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 ...
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’?