Where Ronald Reagan and Ron Paul were philosphically aligned

These are some Reagan quotes;

According to some people on the forum, Reagan might have been someone who always had something bad to say about America because he hated big government.

 

I don't know anyone that would say Reagan tore his country down. I find it more than a bit disingenuous that someone who never seems to have anything good to say about his country would invoke Reagan. Pessimism is pessimism. Reagan was about optimism. He earned "optimism" by preaching it and practicing it. He didn't do the opposite, then try to redefine it.

 

Ron Paul's only slogan is Hope for America. He constantly talks about the problems, then he talks about solutions. And 98% of it revolves around, "the answers are simple" (Reagan used the same rhetoric), and "follow the Constitution. If we have to change it, let's amend it, but we can't pick and choose to ignore it when it is convenient".

Believe me, you're going to start hearing a lot more Reagan+Paul comparisons as the campaign keeps picking up. He's the closest thing to Reagan the GOP has to offer.

Btw, I'm guessing you still haven't watched that Reagan speech called "A time for Choosing." By your definition, he tore the country down pretty good. It's one of the most famous recorded speeches by a non-President in American history.

 

/offtopic a bit
I can see via quotes and your response guerilla the famous troll is invoking 'tearing down America again'

This is simply so fucking old, it's simply pathetic.

It is totally UNAMERICAN to not question government, to not question mistakes, to be blind and not to try to improve. WTF, I can't believe anyone would be insane enough to think it's best to stick your head in the sand and not be against mistakes, bring them up to try to BETTER our country for the future. The true definition of
'tearing down America' would be the one who is so blind he refuses to see and admit to mistakes. The only way to get our country to prosper and to make sure we do not make mistakes is to be honest and truthful, learn from mistakes, not keeping our heads in the sand.

I thought this was one of the basics you learned when growing up, you touch a hot stove and you learn it's 'hot' you don't do it again. This is simply the basics, but with the logic being invoked of 'tearing down America' we should not learn from mistakes, we should be blind and keep touching that stove over and over again. Seriously, some of the most insane, illogical, pathetic excuse I have ever had the displeasure to read from someone who has no argument or point.

If a democrat such as Hillary gets into office I can't wait to see someone practice what they preach and never question anything

I guess when you have no argument it's easy to invoke 'tearing down America' sounds alot like 'they hate us for our freedom' catchy phrases with little to no meaning.

 

What is past if prologue. Gtech needs to study this statement. Throughout democracies of the ages from Greece to the Romans to oyur own modern day government we have always been taught to be on guard
for groups who will try to control government,media and the military . Eisenhower warned against it, yet no one listened. Some people feel more comfortable to wrap themselves in their own little patriotic flag waving bubble because if they did open their eyes they certainly wouldnt like what they see.

Whether its the WMD'S that were never found, or the Imaginery Gulf of Tonkin incident in vietnam that never happened, its up to us, the ordinary citizens to recognize this and make it fully known to everyone.
Ron Paul was the first since eisenhower to publicly tell the full truth as far as our involvement in the foreign affairs of other countries. He is a true American in every sense of the word.

When you can look at the Mossadegh situation and say he was a bad guy, even though till this day he is a hero to every intellectual iranian studnet shows complete blindness to our foreign policies and a complete blindness to what it means to be a true american and it can even be said that its unpatriotic.
This is even worse than flag waving .


As far as Ronald Reagan is concerned, i just hope we dont arm and fund a third world militia again.

 

One thing you will find common amongst the people who support this war. A total lack of regard for history or founding principles. Like when Ron Paul went on Bill O'Reilly, and BillO attacked him on the war, and when Paul offered an explanation for Islamic radicalization against the West, BillO told him he wasn't interested in history.

Of course not. The MSM decides what the relevant facts to the argument are every day, whether they are shilling for the left or the right. You have to go to the internet, to older classic liberal and old right conservative magazines to find an article framed in historical context.

It's ironic, because Eisenhower warned about this as he was leaving office, just as Woodrow Wilson warned about the error he made with the Federal Reserve, yet most people do not know it, haven't been taught it, are too busy in their commercial obsessions to discover it, then when Ron Paul says it, he's treated like a quack.

That's how far from reality we have come. The truth is now the domain of kooks. Honesty is un-American.

This stuff blows the minds of the neo-conservative right and left. I'm sure they were hoping that with dumbed down state controlled public education, people would not ever learn that Vietnam was started under a false flag, or that the attack on Pearl Harbor was provoked by sanctions.

The (sic) strongest supporters of the military in Iraq are unaware that US troops have been used as fodder to facilitate the agenda of the military industrial complex.

Thank GOD for the Freedom of Information Act, and the internet.

As long as these people can wrap themselves in the flag, stand on the sidewalk with the establishment and hum with their hands over their ears and eyes closed, they don't have to confront any moral responsibility, and they do not have to pick up the gauntlet to fight for honesty. They can watch TV, sleep well at night, and go to work the next day talking about football at the water cooler.

They are so intellectually dis-engaged from their past, present and future, that fear and insecurity are all they have to structure their belief systems around.

Some wake up, many choose to carry on dreaming.

A man with a very natural American inclination to understand, might look up the Bay of Tonkin incident, or the 1953 Iranian coup. They might be inclined to research the words of the Founders, or when confronted with the "moonbat-ism" of a North American Union, engage themselves in reading about the Security and Prosperity Partnership that was signed, or Fast Track, or NAFTA, CAFTA et al.

If one is not informed, how can one form a valid opinion?

Unfortunately, the Reagan of 1964 was a much better man than the Reagan of 1980. In order to win the election, Reagan had to accept GHB and the endorsement of the religious right to get into office as the Libertarian strain of the Conservative movement wasn't strong enough to carry the party to the White House.

Today, the GOP is so fractured, there is a real opportunity to return the party to it's roots. Fiscal conservatism and respect for Constitutional Rule of Law.

 

Wow Guerilla, So right. You have been able to put into words so eloquently what alot of us have been thinking for so long. I hope there are more americans like u out ther behind Ron Payul. He just might have a chance if this is so. How will he get around the special interest groups come election time though?

 

He ought to change it to blame America first, because that's all I've seen of him and his supporters.

There is simply no comparison to Reagan and it's an insult. Reagan didn't sit around self-loathing on behalf of his country and tearing it down. How you would even attempt to compare yourself or your candidate is altered reality at it's finest.

I've come to expect dishonesty from RP supporters and the campaign, so it wouldn't surprise me. If one wants to *earn* the Optimism of Reagan, they have to set aside the ceaseless attacks on their country, day in and day out. And I suspect, since that is *all* some do here, it's not going to be easy.

Incorrect. I say again, I don't believe anyone can honestly assert that Reagan tore this country down. To even remotely make such a comparison is the highest form intellectual dishonesty I can think of.

There simply is no comparison.

 

You are 100% right about Reagan not sitting around.

Actually, Reagan endorsed Ron Paul in Congress, and we all know that Ron Paul hasn't changed his views in 30 years. He's voted the same way since he got into the House. Many of your pundits today have already started drawing comparisons between the two.

You still haven't watched "A Time for Choosing" have you? That's ok, I will wait until you are better informed about Reagan and Goldwater before taking your arguments seriously. I want to give you the best possible opportunity to make a strong argument.

Again, you don't seem to be very informed on Goldwater/Libertarian Conservatism, Reagan's role in that, his opinions prior to taking office, etc. You also do not seem to understand that both Ronalds were very good friends, because they came from the very same side of the party, and shared common views on national defense, monetary policy, taxation, socialism, civil liberties, and religion.

I urge you to please, learn more about Ronald Reagan, so that if even you still maintain the position of your current argument, you will be able to back it up with material fact. This would benefit not only us, but the casual thread reader as well.

 

...and self-loathing about his country and tearing it down. I'm glad we agree on this point. There is simply no comparison.

I believe it was the other way around. RP supported Reagan. He taught Jesus to walk on water, etc. RP has a miserable voting record. Voting no to everything takes no special skill. No meaningful legislation passed under RP in all those years.

I'd like to see a few of these pundits that have started drawing comparisons. Would you be so kind to share a few?

There is no point. Reagan was about Optimism, about taking America forward. Not about pessimism and tearing our country down by living in the past.

I give you the opportunity to prove otherwise.

Again, I know Reagan was an optimist and did not sit around tearing his country down. He earned his respect through his deeds and actions, not by doing one thing (tearing America down) and then proclaiming it was patriotic to do so. No comparison.

I urge you to do the same. To even remotely suggest there is a parallel is laughable at best. Reagan was not about blaming America first. Ron paul is. I can't remember a speech I've seen, where he was not blaming America first.

No comparison. If Ron Paul was even close in comparison, people like you would not have to be attempting to draw comparisons. They'd stand out on their own merits, like Reagan's does.

 

They supported each other, just as Ron Paul, Reagan and Barry Goldwater Jr. all supported each other.

Yup, I'll dig up links. Your education is my new hobby.

There is no point in listening to what Reagan had to say about America?

Wow, headline news! Gtech strikes mortal blow against knowledge and credible arguments!

Right, Reagan wanted to take the country forward. Because it was being run like shit. Ditto for Paul. You're slowly getting it Gtech. Learning, BY ACCIDENT!

On the contrary, I have given you the opportunity numerous times to inform yourself by posting the link, starting a thread about the speech etc. The ball is in your court. If you have any game whatsoever, you'll play.

Did you know that Reagan was against equal rights legislation for Blacks to rent housing? Did you know that Reagan was supported by the Klu Klux Clan?

Probably not hunh? This thread seems to be a testament to your ability to post hundreds of words on a subject matter you have absolutely no knowledge of.

I posted Reagan's quotes in the first post. Anyone remotely familiar with Paul would know that they are synonymous with his own words and positions. THEY CAME FROM THE SAME WING OF THE PARTY! lol

You keep saying there is no comparison, when you don't actually know anything about Reagan.

Please watch the speech, educate yourself on the life of Ronald Reagan prior to becoming President, and then we can continue this discussion.

 

You know GTech, I found a transcript to post from since you are averse to the idea of educating yourself, and want to put that responsibility on me.

This made me think of you as I was re-reading the speech.

 

I hope they will not the typical sources used to blame America with.

I didn't say that. There is no point in trying to make a comparison to RP. RP's message is "blame America first." This was not Reagan's message.

I've yet to see any credible arguments.

Again, Reagan didn't tear our country down. Nor was his intention to dismantle the USA, as RP's intention is. There is no comparison.

There is nothing to play. Reagan was not about blaming America first.

Nope, but I'd love to see your sources. My experience has been though, that when you make outlandish claims, and are asked for a source, you never follow through. No idea why.

That would be true, if you believe Reagan was about tearing America down and a pessimist. I submit that it's you that has no knowledge of the subject matter.

Missing, of course, were all the RP quotes tearing America down, and the ones were Reagan did the same. I wonder why, guerilla? You are not doing a good job of trying to match your candidate with Reagan. Perhaps the reason is as I stated previously...that I know Reagan was an optimist and did not sit around tearing his country down. He earned his respect through his deeds and actions, not by doing one thing (tearing America down) and then proclaiming it was patriotic to do so. No comparison.

You keep presuming Reagan was about tearing America down and pessimism. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is no comparison to RP, no matter how you try to twist it. If you can show me where Reagan believe blaming America first and tearing down America were optimistic things to do, you might have a point.

And I ask you, please learn about Reagan. There is simply no comparison to RP. Reagan did not advocate a "blame America first" policy, did not advocate curling up into a ball, did not advocate caving into our enemies, did not advocate dismantling our country. There is no comparison. Saying otherwise does not make it so.

 

That was very kind of you. As you were quick to point out, yet again, Reagan was not about tearing our country down like RP is.

Thank you for helping bring this point to light.

 

Oh Gtech, in the words of RR, you're always saying I am against something, not for it. And the problem is not that you are ignorant, but that you know so much that isn't true.

 

I think it's about time everyone wakes up to the fact that there is no waking up Gtech and bringing him into reality. He's stuck in a world of his own.

 

Reagan was about Optimism. He was about making America proud, about building it up, about positive change.

He was not about tearing America down, blaming America first and finding ways to blame America for the world's problems.

There simply is no comparison.

 

Oh Gtech, in the words of Ronald Reagan, you're always saying I am against something, not for anything. And the problem is not that you are ignorant, but that you know so much that isn't true.

 

I've never seen you start a thread about anything positive in America. Ronald Reagan would have. Make you a deal. Show one thread you've started here, that is "complimentary" to (not tearing down, blaming first, using false information to make allegations against) your country, and I'll personally go donate $50 to the Ron Paul campaign right now.

Not a single post, where you were backed into a corner. A thread topic. Just one thread topic, that you have started, to say something "complimentary" or "positive" about America.

All you have to do is use the search tool, select "Politics & Religion" as the forum to search, and enter your username to search by.

Find one thread that you have started, that is positive about America, provide the campaign donation link to me, and after the transaction (if you can find a thread you started), I will post the exact confirmation email I receive for making the contribution, minus any personal details.

Sounds fair, right? After all, you've started many positive threads about America, like Ronald Reagan would have, right?

Let's see if we can find that "optimism."

 

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=407536

So now you are projecting what a dead President would have done? Is there no level of disinformation you will go to?

I talk about what Reagan did, not what I think he would have done. It's ignorant for you to pretend to speak for him.

You'll disqualify whatever I post. I have several threads on positive American topics, but they are topics you do not care for.

Again, you're playing a game, rather than admit to your complete and total ignorance about Reagan. You've put words in his mouth, you know absolutely nothing about him, and you refuse to acknowledge anything I have posted.

You should be ashamed of yourself Gtech. Taking advantage of one of the greatest men in American history, to twist and manipulate to support your own insidious agenda.