EXCLUSIVE from Big Government blog: Ron Paul in 2009–‘I Wouldn’t Risk American Lives’ to End the Holocaust

oskarschindler.com

 Jeffrey Scott Shapiro   ..."And so I asked Congressman Paul: if he were President of the United States during World War II, and as president he knew what we now know about the Holocaust, but the Third Reich presented no threat to the U.S., would he have sent American troops to Nazi Germany purely as a moral imperative to save the Jews?”
"And the Congressman answered:"

No, I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t risk American lives to do that. If someone wants to do that on their own because they want to do that, well, that’s fine, but I wouldn’t do that.”

"Paul then looked at me, and I politely thanked him for his time. He smiled at me again and nodded his head, and many of his young followers were also smiling, and nodding their heads in agreement. Clearly, I was the only one in the room who was disturbed by his response."

Most of the world would do as Paul might: not lift a finger to help the Jew. Roosevelt did not because he had a voting public that would not. But his own administration turned away a ship full of Jewish refugees fleeing Hitler, sending them back into a terrible fate when he could have saved them.

Even today, Arabs who invade Israeli homes and knife families to death in their sleep have outspoken defenders here in this country. And, I suggest they make up the Obama base.

But there are surely many others as well, though I can tell you first-hand that among those who many call "bible-thumpers" there is near unanimous support for defending Israel. TD

Video: Ron Paul Just May Be Lying About Those Old Newsletters  ..."This is rather like Obama’s defense on the Jeremiah Wright problem, isn’t it? Except, that in Ron Paul’s case he’s claiming that he wasn’t the man in the pulpit, and didn’t listen to the words coming off his own pen. So it’s even less plausible than Obama’s take on Rev. Wright.

"How is Ron Paul different from any other politician caught in a trap? How is this defense materially different from Anthony Weiner’s “I wuz hacked!” defense? Ron Paul, the only man we’re told can save America, was either lying about the newsletters in 1995-96 when he promoted them, or he’s lying about them now because they’re a problem for his campaign. And if he’s lying about them now, then his best defense is that he incompetently managed a newsletter but now wants to manage the executive branch of the federal government.

Since we're discussing Ron Paul...

Video included: The man is a Truther, but he won’t admit it because he knows it would sink his presidential run.  "Paul’s resilient strength in the polls is one of the more disturbing sidebars in the GOP primary. He has a few good ideas on economics, but in no way do those make up for his foreign policy. He discounts entirely the role that beliefs and ideologies play in our enemies’ thinking and ambitions. He constantly blames US foreign policy for 9-11, putting him in the same league as Ward Churchill and Rev. Jeremiah Wright, possibly even to the left of Dennis Kucinich. Paul is not even being honest about his true beliefs concerning 9-11, that moment of “glee” he describes above. Pay close attention to how he answered this question about 9-11 just a few weeks ago."

Paul is that guy in every car pool who, as he was expounding, the other riders would look sideways at each other and try to change the subject with something like, "so how'd them Cowboys do last Sunday?"

Byron York: 'Mischief' voters push Paul to front of GOP race   "Given Paul's views on the Fed, the gold standard and social issues, not to mention his isolationist foreign policy, the polls have left some politicos wondering whether Republican voters have somehow swerved off the rails. But there's another question that should be asked first: Who are Ron Paul's supporters? Are they, in fact, Republicans?"....

" "Paul is doing the best job of getting those people who aren't really Republicans but say they're going to vote in the Republican primary," explains Smith. Among that group are libertarians, dissatisfied independents and Democrats who are "trying to throw a monkey wrench in the campaign by voting for someone who is more philosophically extreme," says Smith."

Tony Branco

Trust me, I didn't find this Paul cartoon by going through Google. The general thrust of Google is anti-conservative, -Republican. You can be sure of that when you search any political topic and, of course, this cartoon did not show up in a search of "ron paul cartoons".