1
   

Does Ron Paul have enough eperience to lead this nation?

 
 
Reply Wed 17 Oct, 2007 11:39 pm
Allot of people here say that the Mayor of a large city lacks the depth of experience needed to run a nation. But how about Ron Paul? Just as I did with his stances, we'll look at his career, by the facts, and see just what leadership experience Dr. Paul has.

BTW, if you're wondering where that thread is, it's here: http://www.conflictingviews.com/t2142/

so, to the Career of Ron Paul.

Well Ron Paul's first crack at leadership came when he was president of his high school student council. That sounds silly but I want to be thorough. He undoubtedly lead students at some point so I guess that counts.

His next stride in Leadership came when he was elected House Manager of his college fraternity; Lambda Chi Alpha of Gettysburg College.

during his senior year Paul got married, in 1957. I guess marriage was seen as a form of leadership in those days, it's before the sexual revolution and all. He does however lose points because his wife actually asked him to their first date. Hows a lack of spine and all.

Paul then considered being a Lutheran Minister, which is odd considering his five children were baptized Episcopalian, but whatever. He decided against that position of leadership to attend the Duke School of Medicine.

His college was interrupted when he was drafted during the Cuban Missile Crisis. He was a flight surgeon while in the military. For those who aren't up to date on the workings of our fighting machine, a flight surgeon is not a position of leadership. Even if it is an honorable way to serve, Just wanted to clear that up.

After that he worked at a church hospital's emergency room in San Antonio. After that he found another position of leadership as he took over the medical practice of a retiring doctor in Lake Jackson, affording him leadership over a small practice in Rural Texas.

His next change came a few years later, Paul became a delegate to the 1974 Texas Republican convention.

After that Paul was an unsuccessful Republican candidate for Congress from the 22nd district of Texas in 1974

When President Gerald Ford appointed Casey as head of the Federal Maritime Commission, Paul won an April 1976 special election to fill the empty seat (Member of the House of Rep). Paul lost six months later in the general election.

Paul was also one of only four Republican Congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan for president against Gerald Ford in 1976,[2] when Paul led the Texas Reagan delegation at the national Republican convention.[36]

he then defeated Gammage in a 1978 rematch (for a seat in The House) and won new terms in 1980 and 1982.

SIDE NOTE: Is Ron Paul pro gun control? In 1980, when a majority of Republicans favored President Jimmy Carter's proposal to reinstate draft registration, he pointed out the majority's views as inconsistent, stating they "were more interested in registering their children than they were their guns".

In 1984, Paul chose to run for the U.S. Senate instead of re-election to the House, but lost the GOP primary to Phil Gramm.

In the 1988 presidential election, Paul defeated American Indian activist Russell Means to win the Libertarian Party nomination for president. He ran against Bush the First, which is a bit odd considering he was such a fan of Reganomics in the late 70's and now considers himself the most like Regan among GOP hopefuls...

After the election, Paul had a coin business,[50] began his own think tank, the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, published an investment newsletter,[47] and continued his medical practice until he returned to Congress.

In 1996, Paul returned to Congress after a tougher battle than he had faced in the 1970s. He's been there ever since. It's important to note that the National Rifle Association actually supported his opponent, again raising the question about his theories on gun control.

Side Note 2: Conflict of Interest? After being elected again Paul continued to work as an obstetrician in Brazoria County, Texas, delivering many of his constituents' babies even while serving in Congress. Where does he find all this time? Well if you haven't noticed by now he isn't running anything, that's a time saver!

Well let's Tally it all up

Ron Paul, during his lifetime has served as a leader in the following roles:

President of his high school student council

House Manager of his college fraternity

Husband of his family (even though it was his wife who took the initiative to set up his first date)

Ran a Small Medical Practice In Texas

leader the Texas Reagan delegation at the national Republican convention in 1976

ran a coin business

ran something called "the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education", which he actually started. They had a newsletter

and that's about it

He's opposed Flood Insurance, a program which has not only been good for the economy by releaving private insurance companies of losses that hurt economic growth but also helps to rebuild the lives of thousands of Americans a year.

He's been a member of the house on again off again, sometimes still holding down a job as a doctor, and who doesn't have that kind of free time?

Being a member of the House is NOT a leadership role! congress holds a 17% approval rating, who's going to give you credit for being a part of that? Beyond that congress anymore is Red Tape Central, there's no leadership to be found.

A man who brings people together? Not exactly, he spends half of his time undermining those within his whole party.

You can have your text message polls and you internet army. Judgning by the man's body of work I would barely trust him leading a Highschool Football team, let alone a country.

His body of leadership experience DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE to that of the mayor of NYC, let alone during a time of Crisis as large as 911

again, truth finds it's way into the side of Ron Paul. Enjoy the thorns of reality guys :cool:

Ron Paul - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

on a side note, his years of OB/GYN do explain how he's been able to MASTER the sour face!

http://images.salon.com/news/feature/2007/06/02/ron_paul/story.jpg
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,418 • Replies: 47
No top replies

 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Oct, 2007 07:30 am
@Silverchild79,
Hmmmm, let's see. We elected a guy that destroyed three businesses, not just any business, but Texas oil busnisess. Now, if you know anything, it is damn near impossible to run a Texas oil busniness into the ground, but Bush managed to do it not once, not twice, but THREE times. At least Ron Paul has some understanding of foreign policy, unlike Julie whos biggest accomplishment in life is being major of a city that had some planes flown into a couple buildings, oh, and there's always that burlesque number he did...

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/1442/rudygiulianidragxj5.jpg

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/5413/giulianiindragup7.jpg

LOL
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Oct, 2007 08:14 am
@Silverchild79,
He was on SNL, so was Bob Dole, it shows depth of character

He also worked as Assistant AG under Reagan

cut taxes 23 times as mayor, while balancing the budget

lowered crime and murder (crime in half, murder lowered by 66%, deemed safest large city in America by the FBI)

decreased the size of government bureaucracy by 20%

He did all this with working with a liberal city government, he can bring the parties together

there's a bit more to it then being a mayor who's city was attacked, not only has Rudy actually lead something bigger then a high school student body he succeeded in getting stuff done! For the first time in a long time there's a presidential candidate who can actually deliver AS PROMISED

but hey, Ron Paul did lead that lemonade stand...
0 Replies
 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Oct, 2007 08:49 am
@Silverchild79,
http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/5413/giulianiindragup7.jpg

And, I have yet to meet a New Yorker that doesn't hate him, not dislike, but hate. It really says something about your leadership skills when an entire organization, such as the International Association of Firefighters, is against you because of your management of 9/11.

YouTube - AMERICAN FIREFIGHTERS *AGAINST* RUDY GIULIANI FOR PRESIDENT

YouTube - FIREFIGHTERS BLAST RUDY GIULIANI! *MUST SEE!*
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Oct, 2007 09:10 am
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;42189 wrote:
And, I have yet to meet a New Yorker that doesn't hate him, not dislike, but hate.


hmm, guess you've never met 51% of the city then



So what does all this Rudy bashing have to do with the fact that Ron Paul has ZERO meaningful leadership experience. Oh that's right, nothing!
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Oct, 2007 02:08 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;42192 wrote:
hmm, guess you've never met 51% of the city then



So what does all this Rudy bashing have to do with the fact that Ron Paul has ZERO meaningful leadership experience. Oh that's right, nothing!


Tell me Einstein, aside from a second term president, who has ever been in a leadership position equivolent to leading a country? Nobody is the answer, I would rather have a guy that understands the government, foreign relations, policy, and monetary issues, than a cousin *******, drag queen, that is pro-abortion, anti-gun,, no family values, two ex-wife having, socialist dressed up as a "republican", that runs around like a parrot braaak 9/11 braaaak terrorist, braaaak 9/11, who's own kids do not even support him.
0 Replies
 
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Oct, 2007 02:18 pm
@Silverchild79,
nice collection of unfounded and petty mudslinging

my candidate has great leadership experience, yours has none. That isn't Mudslinging, it's US History. All the name calling you have doesn't change that, or the fact that Rudy will get the nod and Paul will become a 3rd party candidate that won't carry a single state.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Oct, 2007 02:33 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;42237 wrote:
nice collection of unfounded and petty mudslinging

my candidate has great leadership experience, yours has none. That isn't Mudslinging, it's US History. All the name calling you have doesn't change that, or the fact that Rudy will get the nod and Paul will become a 3rd party candidate that won't carry a single state.


It's only name calling if it isn't true, but, since it is an accurate description of Julie, and every single item has been proven, and is public knowledge...

I'll take a 10 term Congressman that has:

never voted to raise taxes.
never voted for an unbalanced budget.
never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
never voted to raise congressional pay.
never taken a government-paid junket.
never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

voted against the Patriot Act.
voted against regulating the Internet.
voted against the Iraq war.

does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

than the aforemention 9/11 parrot. Put you mask on, PUT YOUR MASK ON!!!!!!!!
0 Replies
 
Freeman15
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 12:51 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;42237 wrote:
nice collection of unfounded and petty mudslinging

my candidate has great leadership experience, yours has none. That isn't Mudslinging, it's US History. All the name calling you have doesn't change that, or the fact that Rudy will get the nod and Paul will become a 3rd party candidate that won't carry a single state.


Ron Paul lacks leadership experience, but not leadership qualities. His campaign, which is headed by himself and Kent Snyder has brought together groups that until recently opposed one another. Libertarians, conservatives, constitutionalists, and even some liberals and greens. He has a knack for creating feelings of goodwill and understanding, and has demonstrated these qualities in his ten terms as a Congressman from a rural district, and not voting for farm subsidies. That is no easy feat.

