Ron Paul Plays Religion Card In New Ad

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Religion, Ron Paul

First he said this…

“It reminds me of what Sinclair Lewis once said. He says, ‘when fascism comes to this country, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross.’ Now I don’t know whether that’s a fair assessment or not, but you wonder about using a cross, like he is the only Christian or implying that subtly. So, I don’t think I would ever use anything like that.”

But at the same time, he was creating the following ad which just started running in Iowa and New Hampshire…

One thing in that ad sticks out for me and it’s the line at the end: “protecting our God-given freedom.”

Normally I would have no problem with that statement. In fact, I didn’t have a problem with Huckabee’s X-mas ad. If a candidate wants to talk about God or Jesus or Whateverâ„¢, so be it. But this ad was literally being crafted around the same time Paul was hinting at the idea of religious fascism and saying he wouldn’t emulate Huckabee’s strategy.

Long story short, the ad makes Paul look hypocritical. There was no reason to put “God-given” in there. He could’ve simply said “protecting our freedom” and the ad would have been just as powerful.

Color me disappointed…


This entry was posted on Thursday, December 27th, 2007 and is filed under Religion, Ron Paul. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

50 Responses to “Ron Paul Plays Religion Card In New Ad”

  1. Rob Says:

    1 word vs a 30 second floating cross… point-taken though, I didn’t even notice the mention of the G-word until you pointed it out.

    Still doesn’t have the same “I am the chosen one” feel that Huckabees had, but maybe that’s just me.

  2. Raymond Says:

    Have you ever READ the Declaration of Independence? It says that our rights are God-given. I think that statement is more of a reminder that our rights are NOT government given.

    I can see where that statement can be construed as hypocritical, but come on Justin, the MSM doesn’t need any help in their Paul-bashing.

  3. Joe Mac Says:

    God given rights are those which are inherent in all of us and not something which is given to you by your government. Ron Paul is not an ideological zealot like Mike Huckabee. He forms his decisions based upon the strict interpretation of the constitution and not on a gut feeling that he gets from communing with God.

    Ron is a Patriot first an a Christian second. In fact his religiosity is more of a form of support to his wife who is a devote Christian than it is from an inner need to explain existence. He brushes of the argument of evolution and creationism as unnecessary and burdensome to progress.

    Let freedom ring.

  4. Justin Gardner Says:

    I wouldn’t say that Huck’s X-mas ad had the “chosen one” feel to it, but that’s just me. And let’s be clear about the Huck ad, the “cross” was a bookshelf in the background, which is eventually obscured by his head as the camera moves right. So it wasn’t a 30 second floating cross. In fact, if you time it out, the cross doesn’t really become apparent until around 5 seconds in and his head covers it around 15 seconds in. Check out the ad:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xn7uSHtkuA

    Also, the guy talks about celebrating the birth of Christ in the ad. If the cross was intentionally placed there is it really out of place? It’s not as if he was trying to hide his faith here or at any other time in the campaign.

    Trust me, I’m not a big Huckabee fan, but I see no problems with his ad. And I don’t think it’s appropriate to compare one ad to another. This is not a question of equivalency. It’s a question of hypocrisy, and Paul is clearly guilty of it in this case.

  5. josh Says:

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    - Declaration of Independence

  6. TheOneLaw Says:

    There is a significant difference between religious spin and messianic political ambitions of an oxymoron.

  7. Coulro DeSouth Says:

    “the ad makes Paul look hypocritical”

    I don’t see the hypocrisy. Stating that human rights are “God-given” doesn’t equate to putting a cross in a political ad (I actually don’t care that Huckabee did so.)

    During the Fox News interview, he was asked about the ad. He said he hadn’t thought about it. It was described to him, and he responded with the Lewis quote, and qualified his statement with “I don’t know if that’s a fair assessment or not, but you wonder about using a cross, like he is the only Christian.”

  8. Louis Says:

    Saying “God-given freedom” is a reminder to people that their rights are not granted to them by the government. This is an important part of libertarianism, and has been for a long time. Many people refer incorrectly to “Constitutional rights.” The Constitution did not give people any rights. The founders were specific in defining human rights as “endowed to them by their creator.” The Constitution was intended to create a government to PROTECT the rights given to people by GOD. There is no hypocrisy here. Let’s talk about Huckabee saying that he would slit his wrists if he had a bunch of money and was low in the polls. How about his saying that the birds he shot were not Huckabee supporters. These are not funny jokes, and definitely not coming from a self-described “ordained minister.” Color me appalled.

  9. badmedia Says:

    The Declartion of Independence
    IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
    The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

    When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

  10. Jason Says:

    Here is the problem with the “cross”. It was obvious. If Huckabee didn’t review the commercial, then it was a serious lack of judgement on his part. He obviously didn’t think it was a problem or he would have taken it out. Huckabee then went on to deny it saying as you just said that it was “a bookshelf”. To deny the “cross” in his ad is to call yourself naive.

    The fact that the Ron Paul ad say “God-given rights” is from the Declaration of Independence which is not specific to any religion. I’m tired of people like Huckabee trying to shove their form of Christianity down my throat. Our nation is built upon the shoulders of people of many faiths. To push Christianity is divisive. Ron Paul’s message is much more uniting in my opinion.

  11. badmedia Says:

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

    Forgot that part. I think the ad was trying to give this kind of a message, not a religious one. It is making the distinction that rights are not given by government. That government gets it’s rights, purpose and duty from the people.

  12. xtrabiggg Says:

    Your attempt to morally equate Ron Paul’s direct 3-word quote from the Declaration of Independence with Mike Huckabee’s commercial-long pandering to Evangelical Christians is ludicrous! The whole THEME of Huckabee’s commerical was an attempt to ‘softly’ push a ‘Christians First’ agenda, while Ron Paul merely mentions a phrase that is neither Christian specifically, nor is advocating a specific religion in the document quoted from. If you want to attack the ad, you’ll need more basis in fact for your argument.

    Of course, if you really want to justify ANY position, you can see shapes in clouds any day. That doesn’t mean there is evidence other than your opinion that they are really there.

    xtrabiggg
    +++++++++++++++

  13. Mark Says:

    In the spectrum of religion in politics, Ron Paul’s hypocrisy is tantamount to the “In God We Trust” on the front of our penny.

    If you don’t think it’s appropriate to compare one ad to another (as above), why did you write the post?

  14. AB Says:

    Apples vs. oranges, bub.

    Ever done a commercial? There are no accidents.
    All is planned, shot and previewed before release.

    You’re not a critical thinker.

    You’re just critical of Paul.

  15. Doug Bayless Says:

    Justin,

    Here’s the deal. Paul gets broadsided with a description about Huckabee’s prominent religious ads and he kneejerks with an astute observation in which he finally (if unwisely, granted) calls a spade a spade. Huckabee, Romney, all these overtly “Christian” politicians make a bigger deal of their faith than some pols *and yet their platforms are decidedly un-Christian in many respects*.

    I have no problem with Paul mentioning that he believes in “God”-given rights and then advocating peace, love, liberty, dialog, and respect (things most people understand the Judeo-Christian God to promote).

    As a Mormon, on the other hand, I do have a huge problem with Romney (who seems to be a pretty decent guy, great father, etc.) advocating Imperial takeover of the entire middle east because of overblown and misconstrued fearmongering about Islamo-fascism — as if in every Muslim country that we choose to occupy that every innocent civilian killed by stray bombings, mine fields, or security checkpoints is surely some type of Islamo-fascist-religious-cult-terrorist.

    Also Romney, Huckabee, the rest, talk about God-given rights in our own country and then vote for the Patriot act, limiting civil liberties (‘in this time of [perpetual, self-propelling] war, etc.

    Paul respects the flag and the God that he worships. IMHO, he does not tend to prostitute what they stand for. The Sinclair quote (or whoever actually said that) is a profoundly wry observation of what [more generally] does indeed occur in politics, however.

  16. mw Says:

    Justin,
    I think you completely missed the intent of that line in Ron Paul’s ad. The line is not pandering to the Religious right, except as a side effect. As BadMedia and Raymond point out in their comments, It is a direct appeal to a core concept in libertarian thought, which was explicitly stated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, co-signed by the founders and architects of our government and constitution.

