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

Skip to comments.

Redstate.com bans new Ron Paul supporters
Politico ^ | October 23, 2007 | Ryan Grim

Posted on 10/23/2007 9:41:03 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative

The ubiquitous and web-savvy supporters of Ron Paul now have one less forum in which to vent their rage.

The influential conservative blog Redstate.com placed a ban last night on all Paul commentary from readers who are recent arrivals to the blog.

Paul's followers are angry that the Libertarian congressman can’t seem to get traction in national polls as he bids for the Republican presidential nomination.

Paul — a representative from Texas who ran for president in 1988 on the Libertarian Party ticket — remains mired in the low single digits.

The post on Redstate, “Attention, Ron Paul Supporters (Life is *REALLY* Not Fair),” begins, “Effective immediately, new users may *not* shill for Ron Paul in any way shape, form or fashion. Not in comments, not in diaries, nada. If your account is less than 6 months old, you can talk about something else, you can participate in the other threads and be your zany libertarian self all you want, but you cannot pimp Ron Paul. Those with accounts more than six months old may proceed as normal.”

Redstate founder Erick Erickson said he woke up this morning bombed with hundreds of e-mails, “the overwhelming majority very angry.” His own readers, though, loved the ban.

“It is the most recommended user diary in Redstate history,” he said.

Paul's energetic online supporters managed to help him raise more than $5 million in the third quarter of this year, roughly tying Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

They’ve also ticked off an awful lot of people, including, apparently, Leon H. Wolf at Redstate, who calls them “annoying, time-consuming, and bandwidth-wasting.”

Wolf writes he is tired of “responding to the same idiotic arguments from a bunch of liberals pretending to be Republicans.”

Erickson said that he and the regular Redstate readers had just had enough.

“They’re terribly annoying and they don’t add to the debate. If people are adding to the debate we don’t have a problem with them coming here. But they’re just coming to promote Ron Paul. They talk over everyone. They yell at everyone,” he said.

Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said he questioned "the judgment of the decision," but added: "They are a private entity and they are certainly within their rights to do as they see fit.

"I'm sure there are a few Ron Paul supporters who get a little shrill," Benton said . "All we can control is what comes from our campaign."

The ban against Paul-supporting is not categorical, Erickson and Wolf made clear.

“Hey, we’re sure *some* of Ron Paul’s supporters really are Republicans. They can post at any one of a zillion Ron Paul online forums. Those who have *earned* our respect by contributing usefully for a substantial period of time will be listened to with appropriate respect. Those who have not will have to *earn* that respect by contributing usefully in the other threads ... and not mentioning Ron Paul. Given a month of solid contributing, send one of us an email and we’ll consider lifting the restriction on your account,” Wolf writes.

Wolf then shut down the comment thread for the post to avoid the deluge of irritation that was headed his way.

Erickson forwarded to Politico a number of the e-mails as examples of that irritation. “You are banning FREE SPEECH. Perhaps next you can forbid discussion of Democratic candidate names. It is a sad day for America when hypocrites who think they are right try to shovel their propaganda onto the rest of us. What goes around comes around,” wrote one reader with an e-mail exchange at socialheart.com.

Erickson finds this sort of complaint hypocritical itself. “So much for their respect for private property,” he said.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 3400troopswhocares; 8moreyearsofclinton; 911americasfault; antwardotcom4paul; burritoboys4paul; codepinko4paul; daviddukeforpaul; delusional4paul08; googlepaulbots; googlepaulistinians; googlesorosronpaul; hahahahahaha; harryreid4ronpaul; hillaryspaulboy; insanekooks; islamofascists4paul; letjihadreign; losethewarisaplan; marxists4ronpaul08; moronpaul; muslims4paul2008; noronpaul; nutflavoredkoolaid; nuts4ronpaul; nutswithnutsontop; nuttiernever; paul; paulestinians; paulluvscodepink; paulskoolaidbrigade; peaceispatriotic; redstate; ronpaul; sharialaw4paul2008; sharialaw4usa; socksberger4paul08; spambots; stormfrontforpaul; strongtallstupid; submit2islam; surrendermonkey4paul; syrians4ronpaul; timesyoufeellikeanut; truthersforpaul; whackos4paul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-115 next last

1 posted on 10/23/2007 9:41:04 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

RedState.Org reminds of John McCain - left wing and willing to sell out their principles for 30 seconds of puff from Chris Mathews.

What a bunch of losers...


2 posted on 10/23/2007 9:42:23 PM PDT by Tzimisce (How Would Mohammed Vote? Hillary for President! www.dndorks.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

I wish, I wish, I wish FR would do the same.


3 posted on 10/23/2007 9:45:59 PM PDT by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tzimisce

Its called spamming and I don’t blame them. Bunch of new signups just to spam the site.


4 posted on 10/23/2007 9:46:41 PM PDT by packrat35 (Politicians would be less worthless if they were edible, or useable for packing wheel bearings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

I read on Redstate. I’ve seen the Paulestinian newbie spammers firsthand. I consider the move less than ideal but justified.


5 posted on 10/23/2007 9:51:42 PM PDT by Dan Middleton (Radio...Free...Mars)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Ron Paul is a nut case and so are his followers. I don’t blame anyone from not wanting them at their blog.


6 posted on 10/23/2007 9:55:20 PM PDT by Brandie (Duncan Hunter in 08' Islam is a Death Cult, is that simple enough to understand!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tzimisce

http://www.redstate.com/story/2005/10/12/125850/42

OMG how offensive and hateful! Let’s take Rush off the air too!


7 posted on 10/23/2007 9:55:44 PM PDT by Tzimisce (How Would Mohammed Vote? Hillary for President! www.dndorks.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Paul, like Pat Buchanan, is brilliant in certain respects but, like Buchanan, he loses traction with his isolationist/nationalistic recommendations.


8 posted on 10/23/2007 10:02:29 PM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done, needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: packrat35

Ron’s the republican for wily clowns who are ashamed to hold conservative views among liberals. You can say that you like the guy without any stigma, precisely because nobody takes him seriously.

Similar to guilt-riddled white people who cower before any black demagogue. In trying to be “tolerant”, they become the biggest racists of all.


9 posted on 10/23/2007 10:03:08 PM PDT by SteveMcKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Were it my forum, I’d keep the spam from people like this down, too. Most forums (including this one) have no-spam policies for a reason. The fact that hese people are Ron Paul supporters is notwithstanding, in my book.


10 posted on 10/23/2007 10:04:44 PM PDT by arderkrag (Libertarian Nutcase (Political Compass Coordinates: 9.00, -2.62 - www.politicalcompass.org))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Ron Paul needs to educate his followers about just whom the Constitution puts restrictions on.


11 posted on 10/23/2007 10:05:38 PM PDT by abigailsmybaby (I was born with nothing. So far I have most of it left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

If your account is less than 6 months old, you amy not “shill for” Ron Paul — but you can attack him all you want.


12 posted on 10/23/2007 10:08:38 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot

IDIOT SAVANT
n., pl. idiot savants.

An intellectually disabled person who exhibits extraordinary ability in a highly specialized area, such as mathematics or music (or politics)

[French : idiot, idiot + savant, learned.]


13 posted on 10/23/2007 10:09:39 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee ("A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SJackson; Allegra; lormand; Petronski; drpix
Wolf writes he is tired of “responding to the same idiotic arguments from a bunch of liberals pretending to be Republicans.”

Oh-baby-I-know-exactly-how-he-feels PING! ;)

14 posted on 10/23/2007 10:10:18 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!" -- Jim Robinson, 09/30/07)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brandie
“Ron Paul is a nut case and so are his followers. I don’t blame anyone from not wanting them at their blog.”

This kind of statement makes me wonder about the Republican Party sometimes.

Personally.. there is not a single Candidate out there that is not a nut case. But the Hatred towards Ron Paul to me almost borders on pathological.

What is it about him that scares the “conservatives”?

You might not agree with him. But to call his supporters Nuts only disenfranchise people. I like allot of what the man says. To bad there is so much intolerance towards him.

But like I said before.. Free Republic use to be a board of discussion..

15 posted on 10/23/2007 10:18:10 PM PDT by Kitanis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

From what I read, Red State is just banning people with accounts less than 6 mo. old from posting RP stuff, but longer term members may proceed as usual. Hardly a case of stifling free speech, but a case for stopping the spamming for which some of RPs supporters are known.


16 posted on 10/23/2007 10:21:06 PM PDT by Theresawithanh (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

Good for RedState.


17 posted on 10/23/2007 10:23:50 PM PDT by Antonio C
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kitanis
What is it about him that scares the “conservatives”?

MODERATOR: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attacks, sir?

RON PAUL: I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us, and the reason they did it and they are delighted that we're over there, because Osama bin Laden has said "I am glad you're over on our sand, because we can target you so much easier." They have already now since that time have killed 34 hundred of our men, and I don't think it was necessary.

18 posted on 10/23/2007 10:26:29 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Kitanis
But like I said before.. Free Republic use to be a board of discussion..

Ya, and it use to be a place where our internal polls didn't get spammed by Ron Paul supporters.

19 posted on 10/23/2007 10:28:24 PM PDT by NurdlyPeon (Thompson / Hunter in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tzimisce
From what I understand, the losers were the idiots trolling RedState.

“Hey, we’re sure *some* of Ron Paul’s supporters really are Republicans. They can post at any one of a zillion Ron Paul online forums. Those who have *earned* our respect by contributing usefully for a substantial period of time will be listened to with appropriate respect. Those who have not will have to *earn* that respect by contributing usefully in the other threads ... and not mentioning Ron Paul. Given a month of solid contributing, send one of us an email and we’ll consider lifting the restriction on your account,” Wolf writes.

This isn't an unreasonable request btw. If your sole purpose is to join their site to spam for Ron Paul and show NO interest otherwise attacking longterm members if they deign to disagree that Ron Paul's the new messiah then you are a TROLL and deserve what you get.

"I'm sure there are a few Ron Paul supporters who get a little shrill," Benton said Oh, and Erick? Good work. I'm still not certain how many of these people can claim to be actual Republicans/Conservatives/Libertarians but I'm damn sure more then just a few come from the Left.

20 posted on 10/23/2007 10:36:57 PM PDT by Soul Seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kitanis
"But like I said before.. Free Republic use to be a board of discussion.."

Well, you can always try RedState.

By the way, we've listed the following statement on our home page for several years. If Ron Paul supporters wish to spam attack FR, our members, our Commander-in-Chief, our war efffort, etc, please feel free to do it elsewhere. Antiwar activism is no more welcome on FR than is abortion activism, gay rights activism, gun control activism or any other leftist/socialist cause.

Statement by the founder of Free Republic:

In our continuing fight for freedom, for America and our constitution and against totalitarianism, socialism, tyranny, terrorism, etc., Free Republic stands firmly on the side of right, i.e., the conservative side. Believing that the best defense is a strong offense, we (myself and those whom I'm trying to attract to FR) support the strategy of taking the fight to the enemy as opposed to allowing the enemy the luxury of conducting their attacks on us at home on their terms and on their schedule.

Therefore, we wholeheartedly support the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive strikes on known terrorist states and organizations that are believed to present a clear threat to our freedom or national security. We support our military, our troops and our Commander-in-Chief and we oppose turning control of our government back over to the liberals and socialists who favor appeasement, weakness, and subserviency. We do not believe in surrendering to the terrorists as France, Germany, Russia and Spain have done and as Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton and the Democrats, et al, are proposing.

As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.

Free Republic is private property. It is not a government project, nor is it funded by government or taxpayer money. We are not a publicly owned entity nor are we an IRS tax-free non-profit organization. We pay all applicable taxes on our income. We are not connected to or funded by any political party, news agency, or any other entity. We sell no merchandise, product or service, and we offer no subscriptions or paid memberships. We accept no paid advertising or promotions. We are funded solely by donations (non tax deductible gifts) from our readers and participants.

We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.

Our God-given liberty and freedoms are not negotiable.

May God bless and protect our men and women in uniform fighting for our freedom and may God continue to bless America.

21 posted on 10/23/2007 10:41:04 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Our God-given unalienable rights are not open to debate, negotiation or compromise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Antiwar activism is no more welcome on FR than is abortion activism, gay rights activism, gun control activism or any other leftist/socialist cause.

Amen!
22 posted on 10/23/2007 10:44:54 PM PDT by rockrr (Global warming is to science what Islam is to religion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TBP

That is sound policy , as the Leftists have just recently overtaken Paul’s campaign within the last 6 months. It’s unfortunate as Paul has some very sound principles , but his followers are mainly Deaniacs and Nutters .....

Why don’t the Paulites just simply start a Ron Paul worship forum ?


23 posted on 10/23/2007 10:48:15 PM PDT by Neu Pragmatist (Unite against Rudy ! - Vote Thompson ! - It's the only way to beat Hillary !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kitanis
I stand by what I said. Ron Paul is not a Conservative nor a Republican as to what he stands for. He is more like a Libertarian. He should be running as that and not as a Republcian. His stand on the war for one thing speaks volumes about him.

His followers not all but too many to ignore have gone out of their way to harass people, and believe me they are the ones that do not believe in conversation and discourse about politics and why Ron Paul is not the man to be President.

You are intitled to your opinion and you obviously like Ron Paul. No one has stopped you and certainly not I. But at my blog I don't post about Ron Paul at all because of how his followers have behaved. I totally understand about any blogger that has had enough.

Now I have commented back to you so your theory is wrong about FR not having discussions.

Afraid of Ron Paul.....LMAO that is too funny to even answer.

I fear no one, especially a wimp like Ron Paul.

24 posted on 10/23/2007 10:48:59 PM PDT by Brandie (Duncan Hunter in 08' Islam is a Death Cult, is that simple enough to understand!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
I would have just deleted the spam and said nothing about it. Then I would have silently deleted the griping about deleting the spam. But I’ve never had to run one of these places so I don’t know what I’m talking about. I highly respect anyone who rides herd on one of these asylums, that’s for sure.
25 posted on 10/23/2007 10:50:40 PM PDT by SaxxonWoods (...."We're the govt, and we're here to hurt."....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brandie; Kitanis

Ron Paul IS a Libertarian, who ran as a Republican.

WRT the WOT, the two don’t mix.

Kitanis, I respect your service, but you need to find a new candidate.

Paul is less sane than McCain.

And, I would never vote for McCain.


26 posted on 10/23/2007 10:56:52 PM PDT by dixiechick2000 (There ought to be one day-- just one-- when there is open season on senators. ~~ Will Rogers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
If Ron Paul supporters wish to spam attack FR, our members, our Commander-in-Chief, our war efffort, etc, please feel free to do it elsewhere. Antiwar activism is no more welcome on FR than is abortion activism, gay rights activism, gun control activism or any other leftist/socialist cause.

WORD, baby!!! ;)

27 posted on 10/23/2007 11:12:34 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!" -- Jim Robinson, 09/30/07)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kitanis

>>>This kind of statement makes me wonder about the Republican Party sometimes. Personally.. there is not a single Candidate out there that is not a nut case. But the Hatred towards Ron Paul to me almost borders on pathological. What is it about him that scares the “conservatives”?<<<

I disagree with the banning of Ron Paul supporters. And personally, I think he’s an alright guy. I’m not going to lie, many of his supporters are downright pathological at times. They don’t respond to reason, they make glaringly black & white judgements (not just statements), and they have a habit of polluting the airways with their nonsense.

That said, I think Paul is a very ideological conservative. He’s impractical, in many ways, and I thoroughly disagree with his stance on what we should be doing now in Iraq. He’s a bit dogmatic in his philosophies. Frankly, that’s something I tend to avoid. Not a big fan of people who put an ideology ahead of common sense. It’s one of the reasons I dislike an unbending commitment to federalism—there are arenas in which the federal government is best equppied to deal with a problem (tort reform and marriage being but two examples).

In short, while Paul doesn’t scare me that much, his supporters are some of the most obnoxious posters I’ve encountered on the net. Doesn’t mean I agree with the outright banning of them, though.


28 posted on 10/23/2007 11:19:38 PM PDT by CheyennePress (Non Abbiamo Bisogno)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SteveMcKing

Well I hope you don’t think I am a fan of that freak.


29 posted on 10/23/2007 11:29:41 PM PDT by packrat35 (Politicians would be less worthless if they were edible, or useable for packing wheel bearings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

Ditto.


30 posted on 10/23/2007 11:48:48 PM PDT by PA Engineer (Liberate America from the occupation media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CheyennePress

The Ron Paul supporter issue....

God Bless you guys, but I can’t seem to even give much serious thought to Ron Paul due to the odd and often bizarre behavior/statements of some of the Paul supporters. They must realize at some point that recruiting the village idiot as your local campaign spokesman actually drives people away from their candidate.

I probably wouldn’t support the guy anyhow based on WOT/Immigration issues, but the almost LaRouche-esque dementia of the True Believers makes it really easy for me to dismiss a Ron Paul candidacy. makes me think Ron Paul might have had a better chance without his supporters.


31 posted on 10/24/2007 12:14:59 AM PDT by Will_Zurmacht
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot

I was a big Buchanan supporter. I agree with your take on him. While the guy can be brilliant, his foreign policy views leave the reservation IMO, and don’t return home often enough.

It’s real shame. What it does is make folks ignore him on other important issues.


32 posted on 10/24/2007 12:26:41 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hillary has PAY FEEVER. There she goes now. Ah hsu, ah hsu, ahhhaa hsu, ah hsu, ahhhhhh hsu...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Will_Zurmacht

Ron Paul is a BIG L libertarian...not a libertarian.

The insane supporters followed...


33 posted on 10/24/2007 12:28:05 AM PDT by dixiechick2000 (There ought to be one day-- just one-- when there is open season on senators. ~~ Will Rogers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: packrat35
Exactly. The other day I was posting on a thread in which one of them spammed. How could I tell? The content of the thread had absolutely nothing to do with RP. My comment to them, "Uh . . . SPAM!"

They are like little out of control kids playing a game that after six months that has long lost its luster and that was after the first five minutes.

34 posted on 10/24/2007 1:36:47 AM PDT by GOP Poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Will_Zurmacht
makes me think Ron Paul might have had a better chance without his supporters.

well said (your whole post). Although I think he would have a minor chance not a mojor one, but he could very well effectuate good points to be debated at times. That is always useful when people are preparing for an election and interviewing the candidates. It helps shine a light in areas otherwise ignored. I think in this light his supporters allow all of us to not take even one point of his seriously. But the way he handles himself doesn't lead me to respect a word he says. He needs much more work on his presentation and polish his delivery. He is afterall speaking to millions of people and should do well to not turn them off because he is so not well spoken.

35 posted on 10/24/2007 1:42:45 AM PDT by GOP Poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: GOP Poet

speaking of not well spoken, it is late and my last post was not well worded, but it does the job. :).


36 posted on 10/24/2007 1:44:30 AM PDT by GOP Poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

They need to get their own party and stop annoying ours.

Ron Paul is a DNC plant. His positions are more closely associated with the disconnect from reality that the democrat party favors.

37 posted on 10/24/2007 2:07:34 AM PDT by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kitanis
What is it about him that scares the “conservatives”?

You get the most flak when you're right over the target.


BUMP

38 posted on 10/24/2007 2:18:18 AM PDT by capitalist229
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
I don’t know who is crazier - - Ron Paul or his supporters.
39 posted on 10/24/2007 2:24:13 AM PDT by Beckwith (dhimmicrats and the liberal media have .chosen sides -- Islamofascism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kitanis

What is it about him that scares the “conservatives”?


I doubt people are scared of the Paul fellar..... many just don’t agree with his approach on some major issues I suspect. There is another vanity thread going now about why Keyes isn’t allowed in the debates and the question was asked if ‘they were afraid of Keyes’? Keyes, Paul and others are niche candidates at best and aren’t to be afraid of as such. Now if they were winning that maybe a different story, imo.


40 posted on 10/24/2007 2:36:26 AM PDT by deport (>>>--Iowa Caucuses .. 74 days and counting--<<< [ Meanwhile:-- Cue Spooky Music--])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Kitanis
What is it about him that scares the “conservatives”?

I've often wondered the same thing, especially here at FR. The man is trying to keep his oath to defend the constitution and all he gets are the ad hominem attacks. The other candidates can embrace eveything from abortion to amnesty and remain top tier (snort) candidates, single digit also ran's but never nutcases.

41 posted on 10/24/2007 4:20:59 AM PDT by Redhd2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
Very understandable treatment in the case of MANY (but not all) Paulestinians. Whether they are dishonest, delusional, dense or PUI (Posting Under the Influence) they are deadenders existing beyond the realm of reason.
42 posted on 10/24/2007 5:10:45 AM PDT by drpix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
Good for Redstate.org. Jim R. is a more patient host than I would be. Whack!
43 posted on 10/24/2007 5:16:35 AM PDT by McGruff (If I can't have Cheney I guess Fred will have to do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dixiechick2000

I too would never vote for McCain


44 posted on 10/24/2007 5:49:19 AM PDT by Kitanis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

45 posted on 10/24/2007 5:53:19 AM PDT by Pistolshot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
You mind if I quote you over and over and over and over?

Antiwar activism is no more welcome on FR than is abortion activism, gay rights activism, gun control activism or any other leftist/socialist cause.

46 posted on 10/24/2007 6:30:43 AM PDT by mnehring (Who is Chris Peden? http://www.chrispeden.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: deport; jimrob
I doubt people are scared of the Paul fellar..... many just don’t agree with his approach on some major issues I suspect.

It is not fear, it is concern that enough people will drink his koolaid (even 1%-2%) that it could split Conservative votes enough to hand Rudy the nomination for our party. The last thing that I want to do is hand the Stormfront/Anti-War/Anti-Israel/Truther/Bircher/Buchananites any sort of victory, even a symbolic one where they can claim to have 'made a difference' (ie, by effecting the vote away from Conservatives.) I believe that there are just enough good Conservatives who have bought into Paul's shtick that it may actually affect the primaries.

47 posted on 10/24/2007 6:34:42 AM PDT by mnehring (Who is Chris Peden? http://www.chrispeden.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

Gosh, can’t imagine why.


48 posted on 10/24/2007 6:36:11 AM PDT by SJackson (every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and figtree, none to make him afraid,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

It’s actually not possible for leftists (”liberals”) to “add to the discussion”.

Their ideology is indefensible at a logical/issue based level, so they must trot out their victims to whine, or hide their agenda behind something else, usually equally flimsy (ie, global socialism hiding behind global warming).

Once you discount the “hate Bush” motive, there’s nothing left.


49 posted on 10/24/2007 6:36:32 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Excellent.


50 posted on 10/24/2007 6:38:54 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-115 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