[Ron] Paul rally draws hundreds (Wyoming)

Star Tribune ^ | 10/29/07 | Joan Barron

[buckleyfan]

Glad to know that all those years in law school paid off. Hint: I wasn’t concerned, Counselor. It is also called “free speech”. Further, I’m glad that you recognize that you would have no standing, before making further threats.

I didn’t “cook up” any absurd lie. I didn’t slur Dr. Paul, nor defame him in any way. The statements about Dr. Paul have nothing to do with his commendable treatment of patients, nor running of his office. However, these are not germain. FYI, I think he has several good ideas. It is his Libertarian nature that takes him over the edge into a place that I disagree with. One is his foreign policy, or lack of knowledge thereof. Isolationism is not reality when you are “the” superpower in the world. It is not the way in which to implement security. One should always find out how things work in the macro.

For the record, I couldn’t be a “bile-spewing idiot” nor “troll” if my life depended on it. However, the attacks by Paulites like yourself are rather detracting from the candidate. There is a reason that many do not take Paul seriously. Perhaps you will entertain that it is “defenses” like this one that are one of the reasons.

So then what happened to "he's just in it for the money?"

Just curious where that went.

[oneamericanvoice]

So then what happened to "he's just in it for the money?" Just curious where that went. It didn't disappear. Obviously, I was response. I stand by my statement that I feel Ron Paul remains in the race for the money. My opinion. What other reason could there be for someone that is obviously not going to be the nominee? Unless it is to harm the Republican Party and be spoiler.

[buckleyfan]

It didn't disappear. Obviously, I was response. I stand by my statement that I feel Ron Paul remains in the race for the money. My opinion. What other reason could there be for someone that is obviously not going to be the nominee? Unless it is to harm the Republican Party and be spoiler.

Do you have any idea how contrary your attitude is to the entire nomination process? I mean, why else have it? Why have a primary at all? Maybe Romney should just quit, I mean, lets be honest, he has no chance. How about Fred Thompson... Are they just trying to split the party?

This is exactly what a primary is supposed to be about. The real test comes when the party does pick its nominee. Then - at that point - if any of the other candidates try to continue the race, split off from the party or try to split votes, then you can accuse them of being in it for the money, for the attention, for the controversy, whatever. Heck, you can accuse anyone of anything you want to right now, I suppose, but it really stinks of the attitude that people are supposed to fall in line for whoever the GOP feels should be anointed for 2008.

A lot of the Paul bashers seem entirely aggravated that someone should spoil their primary party by even being involved in the process. The solution is simple: Don't vote for him. I predict that Rudy Guliani will be the Republican nominee. I'm not thrilled about that, but I think he would have a more realistic chance of winning than Fred Thompson, who seems to have become a darling around these parts. Reality bites, as they say. Still waiting for Tom Tancredo or Duncan Hunter to bring something to the table, for instance. We wait.

[oneamericanvoice]

Do you have any idea how contrary your attitude is to the entire nomination process? I mean, why else have it? Why have a primary at all? Maybe Romney should just quit, I mean, lets be honest, he has no chance. How about Fred Thompson... Are they just trying to split the party? I understand the nomination process just fine. "Lets be honest". Yes, let us be honest. There are people that run that have no chance at all of gaining the nomination of their Party, like Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Tancredo, McCain, Hunter, & Brownback, and on the Democrat side, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, & Bill Richardson. I'm not sure that Fred Thompson doesn't have a chance nor Mitt Romney. At this point Mitt has more of a chance than Fred. They have every right to run of course, but for what reason. There are candidates that run for the money, face time, to be a spoiler, or all of the aforementioned. ...if any of the other candidates try to continue the race, split off from the party or try to split votes, then you can accuse them of being in it for the money, for the attention, for the controversy, whatever.... With all due respect, I can make my statements anytime because they are opinions expressed under free speech. ...it really stinks of the attitude that people are supposed to fall in line for whoever the GOP feels should be anointed for 2008. I don't think that at all. However, I wish that candidates who find that they have no chance would withdraw as Brownback did. It demonstrates honesty, integrity, & a clear grip on reality. A lot of the Paul bashers seem entirely aggravated that someone should spoil their primary party by even being involved in the process. The solution is simple: Don't vote for him. The "Paul bashers" are aggravated by his inclusion in the GOP race because most of his ideas aren't sound, nor serious. This is not to say that he doesn't have some that are good, however, then he goes off the cliff. And he takes all the lemings with him. It's like the "Emperor's New Clothes" with Paul supporters. They seem unable to see him for what he really is.