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

    There is no difference between this line in the Declaration of Independence and the ad’s less elegant reference to “God-given rights.”

    I see no hypocrisy in that statement. The only way any Republican candidate ever has or ever will get elected President is to garner votes by appealing to both the evangelical and libertarian (using Ryan Sager’s “Elephant in the Room” labels) factions in the GOP. This is a simple fact of political reality. This phrasing speaks to both factions. Its brilliant.

  17. eric Says:

    There is nothing wrong with stating that he will protect our “God given freedom”.

    What is wrong with this statement? I don’t know what to think about God as a religious deity. But, if you think of God as the word for Creation, then it appeals to everyone. Whether it be the Big Bang Theory, Christianity, or the Muslim view of God, it is all the same idea. The word God is synonymous with “Begining”.

    Why try to divide people, why alienate large populations of people, why focus on such mundane differences. Start viewing the World from a different mentality, and you will be much better off then trying to set up barriers.

    American culture is downward spiraling more and more each day. Get a grip, some empathy, and think for yourself.

  18. Chris Says:

    You’re a complete moron.

    As others have stated we are given our rights and freedom because our creator “god” has bestowed that right upon us.

    You will hear morons say all the time that the government or the constitution gives us our rights. That is wrong, we are given these freedoms simply because we are human.

    There is nothing hypocritical at all about what Ron Paul said so please admit you are an imbecile.

  19. Rob Says:

    Oh come on Justin… yes please, let’s be CLEAR about the Huck ad.

    It was crafted and refined under the direction of Ed Rollins, who you noted was one of the best spin-doctors in the game, if not THE best in your post two weeks ago.

    http://donklephant.com/2007/12/14/ed-rollins-to-run-huckabees-campaign/

    Are you going to honestly try to tell me that it wasn’t a “Hey look at me, I’m the only REAL christian in the race!” ad? Or that even if it came off that way, it was merely coincidental? Nevermind the master spin-doctor behind the curtain…

    Now does RP’s ad come off remotely similar? It’s like saying that the Chicago River is as bad as nasty as the Nile, because there’s some garbage in it. Sure, I wouldn’t want to drink from the river, but the majority of the population regularly shits it in the Nile. I know which one I’d prefer to swim across.

    You made an interesting point, but calling him hypocritical for that is beyond reaching.

  20. gulmargha Says:

    He’s kept to the same message from the Declaration of Independence throughout the campaign.

    One minute into this NH debate clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsMEMQf64gU

    Ron Paul, “we get our rights *from our Creator* as individuals

  21. Owen Adams Says:

    That’s an easy one. The question is one of sincerity. If most politicians like the ones we have been electing, are not really Christians at all, then they are demagogues. Since, a man is only able to be sure about his spiritual condition, he can be sincere about his own religious convictions. Ron Paul life-long consistency in living in accordance with principles of liberty makes me believe that he is the most sincere candidate to run for President in my lifetime (and that is almost 60 years).

    Second, as alluded to by another reader, God-given rights is simply stating that Ron Paul is dedicated to principle that our rights as human beings are from and not from government. Furthermore, should a government attempt to abridge our rights, it does so in defiance of God. For me, the handwriting is already on the wall, it is change now and continue upon a path of national destruction. Join the Ron Paul Revolution or be prepared to be shocked what the neocons have planned for your future.

  22. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    I find it so funny when Ron Paul talks about fascism coming to this country. The fact is, that all of the fascists who are already here endorse Ron Paul for president! Including Stormfront, the largest neo-nazi organization in North America, and other unsavory characters like Klansman David Duke.

  23. Rob Says:

    Duh ya I hurd liek Hitler believed 1+1=2 so all scientists are liek nazis or sumfin… durrrr….

    This concludes another segment of “Gems by Jimmy”, thanks for listening.

