Posted on 05/19/2007 5:22:40 PM PDT by jdm
I would rather have Regis Philbin as President than Ron Paul.
Bonafide nut I would say.
Have any of the Paulites bothered to stop, for even a heart beat and ask themselves why the two loudest voices of the Anti American Left, MSNBC and the Minneapolis Star Tribune, are the loudest cheerleaders for Paul?
Ever bother to ask yourself why Paul is being so loudly talked up by the Anti American wing of the hard core Left?
But of course not. Paul merely repeates the mindless slogans and empty talking points of their pet radio ranters so of course the political fringers have fallen completely in love with him
Funny how Mr Paul cannot answer the question of HOW he would do anything. He merely regurgitates a few slogans and sound bites with no base in any sort of political reality and the Fringers go gaga over him.
But that right, it not about fact or reality, for the Political Fingers it is about having their emotional hot buttons massaged, NOT about electing someone who might actually advance what they claim is their “Agenda”.
When did all the Marxist inflitrate the Conservative Movement? Pretty amazing that the movement of "Small Govt" is suddenly over run with Marxist screaming utterly stupid class warfare drivel.
Seems to me the Paulites should be asking themselves just why the hard core Anti American Left is so gung ho in promoting their boy.
< Sorry that is pure projection. The Lemmings here are the Paulites with their utter refusal to look at ANY facts in their mindless resolve to follow Ron "Quixote" Paul off the cliff of Political Insanity.
You Paulties better stop drinking the Kool Aid and try reading some history. The Spanish American War, the Philippines Insurrection, World War I, the Bananna Wars, World War 2, the Korean War and a whole bunch of other armed interventions prove your contention completely without any intellectual merit.
Thank you. I’ve asked that question several times and you are the first to give a realistic answer. I withdraw my objection.
That said, how does Ron Paul square his support of the libertarian platform (he did run for president on such) that supports open borders and his current opposition to illegal immigration? Does Paul still support privitization of highways, police forces, fire departments? I think this is a critical question in case Paul does get the nomination in the same sense that any number of people are challenging other candidates to justify their current positions on gun control, abortion, etc., with their past positions.
You have obviously not read any of my other posts.
You are wrong.
That's a laugh, bushbot. Wait, I forgot, do you prefer the purple or the green?
While the Spanish-American War was pure, Jacobin intervention by the father of the neocons, calling WW I and WW II interventionism is stupid. Who knows what you're babbling about with the Banana War reference (I would say you can't possibly be talking about the mafia war, but with you, who knows?) and the Phillipine Insurrection was action against insurgents in a US possession.
Do you even have a clue what interventionism is? Maybe you should spend some time brushing up on your political science before you post any more of your drivel.
“Casually throwing in the word Libertarian to make Paul seem like a kook...”
So words like “capitalist” or “socialist” or “intellectual” are somehow making those described seem like a “kook”?
Dude, if you’re gonna get into a flame war, then Paul isn’t worth my time. If you’re gonna discuss Paul’s beliefs in terms that are commonly accepted as accurate, then we’ll have a discussion.
Either way you cut it, Paulies flooding forums with rah rah articles, and flaming people who question what they’ve heard, is not gonna get one vote for Paul.
Anything posted by MNJohnnie should come with a Barf Alert.
I see 2008 as an important election battle. We could loose our freedom of speech if Mrs. Clinton or B. Hussein Obama get into power. (That is in the Constitution/Bill of Rights too. So please cut the “Holier than thou -only I love the Constitution” talk) Their “Fairness” innitiatives will shut down opposing viewpoints on radio and TV and on the internet including your obsession with Ron Paul. THAT is why I want to back someone who can win and why I hate to see any time, energy, or money wasted on losers. We all have to get behind a winner to keep hateful Hillary out of office. Lincoln’s House divided comments apply to the GOP also. If people waste time promoting their pet rocks, we loose. Working together against the DEMS we win.
How so?
“Have any of the Paulites bothered to stop, for even a heart beat and ask themselves why the two loudest voices of the Anti American Left, MSNBC and the Minneapolis Star Tribune, are the loudest cheerleaders for Paul?”
I think Planned Parenthood is a louder voice for the American Left, and they have been quite the cheerleader for Rudy.
I object to both.
GRPPL Ping
I like “isolationist nutter”.
When a case can be made for islationism, his analysis of the current world conflict between Islam and the rest of the world is serioulsy flawed and simplistic.
Man, I missed that. What debate?
I did hear it and thats what he said.
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.