Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul backed Cynthia McKinney in 2008
Charleston (WV) Daily Mail ^ | January 5, 2012 | Don Surber

Posted on 01/05/2012 6:06:35 AM PST by Mustang Driver

Sarah Palin admonished Republicans not to ridicule Congressman Ron Paul. Sarah Palin is wrong. Ron Paul is a disloyal phony who has earned whatever contempt real Republicans have for him and his dangerously naive ideas about foreign policy. Ron Paul has shunned the party in the past, as he was the Libertarian Party candidate in 1988 and in 2008 he rejected the McCain/Palin ticket, instead embracing Cynthia McKinney and other third-party candidates for president 2008.

Like a kid who is losing a game, Ron Paul took his ball and went home in 2008.

But Missus Palin, sadly, seemed to be unaware of his disloyalty.

In her role as a paid contributor on Fox News, Sarah Palin lectured Neal Cavuto: “Here’s the deal, the GOP would be so remiss to marginalize Ron Paul and his supporters as we come out of Iowa tonight and move down the road to New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida, et cetera. If we marginalize these supporters who have been touched by Ron Paul and what he believed in over these years, well, then, through a third party run of Ron Paul’s or the Democrats capturing those independents and these libertarians who supported what Ron Paul’s been talking about, well, then the GOP is going to lose. And then there will be no light at the end of the tunnel. So, the worst thing that the GOP machine can do is marginalize Ron Paul and his supporters.”

Here’s the deal, her analysis is simplistic and contrary to the facts. While I do agree that Republicans should embrace Ron Paul’s supporters, the man conducted himself in a less-than-honorable manner.

(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.dailymail.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 911truther; 911truthers; apaulling; apaulogia; apaulogist; cynthiamckinney; endorsement; paulbearers; paulestinians; paulistinians; paulkucinich08; paulkucinich12; paulmckinney08; paulmckinney12; paulnuts; ronpaul; thirdparty

1 posted on 01/05/2012 6:06:37 AM PST by Mustang Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver

Yeah..gotta be careful not to “marginalize Ron Paul and his supporters”..snicker.


2 posted on 01/05/2012 6:14:42 AM PST by bkepley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver
And don't forget these additional acts from the LRon circus ...

LRon Paul Wants Kucinich in his Cabinet

Nader, who has recently called this progressive-liberaltarian coalition "the most exciting new political dynamic" in the US today …….. "I believe in coalitions," Rep. Paul echoed.

Paul will give his seal of approval to four candidates: Green Party nominee Cynthia McKinney, Libertarian Party nominee Bob Barr, independent candidate Ralph Nader and Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin.

Ron Paul booed during Tea Party debate after Osama bin Laden answer

3 posted on 01/05/2012 6:17:23 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver

I don’t understand why there isn’t an onslaught of negative ads airing 24/7 about this guy and his dangerous thinking. Better to take this guy out of the picture than Newt.


4 posted on 01/05/2012 6:18:57 AM PST by JudyinCanada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bkepley

It’s an “.... and his supporters” sort of thing. Ron Paul is a RINO and should have always been treated as a RINO ~ he’s ran for public office as a member of a different political party and that’s all that takes!


5 posted on 01/05/2012 6:19:27 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver
Cynthia McKinney is a perfectly reasonable candidate.
You are obviously a racist for mocking Ron Paul that way.
/sarc
6 posted on 01/05/2012 6:20:18 AM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver
But Missus Palin, sadly, seemed to be unaware of his disloyalty.

It's not about Ron Paul! It's about winning the votes of the Ron Paul followers that are strongly interested in limited government and adherence to the Constitution.

7 posted on 01/05/2012 6:23:05 AM PST by Onelifetogive (I tweet, too... @Onelifetogive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver

One has to think that this is the Democrat’s “Operation Chaos”. Iowa and New Hamshire are not relevant. Let’s see how this nut performs in real Primary’s.


8 posted on 01/05/2012 6:23:09 AM PST by mmanager (Reagan Revolution + Republican Revolution = Bury Obama in 2012 - Go Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver

Paul is an anti-semitic, libertine loon who happens to make a lot of sense on certain economic issues. I don’t know exactly what Palin means by “marginalize” but that’s the last group we need to pander to. They’re not that far removed in many respects from the nifty Occupy bunch.


9 posted on 01/05/2012 6:28:36 AM PST by bereanway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver

LOL! Your kidding....right? :)


10 posted on 01/05/2012 6:32:08 AM PST by alice_in_bubbaland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver

Ron Paul, Barney Frank Introduce Bill That Would End Pot Prohibition
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/06/23/137372951/ron-paul-barney-frank-to-introduce-bill-that-would-end-pot-prohibition

Also sponsors:The bill is co-sponsored by Reps. John Conyers (D-MI), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Jared Polis (D-CO), and Barbara Lee (D-CA).

Guess what the Feds did after they lifted alcohol prohibition. TAXED IT. Ron Paul needs all kinds of new taxes.


11 posted on 01/05/2012 6:39:39 AM PST by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver

Ron Paul is three-fourths of a nut but some of his supporters may be redeemable to vote for a conservative once Paul fades.

I think that’s what she was saying. Concentrate on espousing the anti-government views of Ron Paul and attract as many of his supporters as you can.

That being said, when are Palin and Herman Cain gonna give it up?

Herman Cain has announced a 9-9-9 bus tour. How weird is that? And what’s in it for him?

His short-lived popularity as a candidate has certainly brought him fame and some fortune but, give it up, Herman.

I loved Palin but kinda feeling the same way about her now.


12 posted on 01/05/2012 6:41:40 AM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive
It's not about Ron Paul! It's about winning the votes of the Ron Paul followers that are strongly interested in limited government and adherence to the Constitution.

Yep. Bump

13 posted on 01/05/2012 6:41:56 AM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JudyinCanada

There aren’t negative ads about Paul because no one takes him seriously.

He runs every time.

He has his devoted cadre of followers who vote for him every time. The number seems to be growing because of increasing anti-government sentiment.

He loses every time.

But he does take valuable votes for legitimate candidates but there’s not a darn thing we can do about that.


14 posted on 01/05/2012 6:44:29 AM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive

“It’s not about Ron Paul! It’s about winning the votes of the Ron Paul followers that are strongly interested in limited government and adherence to the Constitution.”

The irony for those followers is that he tramples the Constitution. The first objective set out in the Constitution is “provide for the common defense”. For that he fails miserably and puts the nation in great danger.


15 posted on 01/05/2012 6:45:08 AM PST by Proud2BeRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver
Ron Paul backed Cynthia McKinney
Newt Gingrich backed Dede Scozzafava
Rick Perry backed Al Gore
Rick Santorum backed Arlen Spector
Jon Huntsman worked for Obama
Michelle Bauchman could not get her Concord's or John Wayne's correct.
Then there's Mitt Romneycare ... God help us.
16 posted on 01/05/2012 6:47:52 AM PST by Boston Blackie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: altura

Give it a rest! Do NOT discount what Sarah and Herman are doing FOR this great country. They are interested, not for themselves for the lust for power - IMHO they are in this for the betterment of “We The People”.

Ron Paul is a loose cannon. He has threatened to go 3rd party. Can you imagine a Ross Perot type of syphoning of even a few percentage votes from the nutcase young punk college students - new breed from the 2008 hopey changy bunch, that now want legalized weed? Get a grip here folks - Sarah is doing what Sarah does best. Get ahead of the game and gently pull us together for the greater good.

She went against the establishment GOP in Alaska. She won. She got hammered in the 2008 election cycle by the very people that McCain / Romney have running their campaign and letting them run that show. Remember the “clothes in the belly of the plane” gimmick that so many folks fell for? Now we all know she is not a clothes fashionista. Remember the set up interview by a McCain (former Romney) activist with Perky Katie? That gal on McCain’s campaign used to work for Katie C. All a set up by the Romney-bots who are now pounding on Newt, Cain et al. Romney cannot be trusted, nor can McCain.

Trust what Sarah is doing here - she is walking a fine line, quite nicely IMHO that will slowly draw the votes from nutcase Paul over to our side (whomever that may be). She is too classy a lady to hammer McCain or Romney head on. Are you getting all this?


18 posted on 01/05/2012 6:56:11 AM PST by WaterWeWaitinFor (If we don't help make a change, then who will? It starts with us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WaterWeWaitinFor; Onelifetogive; Texas Fossil

Palin knows exactly what she’s doing, and that’s trying to steer the Republican Party away from Big Government Republicans and see the good in a group of otherwise nutty (and wrong) people.