  24. Paul Says:

    That’s so stupid. First of all, when Ron Paul was asked about the ad he had not ever seen it before. He really just didn’t know what he was commenting about. Second of all, if you were to ask him about it[the commercial] he would stand up for what is said here…I seriously doubt that he would be scrambling to make up an excuse for what was said. Huck’s team was running scared, no backbone,….uh…uh…it’s a window payne…no, uh…uh…it’s a bookshelf. Being such a good ol’ boy, you would have thought Huck might have said, ” well, no, it’s not really a cross, but our Lord and Savior managed to get his message in anyway.”

    Here’s a 1988 quote from Huck at the National Pastors’ Conference, explaining what drew him to politics:

    “I didn’t get into politics because I thought government had a better answer. I got into politics because I knew government didn’t have the real answers, that the real answers lie in accepting Jesus Christ into our lives. I hope we answer the alarm clock and take this nation back for Christ.”

    That’s scary.

    Ron Paul believes in God. So that is why he would consider Freedom a God given right.
    It just wasn’t “slipped in”. It’s what he believes and I can respect him for that. Huck has a whole other angle.

    (by the way…I’m athiest)

    and one last thing…I’d like to know when the last time any of the other candidates read a classic novel. Can you imagine? Rudy quoting Sinclair Lewis? That would never happen. Funny thought though.

  25. Oscar DeGrouch Says:

    Even as a Christian, I’d rather see a flying flag in an ad than a floating cross.

  26. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    White supremicist ideology is morally equivalent to simple mathematics?

    Don’t you think it is at least noteworthy, that white supremacists, anti-semites and 9/11 truthers, nearly without exception, would choose Ron Paul to represent them? What is it about Ron Paul that attracts such Riff-Raff en masse, more than any other candidate in the race? Scientific minds would want to know.

  27. Doug Bayless Says:

    Jimmy,

    C’mon be fair about this. All the candidates are going to attract their share of “riff-raff”. The Paul campaign has been completely clear about the fact that they strongly oppose the racist ideologies of neo-nazis and white supremacists. They even highlighted the fact that they were glad to take money *away from* such efforts and put it to better use (in the case of the one controversial $500 donation).

    You might not agree with Paul on the issues he actually does espouse and that’s your right. I applaud your willingness to be part of the discussion. But please stick to the facts and avoid repeating the false slanders of others. Make note, for instance, of the official retraction from the New York Times yesterday (after an article that insinuated Paul consorts with racist groups). There was no substance to any of the old accusations and, further, they were demonstrably false when finally investigated (as one would have expected the NYT to do before going to press . . .).

    Despite all the slanderous hype, Paul has an extremely broad coalition of very good (read: non-fascist, liberty-loving, anti-racist, etc.) people across the country. I would certainly take exception to your claim that the few people you mention represent any “notable” size amongst his diverse supporters. Such propaganda reminds me of Soviet bloc (or Talibani or Chinese) “news” designed to paint all Americans with a broad-brush as hate-filled lunatics after a mall shooting or some other such tragedy.

    The fact of the matter is that Paul’s support is extremely wide across this diverse nation. You’re surely going to find some wackos in a group that large. But that doesn’t mean you have to reduce yourself to their level.

  28. Gene Says:

    Wow Justin – add Atheist to your lousy political pundit resume? Or is that Statist – ‘our rights come from government.’

  29. Rob Says:

    Oh let me guess, he’s a white supremacist because a known white supremacist would vote for him? Obfuscation must be your favorite hobby Jimmy.

    By that logic, Hillary Clinton is a car bombing animal rights terrorist, because PETA will vote for her when she wins the Dem primaries. Yeah…

    Of course if you were just asking my opinion as to what resonates with the Riff-Raff, I imagine it’s the same thing that resonates with most Paul supporters, namely LIMITED GOVERNMENT and INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES.

    Of course that means that anyone that’s not on-board with Putin’s style of governance is obviously a white supremacist by your logic.

    Please spare me the banality of your comments.

  30. Darren D. Says:

    Hey Jimmy,

    Did they parole you at Town Hall? Get out of here with your white supremacist / racist crap. He has clearly stated on MANY occasions that he has no interest in any of these groups and does not support their message in any way. Is this your way of acknowleding Dr. Paul as the front runner. You are now full time going to all blogs spreading your hate.
    Go back to Town Hall…you will find no support here. I’m sorry Fred Thompson is not doing well.

    Justin,

    If Dr. Paul said the Pledge of Alligence in an ad would that be hypocrisy?

  31. Randy Says:

    I’m telling you, the level of nitpicking involved in Paul’s campaign despite everyone’s assertion that he has ‘no chance’ is astounding. It’s funny that the guy’s so square that you feel like you need to take a magnifying glass to everything he does.

  32. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    I never said he was a white supremecist. I just said I thought it was funny!

    You could say that he enables white supremicism, anti-semetism, and 9/11 conspiracy theorists to fester, under the guise of “individual liberty.” He does not confront them, yet continues to pander to them on the Alex Jones radio show, accepts their donations, saying they have a “right to free speech” and all that jazz, when he could – if he so chose – to reject their support as protest, giving back said donations, boycot the nutters’ Politburo and vow to use the power of his presidency to stamp out white supremicism and anti-semitism. But of course, he doesn’t do that – that would infringe on peoples liberty, or some crap.

    If fascism comes to this country, it will not be wrapped in a flag, carrying a cross. It will grow from a grass-roots populist movement only when those in power chose to do nothing, avoiding confrontation and therefore enabling the cancer to grow. Of all the candidates in the field, Ron Paul is the most likely to sit back while the tumor metasticizes.

    Ron Paul is not a white supremecist, but the white supremecists are still inspired by everyhing else he stands for – His presidency will boost their moralle, their ranks will therefore grow, and President Paul will continue to pander to them if it is politically expedient for him, and do nothing to block the rise in fascism in this country, citing “individual liberty” as his raison d’etre.

  33. Rob Says:

    Tinfoil hats for sale!!!

    lol, I take it back Jimmy please continue, you brighten my day :)

  34. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    Buy the tinfoil hats at Alex Jones’ http://www.infowars.com, one of Ron Paul’s favorite hangouts. You can buy books on how the Mossad blew up the twin towers, or how the Bilderbergs are trying to create a global government under our noses (complete with drugging the water supply – and mind-control technology), and donate to Ron Paul’s campaign all in one website!

  35. ADR Says:

    “protecting our God-given freedom.” = “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…”

    Nice play on freedom = slavery there jimmy, thankfully most people will be inteligent enough to see through it.

  36. Rob Says:

    And you can go to Newsmax where you can find out all about Mitt Romney, buy pheremones (your dating secret weapon), put money in investments that make 50% + returns with no losing years, have your high blood pressure cured in 3 minutes and buy a stock that triples every month for six months.

    But what does any of that have to do with the price of tea in China?

  37. Darren D. Says:

    Jimmy,

    Let met illuminate you with some extra wattage.

    These groups that “flock” to Dr. Paul also shop at Wal-mart. Sam Walton’s people do nothing about it. They do not give back their money. They even encourage them by advertising sale prices. Are they fostering hate towards African Americans or Jews?

    NO – they are just offering a product that appeals to EVERYONE.

    Liberty appeals to all groups.
    Privacy appeals to all groups.
    Lower or No taxes appeals to most groups.

    Whether I dislike what a particular group stands for or not they have freedom of speech and the right to persue any religion they want.

    Are you to Dhim to understand this?

    What I am surprised about is that anyone would be blogging against someone who is for liberty, privacy, and property rights.

  38. Pliny Says:

    Ron Paul has been talking about “God given freedom” throughout his campaign and it is much different than Huckabee’s ads which purport him to be the religious candidate for no reason other than to get religious people to line up behind him. Ron Paul emphasizes that our liberty is “God given” for one reason and its a legitimate political reason: Liberty doesn’t come from government, it is something that we have inherently (and traditionally anything inherent is considered to be God given). Keep working hard to find some way to complain about Paul though. I doubt you’ll ever come up with a legitimate issue though.

  39. Dr. John Hamilton Says:

    1st off, I’m not much of a Paul supporter, though I’m slowly being swayed by doing further research into his career and ideas. The author doesn’t understand why that 1 second word was included in the commercial. Basic rights decided upon at the beginning of this country were determined to be GOD-GIVEN, rather than GOVERNMENT-PERMITTED. This is a critically important fact. The federal government should NOT have the ability to determine if our life and liberty are subject to their whims. I don’t see this commercial in ANY way trying to push a “Christian” Ron Paul. All I see is a very brief reminder that liberty and life are intangible freedoms that we need to FIGHT to hold on to in this day age, just as so many before us have.

  40. Jeremy Says:

    I’m admit right now that I am not religious. However I strongly believe in the right of others to practice their faith as long as that practice doesn’t condone violence or infringe on the rights of others.

    I’m glad Ron Paul is religious. It’s shrewd and quite frankly necessary for him to court the Christian base of the Republican party. In order for Ron Paul to have a fighting chance he needs to pull voters from every direction. Ignoring the evangelical/Christian bloc of the Republican party is in effect ignoring two-thirds of the party, something he can ill-afford to do.

    However, since I’m an agnostic leaning atheist I will be watching Ron Paul very closely regarding my rights to practice my faith, which is no faith. To each his own as far as I am concerned.

    One last note. The way that Ron Paul speaks of religion seems normal. The way the rest of the Republican party uses religion seems contrived and scary. I don’t believe Ron Paul practice his faith in a medieval Crusader fashion but the rest of the Republican party acts like it’s ready for the Wrath and it welcomes it. We should be working to make sure this fruitloop
    brand of religion doesn’t take any further hold of our country than it already has. Religion yes! Holy Roller Millenarianism no!

  41. Paul Says:

    Jimmy says: “What is it about Ron Paul that attracts such Riff-Raff en masse, more than any other candidate in the race? Scientific minds would want to know.”

    Answer: Freedom

    Jimmy I’ve seen your posts a lot on here and it’s very rare that it’s a positive comment. You seem ok with the negativity. In fact it seems that negativity is your M.O. I haven’t ever met you, but do consider you to be riff-raff. It’s all perspective.
    Freedom for all, or none.

  42. Jim S Says:

    Paul,

    Ron Paul does not believe in freedom for all. Why do his supporters insist on promoting this myth? He is perfectly happy to allow states to limit the rights of individuals if the state decides that it is upholding “moral standards” in doing so. The federal government is not the only entity capable of limiting individual freedoms in spite of what Ron Paul and his supporters claim.

  43. Jeremy Says:

    “Ron Paul does not believe in freedom for all.”

    Who does Jim S? The corporate bought-off Democrats or the corporate bought-off Republicans? How is it that America spoke its voice last November giving the Democrats a mandate to hold Bush accountable yet what do we got? We got Democrats biding their time, waiting for the dismal tenure of the Bush administration to come to an end so they can gain power.

    Why instead didn’t they act on the conviction of the overwhelming majority of Americans that said no to this war, no to spying, no to torture, no to corporate greed? Again, I voted for the Democrats do do this. What have they done since gaining both houses? They’ve held lots of meetings and lots of “congressional hearings.” What came of these sham hearings? Nothing! Every person that was committing flagrant crimes in the Bush administration walked scot-free. Why? because the Democrats aren’t concerned with holding Bush accountable. Sure! sure! You will see Democrats in spades speak tough and scold Bush’s policies and illegal/unconstitutional laws but they do nothing. They’ve done zilch! In fact they’ve went out of their way to reach across the aisle and co-sponsor unconstitutional legislation and for all the hoopla the Democrats raise over the Iraq war they essentially agree with Bush’s policy. An unjust occupation
    of a country based on a pack of lies. The Dems don’t argue that we should get out of that country for good they instead argue about how to “better manage” it.

    Democrats are on record supporting the idea that America should stay in Iraq for at least another decade. I say no more. No more lies, no more election time rhetoric. The time for that is past, as in the past November or do you remember? Dems ran on change and what do we got? Bush still running the show and Dems making “deals” with him.

    Bullshyt! Enough is enough. I’ll vote for a Republican just to spite this spineless congress. They had their chance. They’ve showed their true colors. Ron Paul!

  44. Logan Flatt Says:

    Above, Jimmy the Dhimmi stated, “But of course, he doesn’t do that – that would infringe on peoples (sic) liberty, or some crap.”

    That is either the scariest or the stupidest statement of this entire discussion here tonight.

    Mr. Jimmy, you equated the American people’s liberty with “some crap.” ALL Americans – yes, even anti-Semitics and racists — have their God-given right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Just because you and I disagree with anti-Semitics and racists doesn’t mean that they should not be able to hold and espouse their beliefs, not be able to associate and protest, and not be able to campaign and vote for their freely-chosen representatives. They have that fundamental right, as ugly and disgusting as it may be to you and me. And, we should all struggle to protect their rights because, one day, those same rights could be taken away from you and me too if we just sit idly by and allow it to happen. Extremists in both right and left wings — (cough) Mr. Huckabee and Ms. Clinton (cough) — would love to take away some of our rights that are inconvenient to them and their followers if we let ‘em.

    For you to suggest that the liberties of those Americans you disagree with are “some crap” is the height of both ignorance and arrogance. I suggest you seek enlightenment in any way you can find it. Might I also suggest adding a dose of humility for good measure?

    Logan.

  45. Jim S Says:

    Jeremy, do you even begin to understand how Congress works? The Democrats only hold 51 seats counting their hawks. It takes 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, which the Republicans have threatened 27 times in the past year on a variety of issues. Don’t underestimate the blind loyalty they show him when it comes to actual votes. Then there’s the Bush veto that would follow. They “haven’t acted” because they can do math and understand the results before bothering with the vote.

    And as for who does believe in freedom for all, it is a constant refrain of the Paulistas that Congressman Paul does. Constant. And untrue.

  46. Jim S Says:

    But, Darren. Ron Paul doesn’t believe in liberty. He certainly doesn’t believe in privacy. He just thinks it’s the purview of the states to stifle them instead of having the federal government do it. Get it right, for heaven’s sake!

  47. Jeremy Says:

    “Jeremy, do you even begin to understand how Congress works?”

    Kim, I heard the lame excuse about the non-working majority before. Save it! Get some principles and integrity. If the president insists on vetoing everything congress tries to pass then congress should veto everything the president tries to pass. The congress should begin an impeachment hearing last year. Yeah, I know what your saying to yourself. But the impeachment hearings would be a big waste of time and it wouldn’t lead to the impeachment of Bush so what’s the point. Again. Get some integrity. If Bush insists on destroying our country then perhaps our government should stop until law and order is re-established in this country instead of allowing der fuhrer to conduct his facist fantasies on the world and our country.

  48. dan Says:

    There is no difference between this line in the Declaration of Independence and the ad’s less elegant reference to “God-given rights.”

    ha. oh yes there is.

    and it is this: “Creator” does not necessarily mean “God”.

    you will most likely whine about this being a “technicality”. however, as already opened the door for that with the definitive statement of “*no* difference”, a technicality is most certainly relevant.

    also, considering there is no god, you’re all retarded. :)

  49. Elisabetta Says:

    “Religiousity” or lack thereof is in the eyes of the beholder.
    Justin you made an excellent point.

    The same people that harped on Huckabee for something that occurred naturally in the video shot, are now defending to the tenth degree Ron Paul’s choice words.

    Personally, I don’t have a problem with any mention of God, except for exploitative reasons.
    However, for those that use a scale for one, and another for their own pet candidate, the word that comes to mind is hypocrites.

    To Dan’s last comment:
    “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” (Pslam14:1; Psalm 53:1)

  50. Elisabetta Says:

    Doug B. Wrote:
    “The Paul campaign has been completely clear about the fact that they strongly oppose the racist ideologies of neo-nazis and white supremacists…. they highlighted the fact that they were glad to take money *away from* such efforts and put it to better use (in the case of the one controversial $500 donation).”

    I can’t stop laughing. That’s a suggestive construct.

    For argument’s sake, let’s indulge your fancy and imagine any of the other candidates offered monetary support from the Mafia, drug cartels. KKK or AlQuaeda, etc. Would you look at it the same way?

    Besides, do you think KKK afficionados, or any subversive grouping likes to be indiscriminately generous with their cash..because?

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: