4um: Review of January 5th, 2008 ABC GOP Debate

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Author! Author!
See other Author! Author! Articles
Title: Review of January 5th, 2008 ABC GOP Debate
Source: 4
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jan 5, 2008
Author: buckeye
Post Date: 2008-01-05 21:57:08 by buckeye
Keywords: Ron Paul
Views: 1801
Comments: 103

Facebook URL
Quick synopsis
Ron Paul, my focus during this event, was tired, slow to articulate his points, and easily overwhelmed by aggressive partisans.
McCain appeared to withdraw his insistence on amnesty, and then spent excess time interrupting other candidates who were differentiating themselves from his former positions — in defense of what he had apologized for.
Romney was effective at articulating his technical perspectives on issues (medical care, immigration) but clearly will not deviate from the Bush doctrines of war.
Thompson was reserved and came across as a fat cat at times. He smirked at Ron Paul several times.
Giuliani was about the same as he has always been. He smirked and laughed mirthlessly at Ron Paul several times.
John McCain was especially demeaning to Ron Paul during discussion of war.
Smirking and chuckling was prevalent when Ron Paul was talking about the Federal Reserve and inflation.
Illegal Immigration

This is my main reason for posting this thread.
It became abundantly clear that no one on the stage would deal with illegal immigration adequately. PC rules the day. we are not being heard yet.
Ron Paul lost an incredible chance to demonstrate his resolve on this issue, but he came close by emphasizing welfare.
The other GOP members are weak-kneed and left themselves with massive openings for abandoning their commitments to deal with immigration.
Huckabee talked about building a fence, and sounded like he's been listening to Gilchrist; his credibility is very low in my opinion.
The American people have NOT communicated their anger effectively with these people.
Ron Paul's demeanor

This was a fair debate with an open format.
Rushed, combative, on the defensive in many cases.
Unable to keep up with cross-talk and interruptions.
Should have worn a red tie, I'm hearing.
Ron Paul's victory
He kept his temper when badly mistreated not by ABC, but by the other participants.
He kept his humor, and joked several times.
He did articulate the threat of inflation/monetary-abuse.
He did talk about civil liberties and preemptive war.
He did talk about free enterprise and the Constitution.
He is the only candidate truly planning on implementing change.

Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-62) not displayed.
.
.
.

#63. To: buckeye. peacemakers here (#57)
Things have sucked for our military ever since the gutless congress abdicated its responsibility of declaring 'war.'
Join the Ron Paul Revolution
Freedom*Peace*Prosperity
Lod posted on 2008-01-06 13:26:21 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#64. To: robin (#60)
He did not give his word, in fact he said he has the right to leave himself some wiggle room (that was to Russert).

That's what RP said - you are correct - but we know how the hairdos will spin it but it matters not - the only ones who believe what mainstream media claims are the 2 fraud party Stepford Wives voters.

scrapper2 posted on 2008-01-06 13:31:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#65. To: scrapper2 (#58)
FPP

Freedom Peace & Prosperity - is that too long a handle?
Join the Ron Paul Revolution
Freedom*Peace*Prosperity
Lod posted on 2008-01-06 13:32:12 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#66. To: lodwick (#63)
It's the worst of Vietnam and Korea combined, because we appear to be ethnically motivated (from the other side, even if it's not necessarily true), it's on the Asian land mass, and we find ourselves unable to achieve our stated objectives without widening the conflict.
Douglas MacArthur warned us never to embroil American conventional forces on the Asian land mass.
The John Birch Society has repeatedly pointed out that the internationalists gain control over our foreign policy when we permit them to run our wars.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 13:34:41 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#67. To: buckeye, Fred Mertz, Robin, Peppa, ALL (#55)
Palo, why isn't the Sibel Edmonds case impacting this election yet?

Sibel told me in email last month her only hope now is Ron Paul will be elected President
I have not been able to fight for Sibel Edmonds since Ron Paul announced his candidacy
I am putting everything into electing Ron Paul president
and Sibel is right, the only chance government will do anything about the corruption she has uncovered
is if Ron Paul is President
as for her supporters, many are ideologically left-wing
I don't know if they will put their ideology aside and support Ron Paul
as for the corruption Sibel has uncovered, and you know how serious it is
members of our State Dept and DOD are selling nuclear material on the black market
to highest bidder
including terrorists
we now have traitors in our FBI, State Dept, DOD, and other places
who sell US Defense intelligence on black market, etc
how can Dr Paul touch this in the election, if he even knows about it
both Parties, and every branch of government is covering it up
Love, Palo
the interesting thing is if mass media ever stopped covering this up,
if it ever did become exposed
before the election
Ron Paul would win by a landslide instantly
you agree?
but right now I don't see it happening
but who knows what will happen

palo verde posted on 2008-01-06 13:36:02 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#68. To: buckeye (#0)
the snickering ignorance of the candidates other than ron paul is highly evident. questions on my mind are: is america a nation of half wits buying this crap? has america been hypnotized into buying this crap? is america ready for the truth?
the outcome of all this doesn't look very bright if a candidate other than ron paul is selected. as a result, i started to vote with my wallet. i began to pare back my u.s. equity investments.

BrentFromCanada posted on 2008-01-06 13:38:07 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#69. To: buckeye (#62)
Jacksonians?

Definitely not. Too much negativity associated with that group today: "nativism, isolationism" blah blah - a Jacksonian Party label would scare libertarians and centrist Dems away imo.
Fukayama ( a neocon theorist who broke with his compadres over the Iraq War) claims this about the unholy alliance between neocons and Jacksonians:
www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5239049
...Neoconservatism is one of four different approaches to American foreign policy today. There are, in addition to neoconservatism, "realists" in the tradition of Henry Kissinger, who respect power and tend to downplay the internal nature of other regimes and human rights concerns; there are liberal internationalists who hope to transcend power politics altogether and move to an international order based on law and institutions; and there are what Walter Russell Mead labels "Jacksonian" American nationalists, who tend to take a narrow, security-related view of American national interests, distrust multilateralism, and in their more extreme manifestations tend toward nativism and isolationism. The Iraq war was promoted by an alliance of neoconservatives and Jacksonian nationalists, who for different reasons accepted the logic of regime change in Baghdad. They sidelined the realists in the Republican Party like Brent Scowcroft and James Baker, who had served in George Herbert Walker Bush's administration and were skeptical about the rationale for the war...

scrapper2 posted on 2008-01-06 13:41:10 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#70. To: lodwick (#65)
FPP
Freedom Peace & Prosperity - is that too long a handle?

Good idea but I'm not sure if the full version title would be believeable to most people (apart from us, of course). Sounds too much like promises rather than political persuasion. But I think the acronymn idea is an interesting possibility...like NDP = New Democratic Party in Canada or the SNP = Scottish Nationalist Party in the UK.

scrapper2 posted on 2008-01-06 13:52:44 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#71. To: palo verde, FOH, Cynicom (#67)
...we now have traitors in our FBI, State Dept, DOD, and other places who sell US Defense intelligence on black market, etc...

Palo dear, you and I both know that it is not left-wing to oppose corruption. Paleo-conservatives all across this country are deeply concerned with the internationalist/communist infiltration of our government, to include the CIA, State Department, and FBI — and other departments.

Sovereign Solutions: Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt

Move forward to 1:08 to see Seibel Edmonds speak on our duty as citizens to oppose treason.
There is a solemn UN flag-burning ceremony which follows that segment.
Mrs. Iserbyt's talk is anything but left-wing, and the people behind the publication of this video appear from casual examination to be solid patriots.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 13:53:48 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#72. To: scrapper2 (#69)
Fukayama ( a neocon theorist who broke with his compadres over the Iraq War) claims this about the unholy alliance between neocons and Jacksonians:

There is nothing wrong with the Jacksonians except they believed that the official story of 9/11 was reasonable. Ron Paul needs the Jacksonians to win. In fact, he is simply just an exceptionally intelligent Jacksonian himself.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 13:57:22 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#73. To: scrapper2 (#70)
But I think the acronym idea is an interesting possibility...like NDP = New Democratic Party in Canada or the SNP = Scottish Nationalist Party in the UK.

That was my thought - there are scores of parties, in other countries, that have three words in their name, and are just known by the initials.
Join the Ron Paul Revolution
Freedom*Peace*Prosperity
Lod posted on 2008-01-06 14:03:00 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#74. To: buckeye, noone222 (#51)
noone222: I just think he possesses the attributes of a Statesman and Constitutional awareness this country needs to put into practice, but seems hesitant to forcefully project himself into the debate.
buckeye: Ron Paul has admitted this on several occasions. Now is his time to change, to listen to his most supportive critics, and to step up and lead...
The internet isn't enough, he must secure the hearts and minds of Americans far and wide.

I tend to agree with you both as long as when Dr. Paul does this he retains his composure and doesn't try to squeeze everything and the kitchen sink into his rebuttals.
I recall the first debates when he tried to be more assertive and he talked a mile a minute and a good deal of he wanted to say was lost on the average teevee viewer. In the NH debate he slowed down and simplified his message but was not as assertive. So I think he is listening to his advisors but he's trying to find a happy medium - simple message and speak firmly but clearly. The upcoming S. Carolina debates may offer RP that perfect balance opportunity. If RP does well in NH, he'll be invited to participate in S. C. debates.
Postscript: last night I caught some snippets of the Dem debate, and the experienced ones in political debates looked weak for yammering over one another - Hillary especially came across as a hormonal nag. Edwards had a good balance between not going off at the mouth but interjecting when he needed to say his brief rebuttal - I have to hand it to the Weasel Edwards - he does the best of all of them in debates. I'd like to see RP get the Edwards balance - maybe he should watch the debates to see what not to do ( Hillary) and what to do ( Edwards). Obama said hardly anything at all - much like what happened to RP last night - and interestingly enough - the hairdo commentators afterwards said that Obama at least did not hurt himself. So maybe that's how we need to view RP's NH performance - though he was not overly assertive, he did not hurt himself and in NH I would think RP has a decent chance of doing pretty well anyways because of the number of independents and libertarians. The debates were not that essential. It's SC where RP needs to reach out and win over new supporters. SC is an unknown to me. I don't know how that state shapes up for undecided vs decided. Does anyone know?

scrapper2 posted on 2008-01-06 14:20:49 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#75. To: buckeye (#72)
There is nothing wrong with the Jacksonians except they believed that the official story of 9/11 was reasonable. Ron Paul needs the Jacksonians to win. In fact, he is simply just an exceptionally intelligent Jacksonian himself.

I'm thinking more that the Jacksonian label - today - could be easily spun the negative way. It's too open to criticism and mis-stating of policies.
Like instead of non-intervention critics would call it the party of isolationists. Instead of border control sovereignists, critics would call the Jacksonion party nativists, xenophobes. In "today speak," Jacksonian policies could be twisted/flipped very easily to infer negatives.

scrapper2 posted on 2008-01-06 14:26:38 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#76. To: scrapper2 (#75)
I'm thinking more that the Jacksonian label - today - could be easily spun the negative way. It's too open to criticism and mis-stating of policies.

Judging from LP's Hasbara-oriented criticism of RP, this is clearly an ethnic panic button issue. Flyover country could care less. Ron Paul has so far failed to capture their vote, although he is the best man to represent their values. (Based on Iowa and Wyoming.) I can't blame anyone else but Ron Paul for failing to reach them, and I think it's on the issue of immigration.
But in urban America, Ron Paul can reach the peace-minded Americans who always knew that war in Iraq was a mistake. This is a possibility we have yet to verify.
Yes, those peace-minded people could be driven away from RP by any semblance of political-incorrectness.
I'm frustrated because I see collectivism as ultimately the most inhumane of all policies, and leads to greater divides between the races and ethnic groups.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 14:33:19 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#77. To: scrapper2 (#74)
I can't answer your questions but I agree with what I'm reading in your commentary on the Democratic debate. Obama is a CFR fair haired boy, and he and Edwards can compete to see which one will accept the scepter, should Hillary continue to disqualify herself with antagonism.
Governor Richardson did exceptionally well in the debate. These people are marvelous at deception.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 14:37:53 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#78. To: buckeye, Peppa, kiki, scrapper2, Cynicom, Peppa, TwentyTwelve, who knows what evil, tom007, Dakmar, lodwick, critter, robin, ALL (#45)
this research revealed that as many as 1 million EXTRA Iraq civilians have died in Iraq since the United States invaded the nation.
I don't know whom to believe on this issue,

This is the problem when you do not do the reading and research needed to prove that which you are exposed too.
The information about the civilian deaths in Iraq was done by a Britsh organization using internationally accepted methodologies. The same methods that were used in Africa to justify interventions in Africa, and, the methods are accepted internationally AND BY THE UN, except as used in Iraq.
In addition to this, there is now evidence to show that there may be as many as 5 million orphans in Iraq. Since the majority of the deaths SO FAR in Iraq were not children, it is not hard to correlate this two numbers; more than 1 million cilivian deaths -- more than 5 million orphans.
Now, take that a step further; 5 million orphans who can not feed themselves will translate to another 1-3 million additional civialian deaths if the war continues.
Now, tell me that something could not be built around this in the campaign. And, should be.
And every time this is talked about, 1 trillion dollars is mentioned again and again and again and again. Endlessly. So, if any of you have a contact inside of the Dr. Paul effort, I suggest that you begin talking.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
richard9151 posted on 2008-01-06 15:17:20 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#79. To: richard9151 (#78)
What if this is true? Some people refuse to allow us to leave Iraq because they see that the suffering is now ours to alleviate. One way Ron Paul could lose even more supporters is if he promised to pay reparations, as one Iraqi war veteran's group has been requesting.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 15:23:17 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#80. To: buckeye (#79)
What if this is true? Some people refuse to allow us to leave Iraq because they see that the suffering is now ours to alleviate.

You alleviate suffering first, by stopping the killing and the hoarding of food -- by the US and her allies.
Second, you alleviate suffering by permitting the people of Iraq to go back to work. Stop with all of the foreign workers, who have stolen the work which belongs to the people of Iraq.
Third, you permit the people of Iraq to begin to rebuild their own nation in their own vision using the proceeds from the oil which is theirs.
As to reparations, have you ever heard of Viet Nam? Or, Korea? In both instances, we correctly paid. How much could/would the US pay, compared to what the war costs?
In addition, the attack on Iraq by the United States and Britian was, according to international law, a war crime. Dr. Paul can use this to better explain his positions, and, end any questions about reparations/continuing the war.
Do not tell me that he could lose support over an issue that is so easily resolved with a very little bit of thought.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
richard9151 posted on 2008-01-06 15:33:46 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#81. To: richard9151 (#80)
I don't believe that we paid reparations to either North Korea or Vietnam. If you have documented evidence, feel free to submit it.
Your other points suggest continued American involvement in Iraq, which is exactly what we do not want. Let them take care of themselves.
Ron Paul has made his positions clear on this matter. I would not support him if he had not.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 15:39:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#82. To: buckeye (#81)
I don't believe that we paid reparations to either North Korea or Vietnam. If you have documented evidence, feel free to submit it.

Please, buckeye, don't try and excuse actions of the US government.
http://www.pownetwork.org/docs/part2.htm
POWs and Politics - Part 2
For instance, much of the money paid to Hanoi for JTF-FA activities is being sent by the U.S. Navy Regional Contracting Office in Singapore through the Bank of America to the account of the External Affairs section of the Communist party.
Much of the money paid to Viet Nam was paid with the excuse that it went to pay for the recovery of the bodies of US servicemen. That would indicate that somehow a sense of regret (?) started in Washington, DC, that is not supported by the evidence about what was and what was not done about MIAs, not only in Viet Nam but in Korea and WWII as well.
In addition, I said nothing about North Korea. I said Korea, but that only makes sense when you know, as I have posted before, that the Korean War originated and was planned in New York. The payments can be counted however you wish, but stop for just one moment and think about this;
US troops have been in Korea for nearly 60 years. The US has a national debt of, what, 9 trillion dollars? How much of that is directly attributable to the Korean War and occupation? With interest, probably in excess of 1 trillion.
There is one more thing which is a fact; after the money was paid in each case (in whatever form you wish to state it), US and British corporations and banks moved in and it was 'business-as-usual.' And if you really want to understand, simply study who owns and controls all of those fancy South Korean corporations (as well as all of the Japanese); New York and London bankers (i.e., the owners and controllers of the Federal Reserve). When everything is said and done, it will be the same in Viet Nam, even if you and I can not see the reality of the situation.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
richard9151 posted on 2008-01-06 16:31:19 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#83. To: buckeye, richard9151 (#81)
I don't believe that we paid reparations to either North Korea or Vietnam. If you have documented evidence, feel free to submit it.

www.greenleft.org.au/agent_orange.php
In the 1973 Peace Accords that paved the way to end the Vietnam War, the US promised Vietnam reparations of US$3.5 billion. So far, not a cent has been paid.
Hanoi has also demanded that Washington honour its moral responsibility towards the victims devastated by its Agent Orange attacks, and help out in decontamination. Under .sovereign immunity., the US government cannot be sued. Hanoi, therefore, seeks redress from the major chemical corporations that supplied Agent Orange and other deadly chemicals to the US military during the war. Vietnam Association for the Victims of Agent Orange/Dioxins (VAVA) was formed in January 2004, partly to carry out this task.

TwentyTwelve posted on 2008-01-06 16:33:10 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#84. To: buckeye (#81)
Your other points suggest continued American involvement in Iraq, which is exactly what we do not want. Let them take care of themselves.

Absolutely not. Long distance, hands-off talks. Pull out in a manner to permit as few causalities as possible. End of story.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
richard9151 posted on 2008-01-06 16:33:52 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#85. To: buckeye, richard9151, FormerLurker, FOH, Original_Intent (#81)
I don't believe that we paid reparations to either North Korea or Vietnam. If you have documented evidence, feel free to submit it.

http://www.namebase.org/books90.html
In Paris on February 1, 1973, the U.S. gave North Vietnam a letter from Nixon promising $3.25 billion in aid in exchange for a list of POWs. North Vietnam wanted "reparations" but Nixon called it "reconstruction." This book makes a strong case that the list of POWs was incomplete; Vietnam was too smart to release all prisoners on the mere promise of aid. When Nixon failed to deliver, many POWs were left behind. Vietnam did the same thing with French POWs in 1954, and their distrust of American motives must have been keen after Kissinger's 1972 Christmas bombing of Hanoi. Much evidence shows that Vietnam always used two or more parallel prison systems, with no cross- fertilization of prisoners between them. The men who came home in 1973 were from one system, and weren't aware of those who may have been left behind.
Since 1973, the Pentagon's cover-ups on this issue have been shameful. The brass want to hold out until the entire mess becomes a footnote instead of a career-stopper. Vietnam seems ready to wait also, and time is on their side. Now that relations are normalized, the transnationals moving into their economy are something of an insurance policy. In five or ten years, Vietnam might be in a position to demand reparations without fear of reprisals -- even another Kissinger wouldn't dare bomb Shell or Exxon.

TwentyTwelve posted on 2008-01-06 16:36:06 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#86. To: richard9151 (#82)
Please, buckeye, don't try and excuse actions of the US government.

When did I make excuses? I made none. Ron Paul makes none. He simply says we should come home.
Much of the money paid to Viet Nam was paid with the excuse that it went to pay for the recovery of the bodies of US servicemen.
I don't see any of that as reparations. I have no intention to support any form of reparations in Iraq, and I would not support Ron Paul if he wanted to add that to my tax bill in 2009.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 16:36:11 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#87. To: buckeye, noone222, Peppa, TwentyTwelve, who knows what evil, tom007, Dakmar, lodwick, critter, Robin, Itisa1mosttoolate, ALL (#76)
(Palo) I just found this post while lurking on another forum
so the Wyoming Caucus is meaningless ...

Wyoming voters do not vote in the caucus.
The delegates are chosen by the good- old-boys GOP club.
It is one of the oldest, most out-dated methods of caucus voting in the country,
and is not democratic at all.

So the results in Wyoming do not reflect what Wyoming citizens want
On to New Hampshire!!
Go Ron GO!!!

palo verde posted on 2008-01-06 16:43:59 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#88. To: buckeye, richard9151 (#86)
don't see any of that as reparations. I have no intention to support any form of reparations in Iraq, and I would not support Ron Paul if he wanted to add that to my tax bill in 2009.

Maybe if our government promised to send to the Iraqis all the neocons who caused the Iraq invasion and give the Iraqis the go-ahead to do what they want, no holds barred with the anti-America/anti-Iraq neocon likes of Wolfowitz, Feith, Kagan, Kristol, Krauthammer, Pohoretz etc - that might be viewed as sufficient re-payment???

scrapper2 posted on 2008-01-06 16:44:40 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#89. To: palo verde (#87)
So the results in Wyoming do not reflect what Wyoming citizens want

Yes Palo dear. But "they hate us because we're free" --Rudy Giuliani

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 16:46:11 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#90. To: scrapper2 (#88)
...hat might be viewed as sufficient re-payment?

You suppose that we owe them anything at all. I don't think we do.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 16:47:52 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#91. To: Itisa1mosttoolate, ALL (#87)
Wyoming voters do not vote in the caucus.
The delegates are chosen by the good- old-boys GOP club.
It is one of the oldest, most out-dated methods of caucus voting in the country,
and is not democratic at all.

Not only that they don't even have to stick to it
they can change their mind at the convention
this is why media pays no attention to Wyoming caucus

palo verde posted on 2008-01-06 16:49:21 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#92. To: scrapper2 (#88)
Maybe if our government promised to send to the Iraqis all the neocons who caused the Iraq invasion and give the Iraqis the go-ahead to do what they want, no holds barred with the anti-America/anti-Iraq neocon likes of Wolfowitz, Feith, Kagan, Kristol, Krauthammer, Pohoretz etc - that might be viewed as sufficient re-payment?

Toss in smirkI & II, cheney, and rummy and you'd prolly have a deal.
Join the Ron Paul Revolution
Freedom*Peace*Prosperity
Lod posted on 2008-01-06 16:49:42 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#93. To: buckeye (#90)
You suppose that we owe them anything at all. I don't think we do.

Errrr...well we kind of turned their nation upside down for no good reason and we killed and/or displaced several million of Iraqi civilians. So yes I think we owe them reparations to re-build their infrastructure at the very least.
Perhaps if we had just gone in and removed Saddam and then motored right out within 6 weeks I'd say - well we gave Iraq a fresh start to take back their country from a dictator we originally helped install. But we didn't do that. We followed Clean Break policy and purposely de-stabilized and destroyed a functional nation.

scrapper2 posted on 2008-01-06 16:52:40 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#94. To: palo verde (#91)
WOW! Vote Fraud up the KAZOO
"You can not save the Constitution by destroying it."
Itisa1mosttoolate posted on 2008-01-06 16:53:48 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#95. To: scrapper2 (#93)
We're going to go different directions on this issue. That's all I have to say. I respect your concern, but I do not share it.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-06 16:54:27 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#96. To: lodwick (#92)
Toss in smirkI & II, cheney, and rummy and you'd prolly have a deal.

He, he, he - and toss in Colin Powell as the final deal maker in case some of the Iraqis are still sitting on the fence. Powell did the big liar yapping before the UN with his handy dandy power point demonstration.

scrapper2 posted on 2008-01-06 16:56:04 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#97. To: buckeye (#95)
We're going to go different directions on this issue. That's all I have to say. I respect your concern, but I do not share it.

Okay.

scrapper2 posted on 2008-01-06 16:57:53 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#98. To: Itisa1mosttoolate, ALL (#94)
YUP!!!
great post, Iiatl
Love, Palo
So the only primary which has meaning which has happened is Iowa
and interpreted correctly, it is very positive for Dr Paul
Ron Paul is now polling at 14 percent in New Hampshire
but since youth is on cell-phone, I figure the real number is 18 per cent
GO RON GO

ps, Ron Paul is ahead of Huckabee in New Hampshire polls

palo verde posted on 2008-01-06 17:01:40 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#99. To: scrapper2 (#93)
Errrr...well we kind of turned their nation upside down for no good reason and we killed and/or displaced several million of Iraqi civilians. So yes I think we owe them reparations to re-build their infrastructure at the very least.

I agree. I have no idea if there's an afterlife or heaven 'n hell or karma and reincarnation or whatever. I don't expect to know until it's too late to do anything about it. but I have a feeling that whatever follows, if anything, will hinge more on morality than economics. money's an issue, sure. but I'm sickened by what we have done to these people. just my opinion, but walking away would seem so morally wrong, just as continuing the damage is.
if your neighbor destroyed your home and killed or maimed every other member of your family, would it be enough if they just promised to stop? what if your dad was a big jerk and he was one of the ones they killed? would that make it ok? I see this as a complex issue and am offended by politicians who represent it as simple. I do personally feel guilt for what my country has done, whether I supported it or not. I didn't stop it.

kiki posted on 2008-01-06 23:53:55 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#100. To: BrentFromCanada, iconoclast (#68)
the snickering ignorance of the candidates other than ron paul is highly evident.

It's not completely clear that Ron Paul's GOP opponents are ignorant. If they treat his comments about a restricted foreign policy and fiscal responsibility seriously, they will be forced to justify their own positions which ignore those things.
They may understand full well that inflation robs savers of their value. They may know that the American military cannot fight a world war against an ill-defined idea with politically correct hogties, and sustain itself financially — let alone politically. They may realize that the Federal Reserve system has enslaved the American people. But to admit any of this would be to discredit the fabric of assumptions on which their careers are based, and would even insult some of their backers.
questions on my mind are: is america a nation of half wits buying this crap?
The media gives them bread and circuses, and offers them pro/con positions that barely differ. Other solutions to problems are ignored or treated as "extreme," even when the positions taken pro/con are often extreme by objective analysis. In short, they don't have any other information, and they are kept busy by the harness of lifestyle complexity into which they have willingly stepped.
is america ready for the truth?
That isn't the issue, by and large. Polls show that we're ready to end the war. Polls show that the government is thought to be incompetent and corrupt. But watching the debates, it was clear that each candidate (D/R alike) wants to offer a so-called solution to these problems. Don't blame Americans for not polling well for Ron Paul. The media, which hands the scepter of power to a few chosen ones, has not handed it to him, and won't. They feel uneasy about this, but can't make a choice comfortably.
the outcome of all this doesn't look very bright if a candidate other than ron paul is selected. as a result, i started to vote with my wallet. i began to pare back my u.s. equity investments.
No arguments here. As Ron Paul says, our government, and specifically this particular government, is not the American people. Americans do believe they are supporting democracy around the world. If they realized that Ron Paul couldn't have ever won in Wyoming this weekend, they might be more concerned about elections in their own country more.

buckeye posted on 2008-01-07 19:38:22 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#101. To: palo verde, noone222, buckeye, scrapper2, All (#59)
One last thing just in case anyone has some insider ability to mention something to Dr. Paul.
He mentions the young people sometimes as if they are his primary supporters almost to the exclusion of everyone else.
He is so surprised and thrilled to find the youth support him, that he forgets to mention the rest of us do.
I think Dr. Paul is more delighted than surprised by the response of the most idealistic of our citizenry, as am I. My feathers aren't least bit ruffled by his reaction to their response.
Might it also be possible that RP realizes that "the Revolution" is going to be a Valley Forge thing, not a Parisian thing?
I think he's the only thing standing between a free America and a civil war.
If Ron Paul is not in our Oval Office this time next year, we will have police state and all police states go fascist this is our one chance to save outselves, we must do it now
One thing I'm pretty damn sure of, apocalyptic talk is not our friend.
I'm reminded of the old "young bull, old bull joke", only with the attitudes reversed.
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
iconoclast posted on 2008-01-08 9:34:43 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#102. To: scrapper2 (#58)
Constitutional Party has already been taken. Any suggestions?

As you know, we are in close agreement on the third party need.
Do you think the Constitution Party would reject an infusion of spirited Paul backers? Hell, they've had problems finding anyone that can found on Google to head their campaigns.
Don't fight 'em, join 'em. If we don't do it this spring, we should seriously get started after the Nov election.
Go Ron Go
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
iconoclast posted on 2008-01-08 9:56:01 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#103. To: scrapper2, buckeye, , *Ron Paul for President 2008* (#58)
I think you'll be delighted to see what the CP has to say on its website about the good Dr.
http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=613#Paul
Republicans (Democrats for that matter) ....... HAD ENOUGH?
iconoclast posted on 2008-01-08 10:04:09 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

Freedom4um

Quick synopsis

Illegal Immigration

Ron Paul's demeanor

Ron Paul's victory

Sovereign Solutions: Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt