Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Attack Dogs Unleashed on Ron Paul ^ | December 28, 2011 | Mike Shedlock

Posted on 12/28/2011 11:40:14 AM PST by Kaslin

Attack dogs have finally been unleashed on Ron Paul. Those barking dogs caused Andrew Sullivan to Re-Think The Paul Endorsement

Time Magazine even launched a headline Paul Walks Away

No Need to Rethink Endorsement

There is no need to rethink endorsements. Here is the deal: Ron Paul did not say the things attributed to him. He denies them, disavows them, and most importantly, his voting record proves it!

Can anyone honestly tell me why things Ron Paul did NOT say over twenty years ago should be news today?

Paul Missed Best Tactic

How many times does he have to deny he wrote those things? Still, Ron Paul did not handle the CNN setup in the best possible manner.

This is what Paul said to CNN.

Why don’t you go back and look at what I said yesterday on CNN and what I’ve said for 20 something years. 22 years ago? I didn’t write them, I disavow them."

That answer was perfectly fine, as far as it went. Then Paul walked out. It was a missed opportunity.

Proposed Follow-Up

Rather than walking out, Paul should have followed up with ...

"I'm not here to discuss imaginary topics or things I never said. Now, do you want to discuss my position on the economy, on the Fed, and on spending, or is your only point to this interview to discuss things I did not say 20 years ago and have explained to CNN countless times?"

That would have smashed the ball down CNN interviewer Gloria Borger's throat, right where it belonged.

OK. Admittedly, Ron Paul did not respond in the perfect manner. So Ron Paul is human. Who isn't?

Is a transgression 22 years ago of something Ron Paul never said, and whose track record in congress proves it, any reason to drop support of Ron Paul?

In favor of who? Flip-flopper Newt Gingrich? Mitt Romney, the man that practically wrote the Obama Health-Care legislation? The Mitt Romney who wants to starts a trade war with China? Another Republican candidate that has no chance of winning?

If case you are a misguided Mitt Romney fan please consider President Obama and Mitt Romney are Nearly One and the Same!

Anyone "rethinking" their Ron Paul endorsement based on things Paul never said is not thinking clearly.

Attack Dog Plus Side

Here's the plus side to the attack dogs: Ron Paul is now considered a serious candidate or the attack dogs would not have been unleashed on things he never said 22 years ago.

Interestingly, The State Column reports Ron Paul still holds a lead in Iowa.

Thus, a majority of voters have decided that 22-year-old never-made statements are irrelevant, even if some misguided souls can't.

TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: earmarks4shrimp; gagdadbob; iowa; lead; onecosmosblog; paul; paulestinians; paulnuts; paultards; senile
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last
To: Kinzua
Oh please principles and issues my ass, the SOB wants to let the musszies kill me and my kid...

Paul had been shown time and time to be a nut job here and you paulitard keep doing the “We are so smart you guys don't understand how brilliant Paul is, he is the only one who yada yada yada...

At some point the you stop debating the dense and just point and laugh...

41 posted on 12/28/2011 12:20:48 PM PST by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Leader_Of_The _Conservatives
"Only true constitutional conservative in race...thats why the GOP doesnt like him."

Extremists are extremists, are extremists. bttt

"....One cannot simply blindly apply first principles to every situation, for this ends in a dogmatic and false absolutism.

"This is, for example, what creeps people out about Ron Paul.

"He says plenty of things -- derived from first principles embodied in the Constitution -- that make perfect sense. However, he always goes too far, in that half of what he says results from a blind application of first principles, irrespective of empirical reality.

"The same moral confusion afflicts leftists who wouldn't waterboard a known terrorist with information about an imminent attack, owing to an unthinking allegiance to the principle of "non-torture" -- which any normal person shares, up to a point, the point of suicidal insanity. ..."


42 posted on 12/28/2011 12:21:13 PM PST by Matchett-PI ("One party will generally represent the envied, the other the envious. Guess which ones." ~GagdadBob)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Russ

He’s no more a Republican than Obama is. In fact, he’s to the left of Obama on a number of issues, including the offing of UBL. His “Blame America First” foreign policy is a better fit in the party of Soros than the party of Lincoln and Reagan.

43 posted on 12/28/2011 12:21:27 PM PST by NYC GOP Chick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

44 posted on 12/28/2011 12:22:15 PM PST by Old Sarge (RIP FReeper Skyraider (1930-2011) - You Are Missed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper

I totally agree with you.

45 posted on 12/28/2011 12:22:28 PM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22

Thank you!

46 posted on 12/28/2011 12:23:50 PM PST by Kinzua (Are you ready to admit that electing Obama was a mistake?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Tex-Con-Man

LOLOLOLOLOL! Excellent. :)

47 posted on 12/28/2011 12:24:10 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

He did say this:

“Just think of what happened after 9/11. Immediately before there was any assessment there was glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq,”

48 posted on 12/28/2011 12:25:43 PM PST by HereInTheHeartland (I love how the FR spellchecker doesn't recognize the word "Obama")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus

“...Sullivan supports Paul as a way to cripple the republican party. I doubt he’s the only leftist to do so. RATS are well known for sabotaging republican primaries.”

You couldn’t be more right:

‘Mischief’ voters push Paul to front of GOP race
by Byron York Chief Political Correspondent


“Blue Republicans”: an Idea Whose Time Has Come
Posted: 07/13/11 By Robin Koerner Publisher,

“Many people of independent, liberal or Democratic sensibilities voted for Obama in 2008 in the hope of jolting America toward civil liberties and away from war, only to find themselves in 2011 disappointed .....” [snip]


Robin Koerner: If You Love Peace, Become a “Blue Republican” (Just for a Year)

Since you can’t change the Democrat ticket, why not act where you can make a positive change, by telling the Republican party where you really want it to go. I offer you a special moniker to set yourselves apart: the “Blue Republican.”

What is a Blue Republican?
We are former non-Republicans who are joining the Republican party for one year to help Ron Paul win the GOP nomination for President in 2012. Who We Are


Anti-war Ron Paul attracting support from local left
By Michael Kitch
Nov 22, 2011 12:00 am

LACONIA ­ Amid polling last week that showed Ron Paul running into the money in both Iowa and New Hampshire there were also signs that he was tapping support from an unexpected quarter ­ the left-wing of the Democratic Party.

Lynn Rudmin Chong, former chair of the Belknap County Democratic Committee, has publicly endorsed Paul and said that “I have found other kindred souls.” The Sanbornton resident said that she left the Democratic Party and changed her voter registration to “undeclared” in anticipation of taking a Republican ballot in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation presidential primary and casting her vote for Paul.

“He is the only one saying no more war,” Chong said. She spent two days in Washington with the “Occupy DC” movement, where she said that she was encouraged to see so many young people holding signs supporting Paul.

“I would definitely call myself a progressive,” said Will Hopkins of Belmont, who returned from a tour as infantryman in Iraq to become executive director of New Hampshire Peace Action, a group seeking to end foreign wars and cut defense budgets. “I supported Obama in 2008, but I’m supporting Ron Paul. That’s where I’m putting my eggs this year,” he said. “A lot of folks in the peace movement are taking a close look at Paul.”

Signs that liberals and progressives were flirting with Paul appeared last spring, when Robin Koerner, a British national who founded “Watching America,” which publishes foreign news about the United States in English, and blogs for the Huffington Post, described Paul as the “conservative champion of liberalism.”

He coined the term “Blue Republican” to brand progressives for Paul, which was promptly promoted on Facebook, where his article was shared 11,000 times in less than a week.

In July. Koerner posted “If you love peace, become a ‘Blue Republican’ (Just for a Year),” telling progressives they do not have to like the GOP “to sign up as a Republican for a year to help make sure that the Republican primaries are won by the one representative who has always been for peace, has always voted against bailouts, and has always opposed the reach of government into your bedroom, your relationships and your person.”

On their website Blue Republicans describe themselves as “people who have never before thought of joining the Republican Party . . . who identify as Democrats or Independents and/or supported Obama in 2008.”

Jim Forsythe of Strafford, the state senator from District 4 and chair of Paul’s campaign in New Hampshire, said that he was aware of independent voters, both conservatives and liberals, either eying or backing Paul. He said that some some liberals and progressives share Paul’s opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, eagerness to reduce the defense budget at home and military footprint abroad, hostility to the Patriot Act and distrust of corporate power.

“I’m being pragmatic,” said Chong, explaining that she would vote for Paul in the primary without showing her hand in the general election. However, she admitted “I am feeling way distanced from Obama.”

Hopkins vowed to support Paul in the both the Republican primary and the general election. However, he said that if Paul loses the nomination to another Republican, he will throw his vote to a third party.

Polls conducted by Bloomberg News last week put Paul in second place behind Mitt Romney in both New Hampshire and Iowa with 17-percent and 19-percent respectively. Unlike several other GOP candidates ­ Michelle Bachman, Rick Perry, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich ­ whose polling numbers have waxed and waned, Paul has polled consistently, without, however, significantly expanding his support.

Another Bloomberg poll indicated that if Paul bolted the GOP to run as a third-party candidate, he would capture 18-percent of the vote, effectively throwing the election to Obama, who would top Romney with 44-percent to 32-percent.
So, if many Republicans & many Democrats support Ron Paul, why couldn’t he take Obama? I think he has the best chance of doing just that.

49 posted on 12/28/2011 12:25:43 PM PST by Matchett-PI ("One party will generally represent the envied, the other the envious. Guess which ones." ~GagdadBob)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mmogamer

Ross Pirot. Paul will implode. (1) He’s 75; (2) He’s unhinged; 3) HE’S 75!!!

50 posted on 12/28/2011 12:25:57 PM PST by csuzieque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: junta
If the GOP smears his supporters you might as well say President Obama is safe electorally.

The few supporters Cut and Run has are never going to vote for a Conservative. His supporters are dopers who want to make sure they never have to sacrifice for the freedoms we have. They are the OWS crowd who want everything, but are willing to sacrifice nothing.
51 posted on 12/28/2011 12:26:21 PM PST by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: bytheBook

[I am grateful for the important ideas that he has introduced into the public forum during the debates.]

You mean where Paul said that we were responsible for the attacks on 9/11?

Or where Paul said that Iran deserved a Nuke like everybody else? Oh, (almost forgot) where the USA did not have the right to stop Iran from getting a Nuke?

Yes, I can see where you would see these “ideas” as “important”.

52 posted on 12/28/2011 12:26:30 PM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kinzua
The anti-Paul people had better come up with something more substantial than aaaahhhh he’s nuts! and anyone looking for a real Constutional candidate is a Paulbot.


Are you saying he's not nuts? Being nuts seems a pretty substantial problem to me.

53 posted on 12/28/2011 12:29:10 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Many of the on-line self-professed financial gurus support Paul and have for quite a while. Most agree with his ideas of ending the Fed and closing many Federal agencies (DHS, Education, etc.). So do I.

But, just because I agree with a lot of his financial positions doesn't mean he would be a good president. I oppose Libertianism on moral grounds as any nation that legalizes the killing of babies and marrying of homosexuals will not last long. God is not mocked.

I work in finance and find that most finance guys can't see beyond money. They are obsessed with money and, therefore, believe that our current financial problems can only be addressed by a militant libertarian like Ron Paul.

There are worse things than a bad economy.

54 posted on 12/28/2011 12:30:20 PM PST by Dr. Thorne (Fall on your knees before Christ, your only salvation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leader_Of_The _Conservatives
“Only true constitutional conservative in race...thats why the GOP doesnt like him.”

NO! It is because he is a racist crackpot. It is because conservatives do not accept the lunacy of his decades of vile newsletters, promoting the screwing up more lives with easily obtainable dope, 9/11 trutherism, friendship with radical supremacist and conspiracy nut types, calling traitors heroes, supporting the OWS parasites, believe that there was “glee” in the Bush White House following 9/11, don't care about terrorist nukes, ignore Islamic terrorists, cripple the military, being anti-Israel, etc.

Ron Paul is NOT GOP, NOT conservative and NOT Tea Party. He is a libertarian nut. KICK HIM OUT NOW!

55 posted on 12/28/2011 12:31:55 PM PST by Proud2BeRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lonevoice

Here kitty, kitty, kitty....

56 posted on 12/28/2011 12:32:01 PM PST by ConfidentConservative (I think, therefore I am conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Only other walnuts would see a walnut as normal.

57 posted on 12/28/2011 12:35:25 PM PST by Gator113 (~Just livin' life, my way~.. Newt/Palin-West-2012."got a lot swirling around in my head.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kinzua

“Ending excessive foreign entanglements”

Paul is a selective ender of foreign entanglements -— only avoids them when it might help his agenda of killing Jews.

Yes, that is what I said.

He’s clearly a virulent anti-semite. You can dismiss one or two things, but collectively the picture is very clear.

58 posted on 12/28/2011 12:40:10 PM PST by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Kinzua

Here is a quote from Paul’s own campaign site;

[”Can you think of one Ron Paul supporter who isn’t a pot smoker?

Because I certainly can’t.”]

59 posted on 12/28/2011 12:40:34 PM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: csuzieque
According to what Paul said about 20 years ago, he is too old to be running for office.
60 posted on 12/28/2011 12:40:47 PM PST by lonestar (It takes a village of idiots to elect a village idiot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 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
Topics · Post Article

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