Some Ron Paul supporters are simply nuts. They are anti-Semites, anti-American Truthers. These people will never be happy and have nothing to contribute.

Many Ron Paul supporters just want a smaller Federal Government. Frankly, I don’t see any small government candidates running except Rick Perry (rhetorically) and Ron Paul, which is one reason Paul pulled 23% in Iowa. I will *never* support Paul because of his ridiculous foreign policy positions.

So I’ve decided, barring some crazy event, I will not support any of the Republican candidates running, although I am currently leaning Perry. Sure, I’ll vote in the general election for the not Obama RINO, but I’m not going to be any more pleased with voting for any of these morons than I was for voting for McCain. Some who are just as frustrated *will* vote 3rd party . . . if the GOP doesn’t figure out it can get a lot of support from these folks. The GOP must stop pimping Big Government “solutions” to every problem imaginable.

I still have hope, though. Cain injected the idea of radical tax reform. Perry injected the idea of a part-time congress (which will play very well with Paultards). Paul has been pushing the field to support radically fewer government “solutions” to problems. The rest of the field has added *nothing* in terms of ideas.


19 posted on 01/05/2012 7:28:08 AM PST by cizinec ("Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: WaterWeWaitinFor

If by, ‘getting all this’ you mean did I read your post.

I did.

I still respect Sarah. She is a sensible woman with the right instincts. But she’s lost much of her influence by her last minute decision not to run after building up the hopes of so many people.

As far as Cain goes, I admit I’ve disliked the man from the beginning, never saw any good reason for the adoration given him here, and he was forced to leave — not because of attacks but because of his own past behavior.

There were huge numbers of people ready to fight for him, but he knew darn well he’d been a bad boy and left while he still had a chance at some respect.

And I don’t know why you are posting to me about this as I’ve already said I agree with Sarah about not alienating any possible conservatives.


20 posted on 01/05/2012 7:33:43 AM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cizinec

Perry’s plan (which he worked out with Steve Forbes) is for a flat tax. It’s a far simpler and better plan than the 9-9-9 which is convoluted and has many flaws and pitfalls.

I don’t know if any, or how many, of the Ron Paul supporters are still sensible enough to vote for a real conservative if Paul falters, but in case a sizable number are, let’s not alienate them.

However, I suspect that many of them will not vote at all if Paul is forced to drop out. They may just retire to their bunkers and accumulate food and weapons.


21 posted on 01/05/2012 7:37:50 AM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: marty60

No, the bill would have ended FEDERAL prohibition. Every single state in this country has prohibition that would *not* go away. A few states have medical exemptions.

If you are against an end to federal prohibition, that’s fine. Just be honest when you post and don’t insinuate dope would have been legal the day after it passed. It still would have been illegal in all 50 states, making it very difficult for the feds to tax.

There is a case to be made that it should be legal at the federal level, but that’s not what you brought up.


22 posted on 01/05/2012 7:38:40 AM PST by cizinec ("Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: altura

“That being said, when are Palin and Herman Cain gonna give it up?”

See my other post on this thread.

Cain is pushing for a radical rewrite of the tax code.

Perry wants a part-time Congress.

Paul wants a radical reduction in federal intervention in all aspects of people’s lives.

Palin is pimping a radical change in who the powerbrokers are in government, shifting from lobby groups pushing self-interest to individual citizens and citizen groups pushing for better government. That’s why Palin, Cain, Perry and Paul are still pushing their ideas while only Perry is in the running. They actually *believe* in what they are doing. Why is that so hard to understand?

Yes, all of these come with negative baggage (mostly Ron Paul and his foolish, anti-American foreign policy, less Sarah Palin who really has little to gain).


23 posted on 01/05/2012 7:49:30 AM PST by cizinec ("Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: altura

“However, I suspect that many of them will not vote at all if Paul is forced to drop out. They may just retire to their bunkers and accumulate food and weapons.”

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.

Want to see a self-fulfilling prophecy? Have that attitude while supporting Rick Perry. Instead of dropping ad hominems (which may well be accurate), you could actually try by arguing why Perry is a better small government candidate. I’ve even told you I’m leaning Perry. Instead of taking the opportunity to try to make me a supporter, you complain about supporters of another candidate.

There may be a good reason Rick Perry is running behind.


24 posted on 01/05/2012 7:56:40 AM PST by cizinec ("Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: cizinec

Totally agree with your analysis.

The Dems are artists at dividing the opposition. Last thing we need is that. Pubbie Establishment is a negative factor and if they think the “Tea Party” thing is a fleeting event, they are sorely wrong.

It is TIME to DownSize DC!

Eliminate entire Departments and the subversive Commies jobs that they support. The only way to remove them from their positions of authority is to eliminate the host, ie. the agency (which contribute nothing but chaos).


25 posted on 01/05/2012 7:59:24 AM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]




Boop His Soft Bunny Ears!

No Need to Hide in the Grass
Abolish FReepathons!
Step Up and Donate Monthly

26 posted on 01/05/2012 8:22:20 AM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive

It’s not about Ron Paul! It’s about winning the votes of the Ron Paul followers that are strongly interested in limited government and adherence to the Constitution.

___________________________________________________

Exactly, many of the followers who don’t consider his Foreign Policy and are interested in the economic stuff, should be voting against Obama.

Some of his supporters are part of the anti cronyism sentiment that Palin has identified.

When he loses these voters should feel they have a place to go.


27 posted on 01/05/2012 8:24:51 AM PST by Leto (Damn shame Palin didn't run, The Presidency was Her's for the taking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver
I LOVE this country and I know that I am lucky to live in the greatest country the world has every had...

...but I know that our foreign policy at times has been inconsistent, self-serving and less than honorable (especially when a Dimocrat wins the Presidency!) Is it wrong to say that we have contributed to some of the problems in the world that we are now dealing with? FDR's administration was FULL of communists that subverted freedom around the world. We propped up dictators to keep countries from falling to communism at other times.

I don't agree with much of what Ron Paul says about foreign policy, but I agree that it is possible to pick fewer fights around the world and stir up less antagonism against us. We have to realistically deal with the legacy of the past hundred years or so, but we can begin by trying to ratchet down the involvement in other countries' affairs.

28 posted on 01/05/2012 8:35:30 AM PST by Onelifetogive (I tweet, too... @Onelifetogive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cizinec

I don’t know what your problem is with my posts on this thread.

I agree with Sarah Palin that we should play up the good points of Ron Paul as much as we can without appearing to endorse him.

I’ll have to go back and look and see what I said that turned you off because I don’t want to do that. back in a minute.


29 posted on 01/05/2012 9:45:28 AM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: cizinec

Well, I still don’t know what your problem is.

This is not a Perry thread. This is a thread about whether we should cater a little bit to Ron Paul supporters in the hope that some of them are sane enough to move to a conservative if Ron fades.

I’m not ashamed of being a Perry supporter (hence my tagline) but we’re discussing something else here.

It was probably my slam at Herman Cain that offended you.

Herman is not running. He self destructed. Sorry about that if you were a Cain supporter. I tried very hard when he WAS running to avoid criticizing him for the very reason you mentioned. I didn’t want to alienate his worshippers in case of his inevitable downfall - self inflicted, but I can’t see why I shouldn’t say what I think about him now.

If that turns you off of Rick Perry, you’re easily turned off.


30 posted on 01/05/2012 9:52:22 AM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mustang Driver

This douche Surber is a total Romney-bot.


31 posted on 01/05/2012 1:15:47 PM PST by jmc813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: altura

I certainly did not mean for that statement about “getting all this” to be so abrupt or in your face. My apologies. My issue is this. McCain took on the creepy/dirty establishment GOP Romney workers after Mittens threw in the towel in 08. Then those - Schultz (?) et al trashed Sarah from top to bottom. My gut feeling is that she saw Mittens being shoved in OUR faces and sees the same nasty campaign staff that trashed her, now working for “the chosen one” of the GOP elites. This hacks me off to no end.

As most of us here on FR note - we don’t want the elites to pick our candidate any more. Tired of Dole, McCain, Daddy Bush, etc. No Romney no way. I feel committed to backing him (disgusted as can be) if he wins the nomination. Daddy Bush got into office and undid many of Reagan’s accomplishments. sigh... Tea Party we must - get off our duffs and do something to make this 2012 election a banner year to save our country. Again not really meant for you, as much as some on here that want to get along to get along. argh. Have a nice night.


32 posted on 01/05/2012 8:38:22 PM PST by WaterWeWaitinFor (If we don't help make a change, then who will? It starts with us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: WaterWeWaitinFor

Don’t worry about it. It’s totally okay.


33 posted on 01/05/2012 9:17:39 PM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson