Full Search Here
RSS Feed Subscribe to Categories

We Are Discussing This Blog:

Predicting G.O.P. Darkhorses (Grassfire Report)

The Grassfire Report by Steve Elliott, President Week of October 8-12, 2007 Skip-Links For This Issue: #1--Values Voters MIA? #2--A GOP darkhorse... or two #3--Illegals to get govt. health benefits? #4--Here come the amnesty bills... #5--Abortionist's illegal procedure exposed #1--Wanted: Values Voters to weigh in during primaries In 2004, pundits coined a new phrase to describe the voters who dominated the elections: Values Voters. Just three years later one must wonder if Values Voters have gone silent. They held a ...

Read full item


Community Discussion
Posts 1-20 of 747 | Latest Post

First 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... Last
October 8, 2007 04:09 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 15, 2007

RON PAUL IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE YOU CAN TRUST TO DO WHAT HE SAYS; HIS VOTING TRACK RECORD PROVES HE VOTES ACCORDING TO WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS!

Media has ignored, discounted and made fun of him in hopes we will go away.  WE ARE NOT GOING ANYWHERE AND GROWING DAILY.  He is the only candidate that increased 114% LAST QUARTER, THE DONATIONS MADE IN $25 UP BY US...NOT BIG COMPANIES AND THE RICH ONLY.

Power to the People; we can see that the man America wants gets in regardless of the manipulation on the Republican Party and Media. If most of what you want is in agreement at Ron Paul 2008.com  Choose him..Thank you for keeping an open mind.
October 8, 2007 04:33 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 14, 2007
I appreciate your opinion, Steve, but please stop trying to shove Ron Paul down our throats, huh?  The guy is an out and out racist, and now it's come to light he is supported by David Duke, former grand wizard of the KKK.  We don't need the likes of that in the White House no matter what other "ideas" he's got.

"A woman who demands further gun control legislation is like a chicken who roots for Colonel Sanders." Larry Elder
October 8, 2007 04:38 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 15, 2007

Oh please.....Steve is not doing anything; it is freedom of expression, and my name is Shirley not Steve.  Ron Paul is anything BUT a racist.  If some people you do not approve of support some of the things he stands for, logic says that this does not a racist make him!
October 8, 2007 04:41 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 12, 2007
Ron Paul, no thanks. I am a values person and see Mike Huckabee the one as a pastor to be the one with values. I really like him and what he stands for and he's funny and human, good looking and Presidental looking. On the other hand, I think the biggest thing that Republicans need to look at is who can beat Hillary. That is what this election really boils down too. Who do we have that can really beat Hillary? I think that may be Guilliani and even though I don't like his positions on many issues, I think he is the only one that can beat Hillary and I trust him for our saftey, a big issue. I don't trust him on immigration, that is for sure. But this is the one Presidental race that I think is the most immportant in my lifetime. I am scared to death to what will become of this country is Hillary becomes President. I don't think I want to find that out. So if Mike Huckabee could beat her, then he's my guy. If not whoever can beat her is my guy. I sure wish Newt was running. One good thing could happen is if Guilliani is nominated we can pray that Mike Huckabee is his VP. That would balance out a few things and maybe Mike would bring some settleing to Guillani and maybe Mike could change Guillani's mind on abortion and immigration and marriage.

craftydr
October 8, 2007 04:45 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
April 3, 2007
Patsy, you need to prove that along with your statement! Where are your sources? I have never heard of him saying anything racist. As for David Duke, when a person runs for office, he has no control over who supports him. If Charles Manson were lucid enough to support a candidate, he would choose one of them. Would that make the candidate a mass murderer? No, Manson is. What Manson did has no bearing on the candidate.
October 8, 2007 04:46 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
March 2, 2007
Patsy, do you have any proof that Ron Paul is a racist? I have followed Ron Paul's Congressional career for many years and have not found anything out about him that leads me to believe that he is a racist. Right now, I am in support of Tom Tancredo. If he does not make it past the primaries, I will put my support behind Ron Paul. I think that a Tom Tancredo/Ron Paul ticket would be a good combination for 2008. Just my humble opinion. C.W.
October 8, 2007 04:47 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
March 5, 2007

Hi Patsy-

He just picked up americanpatol.com's Glenn Spencer's endorsement as well. Don't know if that will help RP or not. Spencer is known mostly to anti-Invasion folks like us...

Notwithstanding the debate tonight, I see something happening at the top that is gratifying only because it indicates that the worst of two evils may not be able to hang on to the top spot. I'm certainly not going to vote for a first tierer! But Romney is soon going to take over for Ghouliani, I believe, in the Midwest and in New England. I think Ghouliani's in trouble. I know what he's doing, hoping to get the Indy "fence sitter's" vote even if he only gets a few conservative votes. He's really ticked off conservatives and the more that comes out on his law firm and SPP/TTC, the more he'll slide. Romney is fighting FT for the RINO/conservative vote and FT is fading. What is left (Huckabee, Hunter, Paul and Tancredo) will split the real conservative vote (that is sticking with the GOP, I mean). Romney's rise will cause FT and McCain to bow out. Eventually, Huckabee and I believe Tancredo with drop out, leaving Romney, Paul and Hunter.

I haven't heard what The Constitution Party plans on doing for a nominee. That's the other $64,000 question. Will RP bolt to The CP as its nominee? Or will it be a rock ribbed conservative in the Howard Phillips mold?

October 8, 2007 04:56 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 15, 2007

Levotb...I appreciate your thoughts on the possible splitting of the votes.However,  consider that when the Republican Party figures out that no one but Ron Paul is picking up speed in donatins,etc. THEY MAY DECIDE TO SUPPORT HIM AS THEIR CHOICE, OR LOSE TO THE DEMOCRATS.  POINT:  Loose estimate is that He is drawing substantially frrom Libertarians(for states rights a lot), Constitutionists, Independents AND DISENCHANTED DEMOCRATS.
October 8, 2007 04:59 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 15, 2007

Levotb...I appreciate your thoughts on the possible splitting of the votes.However,  consider that when the Republican Party figures out that no one but Ron Paul is picking up speed in donations,etc. THEY MAY DECIDE TO SUPPORT HIM AS THEIR CHOICE, OR LOSE TO THE DEMOCRATS.  POINT:  Loose estimate is that He is drawing substantially frrom Libertarians(for states rights a lot), Constitutionists, Independents AND DISENCHANTED DEMOCRATS.

October 8, 2007 05:00 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
October 8, 2007

I completely agree with you craftydr.  It's too bad more conservatives and values people don't support Mike Huckabee.  This is the man Dr. James Dobson should support.

As for Ron Paul, I think the guy is a nut!  Would that we could be isolationists but that's impossible.  He's like Chamberlan facing Hitler.  We are in a World War and we all need to realize that before it's too late!

 
October 8, 2007 05:09 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
August 27, 2007
Any national health-care plan will, #1, be a disaster, given the miserable track record of the government with other social/welfare programs; #2, any program (assuming for the sake of conversation that yet another government welfare program will be added to the already overburdened tax structure) should be for legal U.S. citizens only, but are the proposals that are currently being bandied about mentioning that restriction?, and #3, once again, setting income limits to qualify for government aid, assistance, welfare, whatever, only diminishes a person's incentive to do better. Why even try to earn more than, say, $50,000 if a government program gives away freebies for anyone earning less than the $50,000? Yet another government program that slowly and inexorably takes away a person's incentive.
October 8, 2007 05:19 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
October 8, 2007
Patsy: You will find that not only Steve has a good grip on Ron Paul. Most of Americans are behind him. It is just that our corrupt Media keep it hidden about his popularity. Who gives a crap if he knows someone such as David Duke. I am sure that a lot of people who perhaps has a jaded or colored past are behind him. But I will tell you that there are many more crooked and corrupt people who are behind the others who are running for president than there are behind Ron Paul. All the others are supported by the Bilderbergs, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. These are all corrupt people and yet they are the powerful people who own this world. And the continue to own America as long as their are crooked politions in their pockets. All our politicians are corrupt. You need to do your research. Being someone who "is supported' by David Duke" is something we can live with. Having America being demolished in order to create the NAU and Globalization, The new World Order is not something we can overcome. We are doomed if any of the others get into office. Right now our country can only be save by Ron Paul. All the others will take the path of globalization and the New World Order. When that happens dear lady you will become a member of America's new third world class and will live under a dictator and live in poverty.
October 8, 2007 05:20 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 12, 2007
The only problem I have with Mike Huckabee is he is to soft on illegals and would allow amenesty. I still am not sure of Thomphson but I know for sure I want no part of Ron Paul. I am hearing nothing of John Cox who was on the value voters Debate. Only God can save America Steve. And for that to happen Repentance is a must. Sweet pea
October 8, 2007 05:21 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 12, 2007
I am sorry but I won't vote for Ron Paul after that debate in which here blamed America for 9-11. From what I have heard of him, he is an isolationist. That is not possible in this day and age.
October 8, 2007 05:22 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
October 8, 2007

