Ron Paul rips Fox News as ‘propangadists for war.’
Fox News will reportedly exclude Ron Paul from an upcoming forum of Republican candidates to be broadcast on January 6, 2008. The Boston Globe’s James Pindell reports Paul’s response:
Ron Paul said the decision to exclude him from a debate on Fox News Sunday the weekend before the New Hampshire Primary is proof that the network “is scared” of him.
“They are scared of me and don’t want my message to get out, but it will,” Paul said in an interview at a diner here. “They are propagandists for this war and I challenge them on the notion that they are conservative.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Good?
December 29th, 2007 at 5:36 pmHow sweet is it when the ReichWing RePugniScums melt down!!
December 29th, 2007 at 5:38 pmAll bullies are cowards. Fox News is no exception.
December 29th, 2007 at 5:39 pm“They are propagandists for this war and I challenge them on the notion that they are conservative.â€
I agree that Fox “News” is a warmongering network but I wouldn’t challenge their conservatism.
December 29th, 2007 at 5:40 pmRon Paul gives libertarians a bad rep - just like Kusinich (sp?) gives UFO enthusiasts a bad rep.
December 29th, 2007 at 5:42 pmPlease read this it explains 911 and Pakistans involvment
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.jsp?article=essaysaeed
December 29th, 2007 at 5:46 pmIf Fox News can’t handle Ron Paul, how can they handle Al Qaeda? Oh that’s right, they give bribes to terrorists to get their employees free.
Remember Steve Centanni?
-GSD
December 29th, 2007 at 5:46 pmComment by Jason M. Hendler — December 29, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
Y’all,
Ignore this racist, moronic, a$$h0le!! You will waste you life away responding this idiot!!!!!!!!!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 5:49 pm>b>JackAss Moron Hitler claims to be an expert in LOTS of areas. He’s a racist sh|t!
Tell me again JackAss about your “Ivy League” degree from Stanford MORON!!!!! Hhahahaahahahahahahaaaaahahahahhaahah!!!!
And your RACIST VIEWS about PAN-AFRICAN POLICY!!!
And your stupid, patent troll expertise in Melbourne, FL!!!! HAHAHAAAAA!!!
And your vast knowledge of the AUTO INDUSTRY because you worked at a GM Tech Center!!! HAHAHAHHAAAAA!!
ONE FACT IS FOR SURE!!!
JCAKASS MORON HITLER IS FULL OF SH|T EVERYDAY OF THE WEEK!!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 5:58 pmOne cold, clear, early December morning, as I stood on the tarmac of ABQ airport talking to the fueler as he filled the tanks of the Boeing 727 for its flight that day, he pointed to two cloudy spherical shaped objects as the moved around the visible sky. One, light in color, moved and then the other, ruddy reddish color, would ‘chase’ the other UFO.
Am I crazy Jason?
December 29th, 2007 at 5:58 pmAm I crazy Jason?
Comment by Xisithrus — December 29, 2007 @ 5:58 pm
Please don’t feed the trolls. Ignore this assh0le!!
December 29th, 2007 at 6:01 pmIts certainly true Fox is not fair and balanced, why they are scared of one of their own who placed very well in FOX text polls.
December 29th, 2007 at 6:02 pmPlease don’t feed the trolls. Ignore this assh0le!!
I was talking to Kucinich =P Heh.
December 29th, 2007 at 6:04 pmIts certainly true Fox is not fair and balanced, why they are scared of one of their own who placed very well in FOX text polls.
Comment by Xisithrus — December 29, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
Simple. Ron Paul is not on board with the corporate facism washing away out democracy!!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 6:04 pmFu(ks nOoze = FACISM
December 29th, 2007 at 6:05 pmIf the 9-11 Commission is really looking for a smoking gun, it should look no further than at Lieutenant-General Mahmoud Ahmad, the director of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) at the time.
http://www.atimes.com/ atimes/ Front_Page/ FD08Aa01.html
THIS IS WHY BHUTTO WAS SILENCED
December 29th, 2007 at 6:06 pmwith as much dissent as there is within the democratic party, it is especially fun to watch the repuke/fundie/neocon implosion play out…lol.
December 29th, 2007 at 6:08 pmFine…. But let us not forget what a racist he is and where he stands on Social security, Medicare, Womens rights,…
December 29th, 2007 at 6:09 pmFine…. But let us not forget what a racist he is and where he stands on Social security, Medicare, Womens rights,…
Comment by had enough — December 29, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
True dat…
December 29th, 2007 at 6:15 pmhttp://english.ohmynews.com/ articleview/ article_view.asp?article_class=16&no=381270&rel_no=1
FROM THE KOREAN FREE PRESS
PressTV: We’ve just seen the United Nations Security Council endorse the U.S. mandate in Iraq for another year, so does that mean another year of Article 17 and abuse?
Zeese: That U.N. decision is one that violates the Iraqi constitution. Last January the Iraqi Prime Minister went to the U.N. without consulting the legislature, the parliament. The parliament complained about that. In fact, a majority of the members of parliament signed a letter to the Prime Minister demanding that he bring further continuation of the U.S. role in Iraq to the parliament before he went to the United Nations, and he didn’t do that, despite the fact that the Iraqi constitution requires parliamentary approval.
So the U.N. in approving this continuation is ignoring Iraqi law and I think acting illegally. It’s a clear indication that this is an occupation and not a democracy that we are developing in Iraq.
PressTV: Despite that, George Bush and Prime Minister Maliki have reached an understanding on the long term presence of U.S. troops in Iraq, perhaps similar to the deals with places like South Korea or Japan. It’s quite obvious the Iraqi people don’t want American troops or mercenaries there, so what’s the future for the average American soldier posted to Iraq?
Zeese: I don’t see a good future for this. I think we are in the process of creating more enemies than we are capturing or killing, and I think we are creating all sorts of anger throughout the Middle East. Recent decisions that we are talking about to combine U.S. and Israeli missile defense efforts will further intertwine the United States into the internationally illegal activity of Israel, and that will further create anger.
The Iraqi people don’t want it, the U.S. people don’t want it, and I think the Democratic Party in allowing this negotiation to go forward without saying stop is ceding ground to Bush because they don’t want to stop this war either. They want to keep this war and they want Bush to do the dirty work before they come to power.
December 29th, 2007 at 6:22 pmThe Iraqi people don’t want it, the U.S. people don’t want it, and I think the Democratic Party in allowing this negotiation to go forward without saying stop is ceding ground to Bush because they don’t want to stop this war either. They want to keep this war and they want Bush to do the dirty work before they come to power.
Comment by Peter Pointer — December 29, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
PURE TRUTH!!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 6:25 pmThats the main problem of an unpopular president
they do all the dirty work for the next goverment
December 29th, 2007 at 6:30 pmRon Paul could mean to say that he is a “True Conservative” while Fox News is not.
Many a GOP campaigner runs under the “I am a True Conservative” label.
December 29th, 2007 at 6:44 pmRon Paul is a libertarian…
December 29th, 2007 at 6:46 pmA list of policies that most libertarians support would include: legalization of drugs, legalization of all consensual sexual acts between consenting adults (including sodomy and prostitution), abolition of government censorship in all its forms (including restrictions on pornography), free trade, noninterventionist foreign policy, abolition of rent control, abolition of the minimum wage, abolition of farm and business subsidies, abolition of arts subsidies, privatization of Social Security, abolition of welfare, and drastic reduction of taxes.
When the senior citizens get wind of Ron Paul’s view on SS, it is all over for him.
Ron Paul’s voting record
From TP not that long ago:
December 29th, 2007 at 6:53 pmThe thing I like best about Ron Paul is his fearlessness. He speaks truth to power which we don’t see too often in politics since they’ve all been hushed by blackmail or are lying sycophants. Ron Paul is a breath of fresh air. Having said that, I still wouldn’t vote for him because 1) He’s still a Repuke at heart and 2) his voting record runs asynchronous to my mindset on many issues.
You’ve got to give him props though - Faux News has been ordered by the king of propaganda to NOT include Ron Paul because he’s doing far too much damage to the Bush Cabal.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:03 pm#16 No doubt Bhutto holds a key to 911 - the things she knew and was about to divulge. Now the US is jumping into the investigation of her murder to, as always, control the message as damage control. The truth will still come out because Bush’s ranks are drawing rather thin these days and since he’s truly on his way out, I think some insiders will kick him to the curb in the next few months.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:07 pmOne might well ask: what is the meaning of “is” or the meaning of “conservative”?
One would think that conservatives would be fighting to conserve our earth & it’s resources, but it turns out that so called “conservatives” are in fact the biggest of spenders and the largest squanderers of our heritage and our world.
What’s really weird is that Ron Paul (a so called libertarian) wants GOVERNMENT to restrict abortion rights for women, but probably thinks gun control is verboten. (but then guns are so manly…heh?)
In essence RP is a jerk except for the fact that he realizes the wastefulness of lives & resources of occupation in Iraq. I assume he knows who is profitting from this “war”….Haliburton, Boeing, Exonmobil etc? And you’ld think he would realize by now…that “free trade” is not free at all. It enslaves multitudes and is bringing America to her knees.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:07 pmI can’t find a cognizant statement on Fox as to why they are excluding Ron Paul. As much as I don’t agree with Ron Paul on many (shall we say most) matters, and as Paul seems to have enough support to be a serious contender for the repub nomination, HOW DOES FOX JUSTIFY IT ?
It seems like this would make the debate a paid political commercial (as they picked who they wanted to highlight). This, in turn, would make it a campaign contribution and liable to the numerous restrictions on such contributions.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:08 pmWhy is fat and sweaty Roger Ailes afraid of Dr. Ron Paul?
-GSD
December 29th, 2007 at 7:24 pmI do not agree with Ron Paul, either, but it is unfair for Fox to exclude him from this forum.
“I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” - Voltaire
December 29th, 2007 at 7:44 pmFrankly anything that makes Fox News look bad to it’s viewers is worth more to me than what happens to Ron Paul. But that’s just me being selfish.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:51 pmRethinking Birthright Citizenship by Ron Paul
December 29th, 2007 at 7:51 pmhttp://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul346.html
Ron calls the children of immigrants “anchor babies” and wants them to lose their citizenship but “progressives” carry his water
Ron Paul gives libertarians a bad rep - just like Kusinich (sp?) gives UFO enthusiasts a bad rep.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
Damn, I thought we got rid of this turd. Oh well, more flagging please.
Kucinich saying he saw a UFO is in line with about 45% of the people in this country who have either seen a UFO or know someone who has. We proved that to you the other day loon Jason. And something like 70% believe there is intelligent life out there, so I guess they also see the possibilities of UFO’s.
I know why Christofasists are so scared of believing that there is other intelligent life in the universe. They are scared that they may find that we are really a race of people who were put here by aliens as a social experiment. I wonder what they think of what has become of their “babies”.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:58 pmAnd your vast knowledge of the AUTO INDUSTRY because you worked at a GM Tech Center!!! HAHAHAHHAAAAA!!
ONE FACT IS FOR SURE!!!
JCAKASS MORON HITLER IS FULL OF SH|T EVERYDAY OF THE WEEK!!!!
Comment by dixie blood
And don’t forget his disrespect of our troops. He thinks that 3,900 dead soldiers isn’t really much in the scheme of things. Disgusting.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:59 pmRon calls the children of immigrants “anchor babies†and wants them to lose their citizenship but “progressives†carry his water
Comment by jr1
“Progressives carry his water”….in what universe? Sheesh, another damn troll to deal with. There are few progressives here ready to carry water for Ron Paul. Many approve of his courage and his stance on the war, but most recognize him for what he is and don’t support much of what he stands for other than his stance on the occupation or Iraq.
BTW, I really do wish that everyone here would stop calling it the “War in Iraq”. IT IS NOT A WAR, IT IS AN OCCUPATION! Call it what it is. If all Democrats started doing that, including Pelosi and Reid, I think that people’s perceptions would change drastically.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:07 pmKucinich saying he saw a UFO is in line with about 45% of the people in this country who have either seen a UFO or know someone who has. We proved that to you the other day loon Jason. And something like 70% believe there is intelligent life out there, so I guess they also see the possibilities of UFO’s.
Comment by bilbobaggins — December 29, 2007 @ 7:58 pm
I have video of the Marfa Ghost lights that science has yet to explain. Thousands have seen the Marfa lights.
I also have infra-red video of floating orbs of light, a cloud of mist forming in the middle of a community center gym, objects moving and many other weird things from 15 years of doing paranormal investigations as a hobby. ( no apparitions caught yet. )
There is a lot of weird stuff that happens and science has no explanation for them. Just because someone saw something does not mean they are crazy, or it didn’t happen, just saying….
December 29th, 2007 at 8:09 pmJust because someone saw something does not mean they are crazy, or it didn’t happen, just saying….
Comment by Wayne — December 29, 2007 @ 8:09 pm
Whew!
Thanks Wayne, I needed to hear that…
;)
I’ve seen and heard a couple of things that have no empirical proof.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:16 pmDoesn’t mean they aren’t real.
#37 Comment by bilbobaggins — December 29, 2007 @ 8:07 pm
BTW, I really do wish that everyone here would stop calling it the “War in Iraqâ€. IT IS NOT A WAR, IT IS AN OCCUPATION! Call it what it is. If all Democrats started doing that, including Pelosi and Reid, I think that people’s perceptions would change drastically.
Spot on Bilbo!! It was an invasion and now an occupation! It is not a “war” and never has been a “war.”
December 29th, 2007 at 8:20 pm#34 Comment by jr1 — December 29, 2007 @ 7:51 pm
“progressives†carry his water
Any Progressive that has looked into Paul’s record will be hard pressed to “carry his water.” I give him credit for his position on Iraq but nothing else. I also give him credit for speaking his mind without the triangulating and back pedaling often seen these days.
Paul’s “libertarian” positions are diametrically opposed to the position of Progressive Democrats.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:26 pmPaul’s “libertarian†positions are diametrically opposed to the position of Progressive Democrats.
Comment by Merlin — December 29, 2007 @ 8:26 pm
While I (and, I think, a lot of other progressives) are Liberal Libertarians, Dr. Ron Paul is a Conservative Libertarian, and not very appealing to progressives. He has a lot of positions on which we would never agree.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:30 pm#4 Comment by Nat — December 29, 2007 @ 5:40 pm
I agree that Fox “News†is a warmongering network but I wouldn’t challenge their conservatism.
I would! They are neoconservative which is totally different than conservative. Check out what George Will thinks. He is a “classical” conservative. Faux Snooze would like people to think they are conservative when they are anything but.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:30 pmFine…. But let us not forget what a racist he is and where he stands on Social security, Medicare, Womens rights,…
Comment by had enough
You mean the BS smear that was RETRACTED by the NY Time?
http://themedium.blogs.nytimes.com/ 2007/ 12/ 26/ editors-note-the-ron-paul-vid-lash/
Go ahead and be fooled again, this time into supporting Neocon/AIPAC sponsored Dem candidates like Clinton, Obama and Edwards.
You guys are all a bunch of morons.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:35 pmI’ve seen and heard a couple of things that have no empirical proof.
Doesn’t mean they aren’t real.
Comment by Nevar — December 29, 2007 @ 8:16 pm
8 of us were investigating the old Baker Hotel in Mineral Wells, Tx. On the 4th floor we were discussing the team split to check out the floor, we all saw a “person” walk past us, down a dead end hall and then fade to nothing. All of us watched with our jaws dropped to the floor and not one of us turned on the video cameras or took a damn picture.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:36 pmI am still kicking myself over that one, heh.
I would! They are neoconservative which is totally different than conservative. Check out what George Will thinks. He is a “classical†conservative. Faux Snooze would like people to think they are conservative when they are anything but.
Comment by Merlin
Thank god at least one of you gets it.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:37 pmPaul’s “libertarian†positions are diametrically opposed to the position of Progressive Democrats.
Comment by Merlin
You’re correct. The position of “Progressive” Democrats is complete and utter stupidity.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:39 pmYou guys are all a bunch of morons.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 8:35 pm
Paul is a racist piece of crap. Support him if you want, but I live in Texas and I have read his newsletter he used to put out.
You are a blind fool if you vote for him.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:39 pmI am still kicking myself over that one, heh.
Comment by Wayne
I saw a Mayan warrior, complete with maquahuital in one hand, and a severed head held by the hair in the other, in an abandoned lookout tower in New Hampshire.
My first conscious thought was “What is a Mayan doing in New Hampshire?
December 29th, 2007 at 8:46 pmPoof, he was gone.
That’s what I kick myself for.
From TP not that long ago:
Ron Paul: 95 percent of black men are ‘criminal.’
Comment by had enough
You guys are COMPLETE MORONS…
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=377205
Go ahead, elect another Neocon/AIPAC backed candidate like Clinton, Obama or Edwards. Morons like you deserve such two faced leadership.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:52 pmPaul is a racist piece of crap. Support him if you want, but I live in Texas and I have read his newsletter he used to put out.
You are a blind fool if you vote for him.
Comment by Wayne
That newsletter has been debunked. See my previous post.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:53 pmIt is not a news organization…it is FAUX NOIZ. It is all BS put out by the White House Propaganda machine via Roger Ailes. Anyone who even has it on the dial is delusional.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:59 pmYou are a blind fool if you vote for him.
Comment by Wayne
Oh and speaking of blind fools… go ahead and vote for Clinton, Obama or Edwards. I’m sure that Israel will appreciate us spending billions of more dollars and the lives of few thousand more American sons and daughters to fight their wars for them…
http://www.counterpunch.org/frank02072007.html
You guys are all complete and utter fools.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:00 pmYou guys are all complete and utter fools.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
And where did you ever see me post I was voting for Clinton, Obama or Edwards?
Fcking moron…..
December 29th, 2007 at 9:02 pmThat newsletter has been debunked. See my previous post.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 8:53 pm
My grandfather subscribed to that newsletter, I still have them. Even if he used a “ghost writer”as he claimed, HE published it with himself listed as the author. I call that pulling the wool over the eyes of fools with his excuse. Debunked? Hardly.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:05 pmIn none of the later newsletters did he put a retraction. It was only after running for president did he give that excuse out.
You are a moron JPV.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:07 pmYou’re correct. The position of “Progressive†Democrats is complete and utter stupidity.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 8:39 pm
How would YOU know, considering you’re COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY STUPID? More projection from the ‘tard that thinks we should do away with any assistance for the poor, disabled and disenfranchised. You’re a MORON, that IDEALIZES the THIRD WORLD - what a FOOL!
December 29th, 2007 at 9:15 pmHere’s you posting on redstate and all the ‘intolerance’ you received. you’re post 20, 29, 31, 38.
http://redstate.com/ stories/ culture/ two_cheers_for_the_hypocrites#comment
Doesn’t appear to me that you were being shut down. Maybe it was a different redstate?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007 @ 9:15 pm
How LONG was he permitted to post, before he was blocked? Was he posting anything DISRUPTIVE and OFF TOPIC, like YOU DO - ‘TARD?
December 29th, 2007 at 9:16 pmGo ahead and be fooled again, this time into supporting Neocon/AIPAC sponsored Dem candidates like Clinton, Obama and Edwards.
You guys are all a bunch of morons.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 8:35 pm
While what you say about the top three Dems is true, I don’t believe TP posters are “morons”. Ron Paul has some good points, but is mildly sociopathic. What has happened is Progressives and in fact. most of the planet, have disliked Bush so much that a head of cabbage could win if it ran against Bush or somebody like him. Romney and Giuliani, one of who will run against a Dem, are genuine psychos, and anybody looks good against them. Of course, in a real world, the race would be Kucinich vs Paul, who basically are Constitutionalists, but on opposite sides of social issues. Personally, I would pick Kucinich, but Ron Paul would be better than any of the “foaming at the mouths” running as Republicans. This AIPAC issue is very serious, and all of these Zionist whores in the US Government make my stomach turn, including Hillary, Obama, and Edwards. They are all Globalists in the worse case.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:17 pmPersonally, I would pick Kucinich, but Ron Paul would be better than any of the “foaming at the mouths†running as Republicans. This AIPAC issue is very serious, and all of these Zionist whores in the US Government make my stomach turn, including Hillary, Obama, and Edwards. They are all Globalists in the worse case.
Comment by Brain From Planet Arous — December 29, 2007 @ 9:17 pm
Ron Paul believes poor people and the sick should starve or pull themselves up. Be careful what you ask for, because from where I sit, that’s AS FOAMING or MORE FOAMING radicalism than what ANY of the religious morons are saying.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:20 pmYou guys are all complete and utter fools.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
As opposed to the fools who still think invading Iraq was a good idea, or, can’t get invited to a debate?
December 29th, 2007 at 9:21 pmMy grandfather subscribed to that newsletter, I still have them. Even if he used a “ghost writerâ€as he claimed, HE published it with himself listed as the author. I call that pulling the wool over the eyes of fools with his excuse. Debunked? Hardly.
Comment by Wayne
Well it sounds like he at least took responsibility for it during the campaign.
That’s more than I can say for ANY other candidate in recent memory.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:26 pmOf course, in a real world, the race would be Kucinich vs Paul, who basically are Constitutionalists, but on opposite sides of social issues. Personally, I would pick Kucinich, but Ron Paul would be better than any of the “foaming at the mouths†running as Republicans. This AIPAC issue is very serious, and all of these Zionist whores in the US Government make my stomach turn, including Hillary, Obama, and Edwards. They are all Globalists in the worse case.
Comment by Brain From Planet Arous
Paul, and Kucinich, are both far from ideal.
However given the option of any of the other Republican and Democratic Neocon/AIPAC/Zionist backed candidates that the MSM are pushing, I’d take either of them in a heartbeat!
What other choices do we realistically have?
December 29th, 2007 at 9:29 pmCheck out the link and decide for you self, btruthful.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007 @ 9:25 pm
bilbobaggins is not his first moniker here at TP. Just because he was able to post there today does not refute his previous argument.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:29 pmThat’s more than I can say for ANY other candidate in recent memory.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
Kucinich has filed and fought for impeachment. Dodd stood in the way of immunity for the telcos.
And Ron Paul….. what has Ron Paul done exactly?
Hillary and Obama can’t even get into the Senate to do their fscking jobs. They didn’t even show for the FISA vote.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:33 pmYou guys are all complete and utter fools.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
I don’t know about the rest of you, but that certainly caused me to change my mind about Ron Paul. That’s an amazingly effective campaign strategy, JPV.
Go Ron! Bring on the fish sticks!
December 29th, 2007 at 9:38 pmDoes the Captain have some kind of crush on bilbobaggins? This whole stalking routine is frickin’ lame.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:39 pmWell it sounds like he at least took responsibility for it during the campaign.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
He has not refuted one of the statements in the newsletter. He tried to explain away the article as written by a ghost writer, but he stood by the statements stating statistics back them up and he didn’t mean them as racist.
He to this date has not retracted, but has defended his statements as “statistically sound”.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:40 pmHillary and Obama can’t even get into the Senate to do their fscking jobs. They didn’t even show for the FISA vote.
Comment by Wayne — December 29, 2007 @ 9:33 pm
Ha! They are grepped and fscked, but the MSM has us believing they are the best choices for us after 8 years of a nightmare. However, if Hillary ran against Ghouliani or Romney, I would have to vote for her. She may be AIPAC, but those other two are crackpots as well as AIPAC. They would be full blown fascists.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:44 pmGo Ron! Bring on the fish sticks!
Comment by gummitch — December 29, 2007 @ 9:38 pm
LMAO
You hear that “Hordes” of Paul supporters are staging a virtual march though World of Warcraft?
I will probably load one of my lvl 70s, and if any get pvp tagged, gank them LOL
December 29th, 2007 at 9:48 pmIf Fox “News” can’t stand up to Ron Paul, how can they stand up to al Queda terrorists?
“Fair & Balanced” my rear.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:53 pmThey are grepped and fscked, but the MSM has us believing they are the best choices for us after 8 years of a nightmare.
Comment by Brain From Planet Arous — December 29, 2007 @ 9:44 pm
And I have been watching the “tail” of their voting records.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:55 pmBoth of them need a thorough fsck -yf =)
I haven’t made up my mind yet, but I do know that restoring the Constitution, ending the Occupation, and the economy are the most important issues to me. I have looked at all the candidates’ stances on these issues. I do agree with Ron Paul when it comes to ending the Occupation, Constitutional restoration and the economy. I won’t let the media or the blogs determine my vote. Ron Paul makes a lot of sense in the areas that are important to me. Maybe many (or most) people disagree. That’s immaterial really. I don’t want to regret my vote. I’m torn between Edwards and Paul.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:57 pmI’m torn between Edwards and Paul.
Comment by lefttown — December 29, 2007 @ 9:57 pm
Really?
Maybe you should read up on Paul…
December 29th, 2007 at 10:02 pmI’m torn between Edwards and Paul.
Comment by lefttown — December 29, 2007 @ 9:57 pm
After the last 7 years, no Republican will get my vote, even Ron Paul.
And quite a few Democrats currently in office won’t get my primary votes either.
Final vote, see the “no Republican” comment……
December 29th, 2007 at 10:02 pm“Well it sounds like he at least took responsibility for it during the campaign.”
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
When I ask him why, he pauses for a moment, then says, “I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren’t really written by me. It wasn’t my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady.†Paul says that item ended up there because “we wanted to do something on affirmative action, and it ended up in the newsletter and became personalized. I never personalize anything.â€
So he took responsibility - by blaming his staffers?
Perhaps I’m too much of a “complete and utter fool” to see it.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:03 pmAnd I have been watching the “tail†of their voting records.
Both of them need a thorough fsck -yf =)
Comment by Wayne — December 29, 2007 @ 9:55 pm
Our country needs a good Forced System Check, Connectivity Check, and could repair all errors encountered without waiting for Congressional response.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:09 pmSo he took responsibility - by blaming his staffers?
Perhaps I’m too much of a “complete and utter fool†to see it.
Comment by barfly — December 29, 2007 @ 10:03 pm
Yeah, that seems to be “debunked” means, now days. Shifted blame, not taking real responsibility for ones own actions.
mv “Ron Paul” /dev/null
December 29th, 2007 at 10:11 pmSo he took responsibility - by blaming his staffers?
Perhaps I’m too much of a “complete and utter fool†to see it.
Comment by barfly
Yeah, you are. That interview was done well AFTER the campaign.
In fact, in the excerpt that you quoted he even says…
“I could never say this in the campaign”
You should learn how to read sometime. It helps.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:11 pmMaybe you should read up on Paul…
Comment by Zooey
Unlike Edwards the AIPAC/Zionist shill?
LOL!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 10:13 pmYou should learn how to read sometime. It helps.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:11 pm
ROTFL!! Typical republican! Practice what you PREACH there WIDE STANCE!! ROTFL!!
December 29th, 2007 at 10:13 pmUnlike Edwards the AIPAC/Zionist shill?
LOL!!!
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:13 pm
ROTFL!!! Spoken like a TRUE NUTJOB!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 10:13 pmROTFL!! Typical republican! Practice what you PREACH there WIDE STANCE!! ROTFL!!
Comment by republicans hate facts
Errr… who said i was a Republican?
Fool.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:14 pm“Yeah, you are. That interview was done well AFTER the campaign.”
So, temporally speaking, he’s had time to consider his remarks - and he still blames his staffers?
And that’s your ideal of “personal responsibility?”
So; you support Paul because…
December 29th, 2007 at 10:19 pmROTFL!!! Spoken like a TRUE NUTJOB!!!
Comment by republicans hate facts
Laugh it up…
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?pid=161493
December 29th, 2007 at 10:19 pmJPV, you my be able to read, but you don’t understand. You’re a total and complete moron. Ron Paul is labeled a republican, but claims to be libertarian. Why won’t he change his affiliation? Because he’s a liar, a hypocrite, a Republican politician, the lowest of the snakes in the gutter. you don’t have the brains you were born with.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:20 pmA few moments later, he strongly hinted at the need for possible US military action. “To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep ALL options on the table,†Edwards said. “Let me reiterate – ALL options must remain on the table.â€
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:19 pm
so what? what does that mean? that Edwards can talk tough during a campaign? you’re so gullible and stupid, it’s amazing you can feed yourself.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:21 pmwho said i was a Republican?
Fool.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:14 pm
Your posting support for a Republican candidate ( Ron Paul ) says you are Republican and bad mouthing ALL Democrats, then calling all posters here fools.
And lets see your proof of Edwards being AIPAC?
December 29th, 2007 at 10:22 pmI would like to read that for myself. Link?
“I could never say this in the campaignâ€
You should learn how to read sometime. It helps.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:11 pm
you should look up “hypocrite’ sometime. It describes Ron Paul, and you, perfectly.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:23 pmI can’t force myself to trust a candidate who’s despised by their own party, or, comes from Texas. We should have learned our lesson with LBJ.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:26 pmSo, temporally speaking, he’s had time to consider his remarks - and he still blames his staffers?
And that’s your ideal of “personal responsibility?â€
So; you support Paul because…
Comment by barfly
Like I said, he took the blame for the newsletter during the campaign. I’m sure that it was apparent to him at the time that it was an issue that would hurt him. I’m also sure that if he wanted to make excuses, at the time, that he didn’t need years to think them up.
And I support him because I don’t much care for all of the other candidates that I see as being the same old DC players as usual.
Like I said, he’s not ideal, but to me at least, far more preferable to me than Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee or McCain.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/about/
December 29th, 2007 at 10:29 pm“I can’t force myself to trust a candidate who’s despised by their own party, or, comes from Texas. We should have learned our lesson with LBJ.”
Comment by pete —
Don’t drop a hammer on him, Wayne.
Reagan came from California…
Mea Culpa.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:29 pmComment by JPV —
And what is Dodd - chopped liver?
December 29th, 2007 at 10:30 pmI’m torn between Edwards and Paul.
Comment by lefttown — December 29, 2007 @ 9:57 pm
December 29th, 2007 at 10:31 pmI do hope you vote for Edwards in the primary and let the repugs eat their own or what ever they end up doing. I am from one of those states - Oregon, where the primary is in May… by then the candidate is already picked…. we do depend upon others to vote the correct way.
Your posting support for a Republican candidate ( Ron Paul ) says you are Republican and bad mouthing ALL Democrats, then calling all posters here fools.
And lets see your proof of Edwards being AIPAC?
I would like to read that for myself. Link?
Comment by Wayne
I believe that Paul is a Libertarian not a Republican. I bad mouth Republicans ALL the time on the forum.
Here’s a link to a speech that Edwards made to AIPAC in March 2006…
http://www.stopaipac.org/ documents/ PC06_Transcript_Edwards.pdf
Enjoy.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:32 pmComment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:29 pm
Paul’s record from Paul’s web site, LMAO
Thats rich….
Want to know his real voting record, look him up here:
December 29th, 2007 at 10:33 pmhttp://votesmart.org/index.htm
I can’t force myself to trust a candidate who’s despised by their own party, or, comes from Texas.
Comment by pete
LOL, if the other Republicans despise him, that you tell you something right there.
Of course, I’m sure that you despise the guys that despise him.
Really quite funny logic there… if that’s what you can call it.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:34 pmRon Paul’s libertarian streak goes too deep for my liking. I actually plan on retiring with at least a little bit of the Social Security contributions I’ve paid in over the years.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:34 pmAnd the gold standard, well, good luck with that.
Here’s a link to a speech that Edwards made to AIPAC in March 2006…
http://www.stopaipac.org/ documents/ PC06_Transcript_Edwards.pdf
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
That marks Edwards off my list.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:36 pmThat leaves Kucinich, Dodd, and Gravel.
Unlike Edwards the AIPAC/Zionist shill?
LOL!!!
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:13 pm
He can read up on Edwards, too. Funny how that works.
Let me guess…you’re an “independent,” right? :-D
December 29th, 2007 at 10:36 pmWant to know his real voting record, look him up here:
http://votesmart.org/index.htm
Comment by Wayne
Yeah, and what do you see as problematic votes that he’s made?
http://votesmart.org/ voting_category.php?can_id=296
December 29th, 2007 at 10:37 pmAnd what is Dodd - chopped liver?
Comment by barfly — December 29, 2007 @ 10:30 pm
He seems to be promoting the media darlings view of the race doesn’t he?
December 29th, 2007 at 10:37 pmLet me guess…you’re an “independent,†right? :-D
Comment by Zooey
Guess again. No affiliation. Independent is a party.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:38 pmYeah, and what do you see as problematic votes that he’s made?
http://votesmart.org/ voting_category.php?can_id=296
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:37 pm
His voting against a womens right to choose, against armor for the troops, against or NV for every environmental bill. Did you actually read that link?
December 29th, 2007 at 10:42 pmGuess again. No affiliation. Independent is a party.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:38 pm
You live in Oregon? Because most places, “independent” means “no affiliation.” Because, y’know, it’s English language.
The Independent Party in Oregon is brand-new and in most states, nonexistent. And you’ll notice that Zooey used the lower-case i.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:43 pm“That marks Edwards off my list.
That leaves Kucinich, Dodd, and Gravel.”
Comment by Wayne — December 29, 2007 @ 10:36 pm
You’re not allowed to choose that, you “complete and utter fool!” You’ve bad-mouthed RON PAUL for God sakes!
What ARE “propangadists,” anyway?
Are they like propaniacs?
December 29th, 2007 at 10:47 pm94 Comment by JPV
December 29th, 2007 at 10:50 pmYou failed to mention that Paul IS a racist… IS for privatizing social Security….Always votes against funding women clinics, Always votes against abortion,… Votes against any social program.
Paul’s view is every man for himself… Some out there are saying that not only would he like to eliminate SS, welfare, medicare, he would privatize/eliminate fire and police protection. Do you want to throw grandma out into the streets or let some homes burn down?
The man is a kook..
I flirted with libertarian theory back a few decades but it eventually became clear to me that “libertarian” = “greedy” in real terms. The entire approach is “I’ve got mine and if you don’t, tough sh!t.” Given the opportunity, Ron Paul would defund the entire federal government, including departments of education, health, agriculture . . . think your food is tainted? Well, then sue someone. Water is teeming with bacteria from upstream? Sue someone. Good luck in the courts and 20 years from now you may get a settlement. Or, more likely, your kids might get a settlement because you’ll be dead.
The bedrock of his opposition to the Iraqi occupation is that the fed is spending his money on it. If we could do it for free, fine, no problem. Just keep your hands out of my pocket.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:50 pmhttp://baltimorechronicle.com/2007/012907CARMICHAEL.shtml
December 29th, 2007 at 10:51 pmThe man is a kook.
Comment by had enough
Yeah, you’re right. we are better of voting for one of the other candidates and letting them start WWIII in the Middle East.
Sigh…
December 29th, 2007 at 10:53 pmJPV ignores questions and real debate, then just posts links like a troll.
If you’re gonna act like a troll, we will just have to treat you like one.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:55 pmHis voting against a womens right to choose, against armor for the troops, against or NV for every environmental bill. Did you actually read that link?
Comment by Wayne
Yeah, I skimmed it. He’s know for being called “Dr. No” by his colleagues.
From what I gather, it’s not so much that he is against certain programs, I just think that he believes that they should be administrated at the State and not Federal level.
He firmly believes in a minimal Federal government with minimal powers.
In that respect, I can’t help but agree with him wholeheartedly.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:57 pmJPV ignores questions and real debate, then just posts links like a troll.
If you’re gonna act like a troll, we will just have to treat you like one.
Comment by Wayne
What do you want me to respond to?
December 29th, 2007 at 10:57 pmIf you’re gonna act like a troll, we will just have to treat you like one.
Comment by Wayne — December 29, 2007 @ 10:55 pm
I thought he was a troll. Posts like a troll…
December 29th, 2007 at 10:57 pmI thought he was a troll. Posts like a troll…
Comment by Zooey
What did I post that made me seem like a troll?
December 29th, 2007 at 11:00 pmIn that respect, I can’t help but agree with him wholeheartedly.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:57 pm
Even labor law stance? No workmans comp, no ovetime pay, no to every workers right.
You are either really ignorant of what Paul really stands for, or you are just as bad as he is.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:03 pmComment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:34 pm
I would have more respect for Dr. Paul if he had the courage to end his affiliation with the Republican party. As it is, he just uses the (R) after his name to lend legitimacy to a fringe campaign.
Personally, I didn’t pay much attention to party affiliation before the neocon scum seized the GOP. I will vote against anyone with an (R) after their name until: we are out of Iraq, we have begun to regain the respect and trust of the rest of the world, and, the neocons are just a bad memory.
That probably means I won’t ever vote for another Republican, though, I may change my mind if someone within the party speaks out against the current crop of criminals.
As for Dr. Paul himself? His stand on Social Security, Medicare, and abortion are enough to disqualify him. Over, and above, his lack of conviction re. his continued affiliation to a party with which he, apparently, shares so little. Everything I’ve learned about him indicates he’s a profound fraud and a danger to much that’s good about our country.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:04 pmWhat did I post that made me seem like a troll?
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 11:00 pm
1. Posting long-assed cut & paste crap. Links do fine.
2. Responding to every single post you think might have something to do with you. Very troll-like.
M’kay?
December 29th, 2007 at 11:05 pmHere’s a link to a speech that Edwards made to AIPAC in March 2006…
http://www.stopaipac.org/ documents/ PC06_Transcript_Edwards.pdf
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
What am I missing? There’s no link to any Edwards speech that I can find on this link??
December 29th, 2007 at 11:06 pmwhere was this post for Mike Gravel? thats when I stopped trusting this website.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:06 pmhttp://www.stopaipac.org/ documents/ PC06_Transcript_Edwards.pdf
Enjoy.
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
And this link gives me a
December 29th, 2007 at 11:07 pmWeb page not found error…?
Comment by JPV — December 29, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
Posting links that don’t work. Very troll-like.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:11 pmAnd this link gives me a
Web page not found error…?
Comment by RUCerious
Yeah, I just figured that out. I’ll see if I can find a better link.
I did post a whole article that talks about a speech that he gave at the Herzliya Conference, which I believe covers the same territory.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:13 pmHere’s the gist of what Edwards said at the AIPAC dinner (contrasted with Hillary’s talk minutes earlier)…
Democratic hopefuls have been in agreement about the importance of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. In a January 22 speech to American and Israeli security officials and experts, another 2008 contender, former North Carolina senator and vice-presidential nominee John Edwards, said, “Let me be clear: Under no circumstances can Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons.â€
His address, in contrast with Clinton’s speech, made no mention of engaging with Iran. But when an audience member asked afterward, “Would you be prepared, if diplomacy failed, to take further action against Iran?†the former senator said he supported talking with Tehran.
“As to what to do, we should not take anything off the table,†Edwards said. “More serious sanctions need to be undertaken, which cannot happen unless Russia and China are seriously on board, which has not happened up until now. I would not want to say in advance what we would do, and what I would do as president, but there are other steps that need to be taken. For example, we need to support direct engagement with the Iranians, we need to be tough. But I think it is a strategic mistake to avoid engagement with Iran.â€
He supported talking with Iran…
December 29th, 2007 at 11:13 pmPosting links that don’t work. Very troll-like.
Comment by Zooey — December 29, 2007 @ 11:11 pm
hehe
Add Promoting a regressive kook like Ron Paul on a progressive site.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:13 pmPosting links that don’t work. Very troll-like.
Comment by Zooey
Wasn’t intentional. Sorry, I should have checked it fist.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:13 pmJPV…
December 29th, 2007 at 11:15 pmWho are you counting on to vote for Paul?
Women?
Minorities?
Senior Citizens?
Clear thinking caring souls?
He supported talking with Iran…
Comment by RUCerious — December 29, 2007 @ 11:13 pm
Good catch.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:15 pmAl though I heavily disagree with Paul on most issues, I do find it interesting that his campaign has received the 2nd highest amount of donations from the military -(the highest is Obama). I talk to a lot of troops that like him.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:17 pmWhile there are major changes in the direction this nation needs to go, Ron Paul would be going in pretty much the other direction.
The only bullet I admire is his stance on the war. His stance on Pirates is pretty good too.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:18 pmOk, here’s a good link to the speech…
http://www.aipac.org/ Publications/ SpeechesByPolicymakers/ Edwards-PC-2006.pdf
December 29th, 2007 at 11:20 pmI talk to a lot of troops that like him.
Comment by Chris L — December 29, 2007 @ 11:17 pm
They don’t know he voted against giving them armor then.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:20 pmThey don’t know he voted against giving them armor then.
Comment by Wayne — December 29, 2007 @ 11:20 pm
####
I think his stance on the war is the only thing that most people do know about, and a big reason for his popularity.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:21 pmRon Paul’s web page says he supports lower taxes, but nowhere does he mention repealing Bush’s tax break for the 1% of the wealthiest Americans. JPV, care to comment?
December 29th, 2007 at 11:21 pmI talk to a lot of troops that like him.
Comment by Chris L — December 29, 2007 @ 11:17 pm
December 29th, 2007 at 11:25 pmIsn’t Paul the most outspoken about bringing the troops home?
Isn’t Paul the most outspoken about bringing the troops home?
Comment by had enough — December 29, 2007 @ 11:25 pm
Kucinich
December 29th, 2007 at 11:29 pmHe supported talking with Iran…
Comment by RUCerious
Oh yeah? Well here’s a longer excerpt from his speech…
http://www.aipac.org/ Publications/ SpeechesByPolicymakers/ Edwards-PC-2006.pdf
December 29th, 2007 at 11:32 pmKucinich
Comment by Zooey — December 29, 2007 @ 11:29 pm
####
Unfortunately, Kucinich’s name is not as well known.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:33 pmUnfortunately, Kucinich’s name is not as well known.
Comment by Chris L — December 29, 2007 @ 11:33 pm
Really? I’ve known about him for years. I only heard about Paul a few months ago.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:34 pmRon Paul’s web page says he supports lower taxes, but nowhere does he mention repealing Bush’s tax break for the 1% of the wealthiest Americans. JPV, care to comment?
Comment by RUCerious
I don’t know. If I find some relative info I’ll post it.
Like i said, I don’t think that Paul is ideal, but I don’t much care for the alternatives. Except for maybe Kucinich, who seems capable of rocking the boat also.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:35 pm