previous post next post  

Guest Editorial!

In which the Armorer is taken to task, and perceived wrongs righted! In a rigidly constitutionalist fashion. Meet Kevin, my old high school chum, and Ron Paul supporter, who objected to my snarkiness at Representative Paul's position in the Right Wing News poll I linked yesterday. I do think John Hawkins will be bemused to find he's lumped in with the MSM...

Kevin is a tilter-at-windmills on this issue, however valid some of his points are. I'm about electability. If the Libertarians are going to provide a truly viable alternative, they're going to have to do it the old fashioned way - from the bottom up, winning significant numbers of state and local races to build a national presence. Otherwise, Representative Paul will be like Representative Sanders - a caucus of one. I did edit a touch for the NetNannies, but nothing of substance, if the edits did tone down some of the fire.

Update: John Derbyshire at National Review's The Corner blog posts some props for Kevin's thesis.

You may fire when ready, Gridley.

Well, since you opened the door on YOUR blog....

and not that you have ANY obligation to do so

But...

Ron Paul received the HIGHEST amount of donations from military personnel.... interesting no?

And, since it was a "right wing blog" that you cited.... sheesh. They included 'non' candidates, such as Fred 'do nothing' Thompson and Newt "damn I'm embarrassed" Gingrich... how credible was that? It's almost as if they were parroting the MSM....

And since, RP has consistently scored the highest on all the polls where he has been included... as well as the debates....

In the interest of fairness.... perhaps you might mention that veteran Dr. Paul was the best supported candidate by donations from the military?

But, political differences aside.

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate of EITHER party who is a Constitutionalist and, aside from McCain, as far as I know, the only veteran... and certainly the staunchest supporter of the 2nd Amendment of any of the candidates.

I would encourage you to look at this honorable mans voting record.

It is impeccable.

You and I have had these discussions before, but I am adamantly opposed to sending our military into undeclared unconstitutional wars. And, so is Dr. No.

The rest is below the fold, in the Flash Traffic/Extended Entry.

Look at our track record since WW2, since then our politicians have sold our servicemen out for political expediency time and time again. Damned chickenhawks!

Make those people declare war as the Constitution requires. Kill people, break things, come home. No more weasel-wording. No more undercutting them once those spineless b*st*rds send them into harms way.

Declare war and fight it to the knife or don't do it at all.

Anyhow, perhaps a tad couple too many beers on my part. But, for the first time since Reagan, I've sent my scant dollars to a candidate.

I don't like the idea of leaving Iraq undone either, however, in realpolitik terms, it's gonna happen. Regardless of who wins the Presidency. You know it and I know it. So why expend anymore American blood and treasure on what we all know is going to be a withdrawal after next November?

And morseo since those spineless, corrupt b*st*rds of the Iraqi parliament decided to take a month's vacation from their air-conditioned offices while our troops sweat, bleed and die in the Iraqi heat.

This was was a mistake from day one. Bugger the reasons, they've screwed the pooch. It's prosecution has been buggered. I'm NOT faulting our military, you know me better than that, but the 'best and brightest' in DC have knackered it up beyond OUR repair.

Physician heal thyself, ditto to the Iraqis and their artificial country. If they won't even take time off from their vacation... why should our military sweat, bleed and die? Corruption and incompetence!

Geography is such a bugger when placed into real terms.

Anyhow, back to my ramble. Dr. No DID vote for going after the perps who rammed the Twin Towers (We're going to bomb the Saudis when?) And honestly, Osama has been a side note since HWB got that bogus authority to attack our former ally Iraq. Y'know the same Iraq WE gave WMDs to, along with our allies the Germans and the French? Fug the Soviets, but fug them to!

Neither you, nor I signed up to wear Blue Helmets and enforce UN sanctions. What BS! And while history and hindsight can be real eye openers... (amazing the short term memory of some Democrats during Clintons presidency...) honestly, the invasion of Iraq, however despicable our former buddy Saddam was, was not legal in the Constitutional sense. And the damned politicians of both parties have [screwed] our military men ever since Dec. 11 1941 because of it.

Our track record as a nation shows it. The military wins it, the politicians lose it. All because they haven't been held accountable by a hard vote to declare war or not.

UN sanctions my a$$!

Anyhow, just thought I'd vent a bit, and perhaps open your eyes to the only incorruptible candidate in the race for Prez. Assuming you haven't read up on him and his record, I would encourage you to do so.

Oh and yes. Since he's being labeled a 'libertarian', just thought you might like to know that EVERY LIB I know is a staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment, owns at least one firearm and will 'gladly' blow your perp a$$ away if you attack them, their family or their property.

And, as for national defense. Any attackers worst nightmare would be to underestimate or mistake a 'Libertarian' Presidents response to an attack. Pacifist we are not. You attack, you die.

