1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Nearing a decision on Iran

Martin34 Wrote: Feb 02, 2012 11:59 PM
Ron Paul does not deny disasters that "might happen" if Iran makes nuclear weapons. But we have a rule of law to obey to not be guilty (as George W. Bush was) of sedition by using America's military without a constitutional declaration of war by congress. YOU MUST OBEY constitutional law! That's the point. Say no to liberal WARFARE programs: get out of the war entanglements we are in. If Israel views Iran's nuclear program as a threat, they may attack - with the result likely an Iran regime keeping power for 15 to 50 more years. Their decision may be fair for them. The test is war if NECESSARY, not based on some probability of attack or disaster. That's what "home of the brave" means, valiantly defend constitutional LIBERTY and LAW!!!
In response to:

Ron Paul, Reagan, and Republican Youth

Martin34 Wrote: Jan 03, 2012 1:17 AM
The most responsible choice in accord with our nation's founding principles is Ron Paul: to roll back liberal WARFARE programs as well as liberal welfare programs, to lessen Sate Department entanglements as well as social security entitlements. The GOP has played on our fears with these nation building wars - I would feel MUCH different if W Bush had formalized a request for a declaration of war, punched the Taliban government out of Afghanistan, then left within eight months: job done, message received, and our fist retracts to readiness again. Constitutional obedience: it's great for our national security! Some conservatives are whining because a real Constitutionalist is in the race for GOP nominee: http://altavistayahoo.blogspot.com/2
In response to:

Why 80% Reject Paul and Romney

Martin34 Wrote: Jan 03, 2012 12:42 AM
Bizarre: 80 percent when considering each separately? No matter, it would be better to focus on our need for a sensible foreign policy as well as fiscal responsibility: to dispose of both liberal WARFARE programs and liberal welfare programs, scale back State Department entanglements as well as social security entitlements. It seems McCullough is one of the small-c conservatives who loves those liberal WARFARE programs, and doesn't like facing a true Jeffersonian Constitutionalist: Ron Paul. Some conservatives are whining because a real Constitutionalist is in the race for GOP nominee. They may be feeling that "when dad gets home" feeling of kids misbehaving: http://altavistayahoo.blogspot.com/2011/12/when-dad-gets-home.html
In response to:

Ron Paul is Dangerous

Martin34 Wrote: Dec 30, 2011 1:37 AM
Prediction: Obama will preempt a GOP bid for the opportunity of going to war with Iran in 2013 in order to save his own hide for a second election - by going to war with Iran in the late spring or early summer of 2012, as Romney fails and drops out, Jeb Bush jumps in to "unite the party" and the GOP insiders pull the plug on their Constitutional conscience, the supporters of Ron Paul. You heard it here first. REMEMBER - you heard it here first.
In response to:

Ron Paul is Dangerous

Martin34 Wrote: Dec 30, 2011 1:29 AM
Barber must have the sweetest smack ever. I wonder what he'd sell it for, if I wanted some - and it's only Ron Paul who would love us in the free market transaction of a sale.
In response to:

Virginia Must Change Its Election System

Martin34 Wrote: Dec 29, 2011 3:42 AM
In unfair Virginia, Paul thrives from the force of grass roots intensity. Leadership, it's great for a political party.
In response to:

Virginia Must Change Its Election System

Martin34 Wrote: Dec 29, 2011 3:40 AM
Split infinitives and run ons - I don't understand: Government run health care is a mess, ask anyone dependent on the veterans administration for care.
The Heritage Foundation has vast resources for research, but could not obtain the actual interview footage of the supposed CNN walk out by Ron Paul? They repeated garbage like that? It was a stunt by the Heritage Foundation playing the role of some bastardized rag of misfit wanna-be journalists! The Heritage Foundation has slipped on the credibility front, and an apology is appropriate.
The Heritage Foundation has vast resources for research, but could not obtain the actual interview footage of the supposed CNN walk out by Ron Paul? They repeated garbage like that? It was a stunt by the Heritage Foundation playing the role of some bastardized rag of misfit wanna-be journalists! The Heritage Foundation has slipped on the credibility front, and an apology is appropriate.
The Heritage Foundation has vast resources for research, but could not obtain the actual interview footage of the supposed CNN walk out by Ron Paul? They repeated garbage like that? It was a stunt by the Heritage Foundation playing the role of some bastardized rag of misfit wanna-be journalists! The Heritage Foundation has slipped on the credibility front, and an apology is appropriate.
1 - 10 Next