See other All is Vanity Articles
Title: Ron Paul: Idiot or Coward?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Mar 4, 2008
Author: honway
Post Date: 2008-03-04 16:29:42 by honway
Keywords: None
Views: 1405
Comments: 58
If Ron Paul does not have the capacity to evaluate the available information and conclude that there is a U.S. government cover-up concerning 9/11,then he is an idiot. If Ron Paul has concluded correctly that there was a U.S. government cover-up concerning 9/11 and was afraid to tell it like it is in his campaign, then the man is a coward. Either way, the people remaining in the United States that support the U.S. Constitution are not served well by a flag bearer that is either an idiot or a coward. If the man really is an idiot, I am glad his 15 minutes are over. If he is a coward, I regret the missed opportunity. Had he stood before the American people and guaranteed a full and complete accounting for 9/11 as a primary campaign goal, he may have still lost, but he would have made history. But history often overlooks both idiots and cowards.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-10) not displayed.
.
.
.
#11. To: castletrash (#8)
There's proof all over youtube. The zionist horse won't drink. ZOG's hydro- phobic.
...and give thanks that Obama, Clinton or McCain are saving us from the likes of Ron Paul. After all, they are TRUE statesmen that will blow the lid off the 911 coverup. Just you wait 'n see!
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
Hey, this anti-Paul vanity is also "anti-semitic"! Zionism and fluoride. A "holy" pairing.
Barkeep, I'll have what pinquinite's having .
What do you make of the fact that the Sean Hannity Show first went into national syndication on 9/10/01? I'm not trying to be sarcastic or confrontational, just wondering what you make of it. Of course it could very well be a coincidence, but what are the odds that the # 1 neocon/GOP mouthpiece in all of America first hit the big time the day before 9/11? The odds of it happening that exact day must be astronomical. But then again, I did hit a 99-1 shot at the horse track once.
Both. Also, an person of chimperor-eske type of honesty?
Branded, scorned as the one who ran.
I am old school. Integrity means something to me. I despise hypocrisy more than admitted globalists like those you mention. If a man stands up and speaks about freedom, liberty, and the U.S. Constitution and then ignores the attack on freedom,liberty, and the U.S. Constitution represented by the true nature of 9/11, he has no integrity. Obama, Clinton and McCain are card carrying members of the CFR party and talk the talk. No one could ever listen to these three and confuse them with someone that believes in freedom,liberty, and the U.S. Constitution.
Ron Paul: Politician. I gave up on Paul when he chose to speak at Falwell's Liberty University in Lunchbag, Virginia rather than speak up the road at Thomas Jefferson's stomping grounds in Charlottesville.
Read New History 'He will make Cheney look like Gandhi.' And as he started to go she said, Billy, keep your head low
Imagine the impact if Ron Paul had spent some of the millions he received from freedom loving Americans on ads. For example. An ad beginning with the pictures of two of the reported hijackers, Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf Alhazmi. Then a question or two. Why did a Saudi Arabian intelligence asset meet these two hijackers at the airport when they arrived in the U.S. and assist these foreigners with very limited English make the transition to living in America? Why did Omar Al-Bayomi then hand over these hijackers to Abdussattar Shaikh, a highly paid FBI informant?The hijackers moved in with Abdussattar Shaikh, the FBI informant, and lived with him. Since Abdussattar Shaikh's only income came from the FBI, your tax dollars were used to house two of the hijackers before they attacked us on 9/11. Elect Ron Paul and Omar Al-Bayomi and Abdussattar Shaikh will answer these questions and explain what they know before a live Congressional hearing for all the American people to see.
I understand your frustration. What about the arguement that, see if he can win, and then push for the truth after ther election? or, if as some have stated, for realists, it was only about the message all along. Also, the additional arguement that Paul's message of limited constitutional govt , if enacted, would have prevented such treason and secrecy in the first place. Also, the fact that many who weren't even aware of such proper liberty ideals have been exposed to them for the first time through Ron Paul, and may otherwise have never been. I'm sure you've seen Paul screaming on the morton downey jr show in '88 about george bush senior and the CIA running drugs ("Right Mr Gritz??!" he shouts). I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that he knows the truth about 911 and nothing will convince me otherwise., hence, that may peg him in your category of coward, but he's a sitting congressman, not a fool. I would have liked to see him blow this issue wide open. Seeing as I think he's a good man and respect his decisions, maybe his critics can themselves win congress, establish a widely respected record, raise 30 million, and run for president on a 911 truth platform? why not, if it's so easy?
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" Robin, there was a mistake in that transcript, would you please (for the sake of clarity and accuracy) edit your paste of that thread to convey his correct statement? only one word was wrong but it's important,. It should read, "they even talked before 9/11, thanks
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" I think I fixed it.
'He will make Cheney look like Gandhi.' thanks.
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" i would like to have seen a major ad about the corrupt voting system in this country. RP himself admitted from the getgo that he couldn't win so what better way to truly help this country than to SPOTLIGHT vote fraud.
All I know is that if Obama (or Hillary or McCain for that matter) is the answer, it must have been a effin' dumb question!
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Well hells bells.........I done lost my violin! Really, honway........when did you start dictating the rules of what is or is not a wise move or decision. Why act like Ron is a dolt, when you certainly know better. You with 911, someone else with poop, another bitches about not fighting every friggin vote count that didn't have him at the top, someone else with the Fed, someone else with taxes..........and on and on and on. Y'all would have the guy spread so thin, he have the current liar in chief looking like he had some substance! Others bitch because it takes $$$$ to run a friggin campaign. "Oh yeah....he's my man, my candidate because................... EXCEPT that he doesn't do this, or that, or say this, or wear the right tie, or look to the left for better profile pics, and a zillion other whiny-assed complaints. I wish to hell all the whiners would simply shut the fuck up. If you hate him, fine. Hate him. Say so........but for gawd's sake don't start putting your thoughts and ideals on him.........run for office yourself! ** Grabs soapbox and stomps off....mumbling Turn your back on the sun and you only see the shadows.
The Libertarian party is similarly populated by numerous 1 issue people. They don't really look for a candidate they agree with so much as count how many issues they disagree with in all candidates. For many, one issue, one action, or one statement is all it takes to give them a reason to self-rightiously turn their backs. I think they just want a reason to set themselves apart from everyone else in the world, giving them either a sense of independence or positioning them to point a finger at failure and say "See, I told you so". Ron Paul is the best candidate for president this side of 1900 AD. If that's not good enough for you, then that's your choice.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
I tend to agree, although I don't know much about the earlier ones in this past 100 years.
Well, Wilson gaves us the Fed Reserve, and there weren't too many before him. I really don't see how it's possible RP could be topped even then, but sure, my experience is limited to the corrupt times of our age.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
It rankles me when I see TOSsers scoffing at these claims. He's far more conservative than Ronald Reagan, yet they laugh. Apparently Israel-firstness now defines conservatism for a vast number. The Reichstag fire has worked.
RP is neither an idiot or a coward, but out of all the marginal candidates
I've contributed to over the years, he's the one who raised the most money
while getting the least number of votes for his effort. His showing has been
abysmal and no amount spinning, blimping, or air craft buzzing can alter that
fact. Sorry for not putting out positive vibes; Lord knows it's been honest
assessments that have poked holes in his boat.
Media control is far more absolute than it has been before.
Yes, and add Mr Diebolt to the equation.
Yes, but in Ron Paul's case it really wasn't necessary. People haven't heard of him, or he looks like a clown. It has been very easy for the media to expose him either not at all, or as a humorous nag. If the Internet's influence is at its zenith (before the HR 1955's go into full effect), we're in trouble. It has been the only alternative means for people to learn about a decent candidate.
"I have often met the kind of wandering apostle who says: 'Well, everything you are doing is fine, but you really must also take a stand against foreign words in the German language.' And another comes along who says: 'Well, everything you say is good, but you must have a point in your program that says allopathy is dangerous, and you must support homeopathy.'"
As we meandered our way through the ever busy Bree Street, Harry could not help observing how filthy downtown Johannesburg had become. I had made the same disturbing observation myself the day I arrived, but had been reluctant to accept the disturbing fact that decay of public infrastructure seems to be the story in areas of the city inhabited by blacks. Predominantly black areas have become an eyesore. The beautiful lawns and flowerbeds I noticed in some areas three years earlier now tell sad stories of degradation. Some of them have become open-air urinals.
I think the way Ron Paul handled the 9/11 issue was very smart from a tactical point of view. If he had expressed any other point of view than the one he expressed then his entire campaign would have become about 9/11 truth from that point forward. Now, if he had no expectations of actually trying to win, then that could have been a worthwhile thing to do, but if he thought he had even a small chance of actually winning, then what he did was exactly the right thing to do, IMHO.
#12. To: honway (#0)
If the man really is an idiot, I am glad his 15 minutes are over.
#13. To: honway (#4)
#14. To: Pinguinite (#12)
blow the lid off the 911 coverup
#15. To: YertleTurtle (#2)
There is another conclusion: no cover-up, so he's a really smart guy.
#16. To: honway (#0)
Ron Paul: Idiot or Coward?
#17. To: Jethro Tull (#5)
Sorry.....our revolutionary hasn't the fire.
I've already said too much.
#18. To: Pinguinite (#12)
and give thanks that Obama, Clinton or McCain are saving us from the likes of Ron Paul. After all, they are TRUE statesmen that will blow the lid off the 911 coverup.
#19. To: honway (#0)
Ron Paul: Idiot or Coward?
"Abe Foxman, my good friend and partner." - John Negroponte
#20. To: honway (#0)
(Edited)
U.S. conservative pundit Pat Buchanan, imagining presidential hopeful John McCain in the White House.
#21. To: MUDDOG (#17)
#22. To: nobody (#1)
(Edited)
#23. To: honway, *9-11* (#0)
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#24. To: robin, honway (#20)
they even talked before 9/11 about that they planned or expected it
aboutNOT that they planned or expected it,"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#25. To: Artisan (#24)
U.S. conservative pundit Pat Buchanan, imagining presidential hopeful John McCain in the White House.
#26. To: robin (#25)
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#27. To: honway (#22)
#28. To: Pinguinite (#12)
and give thanks that Obama, Clinton or McCain are saving us from the likes of Ron Paul. After all, they are TRUE statesmen that will blow the lid off the 911 coverup. Just you wait 'n see!
Lord Acton
#29. To: (#0)
'bunch of assholes anyways'
**
#30. To: JiminyC, honway (#19)
#31. To: Pinguinite (#30)
Ron Paul is the best candidate for president this side of 1900 AD.
#32. To: buckeye (#31)
Ron Paul is the best candidate for president this side of 1900 AD.
#33. To: Pinguinite (#32)
#34. To: Politicians blow (#0)
#35. To: Jethro Tull (#34)
#36. To: buckeye (#35)
#37. To: Jethro Tull (#36)
#38. To: rowdee (#29)
You with 911, someone else with poop, another bitches about not fighting every friggin vote count that didn't have him at the top, someone else with the Fed, someone else with taxes..........and on and on and on. Y'all would have the guy spread so thin, he have the current liar in chief looking like he had some substance! Others bitch because it takes $$$$ to run a friggin campaign.
#39. To: honway (#0)
 | Gold and silver are REAL money, paper is but a promise. |
#40. To: rowdee (#29)
yeah
#41. To: honway (#0) (Edited)
False dichotomy - he's both. He "does not have the capacity to evaluate the available information" and he "has concluded correctly that there was a U.S. government cover-up concerning 9/11". That's what I mean when I say I agree 100%.
#42. To: JiminyC, cynicom (#19)
cyni...here's a good rebuttal for you to use.
I gave up on Paul when he chose to speak at Falwell's Liberty University in Lunchbag, Virginia rather than speak up the road at Thomas Jefferson's stomping grounds in Charlottesville.
#43. To: MUDDOG (#17)
What do you do when you're branded and you know you're a man?
Branded, scorned as the one who ran.
#44. To: Vitamin Z (#15)
Just a convergence of coincidences.
it could very well be a coincidence
#45. To: honway (#0)
#46. To: rowdee (#29)
I appreciate all the comments,especially the sentiments represented by the above comments. My question is: Where did the $30 million dollars go? He refused to support the legitimate efforts of Americans who know the election system is a fraud and needs to be repaired. Why did he turn his back on these folks? Supporting an audit of the elections to confirm the results is not treasonous, it is just plain smart. Did he spend the money on TV ads? I live in Texas and I did not see a single Ron Paul TV ad. How much is left in the bank now that the nomination has been decided? --------------------------------------------- As far as single issue 9/11, consider the possibilities. If what many of us believe is true and the government was complicit in 9/11 and attacked and killed our own people in order to attack and kill more innocent people,there is no greater duty than holding the responsible individuals accountable. The only way to hold responsible individuals accountable is to first have a legitimate investigation and no fair minded individual on the planet believes there has been a legitimate investigation into 9/11, not even members of the 9/11 Commission. If the government was complicit in 9/11, consider the damage. Our American way of life has been changed forever. 9/11 changed our world. I am frustrated with Ron Paul because of the lost opportunity, gone forever. For a short time he could have stood on the national stage at the debates and laid it out precisely why a legitimate investigation into 9/11 is an absolute Constitutional requirement for our way of life to survive. Instead, I recall the man going on and on about Vietnam at every opportunity in the debates. I never understood that. If Ron Paul had replaced the amount of time he spent talking about Vietnam in the debates talking about the need for a legitimate 9/11 investigation, he may not have won, but at least he would have mattered. Seeing an ordinary man given the rare opportunity to do something truly extraordinary is a very rare event. Seeing an ordinary man actually using the opportunity is rarer still.
You with 911, someone else with poop, another bitches about not fighting every friggin vote count that didn't have him at the top, someone else with the Fed, someone else with taxes..........and on and on and on. Y'all would have the guy spread so thin, he have the current liar in chief looking like he had some substance!
3,000 innocent dead on 9/11.
Over 4,000 U.S. soldiers dead.
Over a million dead Iraqis.
Over three trillion in costs to the American taxpayer.
#47. To: honway (#46)
He drew the analogy between Vietman and Iraq, an issue most voters identify with. The 911 trap would have him branded a traitor. He needs the position before he can address these issues.
If Ron Paul had replaced the amount of time he spent talking about Vietnam in the debates talking about the need for a legitimate 9/11 investigation, he may not have won, but at least he would have mattered.
#48. To: honway (#46)
Odd. I didn't read where you talked about your frustration when you started this thread, honway. Did you switch horses in the middle of the stream or something? There has been only one, count em, (l), uno, primo, un PERFECT person in the world. And damned if they didn't crucify him. Ron Paul ain't perfect by a long shot but there are tons of folk looking to crucify him for what he didn't do!!!! Instead of bitching, contact his campaign and ask for an accounting of the funds....or look up FEC filings. I even bet you can ask for your donations back, too. I saw where there were refunds to the tune of some $170,000 plus dollars on one filing. You and Cyni should try that.
Turn your back on the sun and you only see the shadows.
#49. To: honway (#46)
You've got to be shitting me.......'precisely' why? Puleeze........it would take more than 2 minutes, with a minute for rebuttal even, to 'splain precisely'. It would take more than the whole friggin debate timeframe to do that! Didn't you witness how easily they talked over him without moderators stopping that bullshit? But even with their mouths duct taped shut, it would require a lengthy amount of time to lay out the case for another 'legit' investigation. First of all, it would have to be explained that the first 'legit' investigation was FLAWED, and FLAWED due to the characters who ran it! Which would lead to even more side-tracking. Geeze...........
I am frustrated with Ron Paul because of the lost opportunity, gone forever. For a short time he could have stood on the national stage at the debates and laid it out precisely why a legitimate investigation into 9/11 is an absolute Constitutional requirement for our way of life to survive.
Turn your back on the sun and you only see the shadows.
#50. To: rowdee (#48)
I thought it was obvious, coming from a long time Ron Paul supporter. Did you switch horses in the middle of the stream or something? I did not switch horses. My horse stopped swimming. I'll tread water with the rest of the country watching the Constitution pass down the drain.
I didn't read where you talked about your frustration when you started this thread, honway.
#51. To: rowdee (#48)
row... Dont confuse frustration with bitching. Many people saw Paul as the ONLY alternative to the system and gave accordingly. When Paul pulled the plug with an inadequate explanation, the frustration set in as there is no one one else. His explanation left much to be desired.
.
.
.
Comments (52 - 58) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest