Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul Wins the Democrat Presidential Debate - oh wait!
Washington Exminer ^ | May 6, 2011 | Christopher Malagisi

Posted on 05/08/2011 9:31:49 PM PDT by 6ft2inhighheelshoes

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last
To: Lazlo in PA

You catch that Ron Paul raised over a million dollars on 5/5?

He will have his support like he did in 2008, and 4 years later, he’s a lot more mainstream.


21 posted on 05/08/2011 11:31:41 PM PDT by truthfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: truthfreedom

Already mentioned that. See my post #19.

Now, read my other replies on this thread and get the rest of the story.

Btw, BFD! Ron Paul remains a libertarian kook.


22 posted on 05/08/2011 11:36:40 PM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
I see you don't know wtf you're talking about.

And I see you are a very angry man on an odd crusade after a small potatoes House Rep with absolutely no sizable base and even less of a shot at winning one state in the primaries. Paul was on a tear after Reagan in '88 because of the spending. Now he cites him in his speeches. Hate is way too strong. As for Rothbard, he was an angry kook and racist. Hate would be suitable for him and Lew Rockwell.

23 posted on 05/08/2011 11:41:15 PM PDT by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: truthfreedom
and 4 years later, he’s a lot more mainstream.

You mistake mainstream with just being known. Did you see how his heroin answer went over at the debate? Disaster. Where exactly did the million come from? If I was a crafty Rat, I would be funding this dope to screw up the election.

24 posted on 05/08/2011 11:48:13 PM PDT by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

First, I think the libertine liberals of today would not recognize the liberals of the Revolution.

While watching Paul/Johnson in the debate, I couldn’t help but think about the similarities to the “fake”Tea Party candidates that ran on GOP ballots last year. The point wasn’t get get their candidate elected, but to siphon votes away from from legitimate GOP candidates.

Paul and Johnson, and yes, even Trump will have the same effect with their already-doomed campaigns. Trump especially could do irreparable harm to a legitimate candidate if he seriously got into this race. He could spend millions on opposition research on the other GOP candidates and when he loses the nomination, we’ll be left with the only candidate who hasn’t cheated on his wife (in the last week). Let’s hope that guy isn’t Gary Johnson!

FWIW, the GOP does have a rather detailed platform that outlines what the party stands for and hopes to accomplish. Maybe someone should vet these guys before they are allowed to participate in the debates. They’ve got to agree with (and agree to defend and promote... say...90% of the policies or they’re out of the debate.

Leadership Institute’s Morton Blackwell did something similar in 2008 for GOP Chair election. He sent out lengthy questionnaires to all the candidates for the position including questions about whether or not they agreed with the GOP platform, how they would raise money, how they would win the Reagan Democrats back, and how big of a tent the GOP should be. 37 questions in all http://bit.ly/kjWBLp

How much better would this primary season be if we could just start with something like this? Get them to commit early instead of wasting everyone’s time and money with endless evasive sound bites and a dozens of “debates” that are not actually debates.


25 posted on 05/08/2011 11:51:13 PM PDT by Paul Kib (http://whattoreadtoday.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA
>>>>>And I see you are a very angry man on an odd crusade after a small potatoes House Rep ...

Sorry, bucko. I have this affinity for the factual truth. I come to FRee Republic to promote and defend conservatism and the Constitution. I only get angry at idiots like you who use FRee Republic to spout off with mindless replies and who promote lies and distortions about conservatism and our best conservative leaders like, Ronald Reagan. At least you realize that Rothbard (and Rockwell) was a hate monger when it came to Reagan. There maybe some hope for you after all.

Btw, what spending are you talking about? The House holds the purse strings, not the President. Ron Paul is an idiot.

26 posted on 05/08/2011 11:54:18 PM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: 6ft2inhighheelshoes

I’ve always said that Ron Paul and his ilk are more aligned with the left than they are the right.


27 posted on 05/08/2011 11:56:23 PM PDT by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobaloobob

‘Democrate?...Republican? surely you know they are one in the same by now.’

Sure, Reagan, Obama, no difference at all. You’ve sure got that.


28 posted on 05/09/2011 12:13:40 AM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla (Liberty and Union, Now and Forever, One and Inseparable -- Daniel Webster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton; Allegra

>>> This sounds like it is written by one of the weak, effete, Republican Elite who is deathly afraid of the Tea Party revolution.

“Deathly afraid of the Tea Party revolution.”? That’s a bad joke.

Saturday, May 10, 2008
Cindy Sheehan endorses Ron Paul over Barack Obama

http://wigdersonlibrarypub.blogspot.com/2008/05/cindy-sheehan-endorses-ron-paul-over.html

and earlier:

Sheehan: “I don’t want to even discuss who is likely to be the Republican nominee, because besides having little foreign policy difference between any of them and Hillary, anyone of them would be a complete disaster on matters of war and peace, with the possible exception of Ron Paul (Tx).”

http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1590/t/523/blog/comments.jsp?key=346&blog_entry_KEY=21045&t

>>> I’ve always said that Ron Paul and his ilk are more aligned with the left than they are the right.

See above, though oddly enough he appeals to the Nazis of Stormfront as well. And generally his proponents on FR spend most of their time tearing down republicans and trying to divide and disrupt.


29 posted on 05/09/2011 12:15:47 AM PDT by tlb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Ron Paul’s foreign policy agenda is based on appeasement and capitulation to America’s enemies, and built on the fallacy of isolationism.

Anyone who blames America and not the terrorists for 9-11, does not have all their marbles.

Ron Paul’s domestic policy agenda is not built on the republican notion of smaller government or even the conservative idea of limiting government. No. Paul’s domestic policy agenda calls for a return to the America of 1789. Period. That is pure insanity and would lead to anarchy, chaos and death for many innocent Americans.

Ron Paul needs to be in a straight jacket, heavely medicated and locked up, 24-7-365!


30 posted on 05/09/2011 12:21:17 AM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

No, it’s just true.

Back in 2008, to criticize the US foreign policy was to criticize Bush. In 2008, that did not go over well with Republicans.

Now in 2012, to criticize the US foreign policy is to criticize Obama. In 2012, this will not be as big a problem as it was in 2008.

In 2008, there was no “tea party”. The only “tea party” was the Ron Paul Tea Party Money Bomb.

In 2012, Ron Paul’s son Rand was clearly identified as on of the top newly elected tea party leaders.

In 2008, only Ron Paul made the Constitutionality of the Federal Governments actions a centerpiece of his campaign.

In 2012, likely many candidates will be talking about limited constitutional government.

I saw the debate. The heroin answer was not a good one. I agree with you there. But most of the Ron Paul supporters seemed to really like it. And I did think it was funny.

Ron Paul, though, seemed to be invisioning a world where heroin was legal. I thought his position was that States should make that decision. And no states would legalize it, most likely.

People don’t want legal heroin. But a lot of people would like to see an end to the Federal Governments WOD.

I really do think the argument “Just let the States decide. Less Federal Government intervention.” is a stronger argument than “People aren’t just going to become junkies if heroin becomes legal.” Because even though it’s true, people still don’t want heroin to become legal.

Right now, the people really only want marijuana legal, and that’s only in some states. I thought that Ron Paul’s policies would allow that to happen. Each state would be able to keep as much illegal as they wanted.

But now Ron Paul’s talking about legal heroin, and that’s bound to lose a lot of people.

The media does not like Ron Paul. Ron Paul does present a dangerous threat to the bankers, and last time around, at least, they went out of their way to ignore and marginalize him. Things could’ve changed in 4 years, as perhaps Palin is seen as a realer more immediate threat, and in that context, they might push or hype Paul to try to keep people away from Palin.


31 posted on 05/09/2011 12:41:15 AM PDT by truthfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tlb

I’m a defender of Ron Paul and I don’t tear down other Republicans or divide or whatnot.

I like Sarah Palin. I think Ron Paul would be the better President, but I think Palin is sufficiently Conservative, is the likely nominee if she chooses to run.

I will tear down Mitt Magic Underwear Romney. And tear down RINOs. But, again, in addition to Ron Paul, and Palin, I do also like Bachmann, and like what Cain is saying (not sure about the Federal Reserve job).


32 posted on 05/09/2011 12:47:19 AM PDT by truthfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

Ron Paul chose Reagan in 1976 when most of the Republicans picked the more liberal Ford.

Ron Paul is not pretending to have supported Reagan. You look at the record, way back in 1976.

It most certainly was a big deal back then. Reagan had the Conservatives, there weren’t many, but Ron Paul was (and remains) one of them.


33 posted on 05/09/2011 12:51:11 AM PDT by truthfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: truthfreedom
The media does not like Ron Paul.

Neither do conservatives.

34 posted on 05/09/2011 3:14:32 AM PDT by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: 6ft2inhighheelshoes
Ron Paul is a HERO IN vein!
35 posted on 05/09/2011 4:01:55 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 6ft2inhighheelshoes
Lips that touch Ron Paul's ass will never touch mine.

Cheers!

36 posted on 05/09/2011 4:02:32 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
And lets not forget that Libertarians from Murry Rothbard, the Godfather of modern libertarianism, to Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell, ALL had/have a strong dislike or a pure hatred for what Ronald Reagan stood for.

Revisionist history won't fly here at FR.

Ron Paul was one of the First Reagan supporters. In 1976, when most of the the Republican party was backing Ford, and calling Reagan a "kook", Ron Paul led the Texas Delegation for Reagan at the National Convention.

Reagan and Paul became friends, sharing much of their small government philosophy. In 1980, Paul again supported Reagan who reciprocated with an endorsement for Paul that was featured in Paul's campaign adds.

It is true that Paul became disillusioned by the Republican Party and the Reagan administration when they abandoned conservative economic principles, but he was not alone in his disappointment. Never, however, did Paul repudiate his support for Reagan, nor did Reagan ever repudiate his support for Paul.

Maybe you could read up a little on Reagan and his belief in the Gold standard, his belief in nonintervention or at least not going to war at every provocation, and many other positions he shared with citizens like Paul. Or maybe you are really a libertarian, because posts with wild claims that are not true about libertarianism only strengthens their cause.

37 posted on 05/09/2011 8:19:35 AM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
>>>>>>Revisionist history won't fly here at FR.

I stated the factual truth. Nothing revisionist about that. You're delusional and in denial.

My post #17 gives two links. The first link is to Murry Rothbard's (the founder of modern Libertarianism) trashing of Reagan. Calling Reagan a "cretin" along with many other hate filled remarks in a long diatribe posted on lewrockwell.com. Read it and get informed.

The second link is to a MTP interview with Ron Paul. In that 2007 interview Paul called Reagan a "dramatic failure" as President. Read it and get informed.

Again. Ron Paul's opinion of Reagan from 1976 to 1988 is trumped by his opinion of Reagan from 1988 until today. And no amount of obfuscation from you and others will change those facts. Reagan died a conservative. Paul is a living libertarian loon.

I think your the one who needs to get up to speed on Reagan. I suggest you start by reading "Reagan In His Own Hand", "The Reagan Diaries" and "An American Life".

>>>>>>It is true that Paul became disillusioned by ... the Reagan administration when they abandoned conservative economic principles...

That's because Paul is an idiot. When Reagan left office in January 1989, the top tax rate was 28%, its lowest level since the 1925 tax cut to 25% under President Coolidge. Another great conservative potus. The annual deficit was reduced and on the way down, no thanks to the Democrats who controlled the purse strings. Federal spending as percentage of GDP was down during Reagan's 8 years as potus. Reagan was successful in rolling back the welfare state, reducing non-defense discretionary expenditures and gave us serious reductions in federal regulations. The US economy was booming. Reagan rebuilt the military and won the Cold War.

Ron Paul can only dream about having that level of success. Paul's political agenda would lead to anarchy and chaos. Paul needs to be in a straight jacket, heavily sedated and locked up, 24-7-365! Frankly, I think you should join him.

38 posted on 05/09/2011 9:33:02 AM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Your posts get more strident and irrational day by day. Your Cultish worship of Reagan and inability to face reality is unbecoming to his name. You wallow in the negative and don't seem to be able to move beyond your flawed remembrance of the past. I can hardly think of a FReeper who sounds less like Reagan than you.

Sad.

39 posted on 05/09/2011 11:12:46 AM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

Attacking my screen handle proves, you lost this debate.

Like Ron Paul, you are a pathetic idiot.

Stuff it!


40 posted on 05/09/2011 11:17:48 AM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson