Ron Paul Just Digs Himself in Deeper
December 19th, 2007 at 12:36am Mark Noonan
This clip of Paul on Fox - he says the following regarding Huckabee’s “Merry Christmas” ad:
…reminds me of what Sinclair Lewis said, “when fascism comes it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross”. I don’t know if that if a fair assessment or not but you wonder about using a cross like he is the only Christian or implying that subtly.
This is the statement of a man who doesn’t want my vote. This is a blanket insult to all Christians - that we are, somehow, on a track to fascism because we want to say “Merry Christmas” and are unafraid to proclaim our faith in the public square. Its also a stupid statement - stupid from Lewis who originally made it, and stupid for Paul to repeat it: fascism is anethema to Christianity. The two are entirely incompatible. Fascism asserts that the State may claim all - Christianity says that while we must render to Ceasar what is his, we must only render to God what belongs to God.
If there are fascists in the making out there, they are amongst the people who want to silence others with hate crimes laws and speech codes; who demand equality of result rather than of opportunity; who insist that there is a wall of separation between Church and State (actually, lefties, it is the vibrant Church which is the strongest defense against the tyranny of the State). Paul proves himself ever more to be of the rather kook fringe - whatever his good ideas are (and he has some) they are drowned out by his more bizarre beliefs.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Religion, Republicans
56 Comments
1. Aaron | December 19th, 2007 at 12:48 am
Right on, Ron Paul!
This is not about saying “Merry Christmas” - it’s not even about Christianity. It’s about using religion and patriotism as a political tool. Bravo Ron Paul for pulling out that great Sinclair Lewis quote - proving once again he’s probably the only GOP candidate who actually has read a book other than the Bible.
Thank God there are some actual conservatives still out there - instead of the Bible-wielding, science-denying, budget-busting, corporate-shilling, country-invading, flag-waving, lapel-pin-wearing, drama-addicted, insecure fascist wannabes that make up the “movement conservatives” of today.
2. bongoman | December 19th, 2007 at 4:58 am
Aren’t you missing the point about Lewis’ quote?
I don’t think either Lewis or Paul are equating Christianity with Fascism in the slightest. Heck, Ron Paul is a serious Christian as far as I can tell.
Lewis is simply pointing out that tendencies towards authoritarianism and other hallmarks of fascist states, will, in the USA be be done in the name of God. Implicit in such an pronouncement (especially coming from Paul) is that this is a misuse of Christianity and religion.
So no need to fell offended - just a warning to be vigilant about politicians who use religion inappropriately in their grab for power.
Now whether Huckabee is doing that or not is a moot point.
3. Eric T | December 19th, 2007 at 7:07 am
I LIKED Ron, but it sounds as if he is trying to equate the cross with the swastika.
4. plainjane | December 19th, 2007 at 7:40 am
While Democratic candidates for President are discussing solutions for such problems as the Iraq Civil war, massive debt, how to best get Bin Laden, health care for all, affordable college tuition, and global warming Republican candidates debate if Mormons are Christians or was the window in a political ad a message from God. Just when you thought the religious divide within the Repug party could get no wider, you have Republican Congressman Ron Paul insinuating Hucabee just might be the anti-Christ that brings Fascism to the United States.
I believe the genie is out of the bottle and there is no way of corking it. Evangilicals will no longer simply accept Republican lip service. In the past, every election cycle a few on the take such as Robertson and Farwell would rally the Evangelicals with promises their agenda would be heard. They said give us Congress and you will be heard. Then they said give us the Presidency and you will be herd. Then they said give us the Supreme Court and you will be heard. But like so many Republican promises Evangelicals found them to be hollow. Instead of abortions going down, estimates believe they are increasing. Instead of building the American family, the entire Bush government is focused on the Iraqi family. Will Evangilicals still be the Republican’s puppets in 2008?
5. Bigfoot | December 19th, 2007 at 7:55 am
fascism is anethema to Christianity.
If fascism comes to the United States, it will very likely be an anti-Christian fascism that will hypocritically accuse Christians of being fascist. It could start with something like criminalizing any expression of disapproval of homosexuality. If anyone thinks this is far-fetched, this is precisely what’s going on in Canada. (By contrast, I have yet to see any Christians advocating criminalizing speech in favor of homosexuality or gay rights.) Historically, Hitler himself (although nominally Catholic) was viciously anti-Christian, and even blamed Christianity on the Jews.
politicians who use religion inappropriately in their grab for power.
You mean like Clinton hanging out in a church on election night? Or Gore getting donations from Buddhist monks?
6. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 8:33 am
>>>>While Democratic candidates for President are discussing solutions for such problems as the Iraq Civil war, massive debt, how to best get Bin Laden, health care for all, affordable college tuition, and global warming Republican candidates debate if Mormons are Christians or was the window in a political ad a message from God. - plainjane<<<<<<
Yet I remember the pandering quote from the Democratic Muslim candidate:
“We’re going to keep on praising together. I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth. - Barack Obama”
plain,
Your hatred towards Christianity is only matched by your cowardice to confront real problems. I am very interested to see your comments on the NOW thread. How do you fell about the Islam practice of killing women?
Bashing Christianity and Republicans now passes for intellect on the left. The degradation of that party is astonishing and will most certainly result their defeat in ‘08.
7. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 8:40 am
plain,
Maybe you could provide some actual quotes where evangelicals said, “give us the Supreme Court and you will be heard”.
And it would be nice if you had real facts to back up your litany of hate. You asserted that abortions are on the rise, well……….
>>>>The number of abortions nationwide has dropped to their lowest levels since the year following the Supreme Court’s landmark decision Roe v. Wade, according to the latest annual Abortion Surveillance report by the Center for Disease Control. Mon, Nov. 26 2007<<<<<
I grow very tired of your ignorant dishonesty.
8. js | December 19th, 2007 at 11:02 am
Hitler came with German flags and a cross. He absolutely opposed communism and atheism. A catholic priest penned Mein Kampf for Hitler.
The rest is history. Nobody ever said that Christianity cannot be used for something other than good things and salvation. Thats not the same as Christians failing to right what is wrong though.
There are good people in bad religions, and bad people in good religions. What people do are the acts of men, even if they are misguided.
9. Mark Noonan | December 19th, 2007 at 11:09 am
bongo,
Sinclair Lewis was anti-Christian - he wasn’t issuing warnings about how a facsist movement would claim to be working for God - he was saying, quite clearly, that Christians were fascists in the making. For Paul to use such a quote indicates either massive ingorance of just what sort of man Sinclair Lewis was, or an agreement with him - in either case, he’s ever more disqualifying himself in my view for the Presidency.
10. bagni | December 19th, 2007 at 11:16 am
hey
markadigger;
dumb alien question?
are you mad/disgusted at ron paul?
or afraid of ron paul?
i don’t understand?
11. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 11:16 am
Mark,
Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see the paranoid schizophrenic that Ron Paul is. The man is more than a table setting short of a picnic.
It’s hard to believe people even listen to him.
12. Mark Noonan | December 19th, 2007 at 11:18 am
js,
What dregs of anti-Catholic websites have you been trolling? No Catholic priest had anything to do with the writing or publication of “Mein Kampf”.
13. Mark Noonan | December 19th, 2007 at 11:18 am
bagni,
None of those things - I just strongly disagree with him and think he’s unfit to be President of the United States - along with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, etc, etc, etc…
14. Mark Noonan | December 19th, 2007 at 11:20 am
neocon,
He’s a Libertarian dressed up as a Republican - I’ll have nothing to do with him, as far as the Presidency goes.
15. mitche | December 19th, 2007 at 11:36 am
What Sinclair Lewis was refering to was deciet. Those that come “wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross” believe in neither. Rather they use those props to whip up a sense of patriotic and religious nationalisim to exploit the fear the massses have against an amorphious, shape shifting and indefinable “enemy”. In others words, he was refering to Authoritarians whose only real power comes from instilling fear and hatred towards the unknown and perpetuating it at every opportunity. Even if means to create “an enemy” so that they can fight it.
Ron Paul is money raising machine, especially from military families.
Mike Huckabee is Gomer Pyle. We are not electing a pastor in chief and The United States is not some evangelical mega church. Plainjane, Aaron and bongoman are absolutely correct.
As am I!
16. Sunny | December 19th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
It would behoove many conservatives here to actually read the Constitution of the United States and maybe read a little history regarding why our founding fathers drafted this brilliant document as they did. Because of the religious dictates of England, many of the drafters wanted to make sure that each American has the freedom to practice the religion of their choice OR not practice any religion without fearing the government. Why any person running for President of the US should have to explain his religious beliefs is beyond disturbing. What has our country come to that we feel we have the right to invade a person personal beliefs before s/he is an acceptable candidate for President? If you cannot determine what kind of life this person has lived up this point, you probably need to find another candidate to support. It obvious that Mike Huckabee is pandering to the Christian right, that he is using religion as a drawing card for voters. The cross in the back ground (don’t tell me that was a accidental happening) of his ad is a deliberate symbol to pull in the evalgalistic Christians. As a Christian, I do have a problem with using religion to garner votes. I do wonder what Christ would say about such tactics.
17. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Sunny,
Huckabees message was a Christmas message. You do know the origin of Christmas, right? Therefore, wouldn’t it be appropos to have the symbol of Christ in a Christmas message?
There are many moderate Christians, including myself, that comprise the American voting public, not just evangelicals, and I appreciated his message.
18. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
And just an FYI, most of our founding fathers were deeply religious and opened many of their meetings with prayer.
And Christ would ardently support Faith in our public discourse. In fact Christ spoke of God and Faith every day to show others the Truth. Do you not suppose he would support the message of faith in a political campaign?
19. mitche | December 19th, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Neocon:
I agree that it would be appropos to have a cross in a Christmas message. However, if that were the case it would have been prominently displayed with zero chance of ambiguity and Huck wouldn’t be defending himself today by saying it was a bookcase. It looked like a window frame to me. Either way, it makes him look foolish an niave.
Just like Gomer.
20. Sunny | December 19th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
FYI Neocon, many of our founding fathers were not deeply religious. That is why they were so very careful in how they chose every word in the Consititution. If you would like, I can recommend a few good books on our founding fathers and the work they did in drafting the Consitution. Maybe you would get a better picture if you spent some time reading early American history.
21. David.B.Schmidt | December 19th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
To All My Democrat Friends:
Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes For an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2007, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.
To My Republican Friends:
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
22. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
Sunny,
I have read quite a bit about Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, etc. and they ALL had a strong faith.
In fact, Jefferson wrote the following:
In the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote:
>>>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.<<<<
You do know who the Creator is, right?
And you want to believe that he wasn’t deeply religious, even though he believes that our unalienable rights come from God?
Your liberalist revision of history is tedious.
23. Sunny | December 19th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Neocon - so is your naivety - tedious, that is. And as I stated earlier, I am a Christian, so yes, I know that we celebrate Christmas to honor the Christ child’s birth. And yes, I know my Creator is God Almighty. Any other really dumb questions?
24. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
No, just wanting to point out your baseless assertion that our founding fathers were not religious.
In fact, our founding fathers carefully crafted the constitution to avoid religious prosecution that they dealt with in England.
25. mitche | December 19th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Neocon:
Nobody knows who or what was “the creator” or even if that concept is definable in those terms. You have faith that there was. You believe. Period.
There are no emperical facts that can prove one way or another that a benevolent, transcendent entity exists.
When man talks to “god”, it is called praying. If “god” talks back, it is schizophrenia.
Google Julain Jaynes. You might find it enlightening.
26. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
mitche,
If you need empirical data to prove the existence of a Higher Power, than I truly feel sorry for you.
I will point out that there is no empirical data that unequivocally supports man made global warming either. But you do believe in that right?
I will pray for your soul.
27. Kahn | December 19th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
mitche - how about you google “kiss my ass”?
28. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
David,
That was hysterical. Thanks for the laugh.
29. Parker | December 19th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
Good one David… Funny.
30. SteaM | December 19th, 2007 at 2:53 pm
“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.”
I wonder if they carefully chose the word “their” rather than just to say “the” creator. To me, “the” implies that there is one only. But “their” implies that it depends on the person.
31. mitche | December 19th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
I didn’t say I needed any, I just pointed out that there isn’t any.
You can believe anything that you want, especially that which gives you comfort and meaning. you are like most religious people.
For me religion is a buracracy between man and what ever our minds are capable of concieving about a higher power. I don’t need some systemitized format to be spiritual or in touch with (what we call ) “the spirit”. For example Buddahisim makes much more sense to me as an explaination for the universe since it’s tenets are reflective of contemporary sub atomic particle physics. I don’t believe in original sin. I don’t believe in redemption after death. I have studied at great length the nature of language and the history of religion as a concept. The origin of religion comes from magic and superstition and an awareness of death. However it is pointless for me to engage a person such as yourself in these discussions because you clearly are not the least bit courious or skeptical and you pretty much believe what you were told. As most folks. This is not a put down, but rather an observation based on your writtings. This is why any exposure to doubt is the nemisis of religious dogma.
As far as emperical evidence of mans influence on climate change, nice try. I will say that there is more evidence that mankind impacts the enviroment than there is that a “man like” god exists.
32. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
SteaM,
Most likely because the Creator created THEM!
33. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
But thee is no empirical date re: global warming so, according to your need for data, you would have to be skeptical. But I doubt your are.
