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

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul Won't Endorse Romney, Sees "Essentially No Difference"
The New American ^ | 10-12-12 | Jack Kenny

Posted on 10/12/2012 3:00:10 PM PDT by kingattax

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-102 next last
To: Longbow1969
That's what primaries are for - you're chance to promote and work for a candidate you can truly be excited about. General elections are a different animal. They are a choice between the only candidates that can win. In our 2 party system, that means you'll usually have 2 options and neither will be all the great. General elections are not an affirmative endorsement of any person or ideology, they are a simply a choice between the only candidates that can win.

These Ron Paul dipships think they are the only ones who understand the founders' brilliance, but fail to see the wisdom in party politics.

Let's face facts, Ron Paul supporters only care about the cult of personality called Ron Paul, not the founding documents.

51 posted on 10/12/2012 3:57:59 PM PDT by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
Ron Paul ran as a Republican and should have endorsed the nominee.

But Ron Paul happily swallows whatever the Republican campaign ejaculates into his campaign!

52 posted on 10/12/2012 4:00:44 PM PDT by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Ron Paul said, “Before I endorse Romney I will need to see that he’s a nut...like me.”


53 posted on 10/12/2012 4:01:04 PM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Coming from the creep who blamed us for 9-11-01, who cares


54 posted on 10/12/2012 4:01:10 PM PDT by italianquaker (The 47 pct need to pay their fair share)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
“I have to say, people that say the two are the same are simply morons with no brain cells left.”

I have to say, people that cannot see the differences between the two (Romney and Obama) are simply morons with no brail cells left.

55 posted on 10/12/2012 4:03:25 PM PDT by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969
One of the biggest problems with Romney is the SC Justices. Obama would never get to appoint a replacement to a conservative to to the SC Scalia and Kennedy will hang on until as Republican is elected. If one of the Conservatives justices were to die in O’s term the GOP if they had any balls couls filibuster the nominees.

Romney on the other had will almost assuredly get to replace Kennedy ans Scalia and given his record in Massachusetts he will appoint liberals shifting the balance of the court to liberal for 40 years into the future.

As to only choosing between two candidates in the General election I just don't buy that argument. If the GOP looses this election because they did not nominate a conservative at the top of the ticket then something may change but if they get away with nominating ever more liberal candidates each time around then only more liberals will be elected and whether they have a R or D behind their name will make no difference..

56 posted on 10/12/2012 4:05:04 PM PDT by montanajoe (Blamed Flamed Shamed didn't vote for R/R or O/B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: italianquaker
Coming from the creep who blamed us for 9-11-01, who cares

That's right.

Ron Paul thinks radical islam is only angry because of our foreign policy and not the inherent evil of their religion. That makes Ron Paul unqualified to be a dog catcher.

57 posted on 10/12/2012 4:05:39 PM PDT by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Apparatchik
Well said. Paul is a narcissist who would put his own interests above the good of the nation. His followers (as they are often called) are just that- lemmings that will follow him over a cliff.

The dirty little secret down here in Texas is that Ron Paul keeps running for President because it's now a quadrennial family business. He collects campaign contributions from his Paulbot minions, and the rest of his family works at salaried positions on his campaigns, which are generally designed to go nowhere except to the bank with his supporters' money.

If he endorses the candidate who defeated him in the primaries, it undermines any potential claim he may have as a viable alternative in the next election cycle. And in four years, if his health is still good, Big Ron Paul will be back, fleecing his earnest yet gullible supporters for yet more campaign cash. And once again, his family members who aren't otherwise employed will have salaried positions once again.

Pretty shrewd racket, I'd say.
58 posted on 10/12/2012 4:05:52 PM PDT by Milton Miteybad (I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Milton Miteybad
The dirty little secret down here in Texas is that Ron Paul keeps running for President because it's now a quadrennial family business.

I guess "Dr Paul" makes more money as a politician than as an MD.

59 posted on 10/12/2012 4:07:42 PM PDT by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

For a smart many he sure is stupid!


60 posted on 10/12/2012 4:12:42 PM PDT by CincyRichieRich (Keep your head up and keep moving forward!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi
Is he even practicing these days?

Yeah...I'd say he's traded in his stethoscope for the political soapbox.

I'm not saying Ron Paul is a bad representative, or a bad physician or a bad person. But his presidential campaigns are little more than vehicles to steer his supporters' political donations into his coffers. I'm just surprised so few of them actually see it.
61 posted on 10/12/2012 4:13:05 PM PDT by Milton Miteybad (I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
"[Romney] will listen to us"

Talk about losing touch with reality.

62 posted on 10/12/2012 4:15:04 PM PDT by Sloth (If a tax break counts as "spending" then every time I don't rob a bank should be a "deposit.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe

Hard to believe you don’t see any difference between the communist and the republican. A communist by the way who supports marxist and islamic terrorists, and has the full support of the looney liberals who don’t give a rat’s ass about anything you stand for. Why are you even here?


63 posted on 10/12/2012 4:16:23 PM PDT by Kirkwood (Zombie Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

64 posted on 10/12/2012 4:20:58 PM PDT by Brandonmark (2012: Our Hope IS Change!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood
“Why are you even here?”

Because this is a Conservative not a Republican site.

If the owner chooses to make this a Republican site then I would not be here.

May you should take your concerns that there are Conservatives here and not just Republicans up with the owner...

65 posted on 10/12/2012 4:24:15 PM PDT by montanajoe (Blamed Flamed Shamed didn't vote for R/R or O/B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

I always have thought that this little gollum was insane. This does nothing to change my opinion of the little man.


66 posted on 10/12/2012 4:35:41 PM PDT by House Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe

This is the great thing about you Ron Paul supporters.

Once we pin you down with the facts, you always resort back to your emotion based drivel. The Paul crowd, and the Left, share that character flaw. You assume emotion based drivel screamed at volume make up for a complete lack of reason and fact.

The veneer of reason the Paul crowd affects is about a millimeter thick.


67 posted on 10/12/2012 4:37:19 PM PDT by MNJohnnie (Giving more money to DC to fix the Debt is like giving free drugs to addicts think it will cure them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

What’s with the sunglasses? You going for the Clancy look?


68 posted on 10/12/2012 4:39:00 PM PDT by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi
Ron Paul thinks radical islam is only angry because of our foreign policy and not the inherent evil of their religion. That makes Ron Paul unqualified to be a dog catcher.

I'm certainly no fan of Paul, but it should be pointed out that the Republican nominee thinks there is no connection between Islam and jihadism.

69 posted on 10/12/2012 4:46:56 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (The only wasted vote is one that doesn't represent you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
How can a person who DESPISES leftism, moral corruption, and the pretentious tomfoolery of the left even SAY such a thing?

The problem is the media and the punditry have created a false narrative. Conservatives have bought it. Voters have been told that there is a clear choice. On one side is a Democratic party that believes government should take extraordinary measures to stimulate the economy and alleviate the effects of unregulated greed among the big Wall Street banks. On the other side is a Republican party offering radical free market policies that would cut government spending to the bone and take us back to gilded age of robber barons and sweatshops.

The portrayal of the Democrats is for the most part accurate. They really do believe that government should act despite the fact that every time such policies have been enacted they have failed. One only has to compare the responses to the depression of 1920 and 1929. One resulted in a quick recovery, the other lead to fifteen years of stagnation that was only relieved by the demobilization at the end of World War II and the explosion of prosperity in the 1950s brought about by the reduction of federal economic management.

It is the image of the Republicans that bothers me. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are being portrayed as champions of free markets. Nothing could be further than the truth. Ryan's proposed budget has been criticized as “drastic.” The truth is even Fox News recognizes that Ryan's budget plan doesn't actually slash the budget. Even the “cuts” are pushed out years from now, when Ryan and company are long gone. In reality, the Republicans wouldn't know a real budget cutting plan if it bit them on the anal sphincter, and would not vote for it if they saw it. Further, there is NOTHING “free market” about Mitt Romney. He is pro-big business, corporatist and state union with business, but “free market” is nothing that even comes close. I said six years ago that Romney would NEVER get the nomination of Republicans,as he was a socialist. He still is. Hasn't moved. The republican party has. The so called “conservatives” show what the libertarians have said all along. You have no principles when it comes to seizing power and will sell out anything. You are just statist power freaks, like the left. The only thing Romney has going for is that he is not Obama. This will result in a victory which winds up being an unmitigated disaster for those who think they are “saving the country.”

How can I say this? Well, Romney is going to win the WH, due to the horrific ineptitude, muddleheaded leftism, and general incompetence of the current resident. All the freepers are going to cheer and congratulate themselves that “disaster has been averted.” Hooray!

The problem is that the policies of Romney will only hasten the coming collapse. Perhaps the stupidest hope of conservatives is that they are “buying time” with Romney. FOOLS AND DUNDERHEADS!!! THERE IS NO TIME. The state of bankruptcy is HERE.... NOW. The next president is going to preside over an economic catastrophe that is going to make the great depression look like a happy picnic. There is no avoiding it. The worst is yet to come. There will be a collapse worse than 2008 and if Romney is President what the majority of the people will believe is that his “free market” plan did not work. All they will know is Romney's “radical capitalism” caused a disaster and the very idea of genuine free market solutions will be set back for decades, if not generations.

This is foolishness in the extreme.

You think you are saving us. In fact, you may be destroying a belief in free markets for generations.

Enjoy your victory, suckers.

Folks who talk about voting “the lesser of the two evils” need to learn to think past the next election. You are in fact voting for the GREATER of the two evils, no matter how much you protest to the contrary.

70 posted on 10/12/2012 4:47:36 PM PDT by AK_47_7.62x39 (There are many moderate Muslims, but there is no such thing as a moderate Islam. -- Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe
If one of the Conservatives justices were to die in O’s term the GOP if they had any balls couls filibuster the nominees.

Dude, you're thinking is loopy. Even if the GOP had the nads to filibuster one attempted liberal replacement for Scalia, Thomas or Kennedy, they can't keep doing that for his whole term. And defeating one bad nominee doesn't guarantee the next attempts will be better. And the Supreme Court isn't the whole ball of wax either - there are all the circuit and appellate appointments too. You are taking an awful chance just assuming that Obama won't be able to replace a conservative judge. Additionally, Ginsburg will likely step down. That means there is at least a chance that Romney will be pressured by conservatives to nominate a conservative replacement that might shift the balance in our favor. Obama will replace Ginsburg with another leftist.

71 posted on 10/12/2012 4:48:25 PM PDT by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
No essential difference.

Maybe Ron Paul feels like the Freeper who posted this:

Who cares who wins. There is no alternative to corrupt governmant just a variation... The house and even Rayn just voted to give Obama every dime he wanted. Obama hasnt been the irresponsible one the republicans in the house are by feeding his communist plans with every stinking dime he wanted. They are culpable and cannot be trusted with our liberty anymore than the left.

I am convinced evil is evil and I will not support evil whether its an R or a D.

I'm out of this round. The country is dead either way.

There are plenty of similarities between Mitt Romney and President Obama. During Romney's term as governor in Massachusetts he did just what President Obama did - force everyone to buy health insurance. The Romney health reforms caused havoc for independent contractors and small businesses in MA. Now he says he's against Obamacare, lets hope he's telling the truth now.

However, as liberal as Romney is, he's less bad than Obama, and sitting out the election is of course a bad idea. One don't have to be "for" Romney, just against Obama.

There is no need for Ron Paul to endorse anybody, since for most voters hearing that Ron Paul endorses a candidate doesn't help the candidate. But we all know what Ron Paul thinks of the current administration's policies, and that may steer some of his supporters away from the Democrats.

72 posted on 10/12/2012 4:51:54 PM PDT by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969
Of course Obama will replace Ginsburg with a leftist but that wont change the balance of the court. Romney will replace Ginsburg Scalia and Kennedy with leftists and the game is up.

Look at Romney's appointments while he was governor of Massachusetts. Liberals all..

I don't believe what any politician says I look at their record Romney appoints liberal judges..

73 posted on 10/12/2012 4:54:35 PM PDT by montanajoe (Blamed Flamed Shamed didn't vote for R/R or O/B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
Ron Paul, the maverick Texas congressman

The last time I heard the term "MAVERICK" was a week before the MSM's poster boy against Bush lost his bid for president........Two years of hearing "The Maverick John McCain" got to be pretty nauseous.......

Do we now have a new "MAVERICK" in our party?

74 posted on 10/12/2012 4:57:12 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco (Jab him with a harpoon.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe

F#@* all the Losertarians who come here to FR and spew their filth.


75 posted on 10/12/2012 4:57:57 PM PDT by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

The crazy uncle speaks. Go back to the basement RP, nobody cares what you have to say. Your occutard followers will vote for you. Go hang out with them.

What we need to do is kick this fool out of the Republican party. He needs to go back to his own party.


76 posted on 10/12/2012 5:15:26 PM PDT by History Repeats (Drink plenty of TEA, but avoid the Koolaid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

well said. Wow. anyone that prefers Obama to Romney has no business posting at this site


77 posted on 10/12/2012 5:20:14 PM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Drango
I always liked Reagan's three legged stool explanation for what a Conservative is ..you had to have the morality of a social conservative, the intelligence of a fiscal conservative and the world view of a military/defense conservative.

I was always a bit confused as to how libertarians have come to be identified as conservatives over the years as they are a one legged stool by Reagan's definition

78 posted on 10/12/2012 5:23:53 PM PDT by montanajoe (Blamed Flamed Shamed didn't vote for R/R or O/B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration

Pardon the joe Biden moment but
The differences are black & white.
There’s no comparison on issues, values, leadership, and moral values.


79 posted on 10/12/2012 5:24:01 PM PDT by Morris70
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe
A little L Ron history of POTUS endorsements ...

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.

And alliances .....

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.

And LRon has got his own endorsement .....

maher would vote for LRon

I am so glad this boil on the butt of the GOP has run his last race.

80 posted on 10/12/2012 5:28:59 PM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Steamburg

That’s what happens when people stop thinking with their heads and start letting their wish list become their reality.
We can only hope the little roach gets stepped on in the near future. Rand needs to learn from this. He is not bigger than his supporters and he is relevant only so long as his message is coherent.


Okay..I’m somebody who was praying that Palin would run. So, I looked at Cain, then Paul. I participated in the caucus, cast my vote and my guy lost in the long run. So, I wait it out and see Romney is the fella that the majority of the REPUBLICAN party wants.

My next choice is to stay home...NOT going to happen, cast my vote for someone other than Obama and Romney...NOT going to happen, vote Obama..Not in this lifetime OR any other, or vote for Romney..yeah, I can and will do that.

I’m not a purist .. I’m not close-minded..I want the best for my country. Paul is acting like the kid that takes his ball and goes home..and so are SOME of his supporters.

This is the old “paint ‘em all with a broad brush” crap. Just because I like the fiscal policies that Paul put forth, I can’t justify staying home or voting for Paul. How does that change the mess we’re in?

I guess I just want to make it clear that there are plenty of people that had their eye on Palin, Paul and others that are indeed voting for Mr. Romney.

I’ll also go as far as saying that I really had to hold my nose and vote for McCain last time around. The only reason that I could do it at all was because of Palin. I don’t have that negative feeling with the Romney/Ryan ticket.

Just wanted to vent a wee bit.


81 posted on 10/12/2012 5:34:36 PM PDT by stillafreemind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe
Hey pal peddle your book with someone other than me..

Radio host and author of Ameritopia, Mark Levin says, "As we head into the most important election of our lifetime, C. Edmund Wright reminds us why, and gives us a laugh at the same time."

As Herman Cain says, "C. Edmund Wright's sharp wit has been a must-read on the web for years, and now you must read this book!"

Called "rocking great fun that hits liberals in their weak spot, reality,” by Mary Matalin

82 posted on 10/12/2012 5:43:45 PM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

If I were Mitt, I’d be greatly relieved. LOL


83 posted on 10/12/2012 5:43:53 PM PDT by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dalebert
I am done with him...I see no difference in him and Biden

My first reaction upon reading the headline what "What a jackass!" - which is exactly what Judge Napolitano said today about Biden. We agree.

84 posted on 10/12/2012 5:53:44 PM PDT by Always A Marine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Always A Marine
My first reaction upon reading the headline what "What a jackass!"

Cong. Paul is leaving public life.

He won't be missed...

85 posted on 10/12/2012 6:03:04 PM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA; Ignorance on parade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
Ron Paul ran as a Republican and should have endorsed the nominee.

You are correct, sir.

86 posted on 10/12/2012 6:04:09 PM PDT by Always A Marine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
Paul refuses to support Romney because he does not want to disappoint his base, which is made up primarily of antiwar nuts who live in their parents’ basements. Sure, Paul does make a lot of sense when he talks about fiscal responsibility, but that is not why he has such a fanatical following. Most of those die-hard fans are much closer to being whacked out Democrats in their beliefs than conservative Republicans. Ron Paul is far less concerned about the future of our country than he is about the future of his cult status.
87 posted on 10/12/2012 6:04:48 PM PDT by Nevadan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Isn’t Ron Paul part of the reason Romney is the nominee? And now he has the nerve not to endorse him.


88 posted on 10/12/2012 6:13:16 PM PDT by ThomasSawyer (Democratic Underground: Proof that anyone can figure out how to use a computer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark

Ron Paul likes Obama stance against Israel too much. Maybe Pres. Hussein can invite Iranian press tv to interview him as Ron Paul did.


89 posted on 10/12/2012 6:17:28 PM PDT by Stepan12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Ron, yuh big dummy! The ain’t the same! Romney’s the white guy with the sane VP.


90 posted on 10/12/2012 6:29:30 PM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Further proof that Paul is mentally deficient.


91 posted on 10/12/2012 8:07:46 PM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
"defective judgment"

Paul exhibits the same kind of political xenophobia that made Birchers conclude Eisenhower was a communist. He might have some legitimate points to make about spending and a few other areas, but overall he comes off as a nut.

92 posted on 10/12/2012 8:11:26 PM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

No need for me to add anything, you pretty much laid down the landscape.


93 posted on 10/12/2012 8:48:34 PM PDT by Free Vulcan (Election 2012 - America stands or falls. No more excuses. Get involved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: AK_47_7.62x39

Is reassuring Obama’s re-election the best scenario for the USA?

Voting is a civic duty is it not? How does throwing a tantrum and taking your ball and going home because you didn’t get your way beneficial to the country? I thought that part of being an adult or a good citizen was sometimes having to make decisions out of less than perfect options.

Yes, I have heard all of the arguments. NO MORE!! blah, blah blah. Or the better one, someone Romney will make things worse and then it will get blamed on the GOP.

Those are all strawman arguments. One, I do not think that Romney could be worse than Zero. I definitely didn’t support him in the primaries. But if given the choice between him and Zero, I choose Romney. At least with him there is a snowball’s chance of getting something done to fix this mess, even more so with a GOP House and Senate. With Zero, there is no chance, no matter who controls the House and Senate. Not to mention the fact the we WILL lose the SCOTUS for a generation or two. And we know that Romney is a US citizen and does not hate this country. And to think that he and Obama are the same in their views of how to run an economy and their qualifications is ignorant at best.

Obviously, we all needed to support our candidate in the primaries. But in the general election, we MUST be rid of Obama. If not, we can all pat ourselves on the back and gloat about how “principled” we are as the country we love circles the drain.

Besides, I do not know why sitting out the election because the “right” candidate (whatever that is)was not nominated is considered the only position of principle. My position is also one of principle, defeat Obama. When I vote against Obama, I will be doing so with just as much principle as the person who withholds their vote because they didn’t get their way.

This is nothing personal towards you, it is just so frustrating to see this sentiment so prevalent on this site. Do you think the average voter thinks this way? They will vote one way or the other. If true blue Conservatives won’t support the GOP candidate, why should they? In the end, politics is the art of the possible.

You have to hand it to liberals and Fabian Socialists for one thing. They understand incrementalism. They seem to be smart enough to understand that in the real world you usually don’t get everything that you want in one fell swoop. Why can’t Conservatives understand this?


94 posted on 10/12/2012 10:44:07 PM PDT by BizBroker (Democrats know nothing. If they knew that they knew nothing, that would be something. But they don't)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Does Ron Paul endorse anyone but himself and his “traitorous” son who obviously has a slightly different world-view?


95 posted on 10/13/2012 2:35:50 AM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle

No essential difference. Not voting for Romney. Like RP.


96 posted on 10/13/2012 2:49:09 AM PDT by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle

No essential difference. Not voting for Romney. Like RP.


97 posted on 10/13/2012 2:49:24 AM PDT by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Buh-bye, Paul.


98 posted on 10/13/2012 3:09:48 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Obama should change his campaign slogan to "Yes, we am!" Sounds as stupid as his administration is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Just Uncle Crazy being Uncle Crazy.


99 posted on 10/13/2012 5:05:47 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

bttt


100 posted on 10/13/2012 5:34:40 AM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-102 next last

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