Bomb
Well. Last night aired the CNN/YouTube debate for the Republican candidates, and while it was really a lot of fun to watch, it was also a bit disheartening. Illegal immigration was by far the most galvanic issue for the candidates, but it was dreadful difficult to comprehend why (although it made me significantly less interested in Huckabee than i might otherwise have been.)
(...Actually, i'm pretty sure it was the oily-smooth, pathos-affected, pulpit-preacheresque style of oration that made me grind my teeth and squint a little whenever Huckabee'd talk...)
The debate convinced me that Thompson is less uninteresting than i'd given him credit for, that Giuliani and Romney are just more demigogues, that McCain is a semi-animated manequin stimulated to talk by what he intuits people in the audience want to hear, and that Senor Paul has been hammering for over twenty years on every issue brought up worth any mention.
Dr. Paul, as usual, got very little attention, although the bits he did get in edgewise were worth more attention than they got. Besides Paul, not one candidate said anything at all about ever bringing the troops home. It was not a topic that they'd even entertain, interestingly-- and it seems that's the case because we're "winning the war." Fantastical!
Let's see: we're going to fund the rebuilding of America's infrastructure, hire more police to stave off crime in our inner-cities, build a fence across the whole of the southern border of the U.S., and beef up our Border Patrol-- all whilst cutting taxes and jettisoning somewhere in the vicinity of a trillion bones a year (of not-yet-existent money) into keeping our military poised everywhere in the world except here. That sounds like a really fine idea. Historically, spreading a nation's resources-- manpower and currency-- as thinly as possible, and on investments that have no possibility of showing a return is what makes a nation solid and morally superior.
In the event that this doesn't ring true, Paul's grassroots folks have organized another "money bomb" fundraiser for Nov. 30 that i'd encourage you to take part in. He may well pass Giuliani in fundraising by this time tomorrow. Whether or not he'll get the Republican nod is something entirely different (he doesn't fit onto a neo-conservative stage of interlocutors at all), but it'll definitely make those silly Repubs listen. And for my part, it'll be worth the hundred little dollars to say i voted for what i believe in.
https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/
(...Actually, i'm pretty sure it was the oily-smooth, pathos-affected, pulpit-preacheresque style of oration that made me grind my teeth and squint a little whenever Huckabee'd talk...)
The debate convinced me that Thompson is less uninteresting than i'd given him credit for, that Giuliani and Romney are just more demigogues, that McCain is a semi-animated manequin stimulated to talk by what he intuits people in the audience want to hear, and that Senor Paul has been hammering for over twenty years on every issue brought up worth any mention.
Dr. Paul, as usual, got very little attention, although the bits he did get in edgewise were worth more attention than they got. Besides Paul, not one candidate said anything at all about ever bringing the troops home. It was not a topic that they'd even entertain, interestingly-- and it seems that's the case because we're "winning the war." Fantastical!
Let's see: we're going to fund the rebuilding of America's infrastructure, hire more police to stave off crime in our inner-cities, build a fence across the whole of the southern border of the U.S., and beef up our Border Patrol-- all whilst cutting taxes and jettisoning somewhere in the vicinity of a trillion bones a year (of not-yet-existent money) into keeping our military poised everywhere in the world except here. That sounds like a really fine idea. Historically, spreading a nation's resources-- manpower and currency-- as thinly as possible, and on investments that have no possibility of showing a return is what makes a nation solid and morally superior.
In the event that this doesn't ring true, Paul's grassroots folks have organized another "money bomb" fundraiser for Nov. 30 that i'd encourage you to take part in. He may well pass Giuliani in fundraising by this time tomorrow. Whether or not he'll get the Republican nod is something entirely different (he doesn't fit onto a neo-conservative stage of interlocutors at all), but it'll definitely make those silly Repubs listen. And for my part, it'll be worth the hundred little dollars to say i voted for what i believe in.
https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/
posted by c at 10:16 PM
3 Comments:
Hi Cody,
I really love the fact that you are getting behind Dr. No. I agree with your assessment of the debate. Little platform given to Dr. Paul but whenever he spoke, it made a lot of sense. Conservative Christians, however, are encouraged to vote for Huck simply because he is a "Christian" and more than that a Baptist Christian. Dr. Paul's chances of winning from a human perspective (not Christian, of course) is to run as an independent. God ultimately puts presidents in power as Daniel 2:44-45 makes clear. Those of us with discernment know that the public's inability to choose the best candidate (whoever that is) is evidence of God's judgment over a nation. Some see Hilary as the judgment of God, others see Romney as that person.
Any case, appreciate the support for Dr. Paul. Keep up what I consider to be a good work.
Hey Sir Katinga! Very good to hear from you. And it's good to hear you're in favor of government with less "federal" in it. i guess i've lost a lot of confidence that Dr. Paul will get the Republican slot, but i'll definitely vote for him in the primaries. That for me is the most important election anyhow. You must vote in the primaries, and tell everyone you know to vote in the primaries.
Oh hey, Beryl was sworn in as an American citizen yesterday. You should give her a call and congratulate her. She's very excited about it.
Beryl the American. Now there's a thought for you.
Post a Comment
<< Home