IMO RON PAUL IS A PEICE OF SHIT

[FUZO]

TweetYOU KNOW WHAT HE TALKS ABOUT HIS LIBERTARIAN STUFF THATS OK .HE TALKS ABOUT HIS CONSTITUTION THATS FINE BUT LETS FACE IT AMERICA THIS MAN WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT. HIS FOREIGN POLICY SUCKS HE WILL MAKE THIS COUNTRY AS WEAK AS OBAMA DID AND NOW HE HAS TO RUN THESE ATTACK ADS AGAINST NEWT.LISTEN RON PAUL YOU WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT. NEWT OR ROMNEY WILL BE THE NOMINEE I HOPE ITS NEWT BUT RON PAUL WONT COME CLOSE. AND THANK GOD BECAUSE AFTER THIS RUN HE WONT RUN AGAIN BECAUSE HE WILL BE TO OLD. HE NEEDES TO JUST GO AWAY RON PAUL LEAVE.ALSO YOUR DEBATES SUCK

[omni]

TweetLOL!! Ron Paul is the only one with an American name...Newt, Mitt, Obama. What's all that about. If I were voting on name alone, I'd vote for Ron Paul, but, I honestly think he's out of touch with the times. Look at the very first Republican debate. I was laughing at him and surprised he's still running.

[6p6]

TweetI really don't like any of the Republican candidates...I mean really this is all we can put out combat bs Obama? This doesn't look good at all guys...

[omni]

Tweet

I really don't like any of the Republican candidates...I mean really this is all we can put out combat bs Obama? This doesn't look good at all guys...

You got that right. We never seem to have a real good candidate. We just vote for the lesser of two evils.

[JsJs24]

TweetIf you truly support the Constitution you would not have these views of Ron Paul. I used to have the same views as some of you until I began to seriously study history, politics, and economics. If any of you are aware of who Michael Scheuer is then you may be surprised with his thoughts on the wars. He agrees 100% with Ron Paul and supports him for President 100%. He says the American people have been misled and are naively believing propaganda. In case you don't know who he is, he is retired CIA, PhD, and former head of the Bil Laden campaign. He knows more about Bin Laden, Al Queda, Taliban, and the Middle East than probably anyone. Watch the short interview from him on Napolitano's show on Fox (also a supporter of Ron Paul)


Ask yourself a few questions......

Why does Ron Paul receive more campaign contributions from the military than all the other Republican candidates COMBINED and double Obama's?

Why does the media, both left and right, hate a man so much who stands by his principles like no other politician in history short of Thomas Jefferson?

Why do the Republicans never talk about North Korea, which hates America and has 7 nuclear missiles with war heads capable of reaching us?

Why do the neoconservative Republicans not credit Ron Paul for constantly warning us of the housing bubble five years before it happened, and the crisis coming to the dollar and Europe?

Why do so many people not want a man in office who has not compromised his principles his entire career and who has nothing to hide? Have you ever heard Ron Paul having to make excuses for why he did this and that like all of the other candidates?

Have you ever wondered why nobody else supports the Constitution and the views of the founding fathers?

Have any of you ever read the Federalist Papers, Anti-Fereralist Papers, or any of the letters or books written by the founders? They all stood for a non-interventionist foreign policy, so why is Paul hated so much for this. Imagine how crazy this is, he is attacked for not wanting to invade an 8th country. How many do we want to invade? When does the war end? When will the rest of the voters sign up and serve in this war they support so strongly. If there was a draft the war would end fast, but when the vast majority of Americans don't have to fight, they support all wars it seems.

I had to respond to this because of the harsh words said about this man. I am a Libertarian, but I would be a Republican if the party wasn't hijacked by neoconservatives and stuck to its founding principles. The party is far away from that. But what I don't understand is why people will always vote against their principles. Newt and Romney are both left wing Republicans. They have supported some of the most ridiculous things that the party supposedly is against, however, they will get a pass from the voters. Why? Because people don't stick to their principles, or simply don't have any in some cases. If I don't believe in a person I sure as hell am not going to vote for them. I will write Ron Paul's name on the ballot if he does not get the nomination. That is what a lot of people I know are going to do. I sure as heck will not vote for a man who implemented socialized medicine in his state, or a man who sat with Nancy Pelosi to encourage people to support the environmental movement. Newt also supported in the individual mandate for healthcare, and cap and trade. But he gets a pass on those major issues, as does Romney. Absurd! One thing is certain though, the media is getting worried about Ron Paul. They have gone from not talking about him at all to talking about him every day. They fear he will win Iowa, which he very well could, and they will tell us that it was his radical supporters once again beating everybody out.

And how come Ron Paul keeps raising so much money when no big corporations are funding him or supporting him? He raises record breaking amounts of money all the time. This is true grassroots but those who oppose him don't want to admit it. Why does he keep winning so many straw poles? The media always says it's because he has so many supporters show up, well, can't the other candidates' supporters show up too? The fact is, there are a hell of a lot of Ron Paul supporters out there. I work for the military, and everyone I work with is former military, mostly Marines and Army. Many of the people I work with are Ron Paul supporters. My last Army unit had a bunch of Ron Paul supporters too, including the chief (warrant officer) in charge of the unit. I have found that many of those who are very well informed of accurate history, and not propaganda, support Ron Paul. But I don't think the majority of Americans will ever support a candidate who does not compromise his principles. That's too bad too because the politicians we have now are destroying our country. I am against Obama as much as the rest of you, and so is Ron Paul, but for some reason that isn't good enough for the Republican Party. If he is not willing to compromise his principles and support all of the wars then they will not support him one iota. I respect all of your views and hope that you can mine. I will stand up and support whoever supports liberty and free markets, which today is only one man. History is full of those who lie and tell us they will support such things, but it's always the same thing. Eventually we will end up like the Roman Empire if nothing changes. You can't spend money you don't have and stay in war forever.

[bowbow]

TweetExcellent post js. If you don't support Ron Paul your support is for the status quo. Simple as that.

[JsJs24]

Tweet

Excellent post js. If you don't support Ron Paul your support is for the status quo. Simple as that.

Thanks bowbow. I was falling for the status quo for several years until I started searching for the truth. Once people find that everything becomes so clear. You'd think more people would start to question the other candidates' attacking him, and the media from all networks doing the same. So we have left wing and right wing media attacking him, scared that he is becoming so popular, and this is because they support big government which he does not. If more Republicans would stop and think about what they claim to support, such as limited government, fiscal responsibility, non-interventionist war policy, free market, etc., then perhaps they would become more interested in Paul. I suggest to those who don't like him to at least read one of his books, which he actually writes, unlike the other politicians who have ghost writers. Ron Paul has more knowledge about history and economics than any of the politicians out there, and more than a great deal of professors.

I have some friends and family who were hard core Republicans that have now switched over to Paul. His message is spreading regardless of what the media says. Recently I volunteered in support of a Ron Paul campaign voter drive at a local gun store, and it was great to meet so many others with the same views as me. I found that most of them were very well read on history and economics too. These are not dumb people, at least not the ones I have met. They just want the government to get off their backs, leave the economy alone, and stop nation building.

The other candidates talk about the constitution but not one of them supports it. Ron Paul has not voted for anything in his career that is unconstitutional, hence Dr. No. And then Bachmann had the audacity to claim she is more consistent that Ron Paul, what a joke! Again, Dr. No should say enough. All the other candidates are having to explain every debate why they flip flopped on some conservative issue, yet Paul has not had to do it once.

I just donated again to Paul's campaign, which he is nearing the $4 million goal at $3,571,244 in just 18 hours and 45 minutes. Who else can raise that kind of money from individuals in such a short notice. He raises more in a day than Herman Cain had raised in a quarter, and he has done this several times already. Every money bomb he has generates millions of dollars, and they always exceed their goal.

And for those who aren't aware of the amount the ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY has donated to Paul and the other candidates from Jan 1 to Sep 30, 2011, here is the breakdown:

Ron Paul $113,739

Obama $68,661
Rick Santorum $750.00
Newt Gingrich $1,275.00
Bachmann $7,182
Perry $7,325
Cain $9,518.00
Romney $11,555

The total amount the Republicans have received is $37,605 which is less than one third of the amount Paul has received.

[FUZO]

TweetRon paul cant win a one on one with newt. he has he most attaks ads in Iowa and he failed in the iowa debate thats why he didnt win it.I hate negative attack ads and he ran the most next to michelle bachman and that pisses me off.But guess what all that money spent from ron paul and bachman against Newt didt work. Newt won that debate with a romney 2nd. perry did well. I like santorum but he's done.Our country needs a tough foreign policy and a tough military. If Ron paul was in charge the USA would be weaker then it is now under blojama.After that debate I'm disgusted at Ron Paul with his remarks on the military and what he said about the judges

[JsJs24]

Tweet

Ron paul cant win a one on one with newt. he has he most attaks ads in Iowa and he failed in the iowa debate thats why he didnt win it.I hate negative attack ads and he ran the most next to michelle bachman and that pisses me off.But guess what all that money spent from ron paul and bachman against Newt didt work. Newt won that debate with a romney 2nd. perry did well. I like santorum but he's done.Our country needs a tough foreign policy and a tough military. If Ron paul was in charge the USA would be weaker then it is now under blojama.After that debate I'm disgusted at Ron Paul with his remarks on the military and what he said about the judges

Fuzo, I admire your passion that's for sure. I also believe you would warm up to Paul if you read some of his books in which he has the chance to thoroughly explain his reasoning for such views. Yes his foreign policy is much different than the other Republicans, but it is precisely what the Founding Fathers believed in. But the Founding Fathers and the Constitution are only considered when it is convenient for politicians today. Keep in mind too that Paul is a veteran Air Force Officer (Captain) Flight Surgeon, who served both on active duty and Reserves. He is supportive of the military, and the military supports him (please refer to the numbers I posted above). Yet, the Republican Party claims the soldiers are in support of the continued wars, however the Active-Duty military are donating overwhelmingly to Paul's campaign. But Paul's support for military is in national defense, DEFENSE being the key word there. He believes in protecting our country but staying out of nation building. He did vote to go in to Afghanistan but wanted a much faster outcome. Thus, an attack against our country and he was all for going in to get Bin Laden. The thing a lot of people don't realize is how many innocent people have been killed in those countries as a result of collateral damage. The number is said to be close to 1 million dead Iraqis, most of which were minding their own business. Now I'm all for getting the insurgents but realistically wars end up killing a lot more than just the enemies. So the man wants peace for once and he is hated for it. Yet, the one point he keeps making that will prove true is that we can't afford to continue fighting the wars because we are going bankrupt. Unfortunately most Americans don't believe that is possible either, and just think we can spend and spend forever with no repercussions. I would think people would see what's happening to European countries and wake up to how serious this is. This is the most important reason to have Paul in office, because of his understanding of economics, which none of the other candidates have a clue about. Heck, they need to learn the Constitution first. Romney thinks he just needs to have his lawyers sort out whether or not he can go to war with a country without Congressional support, even though the Constitution requires Congressional approval as the ONLY way permitted to go to war. So which is it for Republicans, do they support the Constitution or is it just a piece of paper? I say it's lip service for both parties, with the one exception being Ron Paul.

AS for Newt Gingrich, I believe he debates better than all of the others, and would beat Obama in a debate. However, I do not trust him at all. He is what you would call a liberal Republican. The attack add Ron Paul ran about thin was true, and showed video clips of Newt's liberal side. The man supported Cap and Trade with Nancy Pelosi, the health care Individual Mandate, traveled the country with the pathetic Al Sharpton in support of a complete takeover of the education system by the Federal Government (something the Republican Party was against in the Reagan Days), criticized Paul Ryan's healthcare plan as being right wing social engineering, and he supported the bailouts. That doesn't sound very Republican to me. Then you have Mitt who implement Romney Care before Obama, and tends to be more liberal than even Newt. I think Perry may be the most conservative member running between the others, and he may gain support in the coming months due to his improved debate performances. Bachmann hasn't a chance in hell of winning so I don't even consider her. And the attack ads Paul runs are necessary because the others are attacking him in live interviews on a regular basis. They call him a side show, loose cannon, radical, and all sorts of other insulting names. And he doesn't get a fair shake by the media. They try to ignore him but is has become too obvious and they don't want to lose ratings. Many people have switched to Paul because of this. It starts to look pretty bad when they constantly attack a principled politician who has never compromised in his entire career. Not once instance of him voting against the Constitution, that's pretty darn impressive.

But like I said, I respect your passion and have no problem with differing views. I'll continue to support Paul and hope for a restoration of our liberties, because at this rate we are losing them fast. If he does not win I will still hope for the best but I believe it will be business as usual.

And in case anyone is interested, here is Ron Paul on Jay Leno the other night with Joe Rogan as the second guest. It turns out Joe Rogan is a HUGE Ron Paul fan, as is Vince Vaughn. Rogan has his Paul shirt on too. Great clip.


It's fun debating on here with you Fuzo.