53 Replies to “A Warning from Canada for the GOP”

  1. Amen indeed!
    But … the primary caucuses are not about the broad spectrum of “grass roots” supporters.
    Are they?

  4. Ron Paul in 2012 !!!
    The U.S. is better off trying to get a real conservative/republican in and risk failing then to put up an Obama-Lite alternative.
    The compound power of interest makes this an all-or-nothing election. A RINO in office would only result in the delay of a few months the same end result that Obummer would bring about.

  6. I am not a Paulista, I am a Palinista. But that is beside the point. I agree totally with this article. If the Repubs offer another damp-sodden McCain-wimp insider-safe-Washington-type, then they are toast.
    I always refer to the Joe Clarke fallacy: “To get elected as a “conservative”, adopt the programs of your opponents”. Clearly a stupid strategy that relies upon the unstated thought that right-wingers have nowhere to go.
    Actually, as Mulroney et al found out, they do have somewhere else to go … they can stay home.
    So, Palin is quite right (literally). I wish she would run. If some idiot like Sentorum or whatzizname wins, they’d be well served to ask her to be their running mate.

  7. America is at war with itself and there is not a Churchill in sight. Obama is the Neville Chamberlain promising “peace in our time” while the democracy crumbles. As the great Poggo once said, “I have seen the enemy, and it is us”.

  8. Interesting read.
    Kinda gives you the feeling that Canada is ahead of the USA, in the effort to get an authentic conservative government.
    And I never saw the resemblance between Ron Paul and Preston Manning until this very day!

  9. Whether or not you like him, Romney is the only one that can beat Obama.
    Run a Ron Paul or another extreme conservative and the Independents will stay home on election day.
    The disaffected democrats that were thinking of voting Republican will bounce back to Obama.
    Sad but true.
    GOP is ready to take over Congress but that leaves four years of a do-nothing government.

  10. Ralph,
    Romney is the ideal figure for Obama to run against. Romney will lose the independents just like McCain. Why:
    Obamacare is now off the table, because Romney thinks it is great. There goes an easy way of differentiating between the two candidates.
    Bain Capital will be portrayed as Wall Street.
    Bain Capital laid off thousands when trying to save companies. The lay-offs will be remembered, not the jobs that were saved.
    Romney is Mormon and you know when the liberal, caring, open minded progressives are through with him, Mormonism will be portrayed as a wacky cult. Mormonism will be portrayed as racist, sexist, backwards fanaticism.
    Conservatives: Romney likes an assault weapons ban. Romney is Pro-choice. Romney is the establishment.
    There is a reason he only received 25% of the caucus vote in Iowa in BOTH 2008 and 2012.
    Conservatives may not stay home, but they will not get out there and campaign, pound in the lawn signs and attend rallies for Mitt.
    The only reason we did that in 2008 was Sarah Palin, not John McCain.

  11. The GOP is in a quest for a conservative POTUS candidate who is also electable in november. The current list of declared candiadtes does not contain one. Thus in the next few months barring a late entrant or a brokered convention that delivers an option that is not amoung the current declared list, Mitt Romney will be the choice of the GOP. At that point the GOP supporters will need to bury any doubts and get four-square behind the effort to remove the worst and simultaneously most dangerous person ever to be president of the United States.
    Until then pissing and moaning about romney’s flaws/issues is fine. Just keep in mind damaging his ability to be a winning nominee has a high likelyhood of helping to keep Obama in power. And its going to be pretty humiliating to confess to your grandkids a decade from now that you were an enabler in the re-election of obama.
    It occurs to me that the timing of this election is a great shame. Just consider how many excellent GOP POTUS candidates there would be in an open contest (iow if obama were to win in november). Here’s just a few off the top of my head:
    Jindal
    Pawlenty
    Christie
    Palin
    McDonnell (gov of virginia)
    Rubio
    Jeb Bush
    Paul Ryan
    Daniels

  12. The Republican Race
    Thursday, January 5, 2012
    If you think the world is falling apart – and many people do – and if you think that to some degree the job of holding it together falls to the leadership of the United States – a reasonable assumption – then this, 2012, must be a very bleak year.
    …
    Obama doesn’t have it anymore. So the spectator swivels his attention to the prospective candidates from the other party, the Republicans, and it’s a little like going from a troubled sleep to a full bore nightmare. Is this – meaning the primary process – the way to choose a person for the most significant position in all the world? Dog the Bounty Hunter on certain nights is more dignified.
    …
    So then, if one looks at the US and despairs that its current President is not up to the job, that the world is in one of its more parlous and perilous moments. Is it then possible to look to the Republican slate – largely a collection of everyone’s third choices – and feel a gust of sane optimism? No.
    There’s no one on board of that ship to inspire the passengers. It’s frightfully mediocre – maybe a good cast for small-city mayor – but for President of the United States?
    As I said at the beginning, don’t look south this year, if you wish to take on cheer. Politics in the US is more and more a branch of its awful reality TV shows. It hinges on the same qualities they do: exhibitionism, humiliation of the players, and cynicism. Not a good thing for that great Republic. Or for those of us who wish it well.
    For The National, I’m Rex Murphy.

  14. None of the GOP candidates have enough of the undecided, middle-of-the-road support to beat an Obama/Clinton ticket.

  15. gays, race, abortion….meet all 3 with boring talking points and stick to smaller government and the economy.
    Don’t let the DEMS steer your campaign…ask Hudak, he fell into the lefty trap of 24 hour gay everything, when in reality who cares.

  16. Romney may win against Obama but the GOP will continue to lose the loyalty of their grassroots, particularly Gen X and Y who realize that they are going to be saddled with huge debt repayments and unfunded programs. It is absurd that the GOP cannot find a viable candidate in their party who satisfies the growing small-government “Don’t Tread on Me” constitutionalists while still not spooking the “I’ll give you my entitlements when you take it from my cold dead hands” big-government, boomer conservatives.
    To me, the US looks ripe for real reform. Both the D’s and R’s are: losing registered support to independents, have national councils too arrogant to listen to the grassroots, are owned by lobbyist and corporate interest and both the POTUS and Congress have historically low trust and approval rates.
    I know that libertarianism (ptooey) is a dirty word in these parts but I’d bet that a third party would borrow heavily from Ron Paul domestic and maybe even a few of his foreign policy ideas. Libertarianism is flexible enough to allow a bigger tent than the two existing parties.
    Funny and relevant clip:
    Microphones caught a group of Pentagon reporters chatting as they waited for President Barack Obama to take the podium and discuss military budget cuts.
    Among their topics of discussion? What a Ron Paul presidency might mean for their jobs.
    “See this room? Like, two-thirds of us laid off if Ron Paul is president.”
    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/pentagon-reporter-see-this-room-two-thirds-of-us-would-be-laid-off-if-ron-paul-is-president/

  18. Flaggman is right. Just as Mulroney precipitated the collapse of the Progressive Conservatives in 1973 by ignoring the various constituency groups who comprised the conservative base, this same tendency among establishment Republicans to dismiss the grassroots could have the same result.
    The fact that the latest Rasmussen survey of likely Republican Primary voters in New Hampshire shows Paul in second place (a distant second, at 18 percent, with Romney at 42 percent) is a sign that the libertarian-ish, anti-Big-Government constituency within the Republican party is real, and that they’re sending a strong message that, as Flaggman suggests, the RINOs would dismiss at their own peril.
    I think it’s not unreasonable to assume that Ron Paul is hanging in there, as it were, not so much because his supporters think he’d be a great president, or even that they think he’s entirely viable as a candidate, but simply because he’s the only Republican candidate with a clear Anti-Big-Government message. That isn’t a constituency – one wouldn’t think – that the Republicans should want to vilify or exclude or alienate.
    That royal ‘we’, no-dissent-allowed attitude that Palin is challenging doesn’t just affect the left. Even here at SDA, commenters who – politely, convivially – support Ron Paul have been told by other, less polite commenters that they’re idiots who should either shut up or go away, while those who support Mitt Romney – a business-as-usual, big-government guy – don’t get the same treatment.

  19. “Ron Paul in 2012 !!!”
    Ron Paul is a flake. Full stop.
    Yes, he’s good on the economy, but that’s it. If you want a POTUS who believes America caused 911, who would reduce its military and bid sayonara to US interests on the world stage, Paul is your man.
    Otherwise, as noted above, he will split the vote as an independent and guarantee a 2nd term for the most seditious and dangerous president the country has ever seen.
    mhb23re
    at gmail d0t calm

  20. mbh is right. Ron Paul would be an unmitigated disaster. Americans learned the hard way in 1962 that isolationism doesn’t work, when they woke up one morning to find Soviet missiles 90 miles away in Cuba.
    Rex Murphy is also right. The entire field of candidates is a thoroughly uninspired lot. If times make the man then these must be truly dismal times to offer up such a dismal lot to oppose such a weak incumbent.
    Flaggman’s thesis is basically correct with some significant historical errors. The PC public support in Canada did not really begin to erode until the Charlottetown Conference. It was this second attempt to reconcile Quebec with the new constitution which really tanked the government support. He also misses the truly enormous significance of one very highly placed traitor in the PCs, namely Lucien Bouchard.
    He forgets that public opinion going into the 1993 election started out generally in support of the PCs for at least a minority government. However, he omits the fact that the PCs ran a truly dreadful campaign. Elections, and the events that happen in them, matter. The PCs discovered the hard way that Kim Campbell really didn’t have what it took to be a Prime Minister, given the chaotic nature of the campaign she ran.
    He makes some serious errors about the GST as well. Canadians voted in support of the government in 1988 even though it was bringing in both the sales tax and free trade. The sales tax, along with the de-indexing of tax brackets, were the two big tax measures that paid our way out of deficit. It is a popular misconception that Canada eliminated its deficit by government cuts. It did to some extent by cutting transfers to provinces, a measure that the Canadian healthcare system is still trying to recover from, but mostly we taxed our way out. Oh, and gutted the military, but that was a personal vendetta of Chretien, not a budget-cutting exercise.
    The thought of government encroaching on Alberta’ energy resources is just plain wrong. That was Marc Lalonde’s National Energy Strategy, repealed by the Mulroney administration as soon as it got into power.
    Finally, the country was not “pining for a conservative renaissance” in 1984. Turner’s support numbers were good going into the election. It was his election to lose, and he did, blowing up spectacularly in a famous television debate. Showing that he was no more fit to run the country than Kim Campbell was. And given his chronic red nose, that’s hardly a surprise. But then his wife was a souse as well.
    EBD, to a certain extent I agree with you. Ron Paul has to hang in because he represents a constituency. And for any party to be successful, it has to be a big tent capable of accommodating lots of different views.

  21. Americans learned the hard way in 1962 that isolationism doesn’t work,
    I’m not a fan of RP’s foreign policy, but please, America was not isolationist at that point in history at all. Bay of Pigs anybody?
    Despite his (huge) flaws, Ron Paul is the best of the GOP(especially with Johnson out), except maybe-maybe-Huntsman (though I’m doubting). America’s military needs large cuts and if you want fiscal rectitude except for your special pet department then you are a hypocrite.
    If RP loses the nom, I hope his supporters transfer to Gary Johnson, and he splits the anti-Obama vote. Given that there is no meaningful difference between Romney and Obama, another 4 years would be worth it to humiliate and maybe destroy the GOP.

  22. Ralph said: Run a Ron Paul or another extreme conservative and the Independents will stay home on election day.
    —————————————————-
    That is simply not true and a very ill informed comment. This is the same canard that big government conservatives push in Canada as well.
    “Oh, you cannot run a real conservative, because you will scare the independents away”
    This ridiculous nonsense was disproved recently in Canada with mayor Ford and the landslide election of federal conservatives in freaking Toronto.

  23. Ralph said: Run a Ron Paul or another extreme conservative and the Independents will stay home on election day.
    —————————————————-
    It is very apparent that either you don’t follow American politics very closely or that you are purposely deceiving people.
    Ron Paul is the GOP candidate that has the greatest favorability ratings among independents.
    This fact is not only evident but is also easily verifiable by looking for example at the voter split from the Iowa caucus entrance polls.
    Independents made up 25 % of all voters. Among independents 43 % preferred Ron Paul compared to 19 % for Romney and 13% for Santorum.
    You can see the result of the entrance poll here:
    http://tinyurl.com/7pgxjnu
    To give another example here is a poll by PPP showing a favorability rating for Ron Paul of 60 % among independents – light years ahead of any other GOP candidate.
    You can see the PPP poll here:
    http://tinyurl.com/7sv6thz
    If Ron Paul was the GOP nominee the Republicans would win in a landslide. Ron Paul’s biggest opposition comes in fact from big government RINO scum that are entrenched in the GOP. They are the most opposed to the nomination of Ron Paul, because they know that they would be out of a job with a Paul presidency.
    Please stop spreading false information on the internet.

  24. cgh, don’t forget Kim Campbell and her assault rifle ban. That made a bigger difference to Conservatives than a lot of things. GST, the gun ban, I remember those things as being a very big deal.
    atlas is shrugging said: “Don’t let the DEMS steer your campaign…ask Hudak, he fell into the lefty trap of 24 hour gay everything, when in reality who cares.”
    This is really the deal. This is really what Palin, Flaggman, Rex Murphy are trying to pound into some heads.
    The issue is PUBLIC DEBT.
    The issue is REPEAL OBAMACARE.
    The issue is NO GUN BANS.
    The issue is SHRINK THE GOVERNMENT.
    The issue is STOP GROPING GRANDMA AT THE F-ING AIRPORT!!!
    SECURE THE BORDER.
    DRILL SOME OIL.
    JOBS, MAYBE?
    Oh, and is there going to be any money to pay off all those federal, state and municipal BONDS coming due?
    I have heard -zippo- from most of these guys on any of this. Rick Santorum for example, I can tell you his views on gays and abortion, BUT I DON’T CARE!!! As a President he’s got no business even -having- views on gays and abortion, they aren’t supposed to be subject to federal government power. They aren’t important issues compared to a federal deficit that’s 103% of GDP right now, and climbing.
    These issues are not in the conversation. They are under the carpet. The GOP candidates shouldn’t be talking about anything else, and here they are talking about everything else BUT.
    Its insanity.
    Ralph said above: “Whether or not you like him, Romney is the only one that can beat Obama.”
    This is another MSM meme that’s very convenient for the Left. My experience of the USA right now is that Michelle Bachman’s sister’s dog could win against Obama. And could do a better job. Romney could win. Santorum could win. Ron Paul could win.
    The Dems are going to get -decimated- in the House and Senate races. Both are going to be majority Republican after November, many of the Republicans are going to be Tea Party guys.
    If a RINO gets in as President he won’t have much room to screw around, given the Congress. Romney the flashy hair guy will get towed behind them. Ron Paul will get vetoed on his crazy stuff. Checks and balances.
    Go Tea Party!

  25. I won huge coin off my son when I bet Harper would win a majority.
    He’s proposing a bet that Obama will get back in and I’m not biting.

  26. RP has introduced 620 legislative actions into Congress since he has served there. Of those only 4 have been voted on and only 1 passed. Thats 616 actions that are sitting in a closet somewhere, never to see the light of day.With such a dismal legislative record in organizing and leading others to vote with him,how can anyone expect him to do any better as President? He talks the talk but when it comes to leading and walking he falls flat on his face.

  27. Let’s not forget that Flagmann – whose essay was, after all, the subject of Kate’s post – wasn’t stumping for Ron Paul, or arguing that he should be President. His point was that if the Republicans ignore/sneer at/alienate the not-insignificant part of their constituency who want *seriously* smaller government – i.e. who want to scale it back big-time, rather than in pathetic, utterly inconsequential little dribs and drabs — it’s going to seriously hurt them in the long run.
    The Anti-Big-Government movement wasn’t created by Ron Paul — it’s been around for hundreds of years – and it isn’t tied to Ron Paul, and it isn’t a bad thing; you have to separate the idea itself from Paul, who is the only candidate currently stumping for it.
    It’s almost a given that the first candidate to openly and strongly and unequivocally express the view on the big stage would be somewhat of an outlier/nutbar. If there was another Republican candidate who explicitly ran on the same anti-Big-Government message as Paul, Paul wouldn’t even be a factor, IMO, but, as of right now, for Americans who strongly believe that government intrusion, and the *insane*, almost suicidal spending, has to stop sooner rather than later — not an unreasonable position, obviously — who else is there to vote for other than Ron Paul? His current level of support is due to his take-an-axe-to-the-government message, and not because of him personally.
    Btw, *great* comment, Phantom (11:30). Bang-on.

  28. Phantom, I agree with you; those really are the issues that the right is looking for a spokesman upon. At the moment, few of them are speaking to most of those issues at all. I also agree with EBD that Paul is collecting support from independents mostly because he’s the only one really pushing the small government button.
    As to Santorum’s views on gays and abortion etc., the split in the right is between the family values crowd which values these things, and the libertarians who want government out of the business of dictating morality. And remember, every time conservatives get dragged into this swamp, they lose. Conservatives win on security and economic issues. So why are the current crop of candidates playing in the opposition’s ballpark? Are they truly that stupid?
    Phantom, I’m not nearly as optimistic as you are about Obama going out in 2012. This election could still go south if the elephants don’t get their trunks in order. And that means presenting real, clear policy alternatives to what’s in the White House right now. And it must put forward a candidate who has at least some record of actually getting things done. As Mike noted, Ron Paul has no such record.

  29. Daniel:
    Thanks, good to see someone else sees what’s really going on.
    mhb: Ron Paul is going to “cut the military”.
    I don’t believe that’s his main point. His main point on defense spending is WHY IS THE US SPENDING BILLIONS THEY DON’T HAVE TO MAINTAIN BASES IN OVER 100 FOREIGN COUNTRIES? How many bases does China have in foreign countries? Zero. How many does Russia have? Zero. Germany? Zero. Paul is saying bring those soldiers home, reopen bases on US soil, spend that money INSIDE THE US, not in foreign countries.
    But that isn’t the main point.. Paul and the Fed isn’t the main point.. Paul and abortion/gay marriage/drugs isn’t the main point…
    Jesus F***ing Christ – the current Rep House and the current Dem Senate BOTH approved the odious NDAA, which Bambam “reluctantly” signed. (Even Jon Stewart is raking Bambam over the coals on this.) They are all lined up to pass SOPA. This isn’t even a small infringement – it’s a massive move against freedom of speech, due process, government restraint, and the rule of law. I haven’t a heard a word from Mittens, Salamander, or Sanctimonious about any of this. Paul is the only GOP candidate aghast at what’s happening.
    I posted a link to this video above, which apparently not one of you watched. I dare all of you anti-Paul people to actually WATCH it (it’s 3 minutes, 11 seconds long; I hope it doesn’t tax your attention spans), and then come back and REFUTE ANY SINGLE POINT OF IT.
    Chinese Troops On Texas Soil
    I’ll wait.

  30. cgh, personally I think Barry is done like dinner. BUT, I am not a highly paid political expert, so I could be wrong.
    I think it is inarguable that the Tea Party movement, which keeps reliably having 100-200K attendance at its rallies, is going to kick some serious socialist @ss this year. That means it almost doesn’t matter WHO gets to be President. If Barry does win he’ll be the dead duck who can’t even veto anything.
    I view the “family values” crowd mostly as similar to the Left. They want Big Brother to impose their views on everybody else. The views differ, the impose part is the same.
    That’s not the Tea Party. The Tea Party is my real estate lady in Phoenix who’s -terrified- of the national debt and the country defaulting.
    The Tea Party is, believe it or not, gearheads who want to be able to work on their own truck. Latest EPA/California outrage, they sent a bunch of EPA and CARB apparatchiks to the SEMA show in Nevada in November 2011. Those guys were trolling for aftermarket parts companies to bust for selling non-CARB/EPA approved pieces for diesel engines and etc. Paper crimes to shut down employers.
    http://www.dieseltruckresource.com/dev/archive/thanks-edge-update-t296440.html
    The Tea Party is pretty much anyone who doesn’t want to watch the USA descend into a corrupt, baksheesh-fueled nightmare like Mexico.
    Here in Canada we aren’t far behind. Its the little things that do it. I just went to the dump today. Minimum charge is $14.00 Up from $13.50 last year. Up from $12.00 a couple years ago when I first moved here.
    Now, I can afford $14. But there IS a price for dumping at which I’m going to start looking for a deserted government parking lot to dump the garbage on. Long before it gets to me, the poor people are going to be leaving their crap on street corners, rural roads, driveways, you name it.
    Dumping medical waste is -already- too expensive, because there are constantly occurring cases of companies finding dumptruck loads of it in their back loading dock on Monday morning.
    That’s just one thing, but EVERYTHING is like that. Nobody is talking about this stuff. All we get around here is windmills. All the poor old Americans get is abortion or “social justice”.
    Tea Party!

  32. Mike W said: RP has introduced 620 legislative actions into Congress since he has served there. Of those only 4 have been voted on and only 1 passed. Thats 616 actions that are sitting in a closet somewhere, never to see the light of day.With such a dismal legislative record in organizing and leading others to vote with him,how can anyone expect him to do any better as President? He talks the talk but when it comes to leading and walking he falls flat on his face.
    ———————————————-
    Ron Paul is the lone voice of sanity in the US Congress.
    To continue with the Canada-US comparisons:
    What was the legislative record of the Reform Party of Canada when we were in the minority?
    Look were we are now.

  33. “REFUTE ANY SINGLE POINT OF IT”
    Texas is not threatening to nuke Israel. Or South Korea. Americans did not fly an airplane into two tall buildings in Beijing.
    But yeah, they could probably spend a lot less on this kind of thing. 10% cut wouldn’t hurt.

  34. Well said and Amen indeed.
    I’d just like to point out that PMSH has had a majority for less than a year, so be patient.

  35. Very good posts by Phantom.
    ‘Legislative accomplishment’ is a lousy index to measure the goodness of a congressman. ‘Accomplishment’ is usually just expanding the state.
    Imagine Chinese troops in Texas. Well, that would suck. Unless China were the freest nation in the world and were liberating Texas from a theocratic medieval government. RP destroys his own credibility with these crappy comparisons and lines of argument.

  36. KevinB
    That add was good and I believe most Americans now believe that what many of us supported a decade ago has turned out to be another nation-building FUBAR (Iraq and Afghanistan). Everyone knows what Paul is against when it comes to foreign policy. Where he is subject to perhaps exaggerated concern is what he is favour of beyond free trade and peace. Would he keep shipping lanes open with naval power? Would he de-fang nuclear threats with an ABM emphasis? Would he support any allies such as Canada, if say the Russians decided to lay claim to the Arctic?
    Further to what the Phantom said above, there has been data coming out that suggests a Republican sweep this November. We need to get off all of the lessor important areas of disagreement and particularly the notion that Romney is the only candidate that can beat Obama. That is like going back to Joe Clark as the only Tory moderate enough to take out Trudeau.

