The Five Most Important Things You Need to Know about Ron Paul

#1 Paul will not be the Republican nominee. Here’s why. First, nearly 75% of Republicans would vote for any other candidate than Paul. Paul would lose to any one of the Republican candidates. Secondly, a majority of Paul’s support comes from independents who will not be able to vote in most Republican primaries; in both Iowa and New Hampshire, Democrats and independents crossed over to vote in the Republican primaries, but most of the remaining primaries will be for Republicans only, so that statistically, Paul will not be able collect enough delegates to win the Republican nomination.

#2 Paul holds some views that are very important to Republicans, such as limited government, spending cuts, and a balanced budget. On the other hand, he also holds some views on foreign policy which diametrically disagree with all the other Republican candidates, and with the entire Republican Party. Unfortunately, he would have an extremely difficult struggle getting through Congress his agenda that Republicans like, while on the other hand, he would enact all his foreign policy that Republicans all view as dangerous for our country on day one of his presidency, with the stroke of a pen.

#3 Paul lacks leadership ability. I prove this in three points: First, in his 20+ years in Congress, he has introduced hundreds of bills, but only one ever passed—an inconsequential bill to sell a government building in Texas. He has forged few or no alliances with his colleagues in the House; his colleagues consider him fringe, more so than any other member of Congress. Secondly, for years, he edited a newsletter which contained articles written in the first person which were extremely racist; he claims not to know anything about them, but this only betrays a lack of leadership—if he doesn’t even know what’s being printed in his own newsletter, how could he manage the State Department or the Pentagon? Thirdly, currently, Paul’s supporters are invasively protesting the campaign events of other Republicans. This is probably the first time ever that one Republican’s supporters have ever disrupted another Republican’s campaign events. If Paul cannot control his own supporters, how will he lead the nation and the world?

#4 Paul is not “pro-life” in the same way that other Republicans are pro-life. He is pro-life only in the way that Obama is pro-life: abortion is a bad thing, but the federal government does not have a role to protect unborn life. One might say that Paul is “pro-choice;” he thinks that states should choose whether or not abortion should be legal or illegal. More disturbingly, in one of his own campaign ads, Paul discovered a post-abortive baby that was still alive, but struggling for breath. What did Paul do? By his own testimony, he did nothing but walk out of the room. I know what I would do if I found a baby discarded in a bucket, struggling for breath. I’d go absolutely postal in trying to save the baby. But this man who touts his record of delivering thousands of babies, simply walked out of the room, and then is so callous as to tell the story in a campaign ad that is supposed to prove how pro-life he is. Here’s the link to his ad: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DMkAsLPrnJGc&h=QAQEUTJaoAQF9Xd9qUByOdCdvHCH7UsjRUHihogU1Vf843A

#5 Paul does not understand radical Islam. He thinks that it is our own American policy and actions that provoke Islamic terrorism. To refute this naive and foolish notion, one need only ask, “What did the 10 million Buddhists do to deserve being killed by Islamic radicals over the centuries?” Indeed, why do Islamic radicals persecute Copts and burn their churches, and destroy their livelihood in our own era? Or, why did Islamic radicals commit genocide against Orthodox Christians in Turkey at the beginning of the 20th century? Hindus claim that Islamic radicals have killed 60 million Hindus over the centuries. Look at how eagerly the Taliban destroyed the giant Buddhas in Afghanistan in the 90s, not to mention persecuting and executing the Buddhist monks in the same period. And go back to how they violently took over the whole of North Africa in the seventh and eighth centuries from Christians who gave them no resistance. Amazingly, the Christian Crusades, which were merely a response to the violent takeover of Christian lands by radical Islam, are condemned ad infinitum and always painted in the worst possible light, while naive people like Ron Paul and his supporters keep saying that Islam is a religion of peace. I might concede the argument that mainstream Islam is a peaceful religion for the sake of discussion, but there is a radical Islam that does radical things like strapping bombs to their own Islamic women with Down ’s syndrome to blow up unarmed civilians at a bus depot, or to blow up their own little children in their own schools. Such people would not hesitate to detonate a nuclear device right over the Paul homestead in Texas, if they were able to do so. The notion of negotiating with such people fails to understand that their primary goal is to make us dead.

Ron Paul is the quintessential RINO.

For more analysis:

The picture at the top is Ron Paul happily posing with KKK Grand Dragon Don Black from whom he has accepted significant donations.