Ron Paul ad

historian · Senior Member

Ron Paul ad

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

I need to read more about him.

-- Edited by Jen at 16:38, 2007-12-02

-- Edited by Jen at 16:39, 2007-12-02

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

I once had a customer tell me that my competition was going to heaven faster because they didn't charge as much as I did. It didn't faze them when I told them they were in bankruptcy either.

Next time you talk to that relative make sure you have "Hell's Bells" by AC DC playing in the background.

arbilad · Head Chef

If the church officially endorses a candidate, only then would I feel safe in telling a relative that not voting for Ron Paul is voting for the devil. But since I think that'll never happen, I confine my cheerleading for Ron Paul to talking about his good qualities and ideas, and comparing them to gospel principles. And indeed, a great deal of what he says is right in line with what we, as a church, believe.

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Ron Paul is evil I tells ya!!!

DaKnife · Senior Member

The only thing that bugs me about Ron Paul is how his supporters keep hanging signs from overpasses, which I could be wrong but I seem to think I've read is illegal.

Mahonri · Senior Bucketkeeper

HE has some things that I agree with, but he also has some things that I very much disagree with. HE really does scare me and I don't feel we would be safe with him as President... in fact just the opposite.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Yeah, Medved wants Paul to denounce his association with American Nazis.

--Ray

hiddentreasuredotws · Senior Member

I would like Bush to denounce his association with Naziz, based on library of congress record showing the financial connection with Bush family. Reporter John Buchanan did an excellent reveal on the subject.

Ron Paul is GREAT!

see page 3 for the RON PAUL details..www.hiddentreasure.ws

Poncho29 · Senior Bucketkeeper

I saw a "Ron Paul for president" sign in someone's front yard the other day. It was the first one I have seen in this area.

hiddentreasuredotws · Senior Member

Which area? I think I have the only one in my area. When we traveled for Thanksgiving we noticed several Ron Paul Signs but didnt see any others.

for more on Ron Paul see here...
http://www.hiddentreasure.ws/page3.html

Sadly my boys kept their mouths shut in Deacons quarum here in Lovell WY today when talk came up in favor of Mitt Romney the LDS candidate. Too bad the boys didnt mention that Romney has supported Gay marriage and Gay boy scout leaders in the past and that they dont care for having either.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

hiddentreasuredotws wrote:

my boys kept their mouths shut in Deacons quarum here in Lovell WY today when talk came up in favor of Mitt Romney the LDS candidate.

Kudos to your sons then...

First, Mitt Romney is LDS... He is not "the LDS" candidate.
Secondly, church meetings / church properties / membership rosters are not an appropriate place (as the Church leadership has put policy in place) to be campaigning for candidates.
Thirdly, twelve and thirteen year old boys do not have the right to vote and therefore have nil impact on the outcome of an election.

Just the facts.

I'd be worried if your sons were keeping their mouths shut on weightier things... like the Gospel.

DaKnife · Senior Member

Well he may not be the candidate of the LDS Church, he most certainly is THE LDS Candidate since none of the other candidates are LDS.

hiddentreasuredotws · Senior Member

I believe the clarificaion is that although Romney is LDS he is not a candidate that is endorsed by the LDS church. Which I think most of us are aware of but a good clarification.

I would be proud if my boys spoke up for doctorine and or against discussion in meeting that falsely indicates Romney as the only decent candidate. First they didnt bring up the discussion, second they should stand up for and oppose indoctirination. Anyway as stated they are 12 and 13.
I intend to address the issue outside of church meetings. I am going to print the OPEN LETTER TO MORMONS and pass it around town.

hiddentreasuredotws · Senior Member

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/higgins1.html

Open Letter to Mormons Regarding Ron Paul
by Robert Higgins

DIGG THIS

To my fellow Latter-day Saint brothers and sisters, this letter is a pleading with each of you to consider supporting Congressman Ron Paul in his candidacy for President of these united States of America.

Congressman Paul is THE only candidate, from either of the two major political parties, that has shown he understands the proper role of government and that he understands and adheres to the principles written in our Constitution.

All the other Republican and Democratic candidates reveal themselves as lusting for power, to be in various stages of corruption, using weasel words with coached speeches and phrases intended to deceive a dumbed-down American public. This deception is facilitated by a mainstream press that has become dominated by a corporate establishment that has a globalist agenda. This agenda requires reduced national sovereignty. All these other candidates approve of this agenda.

The only things that stand between this agenda and it's ultimate goal of centralized global governance are;

a militarily strong America
a financially solvent America
an economically strong America
an independent America
and .. the Constitution of the United States of America
Congressman Ron Paul's candidacy is a direct threat to this agenda for he alone, among these "establishment candidates," supports all five of the above. Most importantly, his voting record as a Texas Congressman, his speeches as displayed on his website, and his responses during the primary "debates," reveal him to be candid, honest, wise and uncorrupted by the temptations of power that swirl about Washington D.C. He understands the founding principles of this nation and has the integrity to support and defend the Constitution.

Specifically, we Latter-day Saints have been called upon to support and defend our Constitution and this nation, both of which have unique roles to play.

President Ezra Taft Benson counseled the LDS faithful as to their "civic responsibilities" in July 1972's Ensign, writing;

"We honor our founding fathers of this republic .. God raised up these patriotic partners to perform their mission, and he called them "wise men." (See D&C 101:80.)"

"The First Presidency acknowledge that wisdom when they gave us the guideline a few years ago of supporting political candidates 'who are truly dedicated to the Constitution in the tradition of our Founding Fathers.' (Deseret News, November 2, 1964.)"

"Our wise founders seemed to understand, better than most of us, our own scripture, which states that 'it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority . . .they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.' (D&C 121:39.)"

"To help prevent this, the founders knew that our elected leaders should be bound by certain fixed principles. Said Thomas Jefferson: 'In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.'"

"These wise founders, our patriotic partners, seemed to appreciate more than most of us the blessings of the boundaries that the Lord set within the Constitution, for he said, 'And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.' (D&C 98:7.)"

"President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., put it well when he said: 'God provided that in this land of liberty, our political allegiance shall not run to individuals ... our allegiance and the only allegiance we owe as citizens ... of the United States, runs to our inspired Constitution which God himself set up ... This principle of allegiance to the Constitution is basic to our freedom. It is one of the great principles that distinguishes this 'land of liberty' from other countries.' (Improvement Era, July, 1940, p. 444.)"

"The warning of President Joseph Fielding Smith is most timely: 'Now I tell you it is time the people of the United States were waking up with the understanding that if they don't save the Constitution from the dangers that threaten it, we will have a change of government.' Conference Report, April, 1950, p. 159.)"

"Another guideline given by the First Presidency was 'to support good and conscientious candidates, of either party, who are aware of the great dangers' facing the free world. (Deseret News, November 2, 1964.)"

"President Clark warned us that 'we stand in danger of losing our liberties, and that once lost, only blood will bring them back; and once lost, we in this church will, in order to keep the Church going forward, have more sacrifices to make and more persecutions to endure than we have yet known...' (CR, April, 1944, p. 116.)"

"The Lord holds us accountable if we are not wise and are deceived."

We LDS have received much counsel regarding our responsibilities toward government, almost too many to list in this letter, however, I add a few more:

"Next to being one in worshipping God, there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States." (Statements on Communism and the Constitution of the United States. Deseret Book Co., 1966 p. 6)

"We must choose righteous men, good men to fill these positions ." . (Joseph F. Smith, Journal of Discourses. Vol. 25, p. 251)

.".. the fundamental principle of the gospel, free agency..this principle is (1) essential to man's salvation; and (2) may become a measuring rod by which the actions of men, of organizations of nations may be judged." (Gospel Ideals, pp. 299-300) President David O. McKay

." We therefore commend and encourage every person and every group who is sincerely seeking to study Constitutional principles and awaken a sleeping and apathetic people to the alarming conditions that are rapidly advancing about us." (Improvement Era, June 1966, p. 477) President McKay

"No greater immediate responsibility rests upon members of the Church, upon all citizens of this Republic and of neighboring Republics, than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States." President David O. McKay

