase marijuana? Thanks John for the insult, ad-hominem attack. No, perhaps it's the clear, rational fact that the war on drugs has failed, costing us millions with utterly no progress. Prohibition worked out great didn't it? Is alcohol not a more deadly substance than pot? With all of the drunk drivers and deaths, destroyed marriages and families? Has pot been shown to cause such mayhem? Like Ron Paul himself, I think smoking pot is stupid and I honestly have never done it in my life. Yet I think I am capable of rational thought and able to conclude with some brief logical reasoning that pouring millions of dollars down a rat hole while our country drowns itself in debt is a pretty foolish idea. But hey, I'm just a stoner, right John?
Wow, you guys are crazy. Ron Paul schooled Bachmann in the last debate, Santorum in the National Defense debate, and even Guiliani back in 2008. He eats warmongers for breakfast, why would he worry about one little communist community organizer without his teleprompter? See, the thing is, when you're a politician like Obama/Romney/Newt, you have to remember your talking points. When you have principles like Dr. Paul, you are much better prepared for any question they can ask, because you just speak your mind. The fake politicians can't do that, so they deflect and never actually answer the question.
After the first presidential debate between Obama and Ron Paul, Obama will be locked in for 4 more years and the U. S. will be dead as a nation.
Dennis, Yours is the DUMBEST remark that I have heard to date, my friend! There is NO WAY Obama could even compete with Dr. Ron Paul's knowledge of the U.S. Constitution! Obama studied the Constitution to find ways of SUBVERTING IT , while Ron Paul lived his life as a true Constitutional-ADHERING Patriot who UNDERSTANDS ITS TRUE MEANING, backed by knowledge of the Founders TRUE INTENT! ~ The GREATEST THREAT to America is the UNINFORMED VOTER!
How will obama do in a debate with a teleprompter?
Wow, you have a lot of faith in Obama, a man that has done utterly nothing and failed to even keep his word on several issues. I think Ron Paul's anti-war stance will drawn in a great number of independents as well as a large number of democrats. The rest of them, the Neo-Cons just say what they think we want to hear when it's convenient for them. Who's record is untarnished? If people opt for Obama instead of Paul or even the Neo-Cons, then the U.S. is already dead as a nation. Good thing God is in control. We get what we deserve.
UPDATE:
Statement from the Governor's Office on the Congressman Paul comments
(DES MOINES) – Regarding the article appearing in Politico this morning, the governor never said to ignore Ron Paul if he wins the caucus. The governor was very complimentary of Ron Paul in the whole interview, and still is today. He was referencing the fact that there will be three tickets out of Iowa, so you look at #2 and #3 as well, just as we do every single caucus. The headline appearing on the Drudge Report does not match the article, and we kindly ask that you take that into account and understand that Gov. Branstad has great respect for Congressman Paul and the formidable organization he has built in Iowa ahead of the caucuses.
Good to know…..
Ron Paul is for gay marriage and is not a Godly man as a result—How could anyone support such a clown????
Participation in the CFR or the Bilderberg Group or the Trilateral Commission or the UN is a far more egregious and dangerous thing than gay marriage, WHICH, by the way, I DO NOT support. Also, it seems to fly HIGH over your head that a President who expresses a few flawed OPINIONS is NO THREAT AT ALL, compared to a President who RIDES ROUGHSHOD over Congress and governs by FIAT and DECREE (a DICTATOR)! By contrast, Ron Paul does not even WANT to be a dictator!
Ron Paul is NOT for gay marriage, he's against it, but he recognizes that per the constitution the Federal Government has no say in the matter. His ability to follow the constitution even when it goes against his personal feelings is EXACTLY why he's the best candidate for the job.
LOL *backpedal backpedal backpedal*
What the governor COULD have said: "Some day the country will thank Iowa for having the keen insight of selecting Dr. Ron Paul as our nominee for the republican candidacy, proving to the country that he *is* electable and best represents our hope for a bright future for our constitutional republic. His selection cements our important role in the electoral process".
Yeah, but instead you had to say all that dumb stuff you said, so not only is your political career over now, but YOU PERSONALLY have marginalized Iowa in the electoral process because you've basically showed the country how corrupt the process is in Iowa. Nice job Branstad!!!
Woo Hoo!!
Ron Paul 2012 !!
There seems to be an obvious, glaring vacancy in the office of Governor of the State of Iowa, just about now. Not physically speaking, of course, but, mentally speaking. The Iowa governor has vacated his office mentally. Is there anyone out there willing to sit in for the missing mind of the Governor of Iowa? You might want to contact the governor's office in Iowa right about now………..
It is nice to see American Vision advertising biologos.org. I wonder what Ken Ham, Kevin Swanson, and all the guys at CMI are thinking right now!
Ron Paul is the crazy uncle that you keep in the closet and only let him out during election years. He's a pussy on national defense, thinks that the Bradley Manning, the traitor, is a hero not to mention he's a complete A- hole. Other than that he's a great candidate but he should run for the Girlieman, traitor loving party. Sane conservatives will ignore this fool and take the advice from the governor.
Would you have no objection to the chinese coming here and telling you what to do? That is exactly what we are doing in the middle east. Would you love them for "helping" us find our way to a better form of government, say communism? Well that's the elite's goal for the middle east. We should mind our own business and leave other countries alone. I can't really blame them for hating us after what Bush and Obama has forced down their throats for the last 10 years.
The Iowa governor can go to hell. American voters do NOT want the 'elite establishment' telling us how to vote and for whom. That's a huge part of the problem with American politics, the voters do not get a right mix of candidates to vote for. I prefer, and I'm sure many other Americans feel the same, to have multiple political parties representing the citizen base…similar to how the Israelis and Brits have in their government. Having more than just two political parties forces them to work together for the common good. I will always exercise my right to vote and freedom to choose which candidate I vote for…even if it is by "write in" on the ballot. By the way, the Iowa caucus is a very, very small contingent of voters and anyone following their lead does not have a mind of their own but may as well be a leming.
The flip side though is that Iowan's seem to take their role as first in the nation very seriously and seem to do alot of research on the candidates. Plus they have special access to most of the candidates. So I would say Iowan's are far more "informed" than most other voters in the country, and other states would be wise to at least look at who Iowa chose before making their decision.
Paul can’t win the general election. A vote for him is a lost vote. From an ardent TeaPartier!!
The tea party has lost their credibility because they have lost their way and are now officially co-opted by the GOP and Fox News.
Paul stands up for PERVERSION, Gay marriage, anti-Doma, He is not a Godly man!!!
The Tea Party is a joke. Ron Paul started the Tea Party and I'm afraid it has gone the path of the Neo-Cons and lost completely all credibility. To affiliate with it isn't saying much. Join the Tea Party if you want more business as usual… it was fun to hold up signs that read "Taxed Enough Already!" yet then turn around and support people like Bachmann who would love to continue to spread our troops to thin throughout the world, costing millions upon millions of tax payer money, leaving our homeland vulnerable.
An "ardent TeaPartier" is believing the main-stream media?
Not only is the Tea Party an arm of the GOP establishment now, but if you check your facts, in a direct match up against Obama, Ron Paul does 7 points better then Romney and 10 points better than Newt. So actually Newt/Romney can't win the general election – a vote for either of those two is a vote lost!
First, this article is a blatant distortion (Lie?) of what the governor actually said. Read what the governor actually said, not this biased article that distorts his comments. Second, in my opinion, one of the reasons we got stuck with a completely unqualified, radical Obama for the last 3 years is because he was young, charismatic, and looked vibrant compared to the much older McCain. I have watched most of the 12 (?) debates and Ron Paul looks old and at times, seems to have trouble articulating a coherent answer. And some of the things he says really frighten me. His most recent comment calling Bradley Manning, the wikileaks perpetrator, a "hero" is just completely ludicrous. I like Paul's ideas on the economy but I don't think he will attract moderate voters. At times he seems like he's on another planet.
It sounds like you are the one that is on another planet. Why shouldn't people learn of the corruption and coverup that is prevalent in our government? He is a hero for taking on the establishment by exposing them for what they are, liars and traitors to our constitution. Everything that Ron Paul has said so far has come to pass. But, if you are that sensitive maybe you should vote for Obama or hide your head in the sand. Dr. Paul has been vindicated because everything that he has been warning us about have become a reality. Just because you don't like it does not mean it's untrue. RON PAUL 2012!! BECAUSE TO VOTE FOR ANYONE IS A VOTE FOR THE SAME!!
So when you have a bunch of government people who committing crimes against the constitution, you prefer to punish the person who reported the crimes rather than the people who actually committed the crimes? You realize that the ONLY reason the government classifies pretty much every document it publishes is to discourage whistle-blowers, right?
I'm sorry, but I would need some evidence that what Manning did directly put troops in harms way and that the danger of that outweighed the danger of all the OTHER shady stuff the government did. I personally think the government has been hiding behind classified documents WAY too long and if we have to change things I'd swing things much more towards openness not secrecy. The federal govt has already proven on multiple occasions that it can't be trusted to make decisions for the good of the people (Fast and Furious? Patriot Act? NDAA?) so I think it's time to take away their "top secret" decode ring and hold them accountable to the public for what they do.
I'm not a Paul supporter but if he wins he deserves the respect of the people for the majority have spoken. For a Governor, any Governor to say ignore the winner should be ignored come his/her upcoming election
Wouldn't surprise me if they don't do it and get away with it. Hell, we elected Carter, Clinton, and Obummer didn't we.
Well, for years we were told that IOWA meant Idiots Out Wondering Arouond, Looks like the proof might be in the pudding.
From what I've seen they do a much better job of actually vetting the candidates than other states. Here's a playlist that shows you how Obama got nominated in Florida. http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL40D4A0E02E…
You wouldn't see that happening in Iowa…
Ron Paul is the only candidate that follows the constitution consistently. A vote for anyone else is a complete throwaway. Only Paul can beat Obama as well. He will clean MAObummer's clock in any debate.
WRONG–Founding Fathers said–The CONSTITUTION was not written for IMMORAL people to be in power and pervert the CONSTITUTION!!!! THIS was the reason they said would need a new REVOLUTION!!! But people voting for a guy that supports perversion is a sign of "A CROOKED AND PERVERSE GENERATION!!!!"
When has Ron Paul stated that he supports homosexuality? He simply believes the government has no business giving out marriage licenses or even getting involved in marriage. That is a church matter, especially since irregardless of what the government says, homosexuals can NOT marry. They might be called "married" by the government, but it means nothing to God. Homosexuality is clearly a sin, just like lying, cheating, or stealing. It is an abomination to the Lord. Yet, the secular government should not get involved in marriage. What happens when churches are shut down for not allowing gays to wed? Will Christians be forced to marry in front of a justice of the peace? We are much better off to be allowed to retain our religious freedoms… especially the freedom to not be forced to marry homosexuals in our churches without them being fined or shut down.
Wow, Zappo, you're starting to sound like Santorum! :-)
Ron Paul hasn't said he's for gay marriage so just stop repeating that same thing over and over. He's said it shouldn't be decided by the federal government which is 100% correct.
I don't even know you but based on your postings in this one thread I think it's pretty likely that Ron Paul is a much better Christian than you'll ever be!
Jon Darmes – I am an Iowan who would be offended by your comment if I thought you mattered at all. You obviously know nothing about Iowa or the people who call it home.
Let's not send a boy to do a man's job! We Republican's better think real hard as to who we elect to put up on the podium to debate Obama, Even without his teleprompter he will easily make Paul, Romney, Bachmann & Perry stutter and stumble their way through the debate. I believe we have only one person that is capable of beating Obama in 2012, and Obama knows who that person is and will be afraid to debate him. Yes, Newt Gingrich has trash in his past as does Obama, so guess what, we know what it is and so does Obama-sure Obama will try to use it against Newt but, Newt stays on top of what is really happening in our government and knows what strings of Obama's to pull to make him look foolish and unamerican. My vote goes to Newt Gingrich
I agree
Bush (whom in retrospect, I have very significant reservations about, even though I maintain that he was VASTLY better than Kerry could ever have been) looked like a REDNECK BUMPKIN while debating Kerry, but GUESS WHAT? The American people SAW RIGHT THROUGH the VENEER of debating STYLE, and CHOSE the one who spoke (the closer-to-the) TRUTH. soros lost a lot of money on Kerry. Too bad he didn't lose ALL of it, and end up on the street. Sometimes history repeats itself in REALLY SHORT CYCLES. At this time, I'm BETTING on it, BECAUSE:
1) What makes obama what he IS, is that he is a one-world-government ROBOT;
2) The ONLY candidates in the ENTIRE FIELD who are NOT (ALSO) one-world-robots are: Ron Paul and Michelle Bachman.
AMEN, and SANTORUM at least he has FAMILY VALUES and will not place 94 million retirees under the bus!!
I cannot support Paul for practical reasons. Granted, he has made some EXCELLENT points so far during his campaign: Some of them should be addressed during the next Congress. However, he has also put his foot DEEP in his mouth and shown his total ignorance on several topics. These occurences convince me Paul's age is already affecting him mentally, even if only occasionally at this time. This condition will only get worse over the next four or five years, as it does for most other people his age.
If elected, Paul will be 77 when sworn into office, several years older than Reagan when he was sworn in for his first term. We now know Reagan had Alzheimer's and Dementia during his last months of office. Fortunately, nothing major occured that required his full mental attention. We need a president who will have clear mental faculties throughout his/her term(s) in office. We simply cannot be 100% sure this will be the case with Paul.
I think the only candidates who have placed their foot in their mouth are the others on the stage with Paul. Unfortunately truth hurts, and the logical, rational positions are not always the most popular. We need to stop believing the media and think for ourselves according to a biblical worldview. Examine the issues in light of God's Word, and not what Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh thinks.
Elizabeth Warren,obozo in a skirt!
Any person who is less than FURIOUS about this egregiously arrogant pronouncement by the Iowa "governor" is a TOTAL EUNUCH.
If in fact the Iowa Governor did NOT make that statement which was attributed to him by this article, THEN consider my above comment retracted and apologized for.
Q: What causes obama to commit his heinous deeds against America?
A: He serves those who are trying to install a one-world government.
Q: Who are "those who are trying to install a one-world government"?
A: They are widespread, and have infiltrated nearly all of our government. They include UN, Bilderberg Group, CFR, Trilateral Commission, North American Union, Center for American Progress, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, World Court, soros, David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Rhodes "Scholars", Open Society Institute, and Tides Foundation.
Q: Does this mean that any Republican associatied with one or more from the list above will act upon their agenda, just as obama does?
A: I CAN'T FORCE YOU TO THINK! Come on now; RUMINATE on it for a while!
Q: How many Republican Candidates have abstained completely from associating with these individuals and groups?
A: Net total equals TWO. Ron Paul and Michelle Bachman.
WRONG!!!RON PAUL SUPPORTS THE GAY AGENDA___FUNDED BY SOROS!!! AND OTHERS ON LIST—BACHMANN AND SANTORUM DO NOT ——ONLY ONES–but bachmann will place 94 million retirees under the bus!!! Santorum will not!!!!
While I do not find anything whatsoever attractive about homosexuality, it amazes me that anyone can elevate its importance and priority as a SO-CALLED "issue" above ALL ELSE, INCLUDING our NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY, as you do. It really makes me WONDER: is it POSSIBLE that you are just going light years out of your way to deny your own closet passions?
If Ron Paul was not qualified as many claim, Why does he keep getting reelected? He is the only honest candidate who is a conservative that's running, except for Michelle Baukmann. The rest are socialists or have a selfish motive, like that questionable Governor.
Between Paul and Gingrich— i take Gingrich–he does not support gay marriage!!!
Why does it not matter to you that Gingrich is a CFR member? For the record, I DO NOT support "gay" marriage; however, my priorities won't let me endorse a New-World DIS"order" person under ANY circumstances (UNLESS that person is the LAST MAN STANDING, meaning that [Gingrich] won the Primary). Don't you see that obama would be NOTHING without his one-world MASTERS whom he OBEYS LIKE A LAPDOG? What reason is there to believe that a SO-CALLED "Republican" who SERVES THE SAME MASTERS would be any different?
I don't know what the governor actually said but I have said that if Ron Paul wins in Iowa the rest of the country will likely just ignore them. Ron Paul supporters, do you believe that if he is ultimately elected president he will be able to change anything by himself? Congress will not support him ni any meaningful way and he will be rendered powerless and we will have lost 4 years that could have at least turned some things around.
This is a reply to "zappo777":
When and if you ever meet Christ face-to-face, it is very doubtful that you will like Him at all. His attitude toward self-righteous people might make you very angry.
Say WHAT???? IGNORE the Voice of the PEOPLE? Who the heck does he think he is? Governor or not, he cannot ignore the Voters! AND our Constituional RIGHTS! ~Rick Magee, FL
Romney (socialist governor record) or Dr. Paul (anti-socialist voting record)? I choose Dr. No
[...] Iowa or any other states. Instead, local leaders, churches, newspapers and even the state’s governor made it clear that Iowa would lose its place and would look at the second place finisher if Paul [...]
Sign Up for Our Newsletter!
Latest Featured
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) reports on what looks like a classic "first they came . . ...
Like us on Facebook
Recent Comments
Popular Posts
- Cultural Impact
- Family
- Civil Government
- Religious Liberty
- Church
- Education
- Science
- Eschatology
- Privacy Policy
- About
- Contact Us
Copyright © 2011 American Vision News | Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS) View our Privacy Policy powered by WordPress [Back to top ↑ ]