I also am amused by lefties who feel comfortable qualifying people of faith. I spent the better part of my youth questioning, reading and researching everything from political authority to religious doctrine. I was born into a religious family and actually felt uncomfortable with the teachings of the church for a period of time, until I later realized that the interpretation of the Word comes from man, and therefore, flawed.
I don’t subscribe to many of the hard belief sets of the evangelicals, but I do have a strong belief in God. So you’re assuming that I “do as told”, was quite amusing. As if you, being a liberal, have many independent thoughts that aren’t influenced by socialism and other liberal belief sets.
You do understand the term “projection” right?
34. SteaM | December 19th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Now, take that same sentence and change it to:
“Most likely because their Creator created THEM!”
Does THE and THEIR seem different in any way in that context?
35. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
I also just noticed your “man like” God reference. I should have noted that before my earlier post, because this phrase unequivocally reveals your religious ignorance.
36. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Your point?
It is nonetheless a reference to a Higher power, no?
37. SteaM | December 19th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Yes, and no.
If I say:
Necon, Merry Christmas and may God bless you.
Is that different from:
Neocon, Merry Christmas and may your God bring you blessings.
38. mitche | December 19th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Neocon:
There is emperical data to support human influence on climate change.
Words are metaphors. Ideas come forth from concepts and God is an idea of man.
Some concepts are beyond the discriptive ability of language and therefore are understandable only in a transcendently subjective manner without the involvement of ones ego.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year
39. mitche | December 19th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Oh, and BTW. You are patently incorrect when you lable me a “lefty” or adhering to the tenets of socialism. It is sad that you think that just because one is intellectually courious that they are ipso facto a “liberal”.
And yet, I “am” liberal but I am not “a” liberal.
Don’t be so narrow minded. It is unbecoming: especially during Christmas time.
40. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all of you as well.
One final thought, if man would quit looking outwardly for evidence of the Creator and begin to quiet their souls and look inward, they will discover the Truth.
God lives in all of us, it is our soul, and without that we are empty vessels.
41. mitche | December 19th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
Neocon:
You channel Joseph Campbell. Congradulations!
I fully agree.
42. Mark Noonan | December 19th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
mitche,
The person who claims to be absolutely correct - as you have - is not only usually wrong, but usually a fool, into the bargain.
43. Mark Noonan | December 19th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
Sunny,
Indeed, the Founders were very careful…and thus there is no wall of separation between Church and State (such is a mere figment of leftwing imagintion); among other things not in there:
Right to an abortion; gun control; right to health care; right to marry…whole buncha things liberals think are rights but, for people who have read early American history, are clearly not rights…
44. Jonathan | December 19th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
Mark said:
Mark,
Wrong. There is such thing as the Separation of Church and State. It it referred to as the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the 1st Amendment.
Furthermore, the beginning of the 1st Amendment states the following:
Although the statement does not appear in the Constitution, it’s political principle is implemented at the beginning of the 1st Amendment and it’s clauses.
But hey, don’t let 230 + years of American History stand in the way of talking out of your ass, Noonan.
45. Uncommon | December 19th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
Jonathan and Mitche are my heroes - also as far as the seperation of church and state thing - Diana has handed Mark and neocon their asses on a platter over the subject but it appears they have not had enough so… back to Ron Paul.
Mike Huckabee has explicitly stated that God endorses his run for President(http://www2.arkansasonline.com/blogs/bible-blog/2007/nov/05/claim-god-/) so it does not suprise me that he would use his faith to sell his candidacy. And Ron was exactly right for what he said which has been perfectly reflected upon by Sunny. For all of you Ron Paul haters I would say that you probably have a suprise awaiting you next year. Not only has Ron stole away Republicans and Democrats alike and attracted a large portion of the independent vote as well as the military - he also has the support of the largest body of potential voters in this country - THE PEOPLE WHO DON’T VOTE. It is those people who do not show up in “scientific polls” so to even begin to assure yourself of his loss is highly premature. Hopefully people can now admit that his supporters don’t consist of a handful of armchair jockeys with to much time on their hands. He has earned over $18 million this quarter more than any other Republican candidate. So look back at every poll you have seen him win (meaning the majority of all nonscientific polls) and you have an idea of what his numbers will look like in the official polls next year. If you fear the message then you better start trembling now.
46. bagni | December 19th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
mark
agree on your assessment of hilary, barack, edwards
none are nova’esque superstars
but considering today’s wsj poll
the repub are super close
they deem it as a “highly competitive race”
looks like neither party has a solid star
47. neocon | December 19th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Uncommon,
Huckabee DID NOT explicitly state that he was endorsed by God. That was a local pastor who said that.
Lie 1.
In an earlier post I described Paul as a schizophrenic with only one oar in the water. So your support of him makes perfect sense.
Good luck.
48. mitche | December 19th, 2007 at 6:45 pm
Mark:
Where did I claim I was absolutely correct and in what context?
Human “rights” come from humans, not an unknowable transcendent entity which can be described as a creation of our imagination. (Or substitute the word “mind” for imagination because that is what our mind does.)
As far as the items you list, the constitution is a living document and has evolved as society and culture has over the past 230+ years.
If you don’t like it, build a time machine and go back to 1776 and then let us here on planet earth know for sure what they meant.
You have shown yourself; once again, to be an authoritarian. Run and hide from the scary idea of being liberal.
Much to your dismay, the United States is liberal democracy. And your BFF Cheney and GWB have tried to export our liberalism to Iraq. Or did you convieniently forget that part??
Merry Christmas.
49. Uncommon | December 19th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
neocon,
I would like to congratulate you on the effort you had to exert by copying and pasting my link into your browser since I so inconveniently forgot to add the link tags in - my apologies. I even see that you read the first couple of sentences and I feel that I must applaud you there however, your knee jerk mentality you so eloquently display at all times and your intellectual incuriosity has proven your incompetence once again. If you had read farther into the article you would have found “Quoting the late singer Ethel Waters, Huckabee added, ‘God don’t sponsor no flops.’ “. And he has made such claims prior to this article which I will happily find for you since you probably don’t really care to look. So the next time you would like to call someone a liar (and yes saying they lie is the same thing) why don’t you make sure you know what you are talking about. Thank you.
50. Uncommon | December 19th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
And one other thing neocon, you stated:
For one that makes absolutely no sense. Yes my support for him does make perfect sense because I am tired of this oversized, secretive, and power hungry government that we have. I’m tired of watching my hard earned money leak out of my pocket. I’m tired of watching bridges in this country crumble yet paying to blow up and build new ones in other countries. I’m tired of the government telling me what and how my children learn (even in parochial school). I’m tired of policing the rest of the world yet crime in this country is out of control. I’m tired of providing welfare to the rest of the world yet our poverty is increasing exponentially. And the list goes on neocon and it scares me that you support these things- that you actually want these things to not only increase but to become larger in scope. We don’t need the same tired thing that you are selling.
51. Faceplant | December 19th, 2007 at 8:44 pm
“Huckabee DID NOT explicitly state that he was endorsed by God. That was a local pastor who said that.”
Your right. But the Huckster DID say this,
Question: …what do you attribute this surge to?
Huckabee: There’s only one explanation for it, and it’s not a human one. It’s the same power that helped a little boy with two fish, and five loaves feed a crowd of 5,000 people.
Wow, I wonder? What could he ever be talking about?
52. Uncommon | December 19th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
Just to clarify what Faceplant meant by the “surge” - he is referring to Huckabee’s surge in polling not the surge in Iraq. And thank you Faceplant for making my point even more solid and making neocon look even more like a… well, nevermind.
53. Mark Noonan | December 20th, 2007 at 12:22 am
Jonathan,
No, words actually mean specific things - and, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishement of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” means what it says - there can’t be a State-sponsored religion, and government can’t prohibit the free exercise of religion. A “wall of separation” would be absurd - it would say that government could never prevent a religious act from happening, and that religious bodies could never influence government. Jefferson, of course, wasn’t absurd - he used a poor choice of words, but what he was trying to do was reassure a Christian Church that nothing in the constitution allowed the government to interefere with the practice of religion (you do know that, don’t you? That he was writing to a Christian church. I mean, you are aware of these really very basic facts, right?).
54. Mark Noonan | December 20th, 2007 at 12:25 am
Faceplant,
Its a Christian thing - we attribute all good things to His doing, while understanding that all bad things result from opposing His will. For Huckabee, its a natural - he’s rising in the polls and this is all part of God’s plan for his life. Of course, the final issue is unknown - but Huckabee, as a Christian, will take victory or defeat the same way - as what God knew was best for him at this time in his life and, also, what best fit in with God’s plan for the world as a whole. We don’t call Him the Lord of Creation just for fun, ya know?
55. Faceplant | December 20th, 2007 at 12:35 am
“Of course, the final issue is unknown - but Huckabee, as a Christian, will take victory or defeat the same way - as what God knew was best for him at this time in his life and, also, what best fit in with God’s plan for the world as a whole.”
I think this might be the first time, I’ve ever said this but… You’re probably right. I wasn’t looking at it from that angle.
56. Xango Annie | December 20th, 2007 at 1:47 am
Uncommon..
If you really think the military supports RonPaul..you are living in a parallel universe.