  37. Come to think of it the GOP does resemble the psudo Conservative Mulronieites.
    Big Government entitlements mongers. Who shrink in horror of smaller government.
    If it happens there like here they will come to loath
    Republicans who pretend to be champions of reduced Federal control, while grabbing all the power they can. Just like square jaw short pants.

  38. RP is a constituationalist. If congress voted to send troops to defend Canada, Israel, South Korea, or any of it’s other allies then RP would take that as his marching orders. What RP won’t do is keep troops stationed in Saudi Arabia to lend it’s military might to a corrupt regime or to send Billions in aid to Israel so that it can work them like a hand puppet.
    RP has more than twice the support of active serving military members than all of the other GOP candidates combined.
    Unfortunately, people have to ignore the MSM (including Fox News) and dig for more information on Ron Paul themselves.

  39. As a conservative I think that every nation should be responsible for its own defense. Defense is one of the most basic responsibilities of any state.
    Israel, however is perfectly capable of defending itself as they have extremely sophisticated military equipment including nukes.
    The Israelis would like to attack Iran to prevent them from developing a nuclear weapon.
    Why hasn’t Israel attacked Iran to prevent them from developing a nuclear weapon?
    Answer: Because they get welfare from the US, they have to ask them permission to attack Iran. The Americans have said NO.
    If Israel didn’t get any welfare from the US they would be FREE to make decisions they feel are necessary in order to ensure their security.
    Why should the American taxpayer be responsible for ensuring the defense of Israel, which is a responsibility of the state of Israel?
    Why should the state of Israel renege of its responsibility to ensure the security of its citizens and subject themselves to the will of a foreign power?
    As a conservative I do not support giving welfare to domestic bums, much less foreign ones.
    As a conservative I do not support telling other people how to live their lives. Similarly, I also do not support telling other nations what they can or cannot do to ensure their defense.
    This is what Ron Paul wants. He wants for Israel to be FREE to make the decisions that they feel are necessary to secure their citizens without any foreign power interference.
    This is completely in line with Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Canadian position on Israel.
    Canada doesn’t give any welfare to Israel.
    Canada doesn’t tell Israel what they can or cannot do to ensure their defense.
    That doesn’t mean that Canada is not one of Israel’s biggest allies, as evidenced by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s decision to veto any mention of Israel’s 1967 borders in the final G8 statement and John Baird’s staunch defense of Israel at the UN.
    You see Ron Paul’s Israel policy is in line with Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s and I support it 100%.
    Similarly, Ron Paul wants to bring back the troops from Afghanistan which is in line with what the majority of the American people want and it is identical to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s decision to withdraw Canadian troops from Afghanistan.

  41. Well said phantom and EBD. KevinB, I appreciate that video you linked to – it should at least make a person pause for a moment and think of the ‘mile in another man’s shoes’. I hope that the GOP will listen to Sarah Palin – she was the only level head I saw in the GOP in 2008.

  42. The Phantom
    “I just went to the dump today. Minimum charge is $14.00 Up from $13.50 last year. Up from $12.00 a couple years ago when I first moved here.
    But there IS a price for dumping at which I’m going to start looking for a deserted government parking lot to dump the garbage on.”
    For some strange reason the local dump charged $20 to dump appliances while there was no charge for general household trash. Most of the land is crown land so the bush ended up full of fridges etc. They dropped the charge.

  43. “If Ron Paul was the GOP nominee the Republicans would win in a landslide… It is very apparent that either you don’t follow American politics very closely or that you are purposely deceiving people”
    Posted by: Daniel hates RINOs
    This is typical of the delusion shared by the Paulette zombies. Thankfully, they are in the minority, but could still be a problem for vote splitting on the right if this whackjob decides to run as an independent. That, in itself, should turn off fence-sitters from casting their ballots on paul: the completely self-serving and selfish act of splitting the vote as an independent and guaranteeing another even more disastrous 4 years of Maobama rule shows how much paul puts his own agenda ahead of that of the country.
    Hey, Daniel, we know you hate RINOs. Do you hate racist newsletters published in ron paul’s name, too?
    And is it just me, or does anybody else who looks at ron paul think of Hector Salamanca in “Breaking Bad”?
    mhb23re

  44. You know, I’m wondering if an inspired VP choice would make a difference. A VP choice that’s not just window dressing. If it’s Mitt Romney who gets the nomination, and he knows the whole conservative-leaning electorate is not fully behind him and may be looking for a third-party candidate, he has to do something. (he has to know this by now, right? Maybe he has gone “conservative” in his heart and head but can’t convince a jaded (and rightly so) electorate). Marco Rubio, Allen West for example. Tea Party. And when I say not just window dressing, I don’t want him to pull a McCain and get a great VP pick BUT exclude him/her from any true policy planning and undermine him/her…they have to be fully involved. I think this would get Tea Partiers on board and Obama would not stand a chance. And this VP pick would vow to hold the President’s feet to the fire on conservative issues. It’s almost the best we can hope for considering this crop of Pres. candidates.
    The difference up here might have been we don’t get a VP pick to counterbalance a Mulroney.

  45. Texas is not threatening to nuke Israel. Or South Korea. Americans did not fly an airplane into two tall buildings in Beijing.
    Italy isn’t threatening to nuke Israel, either, but the US had naval, air, and marine bases there. Bulgaria isn’t threatening anyone with anything, but the US has air and army bases there. Japan isn’t threatening to fight anyone, but the US has air, naval, marine, and army bases there. Do you sense a pattern here?
    And, yes, while the US did not deliberately take down two huge office buildings, they still managed (for example) to kill over 100 people at a WEDDING through a ‘mis-directed’ drone strike. (There are many more examples of ‘collateral damage’; I’m not going to bother listing all of them.) I just want YOU, Phantom, to imagine how enraged you might be if your mother, father, sister, and many friends and relations were killed on her wedding day by a foreign drone. Think you’re going to say “oh, well, they were trying to kill terrorists, and made a mistake. It happens..”?
    Fat friggin’ chance that would be your answer. You’d be grabbing for the pistol you carry, and be out looking for answers. I wouldn’t blame you – I’d feel the same – but why you can’t imagine the same thing happening in other countries betrays a certain close-mindedness.

  46. MHB:
    1 – It’s just you.
    2 – In the realm of incredibly stupid and meaningless comparisons, the “he looks like a villain from a TV show” meme is pretty much bottom of the barrel. Thanks so much for your intellectually stimulating contribution to the debate.

  47. The Reform movement/party was a diret result of the PC brass ignoring not only party grass roots but the average voter as well. Mulroney never carried a populist agenda, he carried out the agendas of his owners in Montreal and New York – much as Chretien did.
    I really hope the US Tea Party can go the step beyond where our reform movement went and stay a movement which can effect the agendas of all candidates and return a populism to the US GOP.

  48. “2 – In the realm of incredibly stupid and meaningless comparisons, the “he looks like a villain from a TV show” meme is pretty much bottom of the barrel. Thanks so much for your intellectually stimulating contribution to the debate.”
    Save your faux outrage, doofus. Mea Culpa: for the intellectually challenged readers of the thread, may I add, postscript, ” /joking” to the previous post. Hope you feel better, kevin.
    Subtlety isn’t your strong suit, is it?
    mhb

  49. The difference up here might have been we don’t get a VP pick to counterbalance a Mulroney.
    Yup, Joe ‘wake me when the speech is over’ Biden has proven to an invaluable check on Bambam.

  50. I’m not a Sarah Palin fan, but I wish she would run, as she is conseravtive, and isn’t a mental case like Ron Paul

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation