Ron Paul the Official Ross Perot of 2012!<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
By JB Williams
Jb.uspu@gmail.com
 
Paulestinians (aka - rabid Ron Paul fanatics) have a full-court-press on for the upcoming Iowa Caucus, as if winning Iowa makes one a lock to win the eventual GOP primary. Iowa has a distinguished history of getting it wrong most of the time.
In 2008, Iowa chose Mike Huckabee for their GOP nominee and gave John McCain a 13% fourth place finish, which was still above Ron Paul who won only 10% in Iowa last time. John McCain went on to become the GOP nominee.
In 2004, Iowa got it right with George W. Bush. But Bush ran unopposed in 2004…
In 2000, Iowa gave George W. Bush a nod with 41%, meaning that 59% of Iowa Caucus goers got it wrong. Bush became the GOP nominee.
In 1996, Iowa chose Bob Dole, who became the GOP nominee before getting slaughtered in the general election by Impeached President Bill Clinton. Iowa picked another loser.
In 1992, Iowa got it right again with George H. W. Bush, but he was also running unopposed.
In 1988, Iowa chose Bob Dole, who was defeated by George H. W. Bush, whom they only gave 19% of their confidence. Of course, Bush won the nomination and became President of the United States.
The point is -- Iowa has a long history of getting it wrong in Republican primaries. If I were a GOP candidate, I'd be trying not to win Iowa, as winning Iowa appears to be a jinx to any GOP candidate seeking the GOP nomination or the White House.
Winning Iowa is like your momma telling you what a great singer you are, even though you can't carry a tune in a bucket.
So, why all the hoopla over Iowa and Ron Paul? -- He's "Mr. Constitution" they say! (with great pride and vigor…) Why are they only going half-way here? Why President Ron Paul when they could have President Alex Jones? Maybe Alex will be his VP pick, and their Inaugural Hajj will be held at Area 51, complete with an alter call by Glenn Beck…
Yeah? Where does Mr. Constitution stand on Obama's Article II ineligibility? Mr. Constitution would fight for all of the constitution, not just the cherry-picked sections his anti-war base appreciates. Besides, the average age of a Paul supporter is about 20 – which means they haven't a clue about the constitution or the world they live in.
Once again, why Ron Paul? What does his thirty-year career politicians résumé hold to give his followers such confidence in Mr. Constitution, who remains totally MIA (Missing In Action) on Article II, which disqualifies Obama for office and every member of congress, including Ron Paul, knows it!
Mr. Constitution would know that the primary function of the Federal Government is to protect and defend the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. - To do that in a 21st Century world, you had better have one hell of a standing Military, which Mr. Constitution also opposes.
All of the Tea Party candidates are already out of the race, systematically eliminated by Team Obama. They successfully killed off four GOP messiahs in a row, Palin, Bachmann, Perry and Cane. That was easy!
RNC darlings Romney and Gingrich have also received the Obama hatchet job, clearing the field for whom? -- Ron Paul and Rick Santorum…. Rick who? And Ron Paul… Gee whiz… how'd that happen so fast?
Obama likes running unopposed. He has won every political race by eliminating his opponents, one by one, leaving him unopposed in the general election. That's what we are watching right now.
In 2008, the Clinton's had so many skeletons rattling around in their closets that Obama was able to derail the greatest political war room ever known to modern politics by simply cutting a backroom power-sharing deal, making Hillary Secretary of State and opening the door for Bill on the international scene.
Hillary Clinton was a lock for the DNC nomination headed into the 2008 primaries. Then the nobody from nowhere with a blank résumé and not so much as a birth certificate, stole the show. By the DNC convention, Hillary was just a memory and despite threats to defect by Clinton supporters, they rallied behind Obama in the general election anyway.
In the end analysis, the left always marches forward in lockstep, despite their many internal disputes. But the political right is more divided and scattered than ever in U.S. history, and they are no match for the unified international left that has already eliminated any real opposition for Obama in 2012.
Ron Paul will not rule out a third-party run, if he happens to lose the GOP nomination. Paul promises to play spoiler even if he has to do it from outside the GOP.
The Ron Paul campaign is built on a foundation of social liberals, chronic anti-war misfits, modern day peaceniks seeking legalized drugs, atheists, and Democrats and Independents with liberaltarian leanings. Nowhere in there is "conservatives…" who oppose Paul as much as they oppose Obama.
If Ron Paul really was a constitutionalist, he would attract the conservative vote, because it is conservatives who have spent a lifetime trying to protect and preserve our nation's founding principles and values, hence the term "conservative," to conserve.
But conservatives are not easily fooled by constitutional rhetoric, whether coming from the lips of Teddy Kennedy or Ron Paul. Even Obama claims to be a constitutional scholar and no one has been as successful at undermining the constitution as Barack Obama.
Ron Paul is at odds with conservatives on numerous key issues.
·        Paul supports same-sex marriage
·        Paul opposes the death penalty for violent criminals
·        Paul opposes mandatory sentencing for three-time losers
·        Paul supports legalizing illicit drugs
·        Paul opposes firm enforcement of immigration laws
·        Paul opposes free trade
·        Paul opposes a strong U.S. Military and National Defense
·        Paul opposes foreign diplomacy and prefers isolationism
·        Paul opposes stricter limits on criminal campaign finance
·        Paul opposes the Patriot Act, but also insists on letting terrorist live amongst us
·        Paul supported the arbitrary withdrawal from Iraq that resulted in deadly terror attacks hours later
·        Overall, Paul falls in the Middle ground, where libertarians, moderates and populists are found, not conservatives
 
As a result, he cannot muster the conservative vote in November 2012, without which, he cannot defeat Barack Obama.
Most of Paul's "social conservative" congressional votes are actually Tenth Amendment votes, which sidestep the actual issue at hand and redirect the discussion to states right. He is a career politician, supported by folks who claim to oppose career politicians.
While conservatives are strong on Tenth Amendment states right, they are also strong on founding principles and values grounded in the moral laws of nature, at the foundation of our Constitutional Representative Republic.
In short, Paul is actually a liberal leaning populist candidate, rather than a Jeffersonian libertarian. He has very little in common with American conservatives and that presents a serious problem for him in any national election, especially at a time in history when conservative voters are looking to reverse course in America.
Paul has been MIA on far too many constitutional issues to call himself a constitutionalist with a straight face. Beyond lower taxes and less government, he has literally nothing in common with conservatives and even his smaller government leanings can't work in a socially and morally bankrupt society.
Then we have the issue of white supremacists and anti-Semites in his past, which won't come up from other Republican candidates in the primary, but will come up from Team Obama in the general election. Remember, Obama must run unopposed… and the U.S. press will tear Paul from limb to limb long before next November.
If Obama's name is allowed to appear on the 2012 ballot, he will be re-elected.
None of the 2012 GOP candidates deserve the support of truly engaged and patriotic Americans. Of course, neither does Obama.
Voters who grasp the reality that the nation is on the brink of total collapse and the world is on the verge of WWIII, are looking for who can defeat Obama and who might have the backbone to protect the nation from eminent danger on several fronts.
I'm not sure such a candidate exists in the 2012 election, but I am certain that Ron Paul isn't it. Facts don't have any friends, but so far, Paul fans don't seem too impressed by facts. Paul is unqualified for the job he seeks on this single issue alone! His anti-Semitism and poor-pitiful misunderstood jihadists, blame America first and often rhetoric should be enough to end his campaign… but do the facts matter anymore? People who can't vote for a lesser evil are in real trouble this time, as every candidate in the race is a lesser evil. We will see what the people's real priorities are…
Our nation hangs in the balance…