Comments on: UPDATE IV: Bachmann: Bling For Ron Paul? (Paul Wins Straw Poll )

By: Bob Schaefer

Bob Schaefer — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 14:58:30 +0000

Imagining Paul or Bachmann as President is good, academic sport. I voted for Paul when he ran as a Libertarian. I’ll likely vote for Bachmann this go around on the assumption she’s more electable. (I’ll be watching the polls.) The political reality is there is not enough of us, yet. (I hope I’m wrong.)

On the other hand, the moron Trump is making noise about running as an independent, saying that if he does run either he or Obama will win.

If he’s right, we’re doomed for sure.

By: David Smith

David Smith — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 12:13:29 +0000

As evil as they are, the abortion and immigration problems are symptoms of the more overarching issue, i.e. this unconstitutional federal leviathan. Congressman Paul and even the Judge believe in the original intent of the Constitution, especially regarding the limits placed on the three branches. In other words, what they would not be doing in the executive branch would be as important (or more so) as what they would be doing, specifically allowing the states to deal with these problems and not providing intrusive, tyrannical top cover for those who profit from these abominations.

By: Roy Bleckert

Roy Bleckert — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 04:00:29 +0000

@ Ilana .. I have always liked Bachmann & agree with her 70/80 % of the time , I will take that ( But RP is still choice #1 ) & work on educating her on the other 20/30 percent that she is not seeing right LOLLLL !!!!!

@ MyRon… Your right Bachmann is not a 100 % there yet on off shore conflicts , but she is moving in the RP & GJ direction (& so is Palin ) … which I would consider a positive

@ Tom … I think your initial impression of Gov Goods Hair is Right On !

“I don’t know much about Rick Perry as yet, but my initial impression is that he is as stupid as George W. Bush.”

By: Stephen Hayes

Stephen Hayes — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 02:32:58 +0000

Bachman is an impressive lady. She talks substance and she knows what substance is about. What the GOP needs is brains, class, substance, knowledge, personal appeal — likable leadership that has principles and both feet on the ground. And people who, if supported, can win. Who are those people in the GOP? Paul, Bachman…uh…Bachman, Paul…uh…uh…I’m starting to talk like Comrade O without the teleprompter.
I said out loud in more naive days that Obama could not possibly win. So, you see, it really is foolishness to say that we can’t support somebody because they “can’t win” and so give up without trying — and settling for who? Newt? Mitt? Curly Joe? Paul and Bachman are two people who have what we want in leadership and appeal. Let the idiot Chris Matthews say who can’t win. A tired and “safe” candidate is the last thing we need.

By: Robert Glisson

Robert Glisson — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:43:45 +0000

I, in many cases, write most of my comments in the small box, open word, cut and paste, finish the comment and proofread it, cut and paste back into the box. For a klutz like me it works most of the time.
What year was abortion ‘legalized’ and we have had how many Republican presidents that promised to stop abortion? How long are they going to keep dangling that bait to get elected? Truth is, abortion existed before it was legalized and will continue as long as women want it and have a sharp instrument, legal or not. We can’t assign a police officer for every woman that gets a plus on the stick, even if we knew she did. How is saying ‘I’m against abortion’ changing anything or making another unenforceable law going to change anything? Only changing the human heart of potential mothers will do that is my guess. Personally when someone brings up abortion, I drop them off my ‘trust list.’ I don’t have an answer; but, I know that ‘anti-abortion’ is the liberal conservative’s excuse for continuing the run-away system.

By: greenhell

greenhell — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:02:18 +0000

Ilana, would it be possible to have your web team make the comment box larger and perhaps add a preview button? Although I will admit just the physical smallness of the comment box encourages me to be concise.

By: greenhell

greenhell — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:00:04 +0000

I did not like Joseph Farah’s column today against Ron Paul. I don’t agree with Farah’s reasoning on the Preamble to the Constitution. The Preamble states that we formed the United States to “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,” yet Farah says that the founders were specifically thinking of the “unborn” in terms of fetuses and not in terms of descendents. Then to say Ron Paul is off the rails because Ron Paul doesn’t share this definition of the unborn seems to be wasting the great opportunity a Paul presidency would be. No matter how good Ron Paul is on war (and how many lives this may save), the economy, and freedom it seems to boil down to abortion and marriage for Farah and a large number of conservatives.

To put it another way, would 4 years of Ron Paul working to make abortion illegal and passing a constitutional amendment on marriage be better than 4 years of Ron Paul ending wars, balancing our budget, and shrinking the federal government? I believe the latter is not only preferable, but possible.

By: My RON PAUL i

My RON PAUL i — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:53:30 +0000

Sarah is cuter looking but 8 years younger and Michelle is pretty good for 55.

While it has been a positive sign that Michelle is against the Libyan War (which Obamaland “declared” via the NATO unconstitutional subterfuge), there are FUNDAMENTAL differences between her and my man Ron (or even Gary Johnson) on interventionism.

She has called for repeal of No Child Left Behind

http://bachmann.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=141385

but not yet the whole Dep’t of Ed.

The main problem is that the American Sheeple want their TSA Goons, their Socialistic Insecure Medicares, and all the goodies that a $ 1,600,000,000,000 deficit will buy. Either Michelle panders to the sheeple to win or she can speak the truth and lose.

By: Robert Glisson

Robert Glisson — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 14:53:36 +0000

I read the first twenty comments on WND, with friends like that; there is not a chance in Hell of either Paul or Bachmann getting within ten miles of the presidency. John Derbyshire is still right, we are doomed. Good article Ilana.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 13:29:32 +0000

I may agree with Ron Paul on some issues, although not everything, but it seems to me that Ron Paul has as little a chance of winning the Republican nomination as Sarah Palin. On the other hand, at this moment Michele Bachmann seems to have a much better chance than either Ron Paul or Sarah Palin. I don’t know much about Rick Perry as yet, but my initial impression is that he is as stupid as George W. Bush.