Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
( I get a kick out of weird reasons people vote ... a guy I knew voted for Reagan "because he hit someone in a movie and wouldn't take guff off anyone")... and he's one of the few who I don't believe has rolled over and endorsed Robamaney.
No offense taken. Ron Paul did not create the Tea Party movement. Many people attracted to the Tea Party principals are Ron Paul supporters, but that doesn't mean he is the founder. It would be more accurate to credit Fred Koch as the founder of the idea that became the Tea Party Movement. Tea Party Republicans support reduced government, reduced taxes (especially entitlement programs) and they oppose government bailouts. Obviously, there's more to the Movement's position on issues. What you do not find in the Tea Party philosophy are the ultra-liberal, anarchist planks in the Libertarian Party Platform. Ron Paul is not a Republican at heart, he's a Libertarian who became a RINO to get elected. I too support a much smaller government, reduced spending, no more government bailouts and an "original intent" approach the the Constitution. I strongly oppose Ron Paul because of his position on other issues. I also oppose him because even if elected, he couldn't get anything passed. In 27 years in Congress, he passed two meaningless bills! When we finally get enough true conservatives in Washington, we need a President who can help get "our" legislation passed, not one someone who takes a "everything my way or nothing" attitude.GeekDad wrote:
With all due respect Chas, I find it funny you don't like Ron Paul but you like the Tea Party to which it was Ron Paul's Grassroots movement he started in 2008 that was the catalysis for the Tea Party... Irony?
Also, you are dead wrong about Ron Paul... and I find it funny that the only presidential candidate pulling in 9K - 10K sized crowds every where he speaks is the guy that does not have a shot to win. Stop watching Faux News.
One man's "principal" is another man's political irresponsibility. Ron Paul can never get elected President and you know it, otherwise you wouldn't characterize a vote for him as being one made on principal. Casting a vote that keeps Obama in office for another four years is unthinkable in my view. I seriously doubt that you believe there is no difference between Romney and Obama, and certainly not on Second Amendment issues. Battling windmills doesn't bring about change. Vote for Tea Party Republicans in the House and Senate and as their numbers and strength grow, change will come.GeekDad wrote:To Everyone else.
So what you are really saying that only sell outs to Goldman Sachs (Obama and Romney) and other big campaign contributors can only be President...
When are you guys going to realize... the 4 years you are enduring now would have been the exact same as a Romney administrations... Romney = Obama, their is no difference except the little letter next to their names!
When is the general public going to stop voting for a party and start voting on Principal... Even if you don't like Ron Paul, or don't agree with what he says... you could still vote for him and actually know EXACTLY what you are going to get under his administration. The man has never been bought.
Wrong... Here is the quote straight from the horses mouth that was completely ripped up to dis-inform the masses. http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/05/14/r ... g-forward/Charles L. Cotton wrote:Ron Paul has stated he "has put an end to actively campaigning for the Republican Nomination." In an attempt to save face, he does claim he's going to continue to try to garner delegates so he can put a voice to his position on various political issues. Here is just one of many sources: http://www.kptv.com/story/18375804/ron- ... ampaigning" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Folks can play word games all they like, but when you decide not to participate in any state primaries that have not voted, you have dropped out of the race. There's no other rational conclusion. Yes, he wants to have a voice in the Republican Convention, yes he hopes to have Romney adopt some of his positions, but he knows he can't get the nomination and a "suspension of the active campaign" in "states that haven't votes yet" is dropping out of the race.
Romney isn't my first choice; heck he's not my third choice, but he's the only choice. Ron Paul is likely to run as an independent and that works to Obama's benefit. If he truly cared about this county, instead of his own ego, he wouldn't do one single thing that helps to keep Obama in office another four years.
Chas.
"will continue to work in the state convention process." and that strategy is paying in delegates big time!“Our campaign will continue to work in the state convention process. We will continue to take leadership positions, win delegates, and carry a strong message to the Republican National Convention that Liberty is the way of the future.
“Moving forward, however, we will no longer spend resources campaigning in primaries in states that have not yet voted. Doing so with any hope of success would take many tens of millions of dollars we simply do not have. I encourage all supporters of Liberty to make sure you get to the polls and make your voices heard, particularly in the local, state, and Congressional elections, where so many defenders of Freedom are fighting and need your support.
One more time sport and you're gone. Starting off with "all due respect" then launching a personal insult doesn't fly.GeekDad wrote:Again Chaz... with all due respect... Its the people that your generation have voted blindly (voting the lesser of 2 evils) into office that my generation has to clean up... and Ron Paul is a republican, but by the standards of Robert Taft that the now Neo Conservative Republican party has deserted ...
There's no reason to try to discuss this with you any longer. This is so absurd it's beyond comprehension. He can't even get the Republican nomination and you claim he beats Obama?GeekDad wrote:Also, Ron Paul would destroy Obama in a landslide...
You're right, we can't. But perhaps it's time to dispel a myth. I'm not saying I wouldn't vote for Ron Paul only because he cannot win. I would never vote for Ron Paul for anything ever, because I despise his position on those things we cannot discuss. He has been my congressman for a few years now because of redistricting and I never voted for him once, even though he was sure to win.psijac wrote:From a social issues stand point Paul is as far from republican as anyone can get. Which ties into his limited government stance. Can't really get into those issues on this board though.
I apologize, It was not meant to be a personal attack... this is obviously a heated argument and it is something that I hold dear to my heart because of my 3 kids and the impending economy crash that neither Romney nor Obama will fix and are only accelerating the issue.Charles L. Cotton wrote:One more time sport and you're gone. Starting off with "all due respect" then launching a personal insult doesn't fly.GeekDad wrote:Again Chaz... with all due respect... Its the people that your generation have voted blindly (voting the lesser of 2 evils) into office that my generation has to clean up... and Ron Paul is a republican, but by the standards of Robert Taft that the now Neo Conservative Republican party has deserted ...
Chas.
The US economy has more to do, today, with what goes on in China and Europe than at any time in the past. If you want to see economic disaster, play political and economic isolationist like RP would favor and see how quickly things turn belly up. The POTUS can always be blamed for economic problems and sometimes there is legitimate reasons for it, just as a losing football team always finds a way to blame and fire the head coach, but there are a lot of things totally out of the control of the federal government. It's like trying to walk a pit bull on a leash. Every once in awhile, that pit bull gets tired of pulling, turns around and goes for YOUR leg. You imply that the POTUS might be able to FIX economic problems. Seems like the current one tried and had that pit bull turn on him for it. Be careful of what you wish for.GeekDad wrote:...........the impending economy crash that neither Romney nor Obama will fix and are only accelerating the issue.
gdanaher wrote:The US economy has more to do, today, with what goes on in China and Europe than at any time in the past. If you want to see economic disaster, play political and economic isolationist like RP would favor and see how quickly things turn belly up. The POTUS can always be blamed for economic problems and sometimes there is legitimate reasons for it, just as a losing football team always finds a way to blame and fire the head coach, but there are a lot of things totally out of the control of the federal government. It's like trying to walk a pit bull on a leash. Every once in awhile, that pit bull gets tired of pulling, turns around and goes for YOUR leg. You imply that the POTUS might be able to FIX economic problems. Seems like the current one tried and had that pit bull turn on him for it. Be careful of what you wish for.GeekDad wrote:...........the impending economy crash that neither Romney nor Obama will fix and are only accelerating the issue.
Wow... Ron Paul says the same thing... as well as did G W B Jr. when running for president in in 2000... no one had anything to say about it then... And dont give me 911... cause I post some extremely graphic videos of we have been doing in the middle east for decades and then you can tell me if you would be mad at us as well..."I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. All their energies are expended in the destruction of the labor, property and lives of their people." --Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1823. ME: 15:436
"I sincerely join... in abjuring all political connection with every foreign power; and though I cordially wish well to the progress of liberty in all nations, and would forever give it the weight of our countenance, yet they are not to be touched without contamination from their other bad principles. Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Lomax, 1799. ME 10:124
"We have a perfect horror at everything like connecting ourselves with the politics of Europe." --Thomas Jefferson to William Short, 1801. ME 10:285
"Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations--entangling alliances with none, I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government, and consequently [one of] those which ought to shape its administration." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural Address, 1801. ME 3:321
Thanks, apology accepted. I've said things I've regretted in the heat of battle also, so I understand.GeekDad wrote:I apologize, It was not meant to be a personal attack... this is obviously a heated argument and it is something that I hold dear to my heart because of my 3 kids and the impending economy crash that neither Romney nor Obama will fix and are only accelerating the issue.Charles L. Cotton wrote:One more time sport and you're gone. Starting off with "all due respect" then launching a personal insult doesn't fly.GeekDad wrote:Again Chaz... with all due respect... Its the people that your generation have voted blindly (voting the lesser of 2 evils) into office that my generation has to clean up... and Ron Paul is a republican, but by the standards of Robert Taft that the now Neo Conservative Republican party has deserted ...
Chas.
