Comment: 'Ron Pauls refusal to pass

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I'm sorry you see it that way. (see in situ)

'Ron Pauls refusal to pass

'Ron Pauls refusal to pass bad bills is exactly why Rand could win a statewide election. Being associated with Ron Paul's NO! record is a GOOD thing.'

It's a good thing in our eyes. It's not a good thing in *everybody's* eyes. That was the point. A statewide election is not a countrywide election. He has to appeal to everybody as much as possible. Not just Kentucky, and not just us. I'm not trying to argue with anybody and I certainly wouldn't vote your post down for saying these things. But we're not alone in this country and certain states don't always swing our way. So it's not so much how I see things, as it is I'm trying to see things how others see things as well. I see your point, and I didn't start my reply with 'I'm sorry' like you did. I think that the difference between agreeing and accepting is valid here.

'Where would we be right now if Ron voted for the Patriot act or the war in Iraq?'

The same place? The majority wanted revenge. We can't stand in the way of that sort of overwhelming public sentiment. They vote and pay taxes too. Bush rallied the general sentiment of people stuck in shock and awe mode. Buildings came down, people cried, and he gave great speeches. Irrespective of what I think, I have to step outside my own head once in a while to view things from somebody elses shoes. How are we ever going to understand each other if we don't?

'Ron's bills didn't get passed because the neocons running the House didn't put most of them up for a vote. Even so, the makeup of the house since 2010 has been more favorable for Paul than in the past. Unfortunately, he isn't there.'

Because they didn't like him. I tried to drive that home in the first post. When has our house ever saved face? The majority of them to this day would drive this country into ruin before they would admit they were wrong or stand up with someone who doesn't stand with them. It's a giant grade school cafeteria up there on the hill and Ron didn't sit at the cool kids table. I've learned to accept what is and now I gotta learn to work with what I have available to me.

It's time to keep our friends close and our enemies closer. Convincing people to be a friend is futile and turning your back on the enemy gets you nowhere. I would rather try to convince somebody that my line of thinking can coexist with their line of thinking as opposed to trying to convert them to my line of thinking. That is, in essence, what will ultimately unite people across partisan isles.

Conversion attempts leave a lot of people with the sentiment that you do not accept them as a whole and is almost always met with resistance and regret. We are quick to point that out in our 'democracy via gunpoint' arguments with respect to war in the middle east as Paulites. Why can't we apply that logic in our own home?

Coexistence attempts say 'I respect you, even if I don't agree with you. Can we find common ground?' and leaves people much more willing to work with you than against you. People from all parties, ultimately, if they dig deep enough to put aside themselves; Will landslide unite with an individual that attempts this.

I wish you the best and appreciate your thoughts. But please don't apologize for the way I see this. I wouldn't apologize for the way you see things and am perfectly willing to accept them even if they are not in perfect alignment with my own. there are over 300 million people we share this country with and we just can't all be the same. God speed.