Ron Paul on C-SPAN Washington Journal NOW

C-SPAN Washington Journal ^ | 12 Oct 2007 | Self

[angkor]

Heads up you Ron Paul people, your man is on C-SPAN right now.

[longtermmemmory]

He just did the surrender bring em all home speech.

He also does not see any foreign enemies.

FOOTNOTE: He must have stolen one of Fred Thompson’s blue shirts and either romney’s or guilinni’s blue/white ties.

[longtermmemmory]

ronpaul is arguing about monetary theory and arguing for the gold standard...

The only think missing is the tin foil hat on the man.

[mnehrling]

The call spamming is planned.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=24584

[longtermmemmory]

rife with seminar callers.

[Ingtar]

Does he count as Democrat or Republican time on CSPAN?

[alice_in_bubbaland]

or a rubber room...

[longtermmemmory]

from the link:

Falseflagop
Senior Member About:
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 112

REMINDER: Call CSPAN today and talk to Dr. Paul at 9:30 AM !!

---

Flood those lines and thank him for

Being the only Cnadidate to discuss:

1) The Fed
2) North AMerican Union
3) Ending the War

Tell him he is our only hope because without him this nation is done as antion this is a MUST WIN and if they Fraudeluently take the election HE MOST GO 3rd PARTY !!

Thanks for being a TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOT HERO!

---

Hillary’s third party useful idiot.

WOW THEY ARE FOLLOWING THEIR SCRIPT LIKE GOOD LEFTISTS!

[rightwingintelligentsia]

One of the PaulBots called Mark Levin last night. After spewing the regular talking points, Mark tried to engage him somewhat, but he eventually slipped into “controlled demolition” of Tower 7 mode and that’s when Mark hung up.

[mnehrling]

That would be Triton,
See post #7 here.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=24402

[West Coast Conservative]

PAUL IS SURGING!!!!!111




Gallup

[EagleUSA]

Another uptopian liberal idiot. Someone just buy him a white flag and let him go wave it at the insurgents in Iraq.

[alice_in_bubbaland]

LOL! I heard that call. The paulbots are nuts, just like him.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Ron Paul is the Republican version of Gravel. He doesn’t fit.

[mnehrling]

On a related note:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1910197/posts

[svcw]

He really is insane. He should not be at any more debates, well, except that he makes the other candidates look credible.

[mnehrling]

Here he is:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=24604

[alice_in_bubbaland]

“Astroturfing for Paul.” Too funny!

Why are all the “911 Truthers” for RuPaul? Wouldn’t they gravitate towards a liberal dim candidate? A Kucinich type, perhaps?

[Long Island Pete]

Ron Paul should only be allowed on the Food Network. He is a fruitcake and nuts.

[longtermmemmory]

He should just be voted off the debates.

He is a distraction from the adults.

Based on his own cspan comments, all his support is comming from pot-head college kids.

[ElkGroveDan]

ping

[longtermmemmory]

I think the 9/11 kooks are for ronpaul because it is they way to be a spyyyyyyy. To stick it to the haliburton republicans.

(meanwhile daddy’s haliburton stocks paid for jr and juniorettes college dope fest)

[longtermmemmory]

I have it:

Ronpaul is Timothy Leahry’s mini-me.

[lormand]

Stenchippie Surrender Ping.

Sorry if you are double pinged or are on the thread already.

[Paperdoll]

It is chilling to realize there are real people for Ron Paul out there - I mean like the guy next door, or the checkout clerk at the grocery store! Amazing!

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

"Tell him he is our only hope because without him this nation is done as antion this is a MUST WIN and if they Fraudeluently take the election HE MOST GO 3rd PARTY !!"

[WakeUpAndVote]

[Right_Wing_Mole_In_Seattle]

“ronpaul is arguing about monetary theory and arguing for the gold standard...

The only think missing is the tin foil hat on the man.”

Don’t worry. As the dollar becomes worth less and less and you see the buying power of you paycheck become smaller and smaller, you’ll come around to gold!

[hedgetrimmer]

He also does not see any foreign enemies.

You MUST be talking about president Bush, who is giving US sovereignty over to the World Court and freedom of the seas over to the International Seabed 'Authority' right now. If you want to talk about an enemy of the people, you'll have to pick someone else, and there are PLENTY of them in office RIGHT NOW.

[lormand]

Try listening to Prawn Paul’s own words. Prawn does not see any foreign enemies. If you don’t like that statement, don’t try diverting attention away by pointing at Bush.

[hedgetrimmer]

President Bush is a clear and present danger to our sovereignty. His position on the Law of the Sea treaty EMPOWERS our enemies over us. Its VERY clear that the president does not think the US has foreign enemies and he is offering the US up to these phony internationalist groups which is a direct violation of his oath of office. Since your post declares that Mr. Paul doesn’t think we have enemies, I was merely pointing out that we have a man in a position that is truly dangerous to the American people, he is in office right now, and you should properly be discussing HIM as the one who doesn’t feel America has any enemies. Or maybe he realizes we do, which makes his positions even WORSE.

[lormand]

"President Bush is a clear and present danger to our sovereignty."

Since you are a Ron Paul fan, I automatically do not accept your premise that this treaty would empower our enemies, which puts you in a bit of a credibility crunch doesn't it? If we have no enemies as Ron Paul suggests, then a position on either way regarding this treaty in terms of "enemy threat" is a moot point right?

[bcsco]

You MUST be talking about president Bush...

No, he's talking about this: Ron Paul: Give Peace a Chance-no possible reason to ever launch military action or initiate a war.

Ron Paul: "'There's nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today,' he said in the interview. 'I mean, we could defend this country with a few good submarines. If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours.'" and: "'The thought that the Iranians could pose an imminent attack on the United States is preposterous,' he said Tuesday night. 'There's no way.'"

Now do you agree that there is no way anyone has the ability to attack America today?

[Captain Kirk]

spamming? We used to call that freeping but I suppose that the we are no longer the revolutionaries here.

[mnehrling]

Freeping is different from Spamming.

Freeping is making members aware of a poll. Spamming is instructing members to use various means to distort the results of a poll through means like multiple browsers and devices, clearing cookies, and other means.

[bcsco]

President Bush is a clear and present danger to our sovereignty. His position on the Law of the Sea treaty EMPOWERS our enemies over us. Its VERY clear that the president does not think the US has foreign enemies and he is offering the US up to these phony internationalist groups

Since I've shown that Ron Paul also, in addition to Bush (according to you), doesn't believe the US has foreign enemies, who do you believe HE would offer the US up to? After all, if a warmonger like Bush would do it, it stands to reason that a pacifist like Paul would.

[Positive]

"Now do you agree that there is no way anyone has the ability to attack America today?

If a country in that region of the world were to launch a massive attack against the oil terminals where we buy so much of the stuff, it would be a de facto attack against us.

So many US haters say that this or that action is "all about oil." A more patriotic way of putting it is that "it's all about protecting free trade with our partners."

We use almost all of the oil we can produce or buy...if we were to lose 10% or more of it our economy and way of life would crumble...sort of like if we were to lose a war.

[bcsco]

If a country in that region of the world were to launch a massive attack against the oil terminals where we buy so much of the stuff, it would be a de facto attack against us.

Ron Paul's vision of an attack on America is an attack on the homeland. His vision apparently doesn't coalesce with the idea that an attack on America's worldwide partnerships is a de facto attack on us. This is a very dangerous approach to take in today's global marketplace.

[hedgetrimmer]

Since you are a Ron Paul fan

Where did I say this?

I automatically do not accept your premise that this treaty would empower our enemies

Why would you be deliberately unthinking on such an important matter?

If we have no enemies as Ron PaulPresident Bush suggests by his actions, then allowing an international court to overrule our justice system is just fine, and allowing an international committee to control the seabed is peachy-- apparently this is your view.

We can surmise from your post, that those most vehemently opposed to pro american presidential candidates are internationalists, and they don't want the looting of American sovereignty and of the American domestic economy to stop.

[hedgetrimmer]

America is NOT a ‘homeland’.

[hedgetrimmer]

After all, if a warmonger like Bush would do it,

Who said that we had begun a hundred years war? How does a nation survive that, especially when our military is smaller than it was during the Viet Nam war, and the number of ships in our Navy is smaller than its been in a century? How does this president think we will win a hundred years war? By contracting out many of the duties to other nations and foreign corporations so they can get rich off it? This is just another special way that the Bush presidency is redistributing our wealth to the foreign interests and internationalists. Now he says it will continue for 100 years. There won't be a US economy left when he's finished.

I don't see how any loyal American can support these policies.

[ejonesie22]

Exactly, the role of out military is to protect our nation, its people and their way of life.

Oil and other trade items are an integral part of that life in 21st century America. Therefore a “war for oil” is actually a good use for our armed forces. Out military protecting our trading partners and the resources we purchase is by its very nature protecting the country.

[bcsco]

America is NOT a ‘homeland’.

Go back and read what I wrote. Then come back and answer the question I posed.

[bcsco]

Go back and read what I wrote. Then come back and answer the question I posed.

[bcsco]

Exactly, the role of out military is to protect our nation, its people and their way of life.

But they'll become unnecessary once RonPaul sits down with the world's leaders and convinces them of the error of their ways. After all we have to "Give peace a chance".

[hedgetrimmer]

Mr. Bush is the man who institutionalized, through the executive branch, the phony concept of American ‘homeland’ in our government, not Mr. Paul.

I would hope that you would correct this glaring misstatement.

[hedgetrimmer]

You support a hundred years war too?

[ejonesie22]

That and a fleet of yellow submarines...

[bcsco]

I never once stated that Ron Paul used the term ‘homeland’. I used that term in defining the borders of the U.S.

Now, go bat to the post you replied to, read it, and respond to my question.

[bcsco]

Go back and read what I wrote. Then come back and answer the question I posed.