Right wing bloggers hate Ron Paul the most USA Today Tuesday October 09, 2007 The gang over at Right Wing News (via memeorandum) asked 225 right-of-center bloggers to vote for their "Least Favorite People on the Right." RWN got 45 responses. The person with the least right-wing stuff: Texas Rep. Ron Paul, with 23 shots punches to the head. (Earlier today our next-of-center-door neighbors at the On Politics blog wrote about the GOP presidential candidate's hissing match with the New Hampshire Union Leader over his libertarian views on foreign policy.) A distant second: former right guardian Pat Buchanan, with 18 daggers. He barely beat out Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who claimed third place with 17 love-me-nots. The fourth least fav was a tie: 13 shin kicks each for Idaho Sen. Larry "Footsie" Craig and radio Rasputin Michael Savage. The full list follows: Ranking is on the left, er, the other side of right, and the number of top votes for each person is, naturally, on the far right: 18) Ted Stevens (4) 18) Olympia Snowe (4) 18) Mel Martinez (4) 18) Sean Hannity (4) 18) Lincoln Chafee (4) 17) Bill O'Reilly (5) 14) Lindsey Graham (6) 14) George W. Bush (6) 14) Mitt Romney (6) 12) Arnold Schwarzenegger (9) 12) Rudy Giuliani (9) 8) Andrew Sullivan (11) 8) Chuck Hagel (11) 8) James Dobson (11) 8) Ann Coulter (11) 6) Arlen Specter (12) 6) Pat Robertson (12) 4) Larry Craig (13) 4) Michael Savage (13) 3) John McCain (17) 2) Pat Buchanan (18) 1) Ron Paul (23)
Probably because Ron Paul isn't 'on the right', and doesn't even belong on that list! Libertarianism and Conservativism may partially overlap on a few issues, but they really are two entirely separate political philosophies.
ron paul is to the right of right. what are you people smoking? fascism is not conservatism regardless of what the neocon trotskites tell you. never has been never will be.
yeah, how easily folks forget GwB launched his campaign on a 'quasi-libertarian' platform; non-intervention, pro-gun, limited govt, curb spending [oh my!], etc. the message resonated with the public and that's why he got elected. now, this is the same message ron paul is trying to get across as it forms the basis of his campaign as well: the real traditional conservative position, the founding fathers position, pro-liberties and pro-constitution. you like the nanny state idea? then don't vote for dr paul.
Giuliani is the most repulsive in political terms. He's the only one I could see enacting some kind of police state in the US. You can tell he was a prosecutor - madly in love with untrammelled state power, little respect for civil liberties or presumption of innocence, twists the law to get the result he has pre-decided on with no respect for principle.
That came out clearly in the last debate. One of the questions was whether they thought congressional approval would be necessary if they decided to bomb Iran. Only Ron Paul said unequivocably that it was needed. Romney said he would have to run it by his lawyers, a curious evasion for someone with a joint JD-MBA degree from Harvard. The others basically said either no or it depends on the circumstances. It's hard for me to understand how a conservative could argue that the Constitution doesn't require the Executive Branch to get the consent of the Legislative Branch before starting war with a country that hasn't attacked us. You can't stand on principle only when it's easy or when it supports your political position. It was wrong for Clinton to go into the Balkans without an express declaration from the Congress. It would be equally wrong to attack Iran without one. I'm not including border skirmishes, hot pursuit, even clandestine missions. But to send bombers or missiles, a President absolutely should have the consent of Congress. A great question that got lost in the confusion at the debate was , well, what if Congress refuses to pass such a resolution? Is that the end of it or do you just go ahead anyway?
Get real. We're just wasting time here - there are only 2 national candidates - Hillary and Rudy and they are going to win their nominations. And then she'll stomp him to death. Better to speculate who the running mates will be
Please add this choice to the poll: "It doesn't make a shit really, since Hillary is the next president anyway."