Romney: “Of course I’ll win, I’m the white guy”. Really?

I respect your steadfast adherence to your principles. (And I sincerely mean that.) For the majority of my voting life I've done the same. Which usually meant third-party or even write-in candidates.

Like I said, I've voted for Paul in the past. However I disagree with him on quite a few issues now including his more recent (as within the last twenty-five years) views that seem divisive if not slightly bigoted. Also his apparent view that America should immediately pull out of virtually all alliances, treaties, interventions, etc. While I agree that America should have never been a party to them in the first place and should disentangle itself from the world-stage in an orderly way as soon as possible, starting with a withdrawal from the UN, I think that an abrupt change would result in a great deal of danger, chaos and unintended consequences that would be harmful, most importantly, to America as well as to the world in general.

I honestly hate to take the pragmatic view in this election. I've always believed, when others have said to me "You're just wasting your vote." that to vote for a lesser of two evils candidate was the true "wasting" of one's vote.

But there is a time for pragmatism. As I mentioned above for example the alliance with Russia in WWII to fight the more immediate threat of Nazism. Shooting an intruder who is about to do physical harm to your family because there's no time to use reason to defend them. Or Moses, as commanded by God, putting to the sword even the infant children of the Hittites or the Amorites. To give medical attention to an injured serial murderer is not "to participate in the sin they commit" if they might commit another murder in the future. Sometimes pragmatism or immediacy can become the moral imperative.


And I truly believe this is one of those times where pragmatism is morally justified. A vote split between varying degrees of conservatism (and even RINOism) is a guaranteed win for Obama. And in every way, he is truly the vastly greater of two evils.

Yes, I'd vote for Paul if he were the nominee. Again, not my choice but "better than Obama." I agree with much of what he says, and I agree with you that disentangling America from non-security treaties and agreements, etc should be a priority and would ultimately lead to an economic boom and other social benefits as well. However much of this needs to be done gradually and cautiously.

We couldn't safely say for example "As of Jan.1, 2013 all American forces will be withdrawn to American territory, all international treaties will expire and all military and economic aid to foreign nations will cease."

It would create havoc, especially for America's security. Had we never gotten so entangled over the last fifty or more years things might be different now, but we did and we have to deal with today's realities. We have enemies who hate us and strategic interests that at least for now we need to maintain. For example we need bases for American forces worldwide and maintain some key allies related to that security. For now we need bases in Asia, Europe and the Pacific region. We need Israel at least for now as some kind of "off-set" in a region that basically hates America. (Contrary to what most libs and a few conservatives believe, if America immediately abandoned Israel it wouldn't make all the Islamic nations in the Middle-East our buddies or stop hating us. Maybe if we'd never been involved with Israel (and other issues as well over several decades) they'd now hate us less, but as I said above, we have to deal with the realities of today as they are.

America should begin this disentanglement, while at the same time begin to build a national defense that is virtually impermeable and so powerful, both nuclear and conventional, that no one would dare try to do us harm. And then begin to pull out of these entanglements, police-actions and the rest, with an admonishment to the nations of the world that we intend to stay out of the destinies of other nations except when they threaten our own national security. But if and when they do we are prepared to respond immediately and with extreme force.

If I have a belligerent and very unfriendly next-door neighbor who some morning walks out on his porch drunk with a shotgun screaming "I'm going to kill you all" as he begins loading it with shells, I'm not going to wait until he shoots my dog and grandson playing in the front yard before I put a bullet through his forehead with my AR-15.

In the same way, a "saber-rattling" by another nation (for example Iran or North Korea) would be treated the same way. If North Korea has acquired a nuclear capability and announces its next goal is to develop ballistic missiles that can deliver a nuclear warhead to Anchorage, Portland and Seattle I wouldn't wait until those missiles were on their way over the Pacific (whether we had the defensive ability to stop them or not before they struck) before I would lay North Korea to waste.

Anyway, yes. I'd vote for Ron Paul if he were the nominee. A senile old coot conservative is a better alternative for president than an incompetent Marxist.