If we sit idly by, unmoved by the special knowledge which has been given, we are told our state will be awful. Latter-day Saints have been directed to give heed to the Lord's commandments concerning the laws of the land. We have been told to support that law of the land which is constitutional and not tamper with it:

"Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land: and as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil."(D&C 98:6-7)

"Wherefore honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil." (D&C 98:9-10)

....... unless the people of America forsake the sins and the errors, political and otherwise, of which they are now guilty and return to the practice of the great fundamental principles of Christianity, and of Constitutional government... politically we shall lose our liberty and free institutions. Heber J. Grant

Now, at the risk of offending, I submit to you that candidate Mitt Romney , even though he is LDS, is very much unacceptable. Please, compare his voting record, his speeches and positions to those of Congressman Ron Paul's and remember this:

"We live in an age of deceit. .. Even within the Church we have been warned that 'the ravening wolves are amongst us, from our own membership, and they, more than any others, are clothed in sheep's clothing, because they wear the habiliments of the priesthood.' (J. Reuben Clark, Jr., CR, April, 1949, p. 163.)"

November 29, 2007

Robert Higgins has been a frequent Republican delegate, whose writings have appeared in The New American magazine, through KSL-TV editorials and in many local Utah newspapers.

Copyright © 2007 LewRockwell.com

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

I note a copyright notice on that.

Has the owner given permission for it to be reproduced and distributed?

hiddentreasuredotws · Senior Member

Its an "OPEN LETTER" which I believe falls under "FAIR USE" policy.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

Articles like this are routinely circulated by email, and some folks have stated intent to distribute this one door to door. Lew Rockwell looses no money by this. I know the author of the letter personally as Chip Higgins of Sandy, UT, and his intent is to get it to as many LDSs as possible.

Chip is an active LDS who is anxious to help maintain the national sovereignty of the U.S.A. and the intent of the US Constitution as intended by the "Founding Fathers" of our country. He almost daily writes articles which he sends together with articles by investigative reporters about the threats to our constitutional republic.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

If you say so.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

If one goes to http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/higgins1.html and looks just below the title of the article and above the DIGG THIS and the beginning of the text, one will note a link for emailing this article. Pretty obvious invitation to share the article with others.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

So the implication is that Mitt Romney is a ravening wolf, of the type that brought down the original Christian church?

Niiiiiiiiiiiice.

I don't feel the least bit played or exploited by this particular member's political opinions. I wish I had a true testimony of the true candidate of the true government of the truth.

--Ray

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Too many LDS are voting for Mitt because he is LDS and not based on their political principles. That is an excellent article and one I will be forwarding to my email list.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

mirkwood wrote:

Too many LDS are voting for Mitt because he is LDS and not based on their political principles.

That is a pretty closed minded view IMHO.

I have yet to meet any individual who votes for major political offices on anything other than their political principles.

With that comment, aren't you in essence saying that if people understood things the same way you / Ron Paul / Libertarians understood things, they would adopt the same politics and vote the same way as you? Yes?

DaKnife · Senior Member

This author lost me at:
All the other Republican and Democratic candidates reveal themselves as lusting for power, to be in various stages of corruption, using weasel words with coached speeches and phrases intended to deceive a dumbed-down American public.
Sure insult your readers, insult RP's competition, heck Ron Paul is a politician, so he goes right in there with the rest of them.

Like him or not, Romney has proven himself to be an effective leader both in and out of politics. He really did save the Utah Olympics, they would have happened but would have ended with a debt to be repaid by Utah Tax payers, instead they were sucessful, exciting, and profitable, which profits are paying for the maintenance of the many Olympic Facilities built for the games.

Like him or not, Guiliani, came into a corrupt, violent, and overall dirty city and cleaned it up. Times square was rescued from the pornographers, crime rates dropped substantially, and he was also THE man on the ground, when 9/11 occured and his performance there alone could(not likely but could) carry NY state for the Repubs for the first time in a long time if ever.

Like him or Not, McCain is a War Vet and former POW, who is outspoken on his issues, who does not feel the need to toe the party line. He has continually done what he feels is best, not what the pollsters say he should do.

Ron Paul I really don't know that much about, but as I mentioned before, I've been turned off to him by such tactics as his supporters putting signs where they are not legal, and well outside of the campaign period as well. Add in contived "Open Letters" like the one above and I become even less likely to support him.

coolcucumbers · Senior Member

DaKnife I don't agree with you often I have to say I agree with you on this one.

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Cat Herder wrote:
That is a pretty closed minded view IMHO.

Hardly...but your saying that is no surprise. The majority of the LDS I have talked to about Romney can't tell me diddly about his stance on anything except abortion. I'd call that voting for him cause he is LDS. A few of them have even admitted that is thier sole criteria.

Cat Herder wrote:

I have yet to meet any individual who votes for major political offices on anything other than their political principles.

Well I guess that just makes you right doesn't it...it is not in Cat's sphere of experience therefore it is invalid.

Cat Herder wrote:

With that comment, aren't you in essence saying that if people understood things the same way you / Ron Paul / Libertarians understood things, they would adopt the same politics and vote the same way as you? Yes?

No, I'm saying people should be looking at track records> Mitt's isn't as great as LDS are making it out to be.

BTW, I'm not a Libertarian and RP has not cornered my vote yet.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Hey Mirk.

I make no bones about voting for him because he's LDS. :P
Though I admit that mostly because it annoys people.

--Ray

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

At least you are honest about it and I really do respect you for that.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Mirk, if that isn't what you're saying, then say what you mean and mean what you say. Fair enough?

p.s. so, the consensus automatically is that if it is Cat's experience, or lack thereof, then it is not valid? rolleyes

right back at 'cha. I wasn't seeking validation, just stating my observation.

p.s.s. if you are considering and actually do send around a form of political campaigning literature to others, wouldn't that kind of indicate to others you do support that candidate or issue?

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Or maybe an effort to make people think. A counter to the "I love Mitt 'cos he is Mormon so I'm voting for him" mentality.

No the consensus being you think you are right end of story.

Come on Cat...admit it...ray just did.

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Cat Herder wrote:

p.s.s. if you are considering and actually do send around a form of political campaigning literature to others, wouldn't that kind of indicate to others you do support that candidate or issue?

I'm inclined to lean his way...that is not the same as making a decision to vote for him.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

Just for the record, I agree with the statement in the "Open Letter..." that other than Ron Paul, "All the other Republican and Democratic candidates reveal themselves as lusting for power, to be in various stages of corruption, using weasel words with coached speeches and phrases intended to deceive a dumbed-down American public."

I find nothing here that implies that "Mitt Romney is a ravening wolf, of the type that brought down the original Christian church?" I regret his unconstitutional mandatory health care program in Massachusetts, which my 1. cousin in MA tells me is costing more than planned, his expressed ignorance of the constitutional requirement that the Congress declare war instead of the president consulting with a bunch of lawyers, his support of homosexuals while campaigning for the Senate and as MA Governor, and his support of homosexual Boy Scout leaders. And even more than that, I sorrow at the unawareness of most LDSs of the admonition in the D&C to "befriend" the US Constitution. My generation blew it. At least you have the sort of excuse that the admonitions are only in the scriptures and old Conference and other talks, and no longer discussed openly by General Authorities.

-- Edited by lundbaek at 14:57, 2007-12-03

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

mirkwood wrote:

Come on Cat...admit it...ray just did.

I admit nothing under duress or pressure from the group!

But, honestly, I do worry about groups and individuals who are equating the current leadership of the Church (God's current ordained and annointed prophets, seers and revelators) as some how being out of touch or that we are not worthy of this "higher" political dogma since they do not preach what a couple of earlier General Authorities did.

If all the other candidates are lusting for power, what is RP's true motivation for running for office?

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Cat Herder wrote:

mirkwood wrote:

Come on Cat...admit it...ray just did.

But, honestly, I do worry about groups and individuals who are equating the current leadership of the Church (God's current ordained and annointed prophets, seers and revelators) as some how being out of touch or that we are not worthy of this "higher" political dogma since they do not preach what a couple of earlier General Authorities did.

How does opposing Romney's hypocrisy equate to putting down the First Presidency and Q12? Not even left field....left field stands top row...

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

C'mon Cat, admit it. We can both be rebel mindless mormon voters! Woot!

Mirky: I don't care if others think they've shown Romney's hypocrisy, about the issues he's talked about, I agree. I actually disagree with Romney about immigration, I think he's too tough. I also support Bush in the war in Iraq and I liked his guest worker program for illegals in an attempt to make them legals.

I admit I'm a fan of a number of decidedly unpopular opinions. To tell you the truth, I'd probably vote for McCain or Duncan Hunter if there weren't a mormon in the mix. His service in the church, imo, tells me he gets it. I admit it, because I think service as a bishop or a stake president is SIGNIFICANT in terms of time, sacrifice and dedication to correct principles. I don't expect americans to vote for him because he's mormon, but I'm a mormon and know what it takes to serve in such a position... well I don't know... I've never been a bishop or stake prez, but I imagine it's amazingly thankless and well... so his religion DOES influence the reason I think he has the strength of character to lead our nation as a whole.

I also think Mitt has the political structure in place to run a nationwide campaign. He seems like an organized fellow who knows how to run businesses and make pragmatic choices in an executive position. Sometimes he goofs up, and I know he tries really really hard to be liked (a mormon trait, I think), but imo he's no "ravenous wolf".

I don't like Ron Paul because I'm not an isolationist. I agree we need to stop spending so much on government programs, I'd like to see fewer taxes, and I do think our Constitution has taken a few hits lately, but I think Mitt is just as committed to making changes as Paul on those issues. The principles of freedom I cherish, I believe should be shared throughout the world, not just within the boundaries of this country. I do not believe that some people are just too stupid to appreciate freedom. I think they have been deceived. We've received so many blessings, I just don't think we should keep them to ourselves.

Ask the democrats who they would MOST LIKE to see run against them, and they all choose Ron Paul. That's because they know if he is the candidate they will win--hands down. Ron Paul is associated with many fringe elements of the party that Dems have used repeatedly to scare people into staying democrats instead of making sensible conservative decisions.

Romney is a decent family guy. His life speaks for itself. I don't think he's perfect, but I believe he's very qualified for the position of the Republican candidate... and maybe, yeah, I'd also like to see a mormon chosen because it would put a sock in all those evangelicals who have turned their politics into a religion... I dunno... but that's why I say, "I'll vote for Mitt, cuz he's a mormon!" biggrin

--Ray

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

----
Now, at the risk of offending, I submit to you that candidate Mitt Romney , even though he is LDS, is very much unacceptable. Please, compare his voting record, his speeches and positions to those of Congressman Ron Paul's and remember this:

"We live in an age of deceit. .. Even within the Church we have been warned that 'the ravening wolves are amongst us, from our own membership, and they, more than any others, are clothed in sheep's clothing, because they wear the habiliments of the priesthood.'
----

Um. Lundbaek?

That term is used by the Apostle Paul, to foretell the Great Apostasy. I'm pretty sure J. Reuben Clark would be less than pleased to see this quote being used against a man who at least by appearance seems to be a decent and honorable priesthood holder.

Romney's political views have grown consistently more and more conservative as he's gotten into politics. So did Ronald Reagan's (who also started out pro-choice and changed to pro-life)... Heck, RR started out a Democrat. I think there are political viewpoints he has not really been strong on, and on others he's a bit too strident for my tastes, but I think he's the type of man who can lead--who won't piss off congress so badly that nothing at all happens and the country implodes...

What I find disconcerting is that you seem to see no flaws in Ron Paul.

--Ray

arbilad · Head Chef

I got an email from Chip Higgins, the author of the open letter to LDS. He gave us full permission to have the letter posted here on Bountiful, as well as to spread it around so that more people can read it.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

Romney's political views ceretainly have grown consistently more and more conservative as he's gotten into politics. He elected to compromise certain standards during 2 campaigns for office, senator and then governor. He'll not likely be excused for that by those of us who espouse those standards he compromised.

To the suggestion that I have animosity toward Mitt Romeny, disappointment is more accurate. I'm much harder on those LDS legislators in Congress who for years have shredded the US Constitution, as can be determined by their voting records.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Why should one be any harder on LDS folks in politics than non-LDS folks in politics?

That is kind of an enigma.

That is kind of like treating one person one way for having a beer or smoking a cigarette and treating another person differently for the exact same thing.

Is it because we think the one should know better, so therefore they are not as deserving of the benefit of the doubt or the same consideration as the "ignorant" one? Or could it be that we are not looking at either in the same light as The Savior, a son or daughter of God with great potential for righteousness?

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Cat Herder wrote:

Why should one be any harder on LDS folks in politics than non-LDS folks in politics?

I think in the sense that where much is given, much is required. LDS should be the salt of the earth, so to speak.

One thing I do see with Romney is his ability with finances. Anyone who can take a million dollar deficit and turn it into multi-Billion dollar profits has to be alright. Maybe he's the best choice for the economy...?

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Cocobeem wrote:

Cat Herder wrote:

Why should one be any harder on LDS folks in politics than non-LDS folks in politics?
I think in the sense that where much is given, much is required. LDS should be the salt of the earth, so to speak.

Exactly, but what strikes me on this is that we are not the ones who have given an LDS politician anything more than the non-LDS politician, so in that sense they are not answerable to us as a fellow church member for their political views. If he or she espouses and promotes that which is contrary to God's will, he or she will answer for that to Him, just as each of us will.

To imply or say that an LDS politician is not righteous because the political stances he or she has had do not agree with one's politicial belief is as sad as saying one would never vote for an (fill in the blank) politician simply because they are (see previous fill in the blank).

I'm sure those who support Dr. Paul would like to be assured that those who do not vote for him are doing so because they disagree with his policies and not because they think he is an eccentric character in the fringe of conservative political thought.

arbilad · Head Chef

Cat, by dint of his professing a higher standard (a temple worthy LDS life) he should be held to that standard. "A city set on a hill" and all that. For instance, if Mitt Romney appeared in public smoking a cigar, it would be a scandal, because he has professed to be LDS. If Ron Paul appeared in public smoking a cigar, I'd question his judgment, because as a doctor he should know better, but since he has never claimed to be a non-smoker for religious reasons, I wouldn't think significantly less of him.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

So, I guess that means that some would be willing to have someone in office that neither professes to or actually lives a higher standard than one who as far as we know is worthy to enter the House of The Lord, but nevertheless are willing to castigate the latter because his politics have not been march step in-line with their own views?

Granted, church membership and even temple worthiness should not be the reason anyone votes for any candidate for public office. But that is what I'm getting at. What I've seen from the supporters of Ron Paul who are church members is they do not create a level playing field within their minds to begin with. Their candidate is placed on a dustless pedestal and another candidate who, from the common religious community and culture they share, has to be almost dehumanized to show how fallen he is from being in touch with the core beliefs of that community simply because his politics do not match their own.

Which of the candidates has not professed they are of a higher standard (of some sort) over their opponents? How many of them use it to curry favor? Every single one of them. Dr. Paul is not above this, and Gov. Romney has not gone around currying favor by virtue of his being a church member.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Great point, Arbi.

But I've used that same logical extension to suggest that since you're LDS and understand that being a stake president is no walk in the park level of church service, you can rest assured there's a certain level of dependability in his character that you cannot equate to any other candidates.

I guess this is one of those glass half empty/glass half full type issues.

--Ray

hiddentreasuredotws · Senior Member

Ron Paul is the only candidate with a proven record of defending the God inspired constitution without violation of principle . He is still a statesman after being in Washington. Other politicians wether via ignorance or intent have not proven the same.

Romneys recent debate statement regarding desire to double torture is another concern I have that sounded un christ like in my opinion. I dont believe evidence has supported torture even provides legit intell.

Randy · Senior Member

Double torture? Didn't he say double Gitmo?

Torture /= Gitmo.

hiddentreasuredotws · Senior Member

I dont have time to link to the debate, but I dont recall the word Gitmo?

Aside from the the first paragraph I posted remains factual.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/28/debate.transcript/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/28/debate.transcript.part2/

Cooper: Our next question -- our next question comes from Seattle, Washington.

Andrew Jones: Hello, gentlemen. I'm Andrew, and I'm a college student from Seattle, Washington.

Recently, Senator McCain has come out strongly against using waterboarding as an instrument of interrogation.

My question for the rest of you is, considering that Mr. McCain is the only one with any firsthand knowledge on the subject, how can those of you sharing the stage with him disagree with his position?

Cooper: Governor Romney?

Romney: Well, he certainly is an expert and I certainly would want to get his counsel on a matter of this nature, but I do not believe that as a presidential candidate, it is wise for us to describe precisely what techniques we will use in interrogating people.

I oppose torture. I would not be in favor of torture in any way, shape or form.

Cooper: Is waterboarding torture?

Romney: And as I just said, as a presidential candidate, I don't think it's wise for us to describe specifically which measures we would and would not use.

And that is something which I would want to receive the counsel not only of Senator McCain, but of a lot of other people.

And there are people who, for many, many years get the information we need to make sure that we protect our country.

And, by the way, I want to make sure these folks are kept at Guantanamo. I don't want the people that are carrying out attacks on this country to be brought into our jail system and be given legal representation in this country. I want to make sure that what happened ...

(Applause)

... to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed happens to other people who are terrorists. He was captured. He was the so-called mastermind of the 9/11 tragedy. And he turned to his captors and he said, "I'll see you in New York with my lawyers." I presume ACLU lawyers.

(Laughter)

Well, that's not what happened. He went to Guantanamo and he met G.I.s and CIA interrogators. And that's just exactly how it ought to be.

(Applause)

Cooper: Senator McCain?

(Crosstalk)

(Unknown): There were reports Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded.

McCain: Well, governor, I'm astonished that you haven't found out what waterboarding is.

Romney: I know what waterboarding is, Senator.

McCain: Then I am astonished that you would think such a -- such a torture would be inflicted on anyone in our -- who we are held captive and anyone could believe that that's not torture. It's in violation of the Geneva Convention. It's in violation of existing law...

(Applause)

And, governor, let me tell you, if we're going to get the high ground in this world and we're going to be the America that we have cherished and loved for more than 200 years. We're not going to torture people.

We're not going to do what Pol Pot did. We're not going to do what's being done to Burmese monks as we speak. I suggest that you talk to retired military officers and active duty military officers like Colin Powell and others, and how in the world anybody could think that that kind of thing could be inflicted by Americans on people who are held in our custody is absolutely beyond me.

Cooper: Governor Romney, 30 seconds to respond.

(Applause)

Romney: Senator McCain, I appreciate your strong response, and you have the credentials upon which to make that response. I did not say and I do not say that I'm in favor of torture.

I am not. I'm not going to specify the specific means of what is and what is not torture so that the people that we capture will know what things we're able to do and what things we're not able to do. And I get that advice from Cofer Black, who is a person who was responsible for counterterrorism in the CIA for some 35 years.

I get that advice by talking to former generals in our military...

Cooper: Time.

Romney: ... and I don't believe it's appropriate for me, as a presidential candidate, to lay out all the issues one by one...

Cooper: Time.

Romney: ... get questioned one by one: Is this torture, is that torture?

Cooper: Senator McCain...

Romney: And so, that's something which I'm going to take your and other people's counsel on.

Cooper: Senator McCain, 30 seconds to respond.

McCain: Well, then you would have to advocate that we withdraw from the Geneva Conventions, which were for the treatment of people who were held prisoners, whether they be illegal combatants or regular prisoners of war. Because it's clear the definition of torture. It's in violation of laws we have passed.

And again, I would hope that we would understand, my friends, that life is not "24" and Jack Bauer.

Life is interrogation techniques which are humane and yet effective. And I just came back from visiting a prison in Iraq. The Army general there said that techniques under the Army Field Manual are working and working effectively, and he didn't think they need to do anything else.

My friends, this is what America is all about. This is a defining issue and, clearly, we should be able, if we want to be commander in chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, to take a definite and positive position on, and that is, we will never allow torture to take place in the United States of America.

Actually, I don't see him as having said either thing...

Randy · Senior Member

OK, Hiddentreasure, it was Guantanamo, not Gitmo.

And Cat Herder, this was from a debate on May 15 hosted by Fox, not the CNN/YouTube debate.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Silly me...