Our former sister Republic Switzerland is/was a good example. "Shoot twice and go home" etc.

You know me and my mindset, and I can confidently predict that a President Paul's reaction would be the same. War would be declared and there would be no mercy, no quarter and it would be prosecuted to the hilt. Kill people, break things, win and come home.

Either the House does it's Constitutionally obligated duty, or we don't go to war. No more of these BS, limited escalations under UN auspices conflicts.

Wage war or do not. Kill or be killed and there is no substitute for victory. Our largely veteranless reps have forgotten this. And our record of 'wins' since WW2 shows it.

Don't mess with the US. And it's about damned time our politicians took this attitude.

Anyhow, rant off.

But, I would ask you to examine the only candidate who is not corruptible as a consideration.

Nothing more need be said.

Except this.

If the MSM and the old boys DO defeat the only honest man in the election, I will NOT vote for any of the Republican or Democratic candidates running for Prez. They are all corrupt, party toadies who don't give a damn about our Republic, our military or our people.

They are only in it for themselves.

I secede! [I assume this is hyperbole for the rant]

Now, where's my beer?

8)

Laters!

PS. No reply is required. However, I do think you do Dr. Paul, his voting record and our Constitutional Republic a great disservice by your 'snarky' opening comments. 8) Fair and balanced? It's your blog, you dinna have to be!

8 Comments

So, may I expect that Yogic Flying will be allowed to take its rightful place in the political arena? Cheers
 
Boy, talking about getting your undie's in a knot. I personally haven't seen much support for Rep. Paul, and what I have seen is pretty much like this guy. TBS it was very nice of you to give him some space to make a fool of himself.
 
Now now, Unkawill. We're talking about a buddy of mine, who holds his opinions honestly. Remember the Rulez, plz - message, not messenger.
 
Welp, my body armor is on, I'm hunkered down. Fire away. Just be sure you are aiming at the right target. As we all know, friendly fire, isn't. But as regards 'making a fool of myself', last time I checked, the Constitution was the supreme law of the land, and if supporting a candidate who actually bases his votes in accordance with his oath of office to uphold and defend said Constitution is foolish... If not wishing my fellow brothers in arms to be killed and maimed in never ending undeclared, un-Constitutional wars is foolish... If actually believing in the American dream of the Republic that was bequeathed to us by our founding fathers and following their advice in policies both foreign and domestic is foolish... Then fit me up for a jesters suit, bells and all! Personally, I think it's foolish to vote for the lesser of two evils (as so many unfortunately do) as the end result, is still evil. And, I've never considered a vote 'wasted' if you cast it in accordance for what you want, not for what you DON'T want in an elected official. The real questions will be answered next November. Perhaps this time, we as Americans can avoid being played 'the fool' by our new President? Now, get that GLID offa me!
 
Ron Paul vs Dennis Kusinich, should be a fairly even match. As for the message: amusing but less than than coherent; factually suspect; lacks substance; missing postulated substantive options; assertations on constitutionalities should be accompanied by contextualy correct references; Switzerland is a Federation; General Orders No 100 still exists; etc. Cheers
 
J.M. - He did say it was a rant; not a peer reviewed essay with citations in APA format. I think, as rants go, it did make some sense and cause me to ponder several points from a different perspective. I'm afraid I'm not ready to go with the altruistic political view, even though I would probably have less internal conflict supporting a Libertarian than any of the current Republican contenders...
 
Oldloadr 1. I know it was a rant. 2. I responded with a mini-counter-rant. 3. I think Dr Paul has many attactive ideas, not the least being his view of the Constitution, my quibble is with the lack of info on how he proposes to accomplish his aims. 4. In the linked article by Mr Derbyshire, his correspondent repeatedly uses the word "idealists". Idealists are excellent for populating rally, but I hesitate when someone suggests they form the pool from which a government selects its workers. 5. Having read and enjoyed the rant, my response was to query "Now what?" Otherwise, what I take away is: a. Vote for Dr Pauls because he's popular and a strict Constitutionalist; b. --- c. "Morning in America" will return. Cheers
 
I'll make an un-authorized change to choice "c". Make that 'mourning' in America. And, FYI regarding my comments on Switzerland and our history of being a 'sister republic', I will refer you to one of my sources, since footnotes were noted as being lacking in my rant vs. a peer reviewed thesis... http://www.swisscenterna.com/thecenter/documents/sister-republics.pdf Ah, back when the Republic(s) were young and idealism ran rampant, before the present day rot, mold and mildew of big money and special interests has just about ruined everything. Cycles of history and government? You bet! To paraphrase Ben Franklin: "We've given you a Republic, if you can keep it!" Now, where is that damned Sith lord? 7'2" tall asthmatic ass and all! Robot Chicken fans rejoice! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfLOtIhjVFc