Skip to comments.Ron Paul tells Cheney to back off Obama
Posted on 01/05/2010 10:10:32 AM PST by Free ThinkerNY
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) took a shot at Dick Cheney last night, saying the former Vice President wasn't in any position to be criticizing President Obama.
"Well, I think he had his eight years and he's caused a lot of trouble for our country and he perpetuated a war in Iraq that was unnecessary and wrong-headed," Paul said of Cheney on CNN's Larry King Live. "So I would say that it would be best he not be so critical right now."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Ron Paul is in nitwit. He can take his Chamberlainian foreign policy and shove it up his keester.
Fascinated by Ron Paul’s idealism?
You mean the idealism about taking campaign contributions from Neo-nazis?
NeoNazis or Wall Street Banksters, which is worse?
Goldman Sachs robbed taxpayers of tens of billions, ditto GE, NeoNazis are chuckleheads but they do have the right to political speech and they certainly cannot buy legislation ala Goldman Sachs.
“NeoNazis or Wall Street Banksters, which is worse?”
I see you did not deny that Ron Paul accepted political contributions from neo-nazi’s.
Nah, I recall the story but was unsure whether the donations were returned or not and frankly did not care enough to scroogle it to find out as even “if” he accepted them, I have little problem with Paul doing so.
Imvho, if Republicans are to be consistent they cannot simultaneously complain about “Campaign Finance Reform limiting free speech” while at the same time refusing the equivalent of Speech, which is money, at least that was the law until “Campaign Finance Reform” took effect.
And I see you did not answer my question, which is worse, NeoNazis who make up a tiny fraction of the electorate, or Wall Street con men who robbed tens of billions from the taxpayers.
Which is it?
if we don't have patriots willing to stand up to these tyrannical bastards, then we deserve what we get.
I am so damned tired of these cowards.
Am I the only one to notice the left-winged lamestream media giving Ron Paul much more air time than he deserves, much like they did John McCain back in 2006 and forward?
Are we once again getting set up by the left to fall for who they say is our spokesperson over one we would prefer?
Paul’s whiny little leftist anti-war voice is all of a sudden being heard and written about in several places, even claims of he has new found respect and influence in the GOP.
As I recall, the media did the same thing to us with John McCain.
The media must recognize that Paul is a looney as are his adherents.
So, why, all of a sudden, is Paul becoming the darling of leftist media programs?
However, the media will build him up henceforth. Any enemy of Cheney, no matter how sick in the head, becomes an instant darling of the media.
Yes, but it was a lot easier when we could go to the WH web site instead of searching archives.
The Enemedia did not swoon every time President Bush opened his mouth, and in fact rarely covered much of what he said. If they did his remarks were taken out of context and/or editorialized to the point of being unrecognizable. The sheeple would then parrot the Enemedia talking points, wrong as they were. The so-called republicans in CONgre$$ did much the same, instead of supporting the President.
There were those of us, aka Bushbots, that would actually go to the WH web site and READ what he had said and are quite aware of how he defended his policies and decisions.
Here is what I have at this time. Will look for more in the morning.
National Security Archive
Contains links to all comments, speeches, pressers and Fact Sheets issued on national security topics, including Iraq.
Hmmm, rather I support Americanism of Islamic countries...all deserve to enjoys God’s gift of freedom and dignity.
I think Ron Paul is monopolar (whatever that is?). Maybe he could be understood if we listen to every third word he utters.
Thank you, could I perhaps use you as a reference the next time some ignorant POS right here on FR accuses me of being a Ron Paul supporter?
Yes, it actually happened and I’ve been trashing Ron Paul since he reared his ancient dinosaur-like head last election cycle.
He was first elected in a 1975 special election. Lost the seat in Nov 1976. Won it back in 1978. Stayed until 1984 when he ran for the Senate and lost the primary. Returned to Congress in the 1996 election.
Just when I begin to think maybe Ron is OK, he flips out and says something mindless like this.
Cheney was goaded into speaking out by Obama's constant whining about his "inheritance." But Ron didn't notice because he himself is an accomplished whiner. Unlike Obama, he even has a whining voice to go with the rhetoric. When listening to Ron, I always get the expectation that the next sentence is going to be "Mommy, the big boys aren't playing fair."
I have never understood Ron Paul’s following.
I think the little man is just jealous of Cheney.
I love it when Cheney speaks, and I hope we see his daughter in public office.
He had convinced me to vote for him too....pity. He and Newt Gingrich can forget my support..
How unfortunate it is to have to search so hard for speeches and comments that should have been reported on in the first place.
All former VPs and Presidents just need to STFU about current administrations—this includes Cheney, Carter, Clinton, LBJ’s ghost, et al.
The majority of this country knows Obama is a frickin’ disaster already.
There was quite a bit of discussion concerning Paul accepting funds solicited through a neo-nazi website. His campaign manager refused to return the funds.
This isn’t a matter of consistency. It is one thing for a republican, or anyone else, to protest laws prohibiting campaign donations. It is altogether another thing to accept funds from neo-nazis.
Integrity is the property of having your outside actions reflect faithfully your inner values. If, as many say, Paul is a man of integrity, then his outside actions of accepting funds from neo-nazis does not reflect well on his inner values does it?
And then put it DRIVE again..........
To answer your question, which is worse, wall street or neo-nazis: I’m really shocked that you would ask the question. How can you even consider that a group that advocates the wholesale genocide of entire races as being in any way comparable to mere, to use your term, ‘conmen’?
please, a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the electorate vs the theft of tens of billions in the name of “saving wall street”?
Kooks vs Thieves, one has their own ideas, the other steals from generations of Americans.
It is a matter of consistency, and possibly what is wrong with the Republican Party.
When those same conmen can purchase custom made legislation, the so called “Bankrputcy Reform Act” while Republicans handed the legislating pen over to private interests, it is pretty clear that whom pays the bills, writes the laws.
Cheney tells Ron Paul “Let’s go bird hunting.”
Thanks Free ThinkerNY.
So you’re claiming that “a group that advocates the wholesale genocide of entire races” are just “kooks” who have “their own ideas”...
Exactly when did you decide to abandon common sense and common decency in favor of moral relativism?
How funny, one claims moral relativism, yet the very essence of the complaint about Campaign Finance Reform was “free speech” yet that apparently is “free speech...for those that I agree with”.
Can’t have it both ways astyanax.
You’re either missing the point or ignoring it.
It has nothing to do with campaign finance reform or free speech.
Pretty black and white, I’d say.
Do you honestly believe it is appropriate for a campaign to accept money from neo-nazi groups?
Yes or no?
Paul is an idealist like I’m Vince Lombardi. He’s been playing the Washington insider game since most people on this board were spring chickens, and as for leadership we’re talking about aguy who (if we believe him) couldn’t even run a newsletter.
If you take Newt Gingrich, remove the futurist/technocrat module and replace it with a blame America first module, you get Ron Paul, another silly DC insider who is forever running to the front of the movement to declare himself its leader. No sale.
Ron Paul, a legend in his own mind.
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.