Rudy Giuliani did a skit on SNL, and unlike 92b, I really don't care about his personal life, to each their own (though I did think the SNL skit was stupid and unfunny......like most SNL skits). I care about the fact that he has absolutely no foreign policy experience, whereas Ron Paul sits on the foreign policy committee in the House. Giuliani did good things with NYC's economy, and yes did scale back some of its bureaucracy, and that's to his credit, but he is also in favor of firearms restrictions, interventionist foreign policy (a policy that has yet to produce a single long-term gain for the US), and has no opinion on sound monetary policy. I don't dispute that Giuliani did some good things as mayor of NYC, but I do dispute the notion that serving as an executive branch officer is mandatory for election to the presidency.

Ron Paul's, "register their kids before guns" statement was not of anti-firemarm sentiment, but anti-draft sentiment. If you look at his votng record (project vote smart will have it, as will the House's archives), he has never, EVER voted to restrict gun ownership. He opposes the draft, as do most rational people, because the draft is slavery, plain and simple. Forcing somebody to work for you, even if you pay them (housing for slaves in the 1800's could be considered "payment") is slavery, plain and simple. He criticized members of his own party for supporting such a measure because while he is pro-gun, like any rational person he treasures his children before his possessions. You'd know that if you'd actually investigate the man objectively. Instead, you look for flaws, which make you overlook very clear explanations for Paul's actions.

Tell me, how does Rudy Giuliani plan to handle the $9trillion US debt? Or the $168billion 2006 budgetary deficit? Or the $860billion trade deficit with China?

Giuliani has no financial experience at the national level, and so I could just as easily claim that your candidate is not qualified to lead the country because he has no idea how to run a debt-ridden and economically troubled country. You, like most Giuliani supporters want a "leader" to guide you, which is NOT CONSERVATIVE. Conservatives don't want to be led, we want somebody to keep our executive branch in order, and ensure that our government isn't screwing us. If you want a "leader" to make decisions for the country, that's fine, but understand that such a notion runs counter to everything that is classically conservative in the GOP, and of course, is a sentiment that contradicts the Constitution.
briansol
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 12:59 pm
@Silverchild79,
well said dude
mlurp
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 05:47 pm
@briansol,
Very informing..... But still don't know... :dunno:
0 Replies
 
sour claw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 05:56 pm
@Silverchild79,
Compared to the other options, I think he does have enough experience. Some of us regular people just might as well.

But I just joined moments ago, so hello to all!

I also ask, does anyone currently running for President have the ability to confront the internationalists who want to use the USSA as a scapegoat these days? (And our resources, be it military or natural)

I know, not the best introduction but this is the 1st post I encountered here.
mlurp
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Oct, 2007 06:57 pm
@sour claw,
Hi sour_claw and welcome to the board. As for an answer :dunno: but the intellectuals on politics when done ranting in the other political arena might have your answer. Check back. Ron Paul seems to have some sound ideas as far as I can gather. But it is way to early for me to be real interested.
0 Replies
 
Freeman15
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2007 06:40 pm
@Freeman15,
Freeman15;42368 wrote:
Ron Paul lacks leadership experience, but not leadership qualities. His campaign, which is headed by himself and Kent Snyder has brought together groups that until recently opposed one another. Libertarians, conservatives, constitutionalists, and even some liberals and greens. He has a knack for creating feelings of goodwill and understanding, and has demonstrated these qualities in his ten terms as a Congressman from a rural district, and not voting for farm subsidies. That is no easy feat.

Rudy Giuliani did a skit on SNL, and unlike 92b, I really don't care about his personal life, to each their own (though I did think the SNL skit was stupid and unfunny......like most SNL skits). I care about the fact that he has absolutely no foreign policy experience, whereas Ron Paul sits on the foreign policy committee in the House. Giuliani did good things with NYC's economy, and yes did scale back some of its bureaucracy, and that's to his credit, but he is also in favor of firearms restrictions, interventionist foreign policy (a policy that has yet to produce a single long-term gain for the US), and has no opinion on sound monetary policy. I don't dispute that Giuliani did some good things as mayor of NYC, but I do dispute the notion that serving as an executive branch officer is mandatory for election to the presidency.

Ron Paul's, "register their kids before guns" statement was not of anti-firemarm sentiment, but anti-draft sentiment. If you look at his votng record (project vote smart will have it, as will the House's archives), he has never, EVER voted to restrict gun ownership. He opposes the draft, as do most rational people, because the draft is slavery, plain and simple. Forcing somebody to work for you, even if you pay them (housing for slaves in the 1800's could be considered "payment") is slavery, plain and simple. He criticized members of his own party for supporting such a measure because while he is pro-gun, like any rational person he treasures his children before his possessions. You'd know that if you'd actually investigate the man objectively. Instead, you look for flaws, which make you overlook very clear explanations for Paul's actions.

Tell me, how does Rudy Giuliani plan to handle the $9trillion US debt? Or the $168billion 2006 budgetary deficit? Or the $860billion trade deficit with China?

Giuliani has no financial experience at the national level, and so I could just as easily claim that your candidate is not qualified to lead the country because he has no idea how to run a debt-ridden and economically troubled country. You, like most Giuliani supporters want a "leader" to guide you, which is NOT CONSERVATIVE. Conservatives don't want to be led, we want somebody to keep our executive branch in order, and ensure that our government isn't screwing us. If you want a "leader" to make decisions for the country, that's fine, but understand that such a notion runs counter to everything that is classically conservative in the GOP, and of course, is a sentiment that contradicts the Constitution.


Silver, I'd appreciate a response.
rugonnacry
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 07:01 am
@Silverchild79,
Directly to the THREAD TITLE.


NO and he doesnt have the support either HAHAHA
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 09:43 am
@rugonnacry,
rugonnacry;43541 wrote:
Directly to the THREAD TITLE.


NO and he doesnt have the support either HAHAHA


Yes he does. Prove he doesn't other than your opinion.
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 01:47 pm
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;43547 wrote:
Yes he does. Prove he doesn't other than your opinion.



it will be proven when Rudy wins the nomination
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 01:50 pm
@Freeman15,
Freeman15;42972 wrote:
Silver, I'd appreciate a response.


JoinRudy2008 :: Commitment
Freeman15
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 02:17 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;43556 wrote:


Yes that's lovely, Paul can speak of what he'll do in a leadership role just as easily as Rudy can speak of what he'll do when confronting fiscal issues. Your position was that Paul lacks EXPERIENCE leading people, I contend that Rudy lacks EXPERIENCE with federal monetary and budgetary policies. His platform doesn't make up for these shortcomings.

Either accept that Paul can lead the executive branch as well as Rudy can, or accept that Rudy can't handle the fiscal situation of our country. If your argument against Paul is lack of experience, there's plenty of that to go around.

Further, Rudy's platform is for cutting non-defense spending, he mentions nothing of cutting the military budget, which is currently the second biggest cash cow in the federal budget. We can't afford all of our bases overseas and the occupation of two middle eastern countries, but Rudy ignores that, because it doesn't mesh with his "ra-ra-war on terror" platform. Paul wants ALL spending cut, because he UNDERSTANDS national fiscal issues because he's DEALT with them for ten years while on the House Financial Services Committee is vice-chair of the subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

Further, we would agree that allies are important in the war on terror yes? Paul serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and thus has greater EXPERIENCE examining foreign relations than Rudy. How can Rudy hope to prosecute the "war on terror" without the assistance of the countries of the region? Answer, he can't.

Ron Paul, contrary to popular opinion amongst neocons (liars) supports the war on terror, and voted FOR the apprehension of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan (primarily because the Congress ordered the President to go there, as opposed to telling him he could go to Iraq if he wanted). Paul understands the world of money and politics because he's DEALT with it for the last ten years (and several before that).

Rudy was a good mayor, and an ok federal prosecutor. How does that make a man a superior presidential candidate to a man with over a decade of fiscal and foreign policy experience? Rudy's claim to fame, his "leadership" on 9/11 means NOTHING, NOTHING. He had a police chief, fire chief, city planner, captains, lieutenants, sergeants, and ground-level workers that did the detail work, he simply existed. I mean really, what decisions can you make when two skyscrapers come down around your ears? It's not like he can bark orders and say, "get those skyscrapers back up!". Give me a break, deployment of forces was a no-brainer, and 9/11 would've ended on a similar note regardless of who was in charge.

Paul trumps Rudy factually as well. In their famous debate exchange, Rudy was shocked to hear that our foreign policy was the reason for muslim terrorism. Clearly the man hadn't read the 9/11 commission report, OR listened to Osama when we were TOLD in 1996 during bin Laden's fatwa. Rudy is a shell of a candidate who WILL lose the nomination. Maybe not to Paul, but maybe to somebody like Romney, who actually has measurable worldly experience.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 02:20 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;43555 wrote:
it will be proven when Rudy wins the nomination


Just because sheep vote for a cousin *******, cross dressing, anti-gun, pro-choice, ADMITTED liberal democrat as a republican does not mean jack **** other than they have been duped, and thourghly lubed with vasaline. ANYONE that supports a cousin *******, 2x divorced, anti-gun, pro-choice, admitted liberal democrat as the republican nominee is a traitor.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Does Ron Paul have enough eperience to lead this nation?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/05/2024 at 11:08:58