Ron Paul Places 2nd in Fox Poll, but is Again Openly Railroaded by the Establishment (2978 hits)
Category: PoliticsLabels: ets_sociopolitical_commentary ets_essays
Rating: 0.79 on 104 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (View user info) at 2007-05-16 01:27:53 EDT
Ron Paul was winning in Fox's text messaging polls throughout the post debate coverage by a pretty wide margain. By the time the post debate coverage ended, he was still in a very close second place:
Romney: 27%
Paul: 26%
Giuliani: 18%
If you buy into the Fox News explanation of this result that Ron Paul's supporters were more organized in getting their text meassage voting machinery running, you've got some serious problems, because how do you explain that in light of the following statistic:
Romney, Mitt
MA
Raised: $23,434,634
Spent: $11,570,981
Cash on Hand: $11,863,652
Debts: $2,350,000
Giuliani, Rudy
NY
Raised: $16,623,410
Spent: $5,688,207
Cash on Hand: $11,949,734
Debts: $88,862
McCain, John
AZ
Raised: $13,087,559
Spent: $8,379,214
Cash on Hand: $5,180,799
Debts: $1,812,636
Paul, Ron
TX
Raised: $639,989
Spent: $115,070
Cash on Hand: $524,919
Debts: $0
The so-called "top 3" have enough special interest money in their war-chests they could have paid throngs of people on the street to vote for them if they wanted. They have enough money they can, and do, pay people to call potential voters and not only campaign for their candidate, but raise awareness on where their candidate stands on issues. Ron Paul's paltry $524,000 isn't gonna buy all his supporters a friggin' hot dog, let alone the kind of political juggernaut that should be able to, frankly, win a measley text message poll.
The funniest part of the entire debate coverage was watching the pundits at Fox News try and make a case for why Ron Paul didn't win the debate, even though the polls at the time had him clearly in the lead, and Michael Steele even suggesting that it's time to thin out the debate herd by getting rid of some of these "distracting second tier candidates". When asked by Alan Combs what he would base any extraction on he could not answer with anything but an arbitrary personal opinion about the individuals' performance.
It's clear to me that the Republican power structure is in crisis...and for good reason. Traditionally representing the no taxes, low spending, low interventionalist policies of the founding Federalists (labeled "anti-federalists" in their day, ironically enough), the Republican party has come, either fairly or unfairly, to be synonymous with the endless 'war on terror' and the NSA spying and the unending corruption and the bold-faced lies about 'wmd' and 'yellow cake' and the like.
Ron Paul had 30% of the poll locked in through most of the post debate coverage, a full 5 percentage points ahead of Romney, while Giuliani languished at around 16%, and yet that doesn't stop Michael Steele from telling the America people and the Republican party to their faces that it's time to "thin out the field of candidates", and singling out Ron Paul as being among the first that should go.
If there is any doubt in anyone's mind still what's going on here, you're simply not paying much attention.
The bottom line in tonight's Republican debates was this: The establishment media and the establishment candidates tried like hell to discredit Dr. Paul. They attempted at every turn to spin his words and insist repeatedly that, although he was clearly winning the text message poll put forth by their own network, "he did not win that debate!"
But they failed miserably. What they succeeded in doing what producing a Ron Paul awareness MESS that the Monday morning quarterbacks at the national newspapers and radio shows and tv programs will have to attempt to clean up. This will, of course, cause evn MORE people to become aware of Ron Paul and his noninterventionalist, constitutional, libertarian policies.
Good luck to the remaining candidates trying to debate against them on a level playing field. They're gonna need it.
For as long as I can remember, the big money candidates have relied on not having to face the music, not having to confront someone who was speaking the truth on a level playing field. They have relied on smear tactics and their media henchmen, their pundits and their money to silence opposition and frame the debate in their favor; but tonight, a little Doctor/Congressman from Texas once again gave them all what for.
Somebody has to do it.
User Reviews
Submitted by Flack (user info) at 2007-05-21 00:22:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by JulsInsane (user info) at 2007-05-16 10:16:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I don't have as much problem with Giuliani as you do, but that is probably bc I am from NYC and still have the residual ohh Rudy you rock socks attitude going for me. He was a great mayor though, he did limit civil liberties but it felt like a small cost for the general enhancement to the quality of life around here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2007-05-19 04:10:19 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faNwSiWbnWs
Submitted by lungfish (user info) at 2007-05-19 01:34:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Here's an email I received today from a very liberal friend of mine:
So, I've spent portions of the past three to four days listening to
footage of Ron Paul on various issues and shows, as well as Howard
Zinn, Noam Chompsky, and Gino Strada. Between shitting myself and
drinking heavily, Paul has my vote at this point. Although, I'm
scared to think of his running mate....
*Chomsky. He was probably drunk. I love Chomsky.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 21:42:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 21:13:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Think what you want. Nothing I ca do to change that. Tired of wasting my time on you, frankly. Pity too. It's not like you're not intelligent, you just can't be civil. Even when I'm trying to be, you just cannot do it.
----------------------------
I can't be civil, you threatened to kill me?
And you aren't intellegent, as far as I can see.
You don't realize you are wrong about isolationism, and countless other basic facts.
But I guess it is the NWO changing facts on you.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 21:13:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 21:03:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:57:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
You're not even CLOSE to what I'm talking about here. Just fuck off. Yes I read books.
-------------
You read books that are in your comfort zone.
That fit your world view.
You say I am less than skeptical, but what is the last book that you read that is against things you believe in, last book you read the whole thing, and then looked intot hat they said?
I am guessing never, seeing as how you couldn't look at a link that quoted over a dozen polls without discounting the whole thing because fox was first.
You have much bigger blinders than me.
Plus you are an idiot.
----------------
Think what you want. Nothing I ca do to change that. Tired of wasting my time on you, frankly. Pity too. It's not like you're not intelligent, you just can't be civil. Even when I'm trying to be, you just cannot do it.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 21:03:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:57:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
You're not even CLOSE to what I'm talking about here. Just fuck off. Yes I read books.
-------------
You read books that are in your comfort zone.
That fit your world view.
You say I am less than skeptical, but what is the last book that you read that is against things you believe in, last book you read the whole thing, and then looked intot hat they said?
I am guessing never, seeing as how you couldn't look at a link that quoted over a dozen polls without discounting the whole thing because fox was first.
You have much bigger blinders than me.
Plus you are an idiot.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:59:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:52:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Actually, that article devolves into complete New World Order bullshit. Global government is best...War on terror is bad...war on drugs is good
-------------------------------
devolve?
You are devoled to the point where it is worth less than solving the world's problems in the bottom of a whiskey bottle when you bring up star wars, or any other hero-myth story.
I thought in the NWO war on terror and war on drugs are both just vehicles to keep the money and poser in the hands of the jew bankers/NWO?!?!?
Is one war really good?!?!?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:57:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
You're not even CLOSE to what I'm talking about here. Just fuck off. Yes I read books.
There are quite a few good points early on in this paper, but it gets worse as it goes. Yes it is a lecture, but it is by a Yale professor, which should comfort you since it's your butt buddy neo-con president's alma mater.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:52:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Actually, that article devolves into complete New World Order bullshit. Global government is best...War on terror is bad...war on drugs is good...but maybe later war on terror will be good and we can learn from the NSA spying in war on drugs... And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:41:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:16:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The part about Wilsonian forieng plicy being the "genius of America" is complete bullshit, but elsewise, it's a pretty good article.
--------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:11:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.policyscience.net/gw_nsa2.306.pdf
--------------------------
Have you ever read a book?
Have you ever taken the time to read something other than a fucking lecture? Have you ever read anything and not only picked the parts you liked?
This is a fucking lecture.