Ron Paul advocates the same foreign policy the Founding Fathers would

Ron Paul Responds to Union Leader Editorial

Any response to this paper's Friday editorial on my foreign policy position must rest on two fundamental assertions: first, that the Founding Fathers were not isolationists; and second, that their political philosophy -- the wisdom of the Constitution, the Declaration, and our Revolution itself -- is not just a primitive cultural relic.

If I understand the editors' concerns, I have not been accused of deviating from the Founders' logic; if anything I have been accused of adhering to it too strictly. The question, therefore, before readers -- and soon voters -- is the same question I have asked for almost 20 years in Congress: by what superior wisdom have we now declared Jefferson, Washington, and Madison to be "unrealistic and dangerous"? Why do we insist on throwing away their most considered warnings?

A non-interventionist foreign policy is not an isolationist foreign policy. It is quite the opposite. Under a Paul administration, the United States would trade freely with any nation that seeks to engage with us. American citizens would be encouraged to visit other countries and interact with other peoples rather than be told by their own government that certain countries are off limits to them.

American citizens would be allowed to spend their hard-earned money wherever they wish across the globe, not told that certain countries are under embargo and thus off limits. An American trade policy would encourage private American businesses to seek partners overseas and engage them in trade. The hostility toward American citizens overseas in the wake of our current foreign policy has actually made it difficult if not dangerous for Americans to travel abroad. Is this not an isolationist consequence from a policy of aggressive foreign interventionism?

It is not we non-interventionists who are isolationsists. The real isolationists are those who impose sanctions and embargoes on countries and peoples across the globe because they disagree with the internal and foreign policies of their leaders. The real isolationists are those who choose to use force overseas to promote democracy, rather than seek change through diplomacy, engagement, and by setting a positive example.

I do not believe that ideas have an expiration date, or that their value can be gauged by their novelty. The test for new and old is that of wisdom and experience, or as the editors wrote "historical reality," which argues passionately now against the course of anti-Constitutional interventionism.

A Paul administration would see Americans engaged overseas like never before, in business and cultural activities. But a Paul administration would never attempt to export democracy or other values at the barrel of a gun, as we have seen over and over again that this is a counterproductive approach that actually leads the United States to be resented and more isolated in the world.
October 8, 2007 05:23 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
October 8, 2007
From the little I have heard about Mike Huckabee, I would be interested in voting for him. He seems to be the most reasonably conservative of the group and unlike Ron Paul, wants to complete the job in Iraq and other terrorist fronts. As far a values voters go, I think that McCain and Giuliani would be better than any Democrat, but both are far away from where I am in many issues. I hope neither candidate becomes the GOP nominee.
October 8, 2007 05:26 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 15, 2007
Grico:  As far as Ron Paul being an isolatinist:  He believes that "charity starts at hom"....i. e. Take care of AMERICA first in areas of safety, prosperity(trade, but make it also good for America), etc.
October 8, 2007 05:26 PM Post Deleted by Moderator
October 8, 2007 05:26 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 8, 2007

 

The only candidate I will vote for is Sam Brownback, write-in or otherwise
October 8, 2007 05:31 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 15, 2007
Grico:  As far as Ron Paul being an isolatinist:  He believes that "charity starts at hom"....i. e. Take care of AMERICA first in areas of safety, prosperity(trade, but make it also good for America), etc. He doesn't believe that we should be spread so thin around the world when we are not  taking care of our border.  He believes in going to war ONLY when it is declared properly (according to the Constitution)

First 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... Last

You must login to discuss this item.

  Sponsored Links