Ron Paul Quietly Converting GOP Believers

The Street ^ | August 9, 2007 | John Fout

[KDD]

You babble.

Can you give me an example of what posts you might have looked at in the Pre War Doc section?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=prewardocs

Once again what is your name and where is your research?

My name is KDD and my research can be found in the thousands of posts I've made to this forum over almost 10 years. Other non political research I've done is none of your buisness.

[SJackson]

You only need to to maintain some semblance of credibility.

Weaving conspiracy tales doesn't do your candidate any good since, as you know, his association with conspiracy nuts has been an issue.

Besides, if you're right FR should be clearing people out.

[epow]

Get a grip. I didn't say you did

OK, my bad. I just normally assume that a post addressed to me is intended for me.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

As long as it isn’t Al Qaeda terrorists in Iraq?

Hahaha you're a funny guy! Your screenname is appropriate.

[epow]

How does one register as a “Libertarian” in Texas? He can’t. Why? The only way to state a party preference in Texas is to vote in a party primary in either March or April of every even year.

That's outrageous. A voter should be able to change his party affiliation as often as he wants and for any reason, including that he simply wants to.

On 2nd thought, if I made the rules i would not allow a party change for 6 months prior to a national election. That would prevent the people of one party to change to the other just so they could vote in that party's primary. That happens every primary season in states where voters can vote in either party's primary election so that they can help nominate a candidate for the enemy party who they know would be weak in the general election.

[Abcdefg]

Ron Paul has not "aligned" himself with Alex Jones.

[dirtboy]

Many of the most virulent attackers of Dr. Paul on these threads are Rudy toot kissing rejects

Hmmm - I'm a Fred supporter, I'm glad the Rudy toots mostly left for pinker pastures, but I have serious problems with Ron Paul as well. His antiwar stance is pathetic. His blaming islamofascism on US foreign policy is worse. His contradiction on supporting how war was authorized against Afghanistan but opposing how war was authorized against Iraq is absurd.

But the final straw was his role as shrimp pimp (among other earmarks).

Tom Coburn is a prinicpled constitutionalist. He doesn't play the earmark game. Coburn walks the walk regarding fiscal restraint and federalism.

Conversely, Ron Paul is a rank hypocrite. He has no constitutional duty to pass along constituent requests for earmarks. His voting against the earmarks is pure chicken****.

So all his posturing as a principled constitutionalist is bull. As are the feeble attempts of his gropies (yeah, I left off the "u") to rationalize such away.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

As I've told you before, one can formally endorse a candidate, or one can just say all kinds of positive things about a candidate and say how great he is.

So then there's NO David Duke endoursment of Ron Paul's candidacy...and you know that.

Last time i checked, knowingly presenting a falsehood as if it was true is called A LIE.

i believe that would make you a liar.

Duke does the latter rather than the former to provide Ron Paul will plausible deniability.

Again, i find it mildly distressing that you imply having insights into the mind of David Duke. The fact of the matter is that this is nothing more than your own speculation.

Paul and Duke can play that little game all they want, but it's transparent to those who are paying attention.

Presumes collusion between Duke and Paul, yet another baseless assertion that has no evidentary value, and is again, your own speculation.

[wideawake]

Call all the names and spin all the motives you want.

Ron Paul is David Duke's favorite Presidential candidate and so far Ron Paul has expressed no displeasure at all about that fact.

[BlackElk]

You support paleoPaulie which means that you wnt smaller government in preparation for the introduction of Sharia Law. That seems to be where YOU are "coming from." Miniaturization or elimination of government is a libertoonian goal not a conservative goal (at least not a main goal). We can reduce government by jettisoning the welfare state programs, the edumakshun spending and other waste. We CANNOT reduce our military but should substantially increase it.

If ending abortion, preventing lavender "marriage" supported by taxpayers, obliterating the Islamofascist enemies who attacked the Pentagon itself and destroyed the WTC are not higher priorities for you than the tidy bowl theory of knee jerk government reduction regardless of attendant circumstances, then you should join paleoPaulie and get the heck out of a nation you do not deserve or formally join the antiAmerican antiwar left whose foreign policy of cowardice is your very own.

[ravingnutter]

{rolling eyes}...I know you are getting your kicks out of playing this childish little game, but to me, you are just being obnoxious so this conversation ends now.

[Theodore R.]

In TX and I think about a dozen other states as well, one can change his affiliation only once every two years — by voting in the other party’s primary. There is no other way to do so. You can’t “switch to independent”, you merely become an “unaffiliated voter” instead.

[AdamSelene235]

So every instance of supporting American military personnel against those who want to subvert their mission is, in your mind, Dolchstoss?

Demonizing your countrymen who question the war as backstabbers is very definition of Dolchstoss.

I'm pleased the surge is producing positive results, but I still don't think we have viable long term strategy in the ME. This doesn't make me any less of an American.

[Abcdefg]

Are you finished? That was quite a rant.

[Borax Queen]

Anyone can put anything on their Web sites: this does not imply a connection. The same tactic was used by the liberal members of the GOP in the last couple of CD8 races - defame anyone they don’t like by continually bringing up Duke. It’s simply ridiculous.

[BlackElk]

Puddlegum: IF the $266 Billion Defense Appropriations Bill was for a full year, the only excuse for any patriot to vote NO as paleoPaulie did would be to object to defense spending at a level LOWER than it was IN DOLLARS NOT ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION than it was under Ronaldus Maxiumus in 1981. Somehow, it would seem likely that paleoPaulie was just trying to starve and leave defenseless the few troops we can send to war again. Small wonder our troops are struggling and are largely made up of National Guard and Reserves. For starters we can get rid of paleoPaulie's shrimping subsidies, trolley subsidies for Galveston, bus subsidies for Galveston and every ounce of paleoPauliepork and send the money and weapons to the troops who deserve them.

I think we are dealing with John Anderson II here. PaleoPaulie also wants to provide "alternative sentencing funds"???? Where is the "Ohhhh, there, there, poor baby clause in the constitution?" Is it unconstitutional in the wonderwimp's alternative universe to PUNISH criminals????? I am going to assume here that he does not want to execute people who violate the Sherman anti-trust law or remove manufacturing tags from pillows.

Voted NO twice on putting a stop to agenda oriented laftist trial lawyers from bankrupting innocent (that would be all) gun manufacturers from the previously ongoing campaign to cost them soooo much $$$$$ defending themselves that they would have to bankrupt. Voted NO on prohibiting obesity lawsuits against fast food joints??? I thought libertoonians believe in PERSONAL responsibility and not in "Stop McDonald's before it makes a glutton out of me again! Many people are fat and it's all the fault of Mickey D!!!!! Waaaaaaa!!!! Who gonna pay them???? Puhleeze!!!! Mr. constitution strikes again.

Keeping that tax booty flowing to the globalist, internationalist, Wilsonian, warmongering, United Nations???? Interventionists won't fund the UN. I guess the paleopeacecreep has to.

You may support vouchers and ANYTHING is better than gummint skewels BUT where do YOU find edumakashun vouchers in the constitution???? What he should have been doing is abolishing DC gummint skewels and you ought to pay for your kids too. At least he voted right in voting against vouchers. Stopped clock and paleoPaulie 2X daily.

Whatever reasonable conservatives might do is beside the point. PaleoPaulie, as an antiwar, antiAmerican, dishonest, antimilitary, pork barrel loving, etc., etc., etc. fraud is no kind of conservative.

[BlackElk]

dragnet2: We'll see how the pantywaist does in next year's Congressional primary since he sure as heck won't be running for POTUS after he is humiliated in the early actual voting (not "straw polls" where Soros and the Islamofascisti can buy him votes and left-wing academia can provide him with (you should pardon the expression) footsoldiers).

Mark IV Registrada!

[BlackElk]

No, paleoPauliue and his antiwar and antiAmerican supporters and gullibles are finished. The exit from the kitchen is thataway!!!

[mnehring]

It's all a game to Paul, and to watch his followers spin his votes makes it even funnier. Its often why I just let them post and ramble on.. But, it still is a game over principle.

Here is a good example for you, Fred Thompson is a strong Federalist and his voting record shows it, yet, when some of the same Abortion issues came to his vote, he didn̢۪t quibble with if it was a State or Federal right, he voted Pro-Life. He felt ending abortion was more important than making some point.

When faced with the same choice, Paul chose to not vote Pro-Life and instead, thought it was more important to make some State̢۪s right point than actually do something that would save a life...

[dragnet2]

LOL