A lecture that cites star wars mythology, and an anti american movie as being progressive of things to come. Have you ever seen the actual movie? You bandy around the word propaganda constantly, but can you imagine a movie like that? A movie where every muslim is in on a conspiracy to murder americans, then have their clerics sell their organs on the black market so the ultra conservatives can use them?
He is compating international politics to movies. It is probably great for you because you don't understand anything that is going on in the world, but it is simplistic, and nothing better than a barometer of who has a better "hollywood".
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:16:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The part about Wilsonian forieng plicy being the "genius of America" is complete bullshit, but elsewise, it's a pretty good article.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 20:11:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.policyscience.net/gw_nsa2.306.pdf
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 19:06:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 19:00:38 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
They don't have to jerk around all the polls...just the numbers database they're drawing from.
Two words asshole..."DATA MINING". Miracle of the 21st century. You should look into it sometime.
That and "random digit dialing" (RDD). Not bad if actually random, not good if hacked to appear random when in actuality reflecting a predetermined database of desired individuals. The people conducting the actual polling are none the wiser.
----------------------
Ahhhh,
So the NWO/jew/banker league control every type of RDD program out there, and use "DATA MINING" to make sure that only the exact portion of responses are given in any poll.
Question: wouldn't it be easier for them to set up a call center in India to answer all the phone surveyes the send out, or better yet just pull the polls out of their ass?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 19:00:38 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
They don't have to jerk around all the polls...just the numbers database they're drawing from.
Two words asshole..."DATA MINING". Miracle of the 21st century. You should look into it sometime.
That and "random digit dialing" (RDD). Not bad if actually random, not good if hacked to appear random when in actuality reflecting a predetermined database of desired individuals. The people conducting the actual polling are none the wiser.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 18:47:19 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 18:23:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I don't know why I'm bothering with you, because you're not gonna understand why I'm skeptical because you're never skeptical about anything.
------------------
There is a difference between skeptisism and ignoring facts presented by many news sources.
Whithout an understanding of basic science, politics, economics, current events and history (a lack of which you constantly display) skeptisim is useless.
Mr. America was never isolationist.
Mr. Bee pollen not being collected causes more allergies.
Mr. I don't have an education in anything but know the secrets of enegry, history, and economy because I watched a few youtube videos.
Submitted by Spooner (user info) at 2007-05-18 18:46:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
We can argue about why I disagree with his points another time, but you asked why I didn't support Ron Paul and I showed you. I disagree with his stances on certain issues. I do feel the need to clear something up though...
And what's the fuck is so God awful wrong about school prayer? First, who the hell does it offend? You, an atheist? An Agnostic? Who gives a shit if students want to pray to their God and express their faith? If you don't believe in it, move on. Seriously...it's childing and disengenuous to keep this debate raging over school prayer when the Supreme Court has clearly ruled time and time again that a student does NOT leave his first amendment rights at the schoolyard door and millions of government dollars are spent every year on frivilous lawsuits brought forth by some pussy-ass little twit who was "hurt" by some other kid's school prayer. That money could be better spent...I don't know...perhaps MAKING THE CONTENT OF THE CARRICULUM BETTER?!
---
I don't think there's anything so God awful wrong about school prayer. It doesn't offend me in the least bit. There are a few kids I know who carry the Bible with them constantly, and am I bothered? Not at all. Do we need laws saying students are allowed to pray in school? No, the constitution and Supreme Court cleared it up long ago. To be sincere, the website I got my information off of (www.OnTheIssues.org) is unclear about what exactly he was voting on, but it troubles me, along with the fact that he gets a 76% from the Christian Coalition, who support pretty everything that I do not. This isn't anything incredibly hard, but my convictions against him aren't exactly set in stone, either. I'm just saying it sends up a warning flag.
---
I agree with you on gay right issue. I think perhaps Ron Paul could use a little more thought on the adoption thing. But my view is, if there is a heterosexual couple willing to take the child, they should be given preference. I think children have a hard enough time growing up without all this sexual identity confusion from their parents to go along with it. Besides, I'm of the non-politically-correct mind that homosexuality is, more times than not, a learned behavior. Notice I didn't say "all the time". I've seen plenty of evidence for both. But, again, no reason to drag children into all that sexual confusion unless there is no alternative. That's just my viewpoint.
---
To say that a heterosexual couple should get preference is to imply that there's a wealth of couples looking to adopt, so much so that there are battles over the same child and who should get him. That's not the case. Homosexual parents won't compete with heterosexual parents over children, as there are already more children in foster care than there can ever be enough adoptive parents for.
Also, I would point out that numerous studies have all shown that a child raised by gay parents is not different in any significant way from a child raised by straight parents.
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1549491
"he body of literature generally concludes that children with lesbian and gay parents are developing psychologically, intellectually, behaviorally, and emotionally in positive directions, and that the sexual orientation of parents is not an effective or important predictor of successful child development."
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/1467-9450.00302/abs/
"Seven types of outcomes were found to be typical: emotional functioning, sexual preference, stigmatization, gender role behavior, behavioral adjustment, gender identity, and cognitive functioning. Children raised by lesbian mothers or gay fathers did not systematically differ from other children on any of the outcomes. The studies indicate that children raised by lesbian women do not experience adverse outcomes compared with other children. The same holds for children raised by gay men, but more studies should be done."
The only issue ever found with gay parents is treatment at school. However, is it right to deny rights to gay parents because of the actions of heterosexual bullies? And even with bullying, children will invariably come out better raised by gay parents than in perpetual or long-term foster care.
Really, that is the issue. That people see the issue of gay adoption as Gay Parents Vs. Straight Parents. In most cases, the issue is really Gay Parents. Vs. No Parents.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 18:37:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 18:23:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I don't know why I'm bothering with you, because you're not gonna understand why I'm skeptical because you're never skeptical about anything.
Suffice it to say I don't buy it and I'll be posting more on exactly why I don't buy it soon enough.
-----------------
You aren't skeptical. You are too stupid to realize you are wrong. You are too ignorant to realize that you have no idea what you are talking about.
You don't buy
Cook Political Report/RT Strategies Poll
Gallup Poll
American Research Group poll
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll
Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International
WNBC/Marist Poll
Quinnipiac University Poll
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press
ABC News/Washington Post Poll
CBS News Poll
Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll
Time Poll
Zogby America Poll
McLaughlin & Associates
Democracy Corps Poll
I guess I can understand that. I guess all the NWO jew bankers got to those polls?
What poll do you buy? The poll you run out of your basement where you call the only people who will talk to you? Or is it the poll of the comments left on prison planet and loose change websites?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 18:23:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 11:54:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Ron Paul has gotten 1% or less in every non-internet pool that I have seen.
What a groundswell of support. Too bad it isn't only jobless internet trolls who are allowed to vote.
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08rep.htm
-------------------
I don't know why I'm bothering with you, because you're not gonna understand why I'm skeptical because you're never skeptical about anything.
Suffice it to say I don't buy it and I'll be posting more on exactly why I don't buy it soon enough.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 18:14:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 18:03:45 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Anyway, his stance on the net neutrality issue is that for the governmment to start regulating anything, especially internet bandwidth, is a bad idea because it acknowledges that the Federal Government has that power in the first place. It's an undue power to place on the Federal Government. You have to understand Ron Paul's positions in greater context than whether he voted "yes" or "no" on this or that bill that the people you listened to and trusted told you was the right way. I was taken about by that too at first, but ow that I understand it in the larger context of what Ron Paul stands for, which is less federal government intrusion into our lives. If the states want it, let them vote on it. That's Ron Paul's stance. That's why you have to understand the way he votes in larger context.
---------------------------
That is precisely why he souldn't be president.
The spirit of the constitution is more important than the letter of the law.
The world is completely different than when the constitution was drafted.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 18:03:45 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Spooner (user info) at 2007-05-18 16:15:27 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 22:53:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/aol-metropolitan/96/05/23/paul.html There's the original source of the accusations I found.
Do any of you even know anymore what a hit piece looks like?
Spooner, I've called you a sniveling faggot on several occasions, but I have nothing against gay people on the whole. Look, use whatever ammunition you can find, I guarantee you it isn't gonna be as substantial against Ron Paul as, say, Hilary, or McCain, or Giuliani.
Beware of 30 second sound bytes and out of context quotations. Falling prey to them makes you look like a complete fool.
---
It's a joke, man. Have you been to Wonkette before? They take out-of-context quotes and pictures from anyone, looking for the humor.
I'm against Ron Paul's policies. He spouts the "secure borders" bullshit you hear from every Republican politician. He's wishy-washy on gay rights (voted to ban gay adoptions in DC), "Supports a Constitutional Amendment for school prayer," "Voted NO on establishing nationwide AMBER alert system for missing kids," "Voted NO on establishing 'network neutrality.'" Among other things.
I'm not saying there's nothing I don't like about him. I'm not saying I refuse to vote for him. He seems a favorable compared to douchebags like Mitt Romney and Sam Brownback. If anything, I'm only teasing because you're canonizing this man ridiculously early and treating him as if he was the shining light of truth that will lead this country to glory.
I want to see his stances on gay rights. His voting record on them is kinda wishy-washy, and I'm not one to be content with him only voting "no" against the constitutional amendment last year. I want to know his stances on lifting DADT, the hate crime bill that was recently passed in the House (he didn't vote on it), gay adoption laws (he already voted to ban them in DC).
-----------------
Ahh... Didn't realize it was a joke. Sorry 'bout that.
Anyway, his stance on the net neutrality issue is that for the governmment to start regulating anything, especially internet bandwidth, is a bad idea because it acknowledges that the Federal Government has that power in the first place. It's an undue power to place on the Federal Government. You have to understand Ron Paul's positions in greater context than whether he voted "yes" or "no" on this or that bill that the people you listened to and trusted told you was the right way. I was taken about by that too at first, but ow that I understand it in the larger context of what Ron Paul stands for, which is less federal government intrusion into our lives. If the states want it, let them vote on it. That's Ron Paul's stance. That's why you have to understand the way he votes in larger context.
As for the secure borders issue, it is a very big deal. What do you think happens to the American job market when 20 MILLION illegal immigrants flood in and undercut the American worker by 50% or more, sometimes working well below the minimum wage? One of the few jobs of the Federal government is controlling immigration, and you're saying it's not that big a deal? Listen, I'm as sympathetic to a poor man's plight as the next guy, but I am not for amnesty for illegal aliens when my wife had to come into this country the legal way after a 2-year-long fucking process riddled with headaches, heartbreaks, and pitfalls just to have her blood taken and tested, her fingerprints taken, her irises scanned, and her DNA sampled, and then all of this information put on a little security-laden card just so she can come here and every couple years or so go through much of the same bullshit again.
The illegals are coming here in droves and are even sapping off our welfare systems! The ones we and our parents and grandparents have worked to maintain. They get out of crimes because police officers cannot be bothered to deal with them because the paperwork is too hard to file and it's more of a hassle to them than it is worth. It's fucking bullshit, Spooner. Seriously, man... I realize where you're coming from, really I do, but you are just a kid. Stick around a while and take another look.
And what's the fuck is so God awful wrong about school prayer? First, who the hell does it offend? You, an atheist? An Agnostic? Who gives a shit if students want to pray to their God and express their faith? If you don't believe in it, move on. Seriously...it's childing and disengenuous to keep this debate raging over school prayer when the Supreme Court has clearly ruled time and time again that a student does NOT leave his first amendment rights at the schoolyard door and millions of government dollars are spent every year on frivilous lawsuits brought forth by some pussy-ass little twit who was "hurt" by some other kid's school prayer. That money could be better spent...I don't know...perhaps MAKING THE CONTENT OF THE CARRICULUM BETTER?!
I agree with you on gay right issue. I think perhaps Ron Paul could use a little more thought on the adoption thing. But my view is, if there is a heterosexual couple willing to take the child, they should be given preference. I think children have a hard enough time growing up without all this sexual identity confusion from their parents to go along with it. Besides, I'm of the non-politically-correct mind that homosexuality is, more times than not, a learned behavior. Notice I didn't say "all the time". I've seen plenty of evidence for both. But, again, no reason to drag children into all that sexual confusion unless there is no alternative. That's just my viewpoint.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 17:35:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 15:26:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Indoninja... The poll you just linked to says these words right at the top:
"FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. May 15-16, 2007. N=900 registered voters nationwide. Results below are among Republican voters (MoE ± 6)."
I don't trust Fox News as far as I could throw Sean Hannity's ego. These are the very people I'm accusing of stacking the deck against Ron Paul in the first place and you turn around and reference them as if they are the end all be all of honesty. Do you not see the problem with that? It's just like pointing to Popular Mechanics articles when they are just repeating the official government story without introducing any new information.
---------------------------------
That is ONE of the MANY polls referenced in that link.
Most people who don't trust Fox news would take it with a grain of salt, but since it concurrs with virtually every respected polling agency and news source that is covering the election they would accept it as truth.
But not you ETS, you are far too stupid to look past the first poll. Why am I not suprised your clever reasoning skills, indepth multi-faceted analysis, and general knowledge of history and science has turned up the "truth" that 9/11 was an inside job.
Submitted by Spooner (user info) at 2007-05-18 16:15:27 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 22:53:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/aol-metropolitan/96/05/23/paul.html There's the original source of the accusations I found.
Do any of you even know anymore what a hit piece looks like?
Spooner, I've called you a sniveling faggot on several occasions, but I have nothing against gay people on the whole. Look, use whatever ammunition you can find, I guarantee you it isn't gonna be as substantial against Ron Paul as, say, Hilary, or McCain, or Giuliani.
Beware of 30 second sound bytes and out of context quotations. Falling prey to them makes you look like a complete fool.
---
It's a joke, man. Have you been to Wonkette before? They take out-of-context quotes and pictures from anyone, looking for the humor.
I'm against Ron Paul's policies. He spouts the "secure borders" bullshit you hear from every Republican politician. He's wishy-washy on gay rights (voted to ban gay adoptions in DC), "Supports a Constitutional Amendment for school prayer," "Voted NO on establishing nationwide AMBER alert system for missing kids," "Voted NO on establishing 'network neutrality.'" Among other things.
I'm not saying there's nothing I don't like about him. I'm not saying I refuse to vote for him. He seems a favorable compared to douchebags like Mitt Romney and Sam Brownback. If anything, I'm only teasing because you're canonizing this man ridiculously early and treating him as if he was the shining light of truth that will lead this country to glory.
I want to see his stances on gay rights. His voting record on them is kinda wishy-washy, and I'm not one to be content with him only voting "no" against the constitutional amendment last year. I want to know his stances on lifting DADT, the hate crime bill that was recently passed in the House (he didn't vote on it), gay adoption laws (he already voted to ban them in DC).
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 15:27:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-18 11:04:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-18 10:38:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 22:53:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Beware of 30 second sound bytes and out of context quotations. Falling prey to them makes you look like a complete fool.
===
LMAO! you mean like you've been doing with everyone on 9/11, from jonh kerry to sylverstein to firefighters...idiot
---------------------
I could play the whole tapes if you want.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-18 15:26:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Indoninja... The poll you just linked to says these words right at the top:
"FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. May 15-16, 2007. N=900 registered voters nationwide. Results below are among Republican voters (MoE ± 6)."
I don't trust Fox News as far as I could throw Sean Hannity's ego. These are the very people I'm accusing of stacking the deck against Ron Paul in the first place and you turn around and reference them as if they are the end all be all of honesty. Do you not see the problem with that? It's just like pointing to Popular Mechanics articles when they are just repeating the official government story without introducing any new information.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-18 12:13:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
ron paul seems to be famous with people on the internet and the youth mostly.
based on that sample, canada would've been led by the green party for the last decade.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-18 11:54:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Ron Paul has gotten 1% or less in every non-internet pool that I have seen.
What a groundswell of support. Too bad it isn't only jobless internet trolls who are allowed to vote.
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08rep.htm
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-18 11:04:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-18 10:38:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 22:53:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Beware of 30 second sound bytes and out of context quotations. Falling prey to them makes you look like a complete fool.
===
LMAO! you mean like you've been doing with everyone on 9/11, from jonh kerry to sylverstein to firefighters...idiot
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-18 10:38:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 22:53:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Beware of 30 second sound bytes and out of context quotations. Falling prey to them makes you look like a complete fool.
===
LMAO! you mean like you've been doing with everyone on 9/11, from jonh kerry to sylverstein to firefighters...idiot
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 22:53:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/aol-metropolitan/96/05/23/paul.html There's the original source of the accusations I found.
Do any of you even know anymore what a hit piece looks like?
Spooner, I've called you a sniveling faggot on several occasions, but I have nothing against gay people on the whole. Look, use whatever ammunition you can find, I guarantee you it isn't gonna be as substantial against Ron Paul as, say, Hilary, or McCain, or Giuliani.
Beware of 30 second sound bytes and out of context quotations. Falling prey to them makes you look like a complete fool.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 22:46:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Spooner, substantiate that. Where'd they get those quotes?
Submitted by Spooner (user info) at 2007-05-17 21:10:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Internet sensation Ron Paul, while totally right about Rudy Giuliani personally committing 9/11, also has some controversial views about race — the black race, mainly.
"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," Paul wrote in 1992. He added that while good white people like himself "are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational."
This was in some newsletter he published in 1992, and oh how we would like a full bound collection of these things! In other editions, he suggests that heavy cocaine use causes Bill Clinton's scratchy voice, only Whites and Asians commit "complex embezzling," and that "the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government." SEND RON PAUL!
http://tinyurl.com/yw42d8
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-17 13:52:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
don't forget indo, ETS believes degrees and education mean nothing. that universities are "coward factories" (actual quote) where you get brainwashed. that knowledge and factual information are irrelevant...that what matters is the "Truth in your heart"
all you need is to do is listen to Alex Jones and scream as loud as you can. then fantasy will become facts.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-17 12:18:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
If you are worried about what the founding fathers did or did not want, look here
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjlkMGM2YjJjMDZmMzlhMDA0YzdiM2E3ODMwZjA0NWU=
"In a stunning move, House Democrats today revealed they will attempt to rewrite House rules that have gone unchanged since 1822 in order to make it possible to increase taxes and government spending without having to vote and be held accountable."
Congress HAS approved of what is happening in Iraq.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-17 11:57:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 09:48:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
How about for once trying to understand the position of the founding fathers and not parrot some shit you got off wikipedia that doesn't even apply to them.
I don't recall anyone in the 19th century trying to "prevent trade and cultural exchange with people in other states [countries]".
Stop being an ignorant twat.
-------------------
Wikipedia was one link you simpleton, and the opnly reason I threw it out there is because youu are too stupid to understand the other ones.
America practiced Isolationism for most of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century. it is common fucking knowledge. There is nothing to deabte here you are 100% wrong but too fucking stupid to realize it.
It is unbelievable that you call me an ignorant twat when you lack rudimentary understanding of the Constitution and History of the US.
Take your own advice and try and learn a tiny bit of history before you pretend you know what the founding fathers wanted.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 09:48:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolationism
"Isolationism is a foreign policy which combines a non-interventionist military policy and a political policy of economic nationalism (protectionism). In other words, it asserts both of the following:
Non-interventionism - Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
Protectionism - There should be legal barriers to prevent trade and cultural exchange with people in other states. "
----------------------
How about for once trying to understand the position of the founding fathers and not parrot some shit you got off wikipedia that doesn't even apply to them.
I don't recall anyone in the 19th century trying to "prevent trade and cultural exchange with people in other states [countries]".
Stop being an ignorant twat.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-17 07:47:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Bottom line is that Ron Paul either doesn't know shit about history, or wants to rekindle the ideas of a Republican party that hasn't existed in the past 60 yrs.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-17 07:42:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 16:43:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
America was NEVER "isolationist". I don't know what you're talking about there, and frankly, neither do you, Indo.
From the very beginning of this country, we've had ambassadors all over the world, we've negotiated trade, we've held friendships with foreign nations...Benjamin Franklin and John Adams were both ambassadors to France, if memory serves. The problem comes, and the founding fathers knew this and wrote the constitution to account for it, when we get ourselves into binding international alliances that compel war, and when our country goes to war without congress actually declaring war. This ensures that the war can drag on indefinitely because none of the provisions of the constitution are being followed, including the one that states that we shall not go to war in the first place with nations who have not attacked us.
You can agree or disagree with the constitution, you can suggest we amend it so that we can attack anyone anytime, but you cannot argue, as idiot Sean Hannity tried to do with Ron Paul, that such provisions do not exist in the constitution because they do.
They are there for a very good reason, and us forgetting them is clear evidence of just how FAR we have strayed from our constitutional origins toward an overt, cynical policy of empire and world domination. The founding fathers were students of history, they had read about the Romans and others who'd tried this, so they knew better.
I suggest some of you, Indo included, do the same.
------------------------------------------
ETS proving once again he doesn't know shit about shit.
I mean seriously is there any subject you have greater than an elementary school understanding of? Actually scratch that I learned about Isolationism in 5th grade.
http://www.schoolshistory.org.uk/america/isolationism.htm
"During the 1920's and 1930's, America was in isolation, i.e. she kept I herself to herself and took little part in international relations I (conferences and treaties between the nations) .In addition America, isolated herself in terms of trade. Tariffs (import duties) were put on foreign goods to protect American industry. (Because they could not sell their goods to America, European countries could not afford to buy agricultural goods (farm produce) from the USA. This was one of the causes of the Depression.)"
George Washington said,
"The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities."
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1601.html
"The United States remained politically isolated all through the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, an unusual feat in western history. Historians have attributed the fact to a geographical position at once separate and far removed from Europe."
"The country's resultant participation in World War I against the Central Powers marked its first major departure from isolationist policy. When the war ended, however, the United States was quick to leave behind its European commitment. Regardless of President Woodrow Wilson's efforts, the Senate repudiated the Treaty of Versailles that ended the war, and the United States failed to become a member of the League of Nations. Indeed, isolationism would persist for a few more decades. During the 1920s, American foreign affairs took a back seat. In addition, America tended to insulate itself in terms of trade."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolationism
"Isolationism is a foreign policy which combines a non-interventionist military policy and a political policy of economic nationalism (protectionism). In other words, it asserts both of the following:
Non-interventionism - Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
Protectionism - There should be legal barriers to prevent trade and cultural exchange with people in other states. "
How about just once in your life you try and learn something instead of just repeating what you read on prison planet like the ignorant fuck you are.
Congress HAS given support for the operations (I have toruble calling it a war now) in Iraq by making a budget for it.
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-17 03:53:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
man i love Ron Paul.
Submitted by beeltea (user info) at 2007-05-17 03:19:49 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 16:50:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 16:27:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2007-05-16 07:14:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Ron Paul got raped by Rudy. You have to admit that.
-------------
Why? Because he made the loudest noise and looked really mad at the end?
===
no, because of the loud applause and cheering that followed his retort.
ron paul was already entering slippy territory when he asked people who have been conditionned to think that they are hated because of freedom and whatnot to reflect on the causes of terrorism. guiliani jump on the occasion to not only alienate paul, but bank in on his "I went through 9/11" advantage coupled with a :-( face.
it might be retarded opportunism, but considering the reaction of the audience, politically guilliani still 'won' or raped Paul...whichever image you like. i honestly prefer THE LEMONPARTY
----
Shouldn't you be paying attention to the politics in your own country?
he he
hehehehe
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
...nevermind.
Submitted by EmissionImpossible (user info) at 2007-05-17 03:18:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I have never heard of Ron Paul. Ron Howard yes and Sean Paul yes. What an interesting cross breed
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-17 02:58:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxPI-ogwlXE
Ron Paul on CNN the day AFTER the debate, whippin' more ass and takin' more names.
Domenad, you wanna see a bitch slap, watch this.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-05-17 02:42:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.stateofbrain.com/ronpaul.php
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-05-17 02:24:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
"...If Mr. Giuliani is able to substantiate his foreign policy position with critical reasoning and facts, then he has nothing to fear..."
http://www.debateronpaul.com/
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 17:04:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Sean Hannity always reminds me of the character Gamof in Star Gladiator
does that guy and his fake democrat buddy ever do anything else than get all indignant about the statement of some person?
"DID RON PAUL REALLY SAY THAT? *GASP*"
anytime i see a video of those two, they interrogate some weirdo, as if somehow crucifying idiots on the public place validated their retarded show. it seemed to have work.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 16:50:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 16:27:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2007-05-16 07:14:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Ron Paul got raped by Rudy. You have to admit that.
-------------
Why? Because he made the loudest noise and looked really mad at the end?
===
no, because of the loud applause and cheering that followed his retort.
ron paul was already entering slippy territory when he asked people who have been conditionned to think that they are hated because of freedom and whatnot to reflect on the causes of terrorism. guiliani jump on the occasion to not only alienate paul, but bank in on his "I went through 9/11" advantage coupled with a :-( face.
it might be retarded opportunism, but considering the reaction of the audience, politically guilliani still 'won' or raped Paul...whichever image you like. i honestly prefer THE LEMONPARTY
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 16:43:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-16 07:52:38 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I respect him for his integrity, but the man is an idiot.
"Well I think the Republican Party has lost its way because the conservative wing of the Republican Party always advocated noninterventionist foreign policy." - Ron Paul
Who was President during operation Ajax?
Ever Hear of the Eisenhower Doctrine?
Ron Paul is talking about a form of republicans who existed when America was an isolationist country.
We don't exist in a vaccuum and neither can our international policy.
I don't even want to talk about his ideas on international economy.
As far as Ron Paul and the poles take a look around on the internet and real life. He has much more support from people on the internet, people who would be quick in text messaging. And how many people do you know who think Ron Paul is ok, or who absolutely love him? Compare that with peole that like Mcain or Guliani. People that are for Ron Paul, in general, are pretty rabid, witht he other candidates it a matter of lesser evils.
---------------------
America was NEVER "isolationist". I don't know what you're talking about there, and frankly, neither do you, Indo.
From the very beginning of this country, we've had ambassadors all over the world, we've negotiated trade, we've held friendships with foreign nations...Benjamin Franklin and John Adams were both ambassadors to France, if memory serves. The problem comes, and the founding fathers knew this and wrote the constitution to account for it, when we get ourselves into binding international alliances that compel war, and when our country goes to war without congress actually declaring war. This ensures that the war can drag on indefinitely because none of the provisions of the constitution are being followed, including the one that states that we shall not go to war in the first place with nations who have not attacked us.
You can agree or disagree with the constitution, you can suggest we amend it so that we can attack anyone anytime, but you cannot argue, as idiot Sean Hannity tried to do with Ron Paul, that such provisions do not exist in the constitution because they do.
They are there for a very good reason, and us forgetting them is clear evidence of just how FAR we have strayed from our constitutional origins toward an overt, cynical policy of empire and world domination. The founding fathers were students of history, they had read about the Romans and others who'd tried this, so they knew better.
I suggest some of you, Indo included, do the same.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-16 16:28:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:40:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
indo- you're right, infidel troops being allowed into your country is never a reason to slam planes into buildings, killing 3,000 people. the perpetrators of 9/11 are certainly not blameless in this and no one is saying that. ultimately, they are responsible for 3,000 deaths, bottom line. Ron Paul is only saying our foreign policy was a part of their motivation to do it.
i don't understand what you're saying about cultural divide, because i've been to the middle east and i'm going there again in two weeks. i may spend some time, not for business, in a couple other middle eastern countries after my business is done there. there are cultural differences, but i fail to see what it has to do with 9/11. there is much more radicalism in third world countries, especially Islamic ones. many are lied to and brainwashed into thinking that blowing yourself up to kill other people is somehow beautiful to Allah. it doesn't take a whole lot of common sense and rationale to see how absurd and hypocritical that is, but you're right- that's the culture.
so that's the only role i see culture playing in it- that is, many people believing that terrorism is the way to get your point across. there still must be a catalyst to introduce terrorism, which i agree with Ron Paul on- fucked up foreign policy, whether it be occupying their land, support of Israel, or whatever. it's not that they "hate our freedom". you've been out there to the middle east. you may have had different experiences than me. i haven't met any normal Iraqis, Iranians, Egyptians, Saudis, etc, that told me they hated me because i was a non-muslim American. they were in fact very tolerant of that. they told me they hated our government's actions and policies.
-----------------------
I am confused by your second paragraph. You say you don't understand what I am saying, and then you go on to say you know people are brainwashed intot hinking killing for allah is bueatiful. That is part of what I am talking about. But it isn't just the killing for allah is alright part, it is the people who don't follow our rules should die part. It is the belief that societies based on Allah's laws must be perfect not matching with the reality of abuse, ignorance, hate and poverty being much more rampant in such societies than in the west.
I have seen protests in Egypt (our ally) over cuts in gas subsidies where they burned american flags. They have absolutley nothing to do with each other, but America is the great satan so it is ok. We could not be so vilified, so negatively portrayed if it weren't for some underlying belief that allah's way is the only way and if America isn't following it must be evil to get where it is.
How close a relationship did you have with those people? Were any of them people who daily work with westerners? If your job had you working with Arabs all day long would you ever vent stereotypes that your countrymen sometimes have?
i don't know exactly what you do, but if it is with the military you are only going to see one side of their feelings on the west. Unless you have been in a situation where you are by far the minority in numbers and power you aren't going to know what they really feel. That being said, I am not saying all people from there hate the US, but it is a lot more common and on a lot more personal level than you probably think.
Take some time to see what is broadcast on their favorite shows, by the major religious leaders. It won't jive with what you are saying here.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 16:27:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2007-05-16 07:14:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Ron Paul got raped by Rudy. You have to admit that.
-------------
Why? Because he made the loudest noise and looked really mad at the end?
He didn't rape anybody. He asked Ron Paul to withdraw his statement and Ron Paul refused, elaborating forther on what he said. The fact that you are taken in by the canned applause and mindless outbursts from the audience in response to Rudy's stupid appeal to the animalistic and emotional side of man is evidence that you should take another look at yourself.
Not everything is black and white. It takes longer than 20 seconds to explain something sometimes, particularly if it's a complicated thing like foreign policy post 9/11. Rudy's "outrage" act was transparent and on queue.
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 14:35:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
you keep quiet, fatman.
Submitted by apollo88 (user info) at 2007-05-16 14:05:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
WOW
A WHOLE LOT OF GAYNESS BELOW.
Submitted by Anansie (user info) at 2007-05-16 14:04:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:54:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
i'm in complete agreeance with you, Juls. well, i don't know how he was as mayor since i only visit NYC when i have the time, which is close to never. but i have heard from many New Yawkers that he was a good mayor. i just don't think he has what it takes to be a president i will favor, or any of the other republican candidates except Ron Paul.
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:52:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by TheUniter (user info) at 2007-05-15 20:38:11 PDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by JulsInsane (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:47:45 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:02:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Juls- great mayor i can see. handling 9/11 well i can see.
being president i can't see. the way he tried to make it look like Ron Paul was blaming America is just despicable to me. when are people going to stop using 9/11 as a distraction from the real point??
every time i visit Ground Zero (which has been a couple times a year. once on 9/11 and once whenever i get time), it sends shivers down my spine. sometimes when i think about it, it makes me cry. you know what my personality is like and it doesn't exactly scream "emotional", but it 9/11 really does incite powerful emotion. when i was with you and our cab passed Ground Zero, i was quiet for the rest of the ride.
because of those feelings, i find it absolutely deplorable for Giuliani to throw in his 9/11 credentials, which have not a damn thing to do with what Ron Paul said, just to make himself look good and to make it appear as if anything Paul says is invalid. that is slimey. bigtime.
------------------
Ohh I agree, to throw around an event like that for personal gain is fucked plain and simple. I just dig Guiliani bc he had a certain no nonesense way about him in running NYC. His MO was to make it a better city to live in for the majority, and I dug that about him. His grandstanding bullshit about 9/11 is horrible, anyone who wants to wear that as a badge of honor is crap. He took any of the class that he had after 9/11 and threw it away, and since most people just want it to kind of fade away gracefully into American History (myself included, my personal losses associated with that date are seperate to the actual event). But that type of attitude is pretty common, I mean candidates wear military service like it somehow allows them all the insight possible for foreign policy when dealing with aggressive nations. Serving your country gives you an insight into the toll and personal cost associated with war (which I think is actually important since for the citizens of the US the personal cost is going to be the most obvious implication of a war) but it does not make you an expert on foreign policy.
Pretty much what Im saying is everyone is full of shit in politics, I tend to side with the guys who don't want to tell me what to do with my vagina, are tolerant to the gays, and aren't down with handguns (Im ok with hunting rifles for sport but I really cant see a need for individuals owning handguns). Im aware enough to understand there is an entire part of American politics that as Americans we will never be privy to. So a certain amount of blind trust is necessary, as any decision that a presidency makes is based on circumstances that the average American will not be aware of thus much of it is based on blind faith.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:46:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
with the amount of replies i have, i best better have stupid ones, otherwise i'm applying for messiah.
METROSEXUAL RAPTURE!
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:42:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
sometimes you say a lot of really stupid things, Caul, but sometimes you show your true intelligence and awareness and it can be impressive after reading the dumb stuff you say. i say that in the nicest way possible, of course. haha.
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:40:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-16 12:11:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 10:50:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDBkMzQ2MTJmOTFmZWM4NjJhYjg3MTY1MzRhMGU0Y2Y=
that article actually made me so mad it made my heart race and i actually felt like my blood was boiling. i am absolutely floored that people believe that Ron Paul is saying "yes, it's America's fault we were attacked" as if it's so black and white that he blames our country.
i just can't believe how dumb so many people are in the world. do people really believe Bush when he says we were attacked because the terrorists hate our freedom??? FUCK! if i want to know the truth, i'm never going to take someone's word for it. that's why i volunteered to go to Iraq and why i'm volunteering to go to Afghanistan in two weeks. i want to see it for myself. i have to know the truth from my own eyes. not from Fox News.
-----------------------
Ron Paul did say it was America's policy that caused 9/11.
The reason that Al-Queda made US a target is simply because we have troops in Saudi, troops that are there with the permission of the govt. And I don't know about you, but I don't think being angry about foreign infedel troops being allowed in my country is a good reason to kill 3000 people. They didn't attack us for our freedom, but it is a reason they hate us. When they see western TV, movies, magazines, music and it breaks all the laws they are taught come from God how do you think they will feel? and America seems to be their biggest source for this so don't you think they would hate us the most? If they cared that much about palestine they would be fighting there. They only bring that up to rally people.
===========================================================
indo- you're right, infidel troops being allowed into your country is never a reason to slam planes into buildings, killing 3,000 people. the perpetrators of 9/11 are certainly not blameless in this and no one is saying that. ultimately, they are responsible for 3,000 deaths, bottom line. Ron Paul is only saying our foreign policy was a part of their motivation to do it.
i don't understand what you're saying about cultural divide, because i've been to the middle east and i'm going there again in two weeks. i may spend some time, not for business, in a couple other middle eastern countries after my business is done there. there are cultural differences, but i fail to see what it has to do with 9/11. there is much more radicalism in third world countries, especially Islamic ones. many are lied to and brainwashed into thinking that blowing yourself up to kill other people is somehow beautiful to Allah. it doesn't take a whole lot of common sense and rationale to see how absurd and hypocritical that is, but you're right- that's the culture.
so that's the only role i see culture playing in it- that is, many people believing that terrorism is the way to get your point across. there still must be a catalyst to introduce terrorism, which i agree with Ron Paul on- fucked up foreign policy, whether it be occupying their land, support of Israel, or whatever. it's not that they "hate our freedom". you've been out there to the middle east. you may have had different experiences than me. i haven't met any normal Iraqis, Iranians, Egyptians, Saudis, etc, that told me they hated me because i was a non-muslim American. they were in fact very tolerant of that. they told me they hated our government's actions and policies.
Submitted by creep_firebombing (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:39:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
I like yellow cake.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:30:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
i'm amazed how some americans live on another planet.
if there is anything that pisses off people it's that.
does any of you ever invert roles?
i mean, you don't have to enjoy terrorist acts and leave them unpunished, but don't be hypocrites and act like you're hated because of your freedom...that is retarded.
if anything, a little humility would give you a great makeover abroad.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:21:19 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-16 12:20:04 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
A lot of people don't seem to understand the cultural divide between western countries and places like Saudi, and to a lesser extent regions in Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, etc and portions of migrant populations from those countries.
With cable and especially the internet growing it is getting harder and harder to pretend it doesn't matter, or that they won't affect each other, and it is getting easier to keep that divide strong even if you are in a different country.
If you think this cultural divide had nothing to do with 9/11 you are blind.
===
there is cultural divide between everyone. it might cement hatred but certainly not to the extent of devoting your life to slamming yourself against buildings.
if you deny that interfering with everyone's business had nothing to do with anti-americanism, you are not only blind, you are living in a land of fantasy. i remember on 9/11, everyone was shocked, but after the collapse, no one was quite suprised either. if you put your hands in everyone's cookie jar, chances are you're eventually gonna get a slap, which btw, 9/11 was. you guys need to stop banking on it. ok, it was tragic but you've spent all foreing empathy when you went into iraq so please stop acting like 9/11 was your holocaust.
anyway, i'm not saying america is guilty of all things, there are other factors but you know real well that grudges and mistrust are caused by actions, not "cultural divide".
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:19:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Shlongy, in a surprise, came in 4th at 14%.
Submitted by greEn_uGly (user info) at 2007-05-16 13:11:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-16 12:11:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
-----------------------
Ron Paul did say it was America's policy that caused 9/11.
The reason that Al-Queda made US a target is simply because we have troops in Saudi, troops that are there with the permission of the govt. And I don't know about you, but I don't think being angry about foreign infedel troops being allowed in my country is a good reason to kill 3000 people. They didn't attack us for our freedom, but it is a reason they hate us. When they see western TV, movies, magazines, music and it breaks all the laws they are taught come from God how do you think they will feel? and America seems to be their biggest source for this so don't you think they would hate us the most? If they cared that much about palestine they would be fighting there. They only bring that up to rally people.
----------
na, osama is pretty well educated (in uk i believe), americans supported the saudi rulers in oppressing their people, gave saddam weapons to kill iranians, help overthrow the elected iranian government, along with a corrupt dictator helped plunge indonesia into debts it will never be able to repay,.. fuck me i could go on and on.. and it would be understandable if they viewed the pressence of us troops in saudi as a threat,.. i dunno, but it seems that osama may have used religion to rally people rather than the other way around
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 12:59:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
thank u :-D
Submitted by AshK (user info) at 2007-05-16 12:55:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:40:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by AshK (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:14:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
I'll say one thing for you, ETS, you inspire me to get more involved and therefore knowledgeable about what is going on around me.
===
you do realize this is all about his ego adn that saying this will only enable him?
ETS only pastes articles from infowars.com
you could do that yourself
---
Think if it this way Cual, if my comments make his head big enough, he'll get trapped in the bathroom one day and die.
That isn't my intention, but I want you to be able to sleep at night.
Submitted by MidnightToSix (user info) at 2007-05-16 12:34:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
All I got from this is that domenad wins the moldy douchebag competition.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-16 12:20:04 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
A lot of people don't seem to understand the cultural divide between western countries and places like Saudi, and to a lesser extent regions in Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, etc and portions of migrant populations from those countries.
With cable and especially the internet growing it is getting harder and harder to pretend it doesn't matter, or that they won't affect each other, and it is getting easier to keep that divide strong even if you are in a different country.
If you think this cultural divide had nothing to do with 9/11 you are blind.
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2007-05-16 12:18:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
President Ron Paul won't deliver State of the Union addresses. He will deliver State of the Union In-Your-Face Blurbs.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-16 12:11:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 10:50:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDBkMzQ2MTJmOTFmZWM4NjJhYjg3MTY1MzRhMGU0Y2Y=
that article actually made me so mad it made my heart race and i actually felt like my blood was boiling. i am absolutely floored that people believe that Ron Paul is saying "yes, it's America's fault we were attacked" as if it's so black and white that he blames our country.
i just can't believe how dumb so many people are in the world. do people really believe Bush when he says we were attacked because the terrorists hate our freedom??? FUCK! if i want to know the truth, i'm never going to take someone's word for it. that's why i volunteered to go to Iraq and why i'm volunteering to go to Afghanistan in two weeks. i want to see it for myself. i have to know the truth from my own eyes. not from Fox News.
-----------------------
Ron Paul did say it was America's policy that caused 9/11.
The reason that Al-Queda made US a target is simply because we have troops in Saudi, troops that are there with the permission of the govt. And I don't know about you, but I don't think being angry about foreign infedel troops being allowed in my country is a good reason to kill 3000 people. They didn't attack us for our freedom, but it is a reason they hate us. When they see western TV, movies, magazines, music and it breaks all the laws they are taught come from God how do you think they will feel? and America seems to be their biggest source for this so don't you think they would hate us the most? If they cared that much about palestine they would be fighting there. They only bring that up to rally people.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:40:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by AshK (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:14:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
I'll say one thing for you, ETS, you inspire me to get more involved and therefore knowledgeable about what is going on around me.
===
you do realize this is all about his ego adn that saying this will only enable him?
ETS only pastes articles from infowars.com
you could do that yourself
Submitted by AshK (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:14:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Interesting read.
I'll say one thing for you, ETS, you inspire me to get more involved and therefore knowledgeable about what is going on around me.
Admittedly, I am from a family whos heads are no stranger to the sand. I'll keep working on that problem.
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:09:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Bob, i'm going to go with "honest to the point of recklessness". he'll never make it, but i still like him, agree with him, and support him.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:08:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
http://www.ubersite.com/m/85276
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:07:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
slimey is my slang spelling of slimy so i don't want you kiddies to say hidden101 can't speel rite.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:03:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
That debate cost each candidate $25,000 to participate in it. To keep up, Paul will need to raise some serious funds, or drop out due to attrition.
I read the article that hidden linked. It makes me wonder what Paul's motivation is. Is he a "lamb" to be sacrificed by the bigger dogs like Rudi? Is he an agitator sent by the opposite party to act as a poor man's Ross Perot? Or, is he really just honest to the point of recklessness?
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 11:02:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Juls- great mayor i can see. handling 9/11 well i can see.
being president i can't see. the way he tried to make it look like Ron Paul was blaming America is just despicable to me. when are people going to stop using 9/11 as a distraction from the real point??
every time i visit Ground Zero (which has been a couple times a year. once on 9/11 and once whenever i get time), it sends shivers down my spine. sometimes when i think about it, it makes me cry. you know what my personality is like and it doesn't exactly scream "emotional", but it 9/11 really does incite powerful emotion. when i was with you and our cab passed Ground Zero, i was quiet for the rest of the ride.
because of those feelings, i find it absolutely deplorable for Giuliani to throw in his 9/11 credentials, which have not a damn thing to do with what Ron Paul said, just to make himself look good and to make it appear as if anything Paul says is invalid. that is slimey. bigtime.
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 10:50:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDBkMzQ2MTJmOTFmZWM4NjJhYjg3MTY1MzRhMGU0Y2Y=
that article actually made me so mad it made my heart race and i actually felt like my blood was boiling. i am absolutely floored that people believe that Ron Paul is saying "yes, it's America's fault we were attacked" as if it's so black and white that he blames our country.
I. AM. SO. ANGRY.
DOES ANYONE BOTHER TO USE THEIR MIND ANYMORE OR IS EVERYONE JUST LISTENING TO WHAT THE MEDIA TELLS THEM???
anyone with a brain knows the reason we were attacked is because of our foreign policy for years. if you want to hear it straight from Al Qaeda's mouth, read this- http://neveryetmelted.com/?p=2298
it's an article i read in Harper's magazine that i picked up in the airport last night. yes, you read right- hidden101 reads Harper's. suck my cock. anyway, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's testimony sounds a lot like what i've said here- http://www.ubersite.com/m/50823 doesn't it? (shameless linkwhoring)
i just can't believe how dumb so many people are in the world. do people really believe Bush when he says we were attacked because the terrorists hate our freedom??? FUCK! if i want to know the truth, i'm never going to take someone's word for it. that's why i volunteered to go to Iraq and why i'm volunteering to go to Afghanistan in two weeks. i want to see it for myself. i have to know the truth from my own eyes. not from Fox News.
anyway, ETS, i agree with you on Ron Paul. the reason i give you such a hard time is because i think you get way too carried away most of the time. there's a difference between healthy skepticism and straight up delusion and the line is not very fine. i don't actually believe that you are crazy. i know a couple guys that were just as paranoid as you for a long time, but they eventually grew out of that phase and are now really happy.
indoninja- i'm going to go with "giving more attention to the candidates who are already favored". i also believe that deals are stricken to possibly give certain candidates a little more attention. i work close to some pretty powerful people in the "good ol' boys club", and i see that sort of thing all the time.
Submitted by The_Drake (user info) at 2007-05-16 10:20:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Maybe I'll actually vote this election.
Submitted by JulsInsane (user info) at 2007-05-16 10:16:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:58:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
it's about time you posted something good and not crazy.
i can't believe how much the media is talking about those slimebags, Romney and Giuliani, while completely shutting Ron Paul out. this is one of the times when i agree with one of your conspiracy theories about the media being paid to push people like those two penis wrinkles Romney and Giuliani.
-----------------------------
I don't have as much problem with Giuliani as you do, but that is probably bc I am from NYC and still have the residual ohh Rudy you rock socks attitude going for me. He was a great mayor though, he did limit civil liberties but it felt like a small cost for the general enhancement to the quality of life around here.
Romney is a fucking crazy as a bag of badgers though. No way in hell would I want a Morman who can't stick to an issue if he had a tube of crazy glue. Abortion? Yes no maybe so NRA? Yes no maybe so
When did it become cool to be dramatically right/left wing in the US? What happened to middle of the road politics?
Submitted by beeltea (user info) at 2007-05-16 09:52:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I just read one recap of the election where Paul wasn't even mentioned, and the only link to his name on the page was broken. That's funny.
Submitted by snag (user info) at 2007-05-16 09:42:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Impressive.
Submitted by CaptainThorns (user info) at 2007-05-16 09:07:28 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2007-05-16 04:37:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Awesome post.
Welcome back.
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2007-05-16 09:04:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 08:37:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 02:09:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I love my country and I would die protecting it if I thought it was under attack
===
lol, so much élan! you voted for the 1st time this year, man...don't be so dramatic
----------
I have figured out why I like Caul - he just has a nose for BS like a purebred freaking bloodhound.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 08:37:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 02:09:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I love my country and I would die protecting it if I thought it was under attack
===
lol, so much élan! you voted for the 1st time this year, man...don't be so dramatic
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2007-05-16 08:33:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
i semi-agree with indoninja...ron paul seems to be an internet fad.
Submitted by sicosemen (user info) at 2007-05-16 08:20:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
I voted for the Brazillian guy because I was approached by a "special interest" group. In all actuality, I didn't vote because I'm a worthless shit who forgot all about it and the people that I surround myself with are worthless.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-16 07:56:39 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:58:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
i can't believe how much the media is talking about those slimebags, Romney and Giuliani, while completely shutting Ron Paul out. this is one of the times when i agree with one of your conspiracy theories about the media being paid to push people like those two penis wrinkles Romney and Giuliani.
----------------------------
Any non-internet poll has Ron as less than a blip. The networks aren't going to shove a candidate down the audiences throat.
Are news organizations deliberately teaming up and blocking a candidate, or are they giving more attention to the candidates who are already favored?
What makes more sense?
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2007-05-16 07:52:38 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I respect him for his integrity, but the man is an idiot.
"Well I think the Republican Party has lost its way because the conservative wing of the Republican Party always advocated noninterventionist foreign policy." - Ron Paul
Who was President during operation Ajax?
Ever Hear of the Eisenhower Doctrine?
Ron Paul is talking about a form of republicans who existed when America was an isolationist country.
We don't exist in a vaccuum and neither can our international policy.
I don't even want to talk about his ideas on international economy.
As far as Ron Paul and the poles take a look around on the internet and real life. He has much more support from people on the internet, people who would be quick in text messaging. And how many people do you know who think Ron Paul is ok, or who absolutely love him? Compare that with peole that like Mcain or Guliani. People that are for Ron Paul, in general, are pretty rabid, witht he other candidates it a matter of lesser evils.
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2007-05-16 07:14:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Ron Paul got raped by Rudy. You have to admit that.
Submitted by sword (user info) at 2007-05-16 06:05:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by iddqd (user info) at 2007-05-16 05:37:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
"At the risk of sounding like one of those people who is only agreeable to those who agree"
you passed that landmark LONG ago.
Submitted by Flack (user info) at 2007-05-16 05:19:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The best part about all this is that Giulianni made himself look like a doosh to the largely conservative right-wing audience, with his stance on abortion.
Then, when Dr. Paul said "[The Islamic fundamentalists] attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East [for years]. I think [Ronald] Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. Right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting," Giulliani tried to turn his dooshness on Paul by saying that his explanation was "absurd."
The problem with that is that Ron Paul..... WAS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT AND STOOD BY IT!!! HE WAS FACTUALLY CORRECT IN THAT STATEMENT! And now Giulliani looks like even more of an asshole.
This man, Dr. Paul, has renewed my faith in American politics!
Go Tigers!
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2007-05-16 04:37:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Awesome post.
Welcome back.
Submitted by Beano312003 (user info) at 2007-05-16 04:29:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 02:09:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:58:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
it's about time you posted something good and not crazy.
i can't believe how much the media is talking about those slimebags, Romney and Giuliani, while completely shutting Ron Paul out. this is one of the times when i agree with one of your conspiracy theories about the media being paid to push people like those two penis wrinkles Romney and Giuliani.
--------------
If we were going to agree on something, hidden, I'd have it be this issue. I know we haven't always seen eye to eye, and I have said some pretty nasty things to and about you that were unwarranted, perhaps we both have, but I admire your ability to agree and disagree on issues and not on personal lines. It's a commendable trait I wish more of your fellow uberites shared.
Thank you.
At the risk of sounding like one of those people who is only agreeable to those who agree, I admit that I've been wrong about you on a lot of things. Sometimes my emotions get the better of me. I love my country and I would die protecting it if I thought it was under attack, but that is why I direct my attacks, in the form of words, at those who I perceive to be the true enemies of a safe and prosperous nation that respects the rule of law as lain forth in the constitution.
------------------
Jesus, he only said he agreed with you.
(show of hands +2)
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2007-05-16 02:52:25 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-05-16 16:34:43 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKExXjFAQz4
----------------------------
'Oh good, some video of the second GOP debate' I thought.
Submitted by AsshOly (user info) at 2007-05-16 02:48:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
im completely on your side here.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-05-16 02:34:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKExXjFAQz4
Submitted by lungfish (user info) at 2007-05-16 02:13:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:58:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
it's about time you posted something good and not crazy.
---------
But I'm still for el Gordo.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 02:09:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:58:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
it's about time you posted something good and not crazy.
i can't believe how much the media is talking about those slimebags, Romney and Giuliani, while completely shutting Ron Paul out. this is one of the times when i agree with one of your conspiracy theories about the media being paid to push people like those two penis wrinkles Romney and Giuliani.
--------------
If we were going to agree on something, hidden, I'd have it be this issue. I know we haven't always seen eye to eye, and I have said some pretty nasty things to and about you that were unwarranted, perhaps we both have, but I admire your ability to agree and disagree on issues and not on personal lines. It's a commendable trait I wish more of your fellow uberites shared.
Thank you.
At the risk of sounding like one of those people who is only agreeable to those who agree, I admit that I've been wrong about you on a lot of things. Sometimes my emotions get the better of me. I love my country and I would die protecting it if I thought it was under attack, but that is why I direct my attacks, in the form of words, at those who I perceive to be the true enemies of a safe and prosperous nation that respects the rule of law as lain forth in the constitution.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 02:02:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The Article Filthy posted below is a really good one.
Submitted by hidden101 (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:58:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
it's about time you posted something good and not crazy.
i can't believe how much the media is talking about those slimebags, Romney and Giuliani, while completely shutting Ron Paul out. this is one of the times when i agree with one of your conspiracy theories about the media being paid to push people like those two penis wrinkles Romney and Giuliani.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:54:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10947
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:44:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The hit machine is already working overtime:
http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN1547154220070516
But, in a google news search made moments ago, this story was second from the top: http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/05/15/ron-paul-vs-rudy-the-thug-giuliani/
Then: http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070516/cm_thenation/45195576
http://www.newshounds.us/2007/05/15/carl_cameron_gives_negative_spin_to_ron_pauls_lead_in_viewer_poll.php
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martin-lewis/fox-reports-viewers-dec_b_48566.html
...and plenty others where that came from. In fact, I was going to try and illustrate the hit machine in action, but a news story google of Ron Paul returns mostly applause of the revolutionary (at least by today's standards) candidate.
Then there's little ambiguous gems like this: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/05/15/191715.aspx WTF!?!
Anyway, just trying to document things in real time, mostly for myself. Carry on.
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:43:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
It's interesting how many commentators don't want to be given a wide choice of candidates, it's like they don't want the responsibility of making up their own minds. There's still a year to go, and already people are trying to "thin out" the field.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2007-05-16 01:31:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Stats came from here: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/