Posted on 01/14/2008 2:28:06 PM PST by mnehring
What about it? I broke up the monotony of another Paul bashing thread by injecting some sanity, and off with my head per you?
Of course I will. It is no different then my constant critisism of Cindy Sheehan, Murtha, Clintons, Reid, Al Qaeda, Nutmenajob, etc.
Banned/suspended people can still get pings, n00bert.
I think Ron Paul is the reincarnation of Pat Paulson.
For you youngsters, Pat Paulson was a comedian that every year tried to get on the ticket for President.
He was quite a funny guy and I looked forward to his kooky platform every year.
Unfortunately, Ron Paul is not a joke.
Your boy Bush just came out of the closet as a gun-grabber. I wouldn't go advertising that you're so fond of him. Most Freepers pretty much can't stand him any more.
I would figure you weeble would waddle to the defense of a ping list. If they are suspended yes (I am sure you know that, huh.) Not banned. It means their account is gone.
And you would know this how, exactly?
Without a doubt, Jim runs this forum on his worse day way better than I could in my best days with lots and lots of training.
Some Ron Paul freepers are lucky, others not so lucky. I hope that when the time comes, I can in any way influence the mods to permanently zot Paultards from this forum, even if it is one Paultard at a time.
I'm a patient man (which is another reason I'm not a Paultard).
Paultards - The Hemorrhoids of American Politics
And I've only been suspended once in my entire career for the record, for coming on here $hitfaced drunk and telling that crazy chick "nopardons" to f#%& herself. That was a fun night.
Yeah, your probably right. But hopefully the anger by the far left at the Democrats like Hillary for voting for the war, renewing the Patriot Act, ect.. will cost the Democrats in the general election, and Ron Paul can siphon those votes from them.
Sounds like troll activity to me. Forgive the "spam" comment, I should have said, "Ron Paul Trolls".
Ron Paul Trolls should be banned permanently IMO.
Nothing, his views have simply been exposed to a wider audience.
Typical Paultard diversionary tactic.
This is any of your business...how?
Yeah, so did I.
Obsessed is putting it mildly. Did you happen to read this one.
Having a senior moment, I first mistakenly checked the National Journal's roster of writers. At least they have a few well-known journalists, though they are mostly liberals like Jonathan Rauch and Richard Cohen.
This National Ledger rag appears on about the same level as the National Enquirer for legitimacy.
But that won't stop the determined, will it?
Because Paultards are forum proxy trolls for Al Qaeda and we don't like it here on Freerepublic.
You're unintentionally insulting the FR moderators by saying this. It's obvious who supports Paul. You're claiming that the mods are negligent in their duties by not paying enough attention to them and allowing them to fly below the radar. In reality, with an exception of the Bushbot Holocaust of '07, you get suspended/banned based on your behavior. People like me, Triple E, GovtistheProblem, etc, are nice guys (really freaking good looking too) and for the most part stay civil.
There must be money to made in running for president.
Pretty obscure people do it and they must be able to profit from it.
“You see, the vast majority of Americans want the war to wind down and most of these folks are supporting Paul. “
Yeah, most of the vast majority of Americans are supporting Paul. Please. People want to win, not cut-and-run.
He's way ahead of you:
LOL!!
Still in complete denial.
LOL!!
Keep throwing that good money after bad.
“Let’s just go to a “Pray for President Bush” thread and everything will be roses again.”
No need for jealousy. I’m sure there are people praying for Ron Paul to take the White House. Probably in mosques across Syria and Iran.
He should have been running as a Libertarian from the start. He has no business running as a Republican. It's what I've been saying since the start of the primaries.
Does Giuliani have any business running GOP?
I think it might have been old style Republicans who legalized prostitution here, I’m not sure.
My husband said he ran over two Ron Paul signs today and he also scraped one off of a gas pump in town. Some nut is polluting the area with Ron Paul signs.
“So you guys won’t have any problems if Paul goes 3rd party then.”
None at all sooner the better. Can he leave tonite?
He’s not like Perot.
He will not take any Votes from the GOP.
Apparently the powers that be disagree with you, or else all of us who support Paul would be gone, and there’d be no ping list.
BTW, you’ve been had. EEE does NOT support Ron Paul last time i checked.
Again, you confirm what I have been telling you all along.
Ron Paul is has been in this election for the laughs only. He's enjoying himself by spending other peoples money while simultaneously stroking his over-indulged ego.
He'll be laughing because he realizes that his sycophants will always be there to pour more money into his coffers.
I have found this to be true. In the past few days, many lefty articles have been urging the voters not to vote for Ron Paul. Apparently the thought of government shrinking is more horrible to the authors than the war continuing.For example:
While a Ron Paul presidency would likely end the war, at what price would this come?
Ron Paul uses the term liberty a lot, so let’s take a look at what he means by liberty.
The liberty Ron Paul demands is:
The liberty of the capitalists to exploit without labor laws and environmental protections;
The "state’s right” to prevent Blacks from voting without the interference of the Voting Rights Act (voted against its renewal in Congress);
The "states right" to ban abortions without the interference of Roe v Wade;
The freedom of the government to deny same-sex rights (was an original sponsor of the "Marriage Protection Act");
The freedom of children not to attend schools (would abolish public education);
The freedom of the elderly and disabled to starve (would abolish Social Security);
The freedom of the sick to die (would abolish Medicare);
The freedom of the U.S. to destroy the planet without even the most basic limits on carbon emissions (opposes signing on to Kyoto and all other carbon limitations);
This is, in short, the liberty of a wealthy minority to make their money from the exploitation of labor and the environment with zero interference from labor laws, environmental laws, and the IRS. While his program is liberty for a minority of rich white heterosexual males, it is slavery for the majority.
Simply put, Ron Paul’s promises to end the war are not enough when one looks at the fact that he would eliminate two centuries of hard fought social progress in the United States."
:) I don’t think Ron Paul, or myself for that matter, could ever be called hippies.
Deflecting again.
Please take it to a Bush thread. This is a Ron Paul thread.
There just aren't that many wacky 9/11 Truthers out there.
Anybody who believes that is simply fooling themselves.
Ron Paul was in this for Ron Paul. He enjoys the attention and loves spending other peoples money to get the attention.
What's sad is, he will always have a cadre of sycophants who will fund his ego trips.
Ron who?
LOL!!
I think he already did that with his newsletters. It got him in a whole lot of hot water.
Perhaps he should try a different approach.
What credibility?
Remember on 3 Jan 2008 EEE "guaranteed" a top three finish in Iowa for Ron Paul.
Neither the candidate or his supports have any credibility.
"Stab in the back"???
Interesting way to describe Republican party support for a Republican instead of a Libertarian.
Is that found in a special Ron Paul supporter dictionary?
93 posted on 01/14/2008 5:39:28 PM CST by jmc813 (Don't screw this up, vote for Thompson.)
You're still bitter about how Jim chooses to run his forum. Get over it, broseph.
Pot, meet kettle! LOL
Another deflection by yet another Ron Paul supporter. You and EEE goto the same seminar?
This is a Ron Paul thread. Stick to the topic. Take your Bush criticisms to a Bush thread.
Because it is pinged publicly for all of us to view. As a freeper, you should not want anyone putting out inflated outdated information. If you are a Paul supporter I could see how you would take offense to someone pointing out truthful information.
Would an old-style Republican have favored the ever-growing encroachments of liberties necessary to wage the War On Politically-Incorrect Drugs?
I would suggest that a proper old-style Republican would have supported having some things be illegal, but enforce the laws against them only to the extent possible in a free society. If someone is openly using or selling drugs in such a fashion as to draw complaints, prosecute. But if someone is doing so in such a fashion that nobody is bothered, leave that person alone. The job of police should be to respond to complaints--not to track down every single lawbreaker.
Yeah, cause he loves the slander and lies directed not only at him but his family as well.
Ron Paul was "in this" because he fears for a dying America. Doesn't matter whether one personally likes him or not, he has a message that all Americans need to hear. Guess what? The slander and lying originated from the right, not the left. The Guiliani wing of the party dares not attack the message, so they attack the messenger. The messenger is Ron Paul.
This is the Republican party, and it needs shoveling. You don't need my vote? You won't get it. Enjoy your next POTUS.
Not a all. Please convince your savior to get the hell out of our party. The sooner the better.
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.