Ron Paul is supposed to be unelectable, the vintage media has repeated that line early and often. Another tactic popular with Paul detractors is to dismiss any recent poll as an isolated picture of the race. The trouble is, Paul's isolated successes keep coming in polls from different sources and with different methods. At some point, a group of "isolated" events becomes a pattern.
Gallup places Paul in a dead heat with Obama.
The latest poll in the growing trend of success for Paul is a Gallup Poll that shows Paul in a statistical tie with Obama. Among registered voters, Obama drew 47 percent support to Paul's 45 percent. Among all adults, Obama holds a 45 percent to 44 percent lead. The margin of error in the poll is four percentage points, meaning that the candidates are essentially even in the poll.
Other interesting aspects of the poll include:
- Ron Paul leads Obama 46 percent to 43 percent among independents.
- Obama is polling at 40 percent approval in the August before the election, less than the previous six incumbents who were re-elected since Eisenhower.
- Democrats and Republicans are showing strong party allegiance for their candidate.
What does it all mean?
It doesn't mean much this early in the election cycle. Many things can change as the election approaches. But Paul's position among independents bodes well for his campaign since independents will decide the outcome of this election according to many analysts. Obama's approval rating could skyrocket with an economic recovery, and few people in either party at this point would complain about politics should that happen.
But the polls do show trends, and one trend is consistent. Ron Paul is a factor in this race. If his message continues to spread among independents and rational Republicans, he could become an even bigger player in the race. Those who parrot the vintage media ideas about "isolated results" and unelectability refuse to acknowledge facts. That's their right, but it doesn't change the facts.
Image Source: Wikimedia Commons
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 119
He also has no shot at the VP tag since not one of the contenders would pick him to run with.......he would have the same affect as a McCain....cause people to stay home.
Maybe not on this site, but not everyone who reads these posts is a Gather member. You might also want to google Democrats for Ron Paul. I thought this was a paricularly interesting article from a Liberal perspective.
Pure theory is so refreshing, but then when you are President you have to live in the real world up to your neck. You can't do pure theory, it does not work.
That's a canard. Ron Paul has practically all the right ideas needed to fix what truly ails this country (especially when compared with all the status quo and status-quo-on-steroids candidates running against him in the GOP), precisely because he is the only one with a sound, logically-consistent foundation of economic and social theory to work from.
Theory is nothing if it is not an accurate and logically sound analytic descriptor of the forces at work in reality. There is no such thing as a "good theory that won't work in reality." If it doesn't work in reality, then it is not good theory.
Ron Paul is the only candidate right now who has a solid understanding of how we got into the economic trouble we're in, what is needed to get us out of it, and what policies are conducive to liberty, justice, progress and prosperity, for ourselves and for our descendants.
Making up excuses to not vote for him -- "he's unelectable" (which amounts to letting some self-interested pundit tell you who is "electable" and who isn't; might as well give him/her your ID and SSI# and let them go into the booth and cast your vote, too), or the "theory vs. reality" canard -- I hope you find the courage to tell your kids or grandkids that you had a chance to vote for someone who would have reversed the tide that swept them into mass poverty and serfdom, but let a bunch of propagandists convince you to vote for some cookie-cutter status quo candidate instead.
Were part of a "secret cabal of thieves and murderers" who conspired against others to elevate Ron Paul to a position of power to act as their agent for the purpose of "extort[ing], plunder[ing], and murder[ing] the people who reside within the codified geographical territory called 'the United States'", even though he "can have no legal, rightful authority over anyone"?
This is Worth repeating!
Ron Paul is the only candidate right now who has a solid understanding of how we got into the economic trouble we're in, what is needed to get us out of it, and what policies are conducive to liberty, justice, progress and prosperity, for ourselves and for our descendants.
Making up excuses to not vote for him -- "he's unelectable" (which amounts to letting some self-interested pundit tell you who is "electable" and who isn't; might as well give him/her your ID and SSI# and let them go into the booth and cast your vote, too), or the "theory vs. reality" canard -- I hope you find the courage to tell your kids or grandkids that you had a chance to vote for someone who would have reversed the tide that swept them into mass poverty and serfdom, but let a bunch of propagandists convince you to vote for some cookie-cutter status quo candidate instead.
Of course, that being said - the double digit growth we''ll experience with that kind of bottom-up stimulus doesn't hurt either. And getting my freedom back when the Patriot Act is repealed - well that's just the icing on the cake.
Vote Vertebrate - Ron Paul 2012!
I cannot speak for Ron Paul...but as a supporter of his I can attest that this is a very important election issue because it greatly matters to the safety of our troops and the security of our country that continues to be threatened as they spread our troops so thin because they are policing the world. Having family members in these undeclared unconstitutional wars I can also attest that when no set objective has been clearly defined and no way to win has been realized the morality of what these "endless" wars are doing to our troops alone is a disgrace. Not one more honorable life of a troop member should be sacrificed. It is very easy for people to claim they support the troops but when it comes down to it every one who continues to support wars that have lasted for over a decade reveals they are not supporting our troops they are supporting the acts of sending more of them to die.
The military budget is killing our economy and it is killing the chances of the GOP establishment puppets for having any chance of getting back the WH. The arrogance to refuse to admit we made a huge mistake in allowing these wars to continue is a death kneel for the GOP and our country. Any candidate who is not acting on behalf of the troops by clearly stating a goal of ending these wars will not be elected in this country during a time of many wars.."undeclared wars" or not..these are REAL WARS with REAL lives on the line every day.
The troops want to come home and they are justified in that wish. We need them on our borders right now. We have ranchers here in Texas who are being run off their own land because of this treasonous invasion taking place that is fully condoned by Obama. That is the war we need to fight because it does directly affect the security of our nation.
That's right, which is why it's kind of sad that you keep cherry-picking polls, and even parts of polls, in a desperate attempt to make two-time loser Ron Paul look more popular than he really is.
While it may be comforting in some way to Paul supporters to read polls that say that if he were to win the Republican nomination, he'd have more or less the same chance against Obama as Romney, Perry, or Bachmann, it seems pretty clear that his chances to do so don't look very good.
Because the pattern that can be clearly seen by looking at polling averages makes it clear that he is trailing a distant fourth behind Romney, Perry and Bachmann. And if you average out all the polls and look at the pattern, Paul's numbers have been pretty steady since back in November of last year. The pattern shows that Paul's polling numbers are currently in decline.
Actually, I disagree that if he could win the primary, he'd have the same chance against Obama as the others mentioned. He draws a lot of support from Independents and Democrats, unlike that group. Take a look at that linked article that I left above, just for an example. The guy who wrote that is not alone in those thoughts by any stretch.
As for the support coming to Ron Paul from the left, particularly the far left "Firebagger" types of progressives, I see no reason to think they aren't being counted in the polling. The current RCP average for Paul vs Obama is Obama defeating Paul 46.0 to 41.7. That puts Paul doing better against Obama than any other official Republican candidate except Romney, but still losing. It'll be interesting to see if Paul holds his position over Perry, since quite a few of the polls were taken before Perry had officially entered the race.
But at the end of the day, I think it's hard to say that more media coverage leads to more popularity and better polling numbers. Looking at the numbers for media mentions on CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC from May 28 to July 28, the top three were Romney (3585), Palin (3285) and Bachmann (3135). Yet despite getting roughly equal amounts of coverage across those three cable news networks, their RCP polling averages were very different (Romney around 17 during that time, Palin moving around between 10 and 15, and Bachmann well behind between 5 and 7).
Of course media "mentions" doesn't provide any info about whether those mentions are positive, negative, or neither. I think it's pretty clear, both from past experience and from some of the comments here in this thread, that Paul supporters won't be happy with just more coverage, they want more positive coverage, and accuse the media of engaging in "fraud" when they don't get it.
" . the media has no interest in Ron Paul because there isn't enough drama there."
The media has no "interest" in Mr. Paul, because the mass media is owned by hyper-wealthy "elites" that don't give a rodent's rear-end about anything but keeping the public unaware of them. I am quite sure . and in justifying the endless wars and ever expanding and tightening military/police state grip on the "little people", and vilifying any and all who really oppose them.
It's a show, one show, not a "competition" for ratings or credibility or "scooping" the other puppet press-rooms . . It's "pay to play" with the sociopaths, or be savaged by the crony-capitalism corporate machine. The name of the game is world domination, and mass media was turned into a propaganda mill long ago . . just as one would expect if one simply approaches the matter as a strategic global campaign. Virtually none of what we have been exposed to and brutalized by has been unscripted . . they are taking down the Republic, 'cause it's time to take it down.
Mr. Paul will be ignored till he can't be, then he will be attacked relentlessly, and if all else fails he will be eliminated. It's not even about the general citizenry anymore, I don't believe, it's about keeping as many of the police/military personnel from figuring out that they are being used by ruthless monsters, as possible. The show is mostly for them now . . I am rather sure.
When you hear them say "He can't win" . . they mean it ; )
But John's right too. Press good, bad or indifferent, it wouldn't make any difference because the fat lady has sung.
Nonetheless, with the internet at our finger tips there really is no excuse for the public to still be voting based on "name and face recognition" far more then the actual political stances of these people running for office. They have taken the integrity of the election process and turned it into a beauty contest controlled by a teleprompter speech that received the highest rating with a controlled test group. The whole thing disgust me and breaks my heart at the same time.
As you can see from this board there are people who will work far harder to destroy candidates online as well then they will to actually get into the election process to show people who they think would be better. So That leaves us with what choice?
I contend we get the type of government that the people accept. What we have is not acceptable to a majority now. So hopefully more people will see through the smoke and see who is really starting these fires and why.
If we unite together we will get the type of government we want which is exactly why all these groups of division are just as damaging as the media to prevent us from gaining a government of the people and for the people.
Again, I think part of it is a chicken-and-egg thing. As you point out, a lot of people don't know much if anything about him. Since interest in him is low, he's not considered particularly newsworthy. Many other lesser-known candidates get the same treatment. But another part of it is that Paul doesn't easily fit into the various media narratives. He's not good for sound bites or tweet-sized comments to run in the ticker at the bottom of the screen, or even a 200 to 500 word article.
But my feeling is that, at the end of the day, more media coverage isn't going to help Ron Paul become POTUS, and I don't need a Big Media or Secret Global Overlords conspiracy theory to explain why. I think Ron Paul won't be POTUS because he's a fringe candidate who, due to his own personality and his political views, doesn't appeal to anywhere near enough voters to get elected.
Again, chicken and egg. Do people not like him because he's a fringe candidate, or is he a fringe candidate because people don't like him? I think it's likely a combination of both. But again, it's not just about whether they like him or not. I think that, to the extent that they're aware of them, a lot of people don't think much of them. I really don't think many American voters want the kind of country Ron Paul says he'd like the United States to become.
Add to those numbers the fact that he's had failed attempts at the White House for two different parties, including the Libertarian Party (for which he got about .5% of the vote), and that many of his political positions are far outside the mainstream, and I have no problem with labeling Ron Paul a fringe candidate.
He don't seem insignificant to you . . Mr. Mainstream Media ; )
'John Stewart Shows How Ron Paul Is Feared By The NWO Mafia Controlled Mainstream Media'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb5aGgQXhXo
To some degree, bits and pieces of Ron Paul's platform have been co-opted by the Teabaggers, and then again (to a lesser extent) by the Republican establishment. But it hasn't necessarily translated into a lot of additional support, or votes, for Ron Paul himself.
Originally, I came to this site to discuss politics. I've already been through one presidential campaign here. I was touting Ron Paul then too, but it wasn't time, of course. i think at one point I had a discussion with Ron W. about that. He told me I would be throwing away my vote on him. That's the way he saw it then, anway.
I'm not going through another Presidential campaign on Gather. This is just a preview of what it's going to be like, and what I remember it being like the last time around. This isn't my idea of a political discussion. I have better things to do. See you in 2013, depending on a number of things.
I disagree, Sue. I think Ron Paul has spent the majority to his political career establishing himself as a fringe candidate and a fringe politician, both within his own party and in the broader political environment.
In a sense, it's worked for him in terms of helping him build a small but dedicated group of supporters/donors, but not so good in terms of establishing a broad base of support among the general voting population (shown by his history of low polling numbers) or within the Republican Party hierarchy.
Good luck with your efforts to put Ron Paul in the Oval Office, and have fun doing your "better things".
Sue,
It is disheartening to hear this because I went through this last time too. Anyone who remembers how that election went down also remembers the role the media played with either ignoring Paul or giving him extreme labels and key instigators online who then did all they could to quickly try to stifle any real momentum online. As the season progressed the provocateurs went on in larger masses online and they did the same thing they are doing now. Provoking, prodding, labeling, inciting, accusing, and doing all they can to try to stop the people from hearing about the campaign platform of Ron Paul and what he will do for this country. No one I know likes to be silenced. No one likes to be accused of being a terrorist when there isn't a violent bone in their bodies. Or purposefully blockaded to the point where they are labelled as extreme, radical, etc, etc..just because they dared to be enthusiastic when telling people about the candidate they have learned about. Be careful and don't be too excited because you will then be called an extremist, fanatic, or cultist. Good grief.
It really has gotten absolutely insane (by design) and it all stems from the fear of losing control of controlled elections that they do not want to lose control of again. You are correct about the money. But remember..These high dollar campaigns cannot gain this kind of support no matter how much money they have at their disposal. They know it and so do we. The problem is the people who are learning about Ron Paul for the first time do not why all this is going on. Politicians have a notoriously bad reputation and it has been a very long time since anyone was genuinely invested in a politician because their actions in office already and not their campaign slogans and tricks on the road... Thus the ruse of labeling truly invested supporters as fanatics has worked in the past for them hasn't it?
New voters are seeing supporters of Ron Paul saying multiple good things about him and instead of saying, "Hey what's going on with this guy?" They are being trained by the media and by idiotic made up controlling terminology to immediately get suspicious...hence the labeling to make them think..oh it must be a cult..be careful no one likes any politician that much. Yes, they do and they only have to see what Ron Paul has already done in office for 12 terms, then hear his speeches, to see what all the fuss is about. By then they will know this is a man who has real actions in office that match his campaign promises. Which is really sad when we think about it because isn't this all we want a politician to really do? Actually follow through when they say they are going to fight for us in office?
Sigh, it's now become more dirty and more corrupted because the internet does not allow the media to just tell us how great some new puppet candidate is and get away with a majority of the voters who will just accept their word. We can check their records now and see for ourselves what the media left out.
The ironic thing about what has happened to Ron Paul is that this all comes down to our freedoms too. When the people were willing to turn away as he was labelled unfairly and not given a shred of the media coverage they basically opened the door for it to be acceptable that all other candidates who came after him could be marginalized the same way. Which is just what we are seeing happen. Which closes the door even more if we ever want more candidates unlike establishment puppets and if we want more then this two party sham system of the same coin that we have now.
The way the political process has been controlled for decades is not freedom. If we want real representation in office these purposeful attacks cannot be tolerated again. Just because a group of people who have a very negative agenda get away with destroying a candidate once it does not mean it is acceptable or that "we the people" should allow it to repeat itself. Yes, that sometimes means taking off the gloves and letting these instigators, inciters and provocateurs know we mean business. That message needs to be clear that they are not allowed to control the election process any longer. This country did not gain it's original freedoms by niceties. The founding fathers lost almost everything they had and then some through great sacrifice to help us get on this path. Unfortunately, through carefully worded acts filled with nice sounding words (which have given us nothing more then opposite results) we have lost many of those freedoms that blood was shed to gain for us. The Patriot Acts are Unpatriotic. Healthcare freedom is healthcare control. The National Service Act is The National Forced Servitude Act. Homeland Security is Homeland Insecurity and spreading freedom through the barrel of a gun has to be the worst contradictions of all.
They have figured out that the American people want nice sounding words, nice sounding slogans,and nice sounding legislation, and that is all it takes in order to steal more of their rights and make it look like their government is looking out for them. Those carefully crafted words are going to take us all straight into total enslavement. Every step of the way they have used carefully scripted terms to control us. As you can see from this board I am fed up with it when I face it again online and I know how important this next election is.
It would be great if the political discussion was always civil...frankly I'd much prefer it. If you saw from the start ..I tried my best to keep it that way. After repetitive nasty attacks, controlling unwarranted negative labels, and nonstop head games there is only so much anyone can take. Or should take if they truly believe in what they are standing up for. Eventually you realize you are dealing with certain people who have an agenda to not address any real issue but to cause more division, to provoke and instigated anger, and to drag in whatever propaganda they can dream up to try to attack what you are standing for. That will be seen as a direct threat to anyone and it is not acceptable if we believe in our freedoms.
Freedom...that is what this really is ALL about. Unfortunately we have lost so many of our real freedoms because everything has been labelled to such an extreme that free speech is being banned before our very eyes. Therefore, if we find a candidate who has also been in those trenches where he too has stood alone on the people's floor and fought for their rights (when everyone else remained silent..) you know you cannot be silent when he needs you to have his back if you want him to be the voice for all our people's freedom.
This next election has already revealed it will probably be the most brutal one we have yet to experience in my life time. But let me tell ya..It will not make me stay away and I hope it doesn't make you stay away either because we all need to pull together to remind our government that they serve us...not the other way around. That won't happen if we allow the early battles to make us shy away from the whole political process. The truth is this process has never been nice or uncorrupted. They've just been able to control the behind the scene deals much better then they can today. Anyone who stands in the way of gaining back our freedoms is a disgrace. Alas, the low life's are out there waiting to create the next filthy mess to try to stop us from being free and it has become more then obvious that they have become a vast part of the problem that also needs to be addressed if we are to 'all" to gain back our freedoms as our founding fathers intended for us to have. It really is pathetic that they are so enmeshed in the propaganda they have no clue what this is all really about and what it means for them too.
Take care and please do not give up...hang in there. This is a fight worth sticking with.
Ron Paul = Right Message...Wrong Messenger!!!
Unfortunately for America
For anyone who truly understands that our rights come to us as "individuals" and not because of our race, sex, religion or any "group" we belong to they will also understand how Ron Paul has managed to reach across all party lines, through all religions, with both sexes and all races by uniting us as individual "Americans" instead of dividing us as Obama has done. He is electable and he can win this race. He does have massive support with scholars, constitutionalist, independents, gun owners, homeschoolers, waiters, truck drivers, small business owners, parents, senior citizens, college students, and he has single handedly collected more individual donations from our troops then all of the republican candidates combined and more then Obama as well. If we support our troops (like we claim we do) then we will support the only man who has vowed to bring them out of harms way to make sure they are used only as they are constitutionally mandated to be used and that is to secure "this" country and not police the world as our borders remain wide open. Americans need to make a choice do they want to be enslaved by socialism until this entire country collapses and we are all equally sinking in poverty or do they want real freedoms to help bring this country back up to the wonderfully prosperous country it can be again? These are the real choices of what this election will come down to for all the other candidates against Ron Paul. Do you have to ask why they are all so dead set to marginalize him and place him into the category they hope the people will throw him into as well..that being the category of the unelectable? That's the great thing about freedom folks. You have the choice to stay on this path or to forge a whole new one to prosperity. Just know that all of these other candidates will offer the same dead end path we are already on. Ron Paul offers true freedom and the promise of new opportunities to make our lives what we aspire for them to become with our own efforts and the lack of government interference on the free market to help make those aspirations come true.
I thank you Mr. Turner for giving Ron Paul a fair shake in your work. This is a rarity to see from any venue of the media and it is most appreciated.
But what do the Ron Paul supporters have to say about the times when he was wrong? Shhhhhhhh. Apparently it's best if his failed predictions are never mentioned. Surely I can't be the only one who remembers this one:The race war of the 1990s. Remember that? No? Me neither.
Thanks to our president of division we see headlines like this all the time..
Congresswoman blames black unemployment on 'racism'...
Tell me are black Americans the only ones unemployed right now? Who has affirmative action and racial quotas to enable them to have ore job opportunities?
You never gave one specific quote or a link to reference exactly what you are alleging Ron Paul was wrong on. Just alluding to a racially based riot that occurred in 1991 and claiming Ron Paul was wrong about a race war of the 90's doesn't tell me what he said does it?
LOOK around you and see how every taxpayer in this country right now is forced to pay taxes in the billions for special benefits for "select groups" that give those ax funded benefits and entitlements only to those select people in those "groups". Then tell me the tax payers who do not fit in that criteria to reap rewards of what their taxes are paying for have not been thrown into a race war for decades already...well before that riot of 1991 and long afterwards? Are you ok with stealing money from all citizens to give handouts to one select group? Is this is the new so-called "conservatism"? We used to call it wealth distribution by the theft of taxation. These days I don't even recognize so-called conservatism so feel free to enlighten me. BTW...I have yet to meet a perfect mortal human..so no I am not saying Ron paul has always been correct or that he has never made any mistakes. I am saying he is the best choice for what we have on the table in this country.
Nor do I see him as a doom and gloomer. I see him as a realist who has tried consistently to head off damages to this country "before" they occur which is exactly what the elected representatives in this country were elected to do.
I'm living on the planet where there was no race war in the United States during the 1990s, as ridiculously predicted by Ron Paul. And yes, I quoted Ron Paul's comment in his June 1991 newsletter.
I'm not saying Ron Paul has always been correct and has never made any mistakes, either. I'm saying that the race war he predicted never happened. And I'm saying that he said a race war, not racial divisiveness (which, to the extent that anybody was listening to him, Ron Paul was doing his part to increase)or however else you'd like to try to spin it .
I'm saying that I don't agree that Ron Paul is the best choice, given statements like:
"I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities." (June 1990).
"Bring Back the Closet!" (August 1990)
"A mob of black demonstrators, led by the "Rev." Al Sharpton, occupied and closed the Statue of Liberty recently, demanding that New York be renamed Martin Luther King City "to reclaim it for our people."
Hmm. I hate to agree with the Rev. Al, but maybe a name change is in order. Welfaria? Zooville? Rapetown? Dirtburg? Lazyopolis?
But Al, the Statue of Liberty? Next time, hold that demonstration at a food stamp bureau or a crack house." (October 1990).
Recommendations #8 and #9 "To Those Caring for the AIDS Patient" -- "Do not allow the patient to eat in a restaurant" and "Do not allow the patient to drive or operate machinery due to mental impairment." (October 1990)
"[Former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan David] Duke carried baggage from his past, but the voters were willing to overlook that. And if he had been afforded the forgiveness an ex-communist gets, he might have won." (November 1990)
"Kids growing up in today's hyper-sexual atmosphere believe the safe sex propaganda that condoms prevent AIDS. The only safe sex, medically and morally, is that between husband and wife." (December 1990)
There are some good reasons why Ron Paul's is polling at less than 9% on average. There are some good reasons why so many people don't consider him a serious candidate, or a serious contender. I think those newsletter quotes illustrate some of those reasons. I think this article listing "Ron Paul's 15 Most Extreme Positions" illustrates some others.
For every offensive quote you can dig up (regardless of solidity of attribution, or lack thereof), I can easily dig up one on the same subject that is as reasonable and good-spirited as anyone pleases -- and exponentially more likely (or positively provable) to have actually come from the mind or the mouth of Ron Paul.
As to the article of "Ron Paul's 15 Most Extreme Positions," every gripe listed, in the first place, amounts to describing honoring one's Oath to "uphold the Constitution" as "extreme," and most of the list can simply be attributable to Josh Harkinson's ignorance of good sense and sound logic.
It's a sad sign of the times that the candidate who says let's honor the Rule of Law, let's afford to everyone else the same liberty and justice we would have for ourselves, let's live within our means and let's not allow selfish, antisocial interests to continue to plunder and defraud the public with impunity, is considered "extreme."
If he was honest about it and named the magazine editor, and explained how those comments came to be published in newsletters that were made to appear to have been written by him, rather than an anonymous editor, then that might be the case.
Of course then there's still the question of why those comments were included in the newsletters in the first place.
Good for you! But be Careful here... because you are using way too much common sense for some people on this board to handle.
One thing most people (who bring up this old garbage) never dare take into consideration is Paul's sincere civil decency towards others. Throughout his 12 terms we have seen a respectful, honest, man of integrity. Ironically, he is so civil and decent to others that some of his supporters wish he would be far more aggressive via personal attacks on his political opponents..but he won't go there because that is not the type of person he is. Ron Paul comes from an era of realizing that real changes for the better can only occur when the people in the discussion can remain civil toward each other. He also knows that when the debate turns from the issue to the personal life of the opponent then no real solutions will be found for that issue at hand. So he tries very hard to stay on topic because he wants to see positive changes for all our people in this country. Throughout every election he has yet to be the trash type of politician that goes for the cut throat personal attacks on his opponents. He stays steadfast and runs on his political stances against theirs.
I realize this won't matter to some people who have made up their minds about him..but it matters for others reading these posts to know the following... it was revealed way back then that Ron Paul fired the person responsible for those words. Did he then go much further to try to RUIN that persons life by ousting them to the public? No, he did not because this is NOT the type of man he is. As you probably already know....but many others many not..voters only need to LOOK at the decades of Congressional Records on Ron Paul's words and they will see nothing but a man who worked tirelessly for all our rights with not one inkling of racism in any of his work.
For decades Ron Paul has been working very hard to end the racial disparities by making us all realize we get our rights because of being individual citizens not because of the color of our skin or our sex. If we look at Ron Paul's record of staying true to his stances we will see that no one will be able to get him to become vicious or vindictive after so many years. It's Sad and pathetic...but this is the climate of the mentality we are dealing with in America today. Some citizens are far more preoccupied with spreading rumors and trash talk then they are in getting involved in the election process of who these candidates really are and what they can do for our country.
Do you have evidence to back up this claim, or is it something you just made up?
The ironic thing about quotes like this is taking the era into consideration. I assure you I could fill the Lincoln library with racist quotes coming from this countries top leaders of these unconstitutional groups of division and that would get us no where on the direction our country is headed today in terms of why we need a constitutionally abiding president to help us end all the divisions in this country and bring us all together.
I throw these out there as a freebie for you.
WE all know Pat Buchanan has been barbecued for his comments..
1991: "David Duke is busy stealing from me. I have a mind to go down there and sue that dude for intellectual property theft."
Pat Buchanan- Manchester, NH Union Leader, December 15, 1991
Where's the outrage about these comments?
The Jews don't like Farrakhan, so they call me Hitler. Well, that's a good name. Hitler was a very great man. He rose Germany up from the ashes -- Louis Farrakhan, 1984
You see everybody always talk about Hitler exterminating six million Jews. That's right. But don't nobody ever ask what did they do to Hitler...They went in there, in Germany, the way they do everywhere they go, and they supplanted, they usurped...they had undermined the very fabric of the society. -- Khalid Abdul Muhammad, Nation Of Islam & New Black Panther Party, Chicago Sun-Times, Appearance at Chicago State University, March 24, 1996
This one is extremely ironic since Maxine Waters just told the Tea party to go to hell too..yet she received a truckload of favorable press now didn't she?
I say to Jewish America: Get ready...knuckle up, put your boots on, because we're ready and the war is going down... The real deal is this: Black youth do not want a relationship with the Jewish community or the mainstream white community or the foot shuffling, head-bowing, knee bobbing black community... All you Jews can go straight to hell. -- Quannell X, National Youth minister for the Nation Of Islam, New York Daily News, October 17, 1995
(On Black Conservatives) A new breed of Uncle Tom [and] some of the biggest liars the world ever saw - Former NAACP executive director Benjamin Hooks on black Conservatives
In South Africa we'd call it Apartheid. In Nazi Germany we'd call it fascism. Here we call it conservatism. These people are attacking the poor -- Jesse Jackson
When white folks can't defeat you, they'll always find some Negro, some boot-licking, butt-licking, bamboozled, half-baked, half-fried, sissified, punkified, pasteurized, homogenized N*gger that they can trot out in front of you -- Khalid Abdul Muhammad of the Nation Of Islam
The President wants to talk about a terrorist named bin Laden. I don't want to talk about bin Laden. I want to talk about a terrorist called Christopher Columbus. I want to talk about a terrorist called George Washington. I want to talk about a terrorist called Rudy Giuliani. The real terrorists have always been the United Snakes of America. -- Malik Zulu Shabazz at reparations rally, 2002
I want to go up to the closest white person and say: 'You can't understand this, it's a black thing' and then slap him, just for my mental health -- Charles Barron, a New York city councilman at a reparations rally, 2002
If they don't pay us reparations now, we're talking about scorched earth -- Charles Barron, a New York city councilman at a reparations rally, 2002
I mean, if black people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill white people? You understand what I'm saying? In other words, white people, this government and that mayor were well aware of the fact that black people were dying every day in Los Angeles under gang violence. So if you're a gang member and you would normally be killing somebody, why not kill a white person? Do you think that somebody thinks that white people are better, or above dying, when they would kill their own kind? -- Sister Souljah In A Washington Post Interview, 1992
(On the Pope) Elijah Muhammad taught that the Pope of Rome is the anti-Christ... It makes me sick to my stomach to see black people running over each other just to kiss this cracker. Who in the hell is the pope of Rome? He's an imposter, he's an idol, he's a false icon that must be torn down. -- Khalid Abdul Muhammad, Nation Of Islam & New Black Panther Party, Appearance at the "Black Holocaust Nationhood Conference," held as a prelude to the Million Man March, October 15, 1995
White folks was in caves while we was building empires... We taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it. -- Rev. Al Sharpton in a 1994 speech at Kean College, NJ
Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them -- Mary Frances Berry, Chairman, US Commission on Civil Rights
The theft of our assets and the fruits of our labors for the benefits of a select group will continue the race wars that ARE ongoing today that you continue to want to pretend are not there. Like a massive elephant in the room you have bought the propaganda of believing what you were told to believe and only saying what is politically correct for you to say.
Are you hoping for another 4 years of Obama's socialism?
Are you denying all of these things took place in the 90's
1991 Washington, D.C. riot
Crown Heights Riot
1992 Los Angeles riots
Are you denying that our taxes are looted to the tune of billions and billions of dollars for special hand outs to select races, select sexes, and groups? Handouts and benefits that "all" people are not eligible for even though "all" people who pay taxes have to pay for them.
Are you denying that they have given special unconstitutional privileges for housing, education, and employment to certain groups at the exclusion of all other people?
Do you not see how all of these entitlements and special programs and hiring schemes are utterly unconstitutional because they institute reverse racism on everyone else who is denied those benefits?
Ya know the funny thing about digging up quotes from a long time ago is we can see the rampant racism and divisions in democrats and republicans. But the politically correct thing to do is to attack Conservatives to make them hold the bag for all of it.
THis only continues to divide this country even more which is exactly why our constitution does not give us our rights based on race, sex, religion or any group we belong to. Which again is why we need a president who will indeed make sure that billions of dollars are returned to the people who earned them instead of being looted from the ever dwindling segment of tax payers who are currently going under because of this massive burden.
Tell me oh wise one..who is your preferred candidate for this race? You have not revealed which candidate you think would do a better job or why. You have only revealed you would be willing to drag up this old trashy news to make your point hoping to crush Ron Paul in the process. Is this how the "new conservatism" operates? Attacking their own until they can get the right sell out in the job again to help finish this country off?
I might be more inclined to believe him when he says he didn't write all that homophobic and racist stuff in those newsletters if he provided the name of the person who did.
But then I'd still wonder why he let other people write that stuff in his newsletter, making it appear that they were his words.
And why the other members of his family who were involved in the publishing of those newsletters let it happen.
And why they were apparently happy to rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars in subscription fees from newsletters that contained such vile content.
But hey, since you've got that list of stuff that other people said, clearly that's a good reason to just ignore what Ron Paul said in those newsletters, and just forget it ever happened. LOL. I don't think so.
Also, if you going to use the old "tax is theft" argument, I don't think it looks good if the best you can say about your candidate is that he'll keep stealing from you, but he promises that he'll steal less.
1991 Washington, D.C. riot
Crown Heights Riot
1992 Los Angeles riots"
No, I'm LMAO if you're trying to claim that those riots constitute the race war of the 1990s that Ron Paul insisted would happen.
Also, if you going to use the old "tax is theft" argument, I don't think it looks good if the best you can say about your candidate is that he'll keep stealing from you, but he promises that he'll steal less.
-------------------------------------------------------------
It appears as if you are trying to get "me" to give you answers that are not going to be found with me. I was not there, I was not a recipient of these newsletters and I would not know who wrote them. For me Ron Paul stating they were not his words was enough because none of them correlate with any of his other work. His word is not good enough for you so I suggest you take it up with the people you are accusing and ask them what happened.
You can save the effort to try and put words in my mouth. I never said any of these comment were acceptable coming from any of the quotes. I do know that in todays climate of historical revisionism it is become much harder to know who said what unless we were there to hear it for ourselves. It is not just the words that matter it is indeed the actions that back them up. Ron Paul has been consistent in fighting for ALL our rights and he does not go for allowing the constitution to be watered down to mean they can create special tax funded privileges for select groups.
The tax tib bit really is hilarious. Can you hear yourself? You do realize that the president cannot change the tax code by himself right? You also realize the limited power of one congressman to change the tax code by himself right? You act like it's either all, or nothing here, and as if this complex issue were so simple. For one thing, no one hear is naive enough to believe they would allow Ron Paul to cut the government all the way back to their constitutionally confined role. But will Ron Paul greatly cut and save our taxes that are currently being looted nonstop? You bet he would. Did he say he wanted to abolish the IRS? Yes he did. Would that save you a lot of money? If you are working it sure as heck would. Did he concede that if the public would not be able to handle giving up all their dependence programs he would be willing to try a set tax rate for all people to pay equally? Yep he did. Would that lower taxes for a majority of the working class? yes it would. Would it stimulate the economy by putting more in our pockets to spend in this country? yes it would. Would it make sure equal taxations were across the board? Yes it would. Would it end the issue of people getting money back from tax returns they never had to pay into ? Yes it would. How is any of this turning into sounding like a bad deal for you or any citizen in this country?
You need to remember he didn't create this system of massive over taxation that is so insanely complicated and out of control that our small business owners are literally overwhelmed with massive red tape just trying to keep what is expected of them paid. You need to also see his voting record whereas he has consistently fought overtaxation for decades. They do not call him Dr. No for no reason. He does not vote to increase taxes. His plan is loaded with tax incentives to give us back even more while stimulating the economy even more. Sounds like what this country needs if the goal is to protect our sovereignty and maintain our freedoms right? When you are in this system you have to figure out how to use it to at least try to do your job to represent "ALL the people" and that is exactly what his plans do. He works with a messed up system to do all he can to give the people more in their pocket to spend how they see fit instead of condoning more theft through more forced taxation for us to see the government has just fraudulently blown millions more that our people and our economy needed to get back on it's feet. Knowing what he is up against and how people in both sides of the aisle are beholden to their lobbyist benefactors I would say he has his work cut out for him which is exactly why he needs more support then ever if we finally want a president who is working "for the people" as every one of our elected reps are constitutionally bound to do.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quite frankly I don't think anyone "else" is laughing after the Rodney King riots alone. That nightmare was the catalyst to set this country back decades in our race relations. The aftermath of that case still reverberates today. It also revealed to us the power of the media to greatly shift the perceptions of our people to keep that race war going even more. Those same exact tactics are being implemented in high gear today and they were greatly ramped up during Obama's campaign run all the way into the white house where now we have a president who not only condones playing the race card but he has done more to damage the race relations in this country then any other president in my era. There is no doubt in anyones mind that before this election series is over our race relations are going to be even worse the they are right now. See the planned staged protest by the Unions for Sept 17 and ask yourself why this administration is allowing racially derisive language to be used on the printed materials and why they are doing nothing about what is publicly noted to be a protest that incites anger and violence? As a citizen we cannot yell fire in a crowded theater..but these unions are allowed to use threatening language all they want and no one makes a peep about it. But you claim those race wars are not still going right? Good grief.
You wanna know what's funny to me? You have no idea what my race is. I'll tell you why it doesn't matter. I do not believe I should get a handout just because my lineage happens to be the right race to get that handout. I do not believe I should get a job just because my sex happens to be the right sex to meet a job quota. I do not believe I should get any special privileges that I have not earned on my own merits. Nor do I believe I should be punished and forced to pay for everyone else who gets all those entitlements based upon their race, sex, or religion. When I see others are in need, and they need help, I give what I can to help others get ahead. But the key to that help is it is given of my own free will and it is given by my choice. I am not opting to steal from everyone around me because my government has given me the unconstitutional right to do so. Right now we are not free to make those choices in our lives. Our government has decided they will create all these programs and continue to make more and more of our people dependent on them while they sink the worker bees who are forced to pay for it all. That is called enslavement and they can continue to twist it and find a new politically correct term all they want and it will not change the insane burden that tax payers are facing because of this current system that continues to create more dependence on it while it enslaves the rest of us to make the sacrifices for it.
When those handouts divide us by race you will see race wars continue until they reach a boiling point. Tell me again you see no race wars around you and I will say you are in complete and total denial which will do nothing for the future of this country is a majority of our people remain in that denial with you.
I don't expect any answers from you. I expect more long-winded BS-filled comments, but I won't mind if I'm pleasantly surprised and you choose to stop providing them.
Here's my prediction. Ron Paul is not only going to fail to get the Republican nomination for the 2012 Presidential election, he's not even going to get close.
And I believe that the types of comments from Ron Paul supporters seen here and in countless other online discussions are part of the reason why Ron Paul's popularity as a Presidential candidate remains so severely limited.
Think again about Ron Paul's support. The entire country is shifting to what he has been saying all along because what he did warn about on these major events have happened and they can check the records and see how he predicted it would come down to this. You want to "cherry pick" things and focus on things he said he didn't say and doggedly hold onto that for dear life while trashing a truckload of congressional records that span decades that are clearly verifiable in the Library of Congress.
Where were you when the massive national debate was going on about Rodney King? Were you living under a rock? Did you miss the aftermath of serious hardcore racial division in our country? Do tell what your depiction was of what you thought Ron Paul meant and tell me what you thought it would look like? It is obvious a race war can be going on right now and you are so dense as to not see it right now. So I won't hold my breath that would would remember it from the 90's.
In spite of the efforts of people like you who clearly have no solutions or other candidates to offer yourself, Ron paul continues to gain support from people of all walks of life, both, sexes, all ages, all races and all parties. Sounds like the kind of candidate we need to beat Obama..but of course when we have people like you out there working harder to help Obama we know it's going to be an ongoing efforts that is needed to keep the momentum going.
Guess what Wil? regardless if you help us to beat Obama or not..if we win...all those rights that will be restored to the citizens of this country will also be given back to you. It would be nice if you'd join us. If not, you can thank us if we win after you get your rights back or you can look in the mirror and see someone who helped to contribute to another win for 4 more years of socialism.
I don't need to think about it again. I look at his polling numbers every day. I see that his RCP average has dropped again, from 8.8 to 8.7. Looks like his support for the Republican nomination is falling. Again.
Like I said..think again... how about sharing the candidate you endorse Wil B? Surely with so much effort extended towards attacking Ron Paul you must have someone fantastic in mind who would be better right?
Ron Paul Steady, Michele Bachmann Down in New GOP Gallup Poll ... 6 hours ago
Ron Paul Top Three Among GOP Contenders in Gallup Poll
Survey has Paul quietly surging into top three LAKE JACKSON, Texas – In a new Gallup survey, 2012 Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul takes third place among top GOP contenders and is within striking distance of second.
SFGate: Ron Paul Leaps Past Bachmann in Latest [Gallup] Poll
Video 8/24/2011: "Ron Paul Picks Up Steam Despite Minimal Media Coverage" -KHOU 11 News Houston
Ron Paul Picks Up Early Tea Party Endorsement
Ron Paul scores endorsement, wins taxpayers' straw poll
Ron Paul Snags Key Endorsement | Cory Adams
Veterans for Ron Paul – U.S. Army Sgt. Ryan
CS Monitor: "Has Ron Paul Become Electable?"
Ron Paul Within One Percent of Obama in Head-to-Head Poll
Ron Paul wins presidential straw poll; Mitt Romney second USA Today
Ron Paul Takes New Hampshire Young Republicans Straw Poll With 45 percent of Vote
Ron Paul Leads Bachmann, Perry in Two Recent Polls; Media Doesn’t Care
Ron Paul Splits Vote Versus Obama in New Poll
Gets 50 percent against President
Ron Paul Competitive Against Obama in New Poll
Source: RasmussenReports.com Within “hailing” distance according to new Rasmussen survey
Ron Paul Polls Well in Head to Head Versus Obama
Does better than majority of the Republican field LAKE JACKSON, Texas – According to recent surveys in the New York Times
Ron Paul Campaign Raises Most Donations from Military
Out-raises all candidates from both parties
New Hampshire State Representatives Endorse Ron Paul
Ron Paul Campaign Scoops Up Major GOP Pollster
CNN Debate: GOP Candidates Now Sound Like Ron Paul
Ron Paul Wins RLC Straw Poll
Second consecutive win in conservative event straw polls
Ron Paul Receives More Key Iowa Endorsements
Gaining essential GOP and Tea Party support
Ron Paul Endorsed by Iowa Representative Kim Pearson
Campaign momentum builds
Ron Paul Campaign Welcomes Constitutional Law Heavyweight Bruce Fein as Senior Advisor
The Hill: "Why Ron Paul is Good for America," by Brent Budowsky
Conservatives back Ron Paul for GOP's 2012 ticket | National ...
Conservatives again back Ron Paul for Presidential nominee | McClatchy
Ron Paul Birthday Money Bomb Raises over $1.82 Million!
McLaughlin Group Video: Is Ron Paul's Revolution Now At Hand?
Former Obama Supporter Endorses Ron Paul – Appeals to Dems and ...
Ron Paul Gains Bartender & Server Fans in New York · June 2011 ...
Ron Paul Gains Fans in New York, June 7 2011
Veterans for Ron Paul – U.S. Army Sgt. Ryan
Official: Ron Paul is choice of troops | Ron Paul 2012 Liberty ...
Ron Paul: #1 with the Troops
Ron Paul Has Students' Support - CBS News
Student effort to bring Ron Paul to campus pays off - Campus - The ...
Home Schoolers for Ron Paul
Catholics for Ron Paul Effort Supports His Pro-Life Stance ...
Texans Prefer Paul Over Perry
Central Florida Students for Ron Paul
Republican Liberty Caucus of California: Ron Paul Wins RLCCA ...
The Ron Paul Revolution Taking Back California - YouTube
Ron Paul has all the answers - Arizona Tea Party Network
Ron Paul Wins Republican Leadership Conference Straw Pole!!! « The ... Arizona
Ron Paul Wins South Carolina Straw Poll
Ron Paul: Washington's Lone Champion of 'Sound' Money – Visionary ...
Ron Paul's Economic Theories Winning GOP Converts - The Washington ...
His RCP average is 8.7. That takes into account the Gallup poll, and the Rasmussen poll, and Fox News, CNN, USA Today, etc. All of them say the same thing--Ron Paul's level of support for the Republican Nomination is limited. And he's falling further and further behind the front-runners.
Let me tell you something about homeschoolers. For one thing this group of students test higher then any other group in the US. On a consistent bases they test at least 38% higher then all public school educated children. These kids are also well versed on their constitutional rights inside and out. They know how to work independently and if they take on any cause they exert hardcore efforts towards reaching a goal. The do not have to have their hands held because they have been allowed to think independently and that has helped them to become truly independent workers. That free learning atmosphere also develops creativity that fosters some very ingenious ways to market their ideas with very little financial investment.
During the mid term elections there were several GOP candidates clamoring to get these homeschooling groups on their side because they knew this was a group that would go to great distances to help them win an election. They also knew this group of kids was known for being very polite, respectful, and well mannered so there was a far less risk that the public behavior of those kids would reflect badly on any campaign they were working on. This is also reflected in the comments from professors who get these kids in their classes in college..they are thrilled to have such respectful, well educated, independent students who are ready to delve into the studies and give it all they have.
The other ironic thing that the achievements of home schoolers has revealed is that there is no "achievement gap" found in this group of students. Regardless of race, demographics or the income of the parents these kids, they all test consistently higher as a group in comparison to public educated students. It cost on average approximately $500 a year to homeschool one kid compared to the average of $14,000 a year our taxes are paying for public educated children. Anyway, this is relevant seeing the horrible state of our public education system and seeing how Obama's Race to The Top scam will only further drain more resources while not raising these kids up to their potential in their academic skills.
You can laugh all you want and your can try to discount the incredible boost these groups give to campaigns but it will only reveal your ignorance to the facts of what these groups are capable of doing for any candidate who is lucky enough to gain their endorsement.
Well that is all horrendously fascinating. Now, if you don't mind, let me tell you a few other things about home schoolers.
First, there was a Homeschoolers for Ron Paul group last time he failed to secure the Republican nomination. And after they exerted their, um, considerable political influence, Ron Paul ended up with an RCP average polling score of 6.5, far, far behind Huckabee (26.3) and McCain (56.7).
Second, apart from dismal polling numbers, Ron Paul performed even worse when it came to actually securing delegates to nominate him as the Republican candidate in the 2008 Presidential election. 21 estimated total delegates (1%) and 6 (0%) actual pledged delegates. And remember, that was with the considerable support of the "group that would go to great distances to help them win an election."
Third, as would be expected, home schoolers weren't united in support for Ron Paul in 2008. The Home School Legal Defense Association endorsed Huckabee, (which didn't go over well with the Homeschoolers for Ron Paul crowd). Although Huckabee did significantly better than Paul, it seems the homes choolers' endorsement wasn't enough to provide him with the opportunity to lose to Obama, either.
So it's great that once again, the Home Schoolers for Ron Paul are out in force, voting in online polls, participating in money bombs, and plastering the internet with as many posts and comments as possible. I noticed that they've got over 1000 "likes" on their Facebook page. That's mightily impressive.
But enough about the awesome political force that home schoolers represent. My point was that, even with the support of the home schoolers, and the bartenders, and the Teabagger Goldbug Catholic Vets, and whatever other groups you mentioned (and a few you didn't, like Stormfront, various Klan groups, etc), Ron Paul is still only sitting on an RCP average of 8.7 and his average polling number is trending downward.
Well, Look who got off their butt to do a little homework.
Let me ask you something...where did I say that homeschoolers would secure the whole election? Good grief Wil you do realize that all candidates need the help of a lot of people and not just one group right?
Your big point was that Homeschoolers were acting independently and they were supporting separate candidates..oooh big shocker eh? Indeed, look at what happens when people are allowed to think for themselves? They act independently. It's called FREEDOM Wil and it is becoming obvious that REAL freedom scares the hell out of you. Is this what this comes down to? Are you so terrified that we may actually get a president in office who dares to remove government control of our lives to the extent that you will have to start thinking for yourself again?
If you would get off your butt and do a little more digging you would see that Huckabee only gained steam in that election "after" he plagiarized the most popular portions if Ron Paul's platform and claimed them as his own. Just like these Faux Tea Party candidates are doing again right now. If you do a tally on the media coverage back then you would also see that Huckabee started gaining a truck load of coverage to aid his so-call rise in that election AFTER he started emulating Ron Paul and mixing it with the establishments agendas. It appears as if they handsomely reward the sell outs too because just like Palin recieved her own reality show, and every stop of her book tour received a landslide of free press for when and where it would be to enable her to gather more support, Huckabee was rewarded with his own show on Fox news after that election.
I guess you also forgot where they banned Ron Paul from one of the debates? Or how Ron Paul rented the facility next door to that debate and he gathered more supporters at his event then all of the other candidates combined in the debate next door? I guess you also forgot how Sean Hannity had a melt down when Ron Paul won one of their own polls and dared to say their own poll was rigged because he couldn't bare the thought of telling the public Ron Paul won by a landslide against their preferred sell out puppet?
If you are REALLY interested in what happened during that last election I suggest you do a lot more homework and see the role of the media to do all they could to knock Ron paul out of the race. Quite frankly, with the odds he had against him I am shocked he did as well as he did do.
If you want to see how the same crap is occurring right now pick your little finger up and hit a few key strokes to see the clip of Jon Stewart where he uses real news reels to reveal blatant biases of the media to once again marginalize Ron Paul and act like he isn't doing near as well as he is to the point of even skipping over him form one poll to go right to Bachman and see how each one of those sell out media talking heads are trying to shape the publics perceptions to only focus on their preferred sell out puppet candidates.
Be sure to look it up and see where Fox news was busted for using a clip from last years straw poll and dubbed it in this year to make it look like the crowd booed Ron Paul for the new straw poll that he won by a landslide.
next, make sure you see how they w ere shaping the publics perception of herman Cain...calling him some "pizza guy" while conveniently leaving out he is a former Federal reserve insider. See how Sean Hannity didn't just "interview" Cain he let his HOST hois show. See how Neil Bortz did the same thing. Also note Cain has his own talk show on the radio too...couldn't even manage to make the bottom 200 for ratings so it's not like having his host the radio show of Hannity or Neil would give them any boost. But hey why not...Cain is another puppet they are supporting hoping to take coverage off of the only candidate in this race that would turn this country around. Cain was adamantly against auditing the Federal Reserve too and he was all for the TARP bailouts and if you want to talk about Racism...see it from his own mouth on what he said about Muslims.
Let's not forget how they groom these candidates WAY before they jump in the race. you do the math Wil...see how much media coverage every one of those candidates get way before they jump in compared to Ron Paul and tell me if it is ok with you for the media to select your next president or if you believe the "people" should select their own president?
Tell me oh wise one...indeed, just HOW do these figures reveal the REAL pulse of America with such fraud as this in the media?
Now get ready for your panties to go in a wad because this time around Ron Paul is gaining those delegates and his supporters know how the game is played. He is polling TEN times higher this time around compared to last time. So put that in your pipe and smoke it with whatever else you have been smoking.
Go back to the last election and see the "pattern" Wil. I know how you like to see those "patterns" so here ya go.
The ONLY pattern that has been consistent in these elections is the blatant media bias against Ron Paul.
SEE how Huckabee had no problem with handing that election over to Obama when he revealed that even if we lost that election because he was too ignorant to admit these wars were a sham that was A-ok with him.
Noting Huckabee-Paul debate disagreement on Iraq, Luntz declared Huckabee's position "principle[d]"
Summary: On Hannity & Colmes, Republican pollster Frank Luntz cited Republican focus group responses to an exchange over Iraq policy between Mike Huckabee and Rep. Ron Paul, and, echoing Huckabee's assertion about needing not "to lose our honor," declared: "Clearly, principle won out in this exchange." Luntz cited no evidence that the focus group participants favored Huckabee's comments because they thought that the comments -- in contrast with Paul's -- were based on "principle." In fact, Paul's position on the Iraq war has been consistent, though originally sharply at odds with public opinion.
On the September 5 post-presidential debate edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Republican pollster Frank Luntz cited Republican focus group responses to an exchange over Iraq policy between former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR) and Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), and, echoing Huckabee's assertion about needing to not "lose our honor," declared: "Clearly, principle won out in this exchange." Luntz made his declaration about which side "won" the exchange in the opinion of the focus groups after showing a video clip of part of the exchange with lines on the screen showing the focus group's response to have been more favorable to Huckabee. He did not cite any comments from focus group participants or any other evidence that the participants favored Huckabee's comments because they thought that the comments -- in contrast with Paul's -- were based on "principle." Nor did he explain his suggestion that Paul's position on the war was not based on principle.
In fact, Paul's position on the Iraq war has been consistent, though originally sharply at odds with public opinion. On October 8, 2002, Paul said, "There is no convincing evidence that Iraq is capable of threatening the security of this country, and, therefore, very little reason, if any, to pursue a war." He was only one of only six Republicans in the House to vote against the resolution authorizing war with Iraq. Paul has also been calling for a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq for more than two years.
Reporting on the same exchange during the debate, the September 6 edition of CNN's Your World Today aired only Paul's statement that "[w]e've dug a hole for ourselves, and we've dug a hole for our party. We're losing elections, and we're going down next year if we don't change it," followed by Huckabee's assertion that, "[e]ven if we lose elections, we should not lose our honor. And that is more important than the Republican Party." By cropping Paul's quote to leave out his substantive arguments for withdrawing from Iraq, CNN suggested that Paul's argument was entirely about electoral politics. CNN did not broadcast Paul's remarks that, "when we make a mistake, it is the obligation of the people, through their representatives, to correct the mistake, not to continue the mistake" or his claim that he did not believe the U.S. should remain in Iraq just to "save face." Nor did CNN note that Paul -- contrary to the initial desires of a majority of the electorate -- opposed the Iraq war from the beginning.
In response to an announcement in April by PBS that, immediately after the June 28 Democratic presidential forum, "public feedback on the performance of the candidates will be conducted by noted pollster Frank Luntz, who will also appear on 'Tavis Smiley' on PBS the following evening to discuss his findings," Media Matters for America criticized Luntz's involvement and noted his history of partisan GOP activity and record of reported reprimand and censure by this peers. In 1997, the American Association for Public Opinion Research reprimanded Luntz for comments he made to the media regarding his polling work on the Contract with America, according to a 2000 Salon.com article. Similarly, Washington Post polling director Richard Morin reported in 2000 that the National Council on Public Polls "censured pollster Frank Luntz for allegedly mischaracterizing on MSNBC the results of focus groups he conducted during the [2000] Republican Convention." As Media Matters has also documented, Luntz has worked for former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R), a primary election opponent of Paul and Huckabee's, and has heaped praise on Giuliani this year.
We are getting the same media bias this time around.
Ok Wil, here's that "pattern" repeating itself this time around.
Have you ever seen anyone poll at ZERO percent?
CNN Reports Ron Paul At 0% While CNN Online Poll Shows Him At 75 ... June 2011
While the online poll conducted by CNN shows Ron Paul as the clear winner with 75% of the votes, CNN reporters pull a fast one by citing a lesser known poll hosted at National Journal claiming Ron Paul came in at 0%.
CNN discards their own poll in favor of another poll that shows results more to their liking.
Meanwhile, The National Journal poll cited by CNN now shows Ron Paul in the lead with 33% of the vote.
Ron Paul Media Bias Exposed In Iowa Aug 2011
Candy Crowley Lies About Ron Paul’s Chance to Beat Obama… Ignores Own Polls
On CNN Candy Crowley says Michelle Bachmann and Ron Paul have no chance at beating Obama. However countless polls have shown that Ron Paul has the greatest chance of beating Obama then the other GOP candidates.
More media bias against Ron Paul After Ames Poll » For Great Justice
Ron Paul took 2nd place in the big Ames Straw Poll yesterday, losing by less than 1%. But if you followed the media results today, you wouldn’t even know he was a candidate. The media gives more attention to people who got 3rd, and even 7th place, or people that aren’t even official candidates yet. It’s just sickening. And when Ron Paul is mentioned, rarely at that, they do it in a negative way, like saying he’s not a front-runner, or is a dark horse, or is not electable.
The Media keeps passing Romney and Perry the ball, even though Paul is wide open in the end zone. It’s no wonder they end up with the most touchdowns.
Here’s a screenshot of an article on CS Monitor. You wouldn’t know that Ron Paul is a candidate, let alone got 2nd place. It briefly mentions him on the second page, but only to disparage him in the same way, by saying he’s unelectable, because they say so. Meanwhile, they prop up everyone else, including Perry, who didn’t even announce his candidacy until after the poll, and Romney, who took 7th. Tell me again why the man who took 2nd is “unelectable” while the man who took 7th is?
How about the Des Moines Register failing to mention Ron Paul at all in the entire article, but calling everyone else, once again, including the guy who just announced candidacy, front-runners.
We can’t leave out Fox, now can we? The media chooses who the “leading” candidates are, rather than let the evidence speak.
MSNBC is just as bad. They reduced the 2nd place finisher to a “nuisance“, and continued the trend of call people he beat “top-tier”, including the guy who’s been a candidate for all of 5 minutes.
How about the Wall Street Journal? His only mention in the entire article was inside a pair of parentheses, and it was to unjustifiably disparage him. (Libertarian Ron Paul, who has no chance to win the nomination, finished a close second.) Is it clear yet that the media doesn’t report the news, it makes it? It tells you what opinion to have. Why? The answer can be found by looking into who owns these media companies.
How about CBS? Two days after Ron Paul took 2nd place in the straw poll (losing by less than 1%), and two days after Perry announced his candidacy, and two days after Romney took 7th place, this is the poll they run. They’re not even trying to hide their bias.
If you think about it, the fact that neither political party, including the one Paul is a member, wants anything to do with him, suggests that he’s doing something right. The fact that the media shuns him shows that they are just as corrupt as the political parties. When the media talks about “front-runners” or “top-tier” candidates, it’s safe to assume they’re talking about establishment candidates. Candidates that will keep the status quo going that is destroying our country.
we have a study from the nonpartisan Pew Research Center to back it up. The bar graphs don't lie:
See how "Paul's coverage also lags far behind (Donald) Trump (94 stories), who dallied with a run before opting out in mid-May and (former Alaska Gov. Sarah) Palin (85 stories), who has given no indication to date that she will enter the race. In addition, Paul trails longshot candidate and former Utah governor Jon Huntsman (44 stories) and Texas Governor, Rick Perry (33 stories) who only announced his candidacy on August 13."
Number of media stories
OBama 221
Romney 120
Gingrich 112
Bachman 108
Trump 94
Palin 85
Pawlenty 52
Huntsman 44
Perry 33
Paul 27
Santorum 21
Cain 11
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=95608#ixzz1W4ZY3z9l
Here's More of a "pattern" for you Wil.
Straw Poll Media Bias: Ron Paul vs. Mitt Romney :: Liberty Maven 2010
When Ron Paul annihilated ole Mitt “Sideburns” Romney at the CPAC straw poll back in February the coverage at many mainstream news outlets dismissed the result. Today when Mitt Romney won the Southern Republican Leadership Conference straw poll by a single vote over Ron Paul the coverage was a bit different.
Case in point, CBS News wrote the following after Ron Paul beat Romney in a landslide at CPAC:
“Fewer than a quarter of the 10,000 attendees participated in the balloting, an unscientific sampling that only offers bragging rights.“
Today CBS (via AP) writes the following after Romney squeaked out a victory by one vote in the SRLC straw poll:
“Mitt Romney won the straw poll at the Southern Republican Leadership conference here Saturday in a victory that will be taken as a sign of the former Massachusetts governor’s strength as a 2012 presidential candidate.”
Even the prospects of Ron Paul becoming a presidential candidate pushes the media to marginalize him. Just looking at the headlines for these two articles suggests bias. The Paul-CPAC win article is titled, “Ron Paul Wins Early Conservative Poll“. The Romney-SRLC win article is titled, “Mitt Romney Wins GOP Presidential Straw Poll“. So Paul’s win was just an early conservative poll, but Romney’s was a GOP Presidential poll?
CNN's Cafferty: Perry, Bachmann, Palin Supporters Seem 'Allergic to ...Brains" August 24, 2011
In an election where the Republican candidate actually stands a chance against a weakened incumbent president, so far it is a couple of intellectual lightweights who are stealing the show.
Since Michele Bachmann won the Iowa straw poll and Rick Perry entered the race, these two have been sucking up most of the media’s attention, mostly for saying stupid stuff. Like Bachmann‘s claim that as president she’ll bring gasoline down to $2 a gallon. Or Perry’s highly inappropriate shot at Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke saying that his actions could be “treasonous.”
Meanwhile, some Republicans, including Karl Rove, are suggesting that the former half-term dropout governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, is going to join the race as well. Swell. Palin’s people are pushing back against the speculation, saying that anyone who claims to know about her plans is misleading the American people. But Palin has certainly been acting like a candidate, now hasn’t she? Showing up in Iowa during the straw poll voting, and…Iowa-themed political video released ahead of her Labor Day speech which is also scheduled to take place in Iowa. If Palin runs, we’ll have yet another MENSA candidate to join Bachmann and Perry. There is no doubt this three-some would consume the lion’s share of the media coverage.
Palin bus tour to roll into Iowa – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs Aug 2011
CNN) - After a more than two-month hiatus, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is planning to crash the presidential party once again with a heartland-themed re-launch of her "One Nation" bus tour this week in Iowa, according to a Palin fundraising email obtained by CNN.
Palin is bringing her Constitution-draped bus to the Iowa State Fair, just 30 miles south of where the Republican presidential field will take the stage on Thursday for a presidential debate in Ames.
It's not yet clear which day the tour begins, but her surprise arrival in Iowa will happen "before" the closely watched Ames straw poll. Palin is NOT on the straw poll ballot.
Do you believe in a fair election process or are you ok with this blatant fraud that is going on again?
It really is pathetic that you erroneously measure Paul's electability based on rigged media coverage that is doing all they can to fix this next election.
I can only say thank God other voters in this country are sick of the media's attempts in trying to select their candidates for them. The one poll the media would never want to reveal would be their own standing with the public. That standing continues to sink like a rock as they all continue to lose credibility after they get busted trying to create the news instead of just reporting on it.
List of Media Exclusions for RP's 2012 run
Articles/Polls/Reports Excluding Ron Paul for 2012 election season:
Ron Paul left out of Public Policy Polling August 23rd National President Poll
Trump’s Candidacy Got 3x more Coverage than Ron Paul’s candidacy
Jon Stewart Scolds Media For Ignoring Ron Paul, the One Who "Planted the Grassroots!"
CNN once again omits all mention of Paul
Mass Media Deception: 800+ 2nd Quarter Fundraising Reports, Only 2 Mention Ron Paul
Morning Joe Censorship on Ron's Q2 Push
More Ignorance of Ron Paul on NBC
Politico- Romney dominates GOP cash dash [No Mention of RP]
Huntsman Only Republican Calling for Rapid Withdrawl from Afghanistan? Are You Kidding Me?
SLRC Straw Poll Win: (But the big news is who came in #2) (Video)
Video: CNN Disinfo. Refuses to Use OWN Poll; Ron Paul Win at 79% - Reports 0% Poll
Media Bias Exposed in 3 Recent Polls!
ABC News forgot Ron Paul...Again
NEWSMAX Can't Find GOP Front Runner!
Updated: Bloomberg OMITted Ron Paul from list of republican presidential candidates!
Poll at Fox News Omitting Dr. Paul
Club for Growth's Presidential White Papers Excludes Ron Paul
Poll - US NEWS Excludes Ron Paul from poll
"conscious decision" to exclude RP...vote "other"
UPDATED - SC GOP intentionally omits guest speaker Ron Paul off ballot (SEE PIC) he still gets 5% by write-in anyway!
Ron Paul excluded from WSJ/NBC presidential poll
You didn't. Where did I say that you did?
"Your big point was that Homeschoolers were acting independently and they were supporting separate candidates..oooh big shocker eh?"
No, my point was that despite the support from some home schoolers and the various other groups you mentioned, Paul still performed poorly in both the 2008 Republican nomination and in the polls leading up to it. And that despite the support from the home schoolers and the various other groups you mentioned, Paul is performing poorly (but better) this time around as well. A RCP average of 8.7, trending downward.
"If you would get off your butt and do a little more digging you would see that Huckabee only gained steam in that election "after" he plagiarized the most popular portions if Ron Paul's platform and claimed them as his own."
For the sake of argument, I'm willing to accept that your claim may be true, though you've provided no evidence to back it up. I have no problem considering that one of Ron Paul's many problems is that other candidates have, to some degree, "stolen his thunder", mainly thanks to the Teabagger movement.
"Tell me oh wise one...indeed, just HOW do these figures reveal the REAL pulse of America with such fraud as this in the media?"
The figures are what they are, and whining about the media isn't likely to help those figures improve. A lot of Ron Paul supporters seem happy enough to trumpet the news all over the internet and beyond when Paul does well in a poll (even if it's just an online poll) (a good example would be Bill's article above, and several others he's written here at Gather), but when numbers are presented that don't fit in with the story they're trying to sell, then it's all about how the numbers don't reveal "the REAL pulse of America."
"Now get ready for your panties to go in a wad because this time around Ron Paul is gaining those delegates and his supporters know how the game is played. He is polling TEN times higher this time around compared to last time. So put that in your pipe and smoke it with whatever else you have been smoking."
Actually, he's not polling TEN times higher this time around, and a quick look at the actual polling numbers make it clear how outlandish your claim really is. Paul's RCP average in Oct. 2007 was 3.0, dropped to 2.2 later in the month, slowly climbed to peak at 7.4 in Feb 2008, then dropped back down to finish at 6.5 in March. This time around he's doing a little better, currently at 8.7 down from a peak of 9.6.
Blame the nasty old media all you like, but those are the numbers, whether you like them or not.
And thanks for once again providing an excellent example of the kind of behavior that I mentioned before with regard to Ron Paul supporters actually hurting his campaign.
What's the deal Wil, are you now putting on your so-called "impartial" mask since the "defamation of character mask" has been ripped off?
Get a load of this …then tell me again what you think you know about Ron Paul?
Ron Paul soars to 10-point lead over Obama among fastest growing voter segments
Aug 25, 2011
Perhaps the most revealing spread of polling numbers comes from the latest Rasmussen poll on Tuesday showing that among voters that do not identify themselves as Republican or Democrat, Ron Paul is now in a 10-point lead over Obama (43% to 33%).
http://m.examiner.com/exWashingtonDC/pm_61809/contentdetail....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You may need a drink for this one since you are so behold to these polls only when they show Ron Paul sinking after they have been rigged.
August 25, 2011
RealClearPolitics.com rigs polling archive!
Please peruse here:
President Obama vs. Republican Candidates
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/presi...
Note this summary data:
General Election: Romney vs. Obama; Obama +1.2
and
General Election: Paul vs. Obama; Obama +4.3
But wait, the Ron Paul data includes the ABC News/Wash Post poll from mid July where Paul trailed by 10%. If that poll is removed, then Paul trails Obama by only 1.5%.
There's more.
In an August 24 Rasmussen poll, Romney trails Obama by 8%. But this poll is omitted from the RCP polling archive. If it were included, then Romney trails Obama by 2.3%.
So Paul actually out-performs Romney trailing by only 1.5% instead of 2.3%. Paul out-performs all the other GOP candidates as well.
Accurate Poll Averages
Paul -1.5% Romney -2.3% Perry -6.6% Bachmann -8.8% Cain -14.0% Huntsman -14.0% Gingrich -14.7% Palin -16.2%
The RCP poll average is cited by MSM sources as an authority.
They are also skewing the national poll results against Ron Paul.
http://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republ...
Until now, they have been taking the average of the last 5 polls. Well, after the recent poll, they changed it to take the average of the last 7 polls, because the Marist poll has Ron Paul at 3%, which brings down his average significantly. If you take out that poll, his average goes to 9.7 - pulling him ahead of Guliani and Bachmann. I can almost guarantee that they will go back to taking the avg of the last 5 when the next poll is released so they can drop his 12 and 14 from his average.
This is not new, they did this kind of stuff in 2007 as well.
why weren't the same polls used in each candidates average?
It's also funny that they don't put them in order of who did best against Obama but rather the order is Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Palin and then Paul.
Also the title of the page is "President Obama vs. Republican Candidates" yet they show Sarah Palin on the page.
Of course - how can this be slapped in their faces so they have no choice not only to make the correction - but to issue a very loud press release on the fact that they intentionally were trying to distort the data, and that they have now corrected it, AND most importantly, that it shows Paul is the strongest against Obama?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wil, This impish reverse psychology that you're desperately trying to use is taken right out of the Sal Alinsky playbook…to accuse others of what you yourself are doing.
It appears as if your ill-focused eyes continue to only see what you want to see again Wil. Tell me something…who harms Ron Paul more …someone who would dredge up hatful racist rants that have been refuted years ago or someone who would go the distance to reveal the true record of Ron Paul's support and defend his "verifiable political" stances?
You bet I will blame the media for their blatant biases and proven censorship. You would too if you cared at all about having a shred of a decent election process. It's obvious that facts do not matter at all to you because you keep coming back with the same garbage again and again thinking somehow if you say it enough anyone at all will care enough to believe you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OH but he is...
Ron Paul Polling 10x Stronger in August 2011 vs August 2007 ... Aug 18, 2011
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/smartpolitics/2011/08/ron_paul_polling_10x_stronger.php
Get a load of what? Your URL doesn't work. If you're going to copy and paste so much stuff, you might work at being more careful about not breaking your links or URLs.
"You may need a drink for this one since you are so behold to these polls only when they show Ron Paul sinking after they have been rigged."
So you're claiming that the RCP average is "rigged" because it includes poll results you don't like, but doesn't include polls you do like? Yeah. I totally get that. Clearly it's a conspiracy. Or it could be that the ABC News/Wash Post poll was included because they use at least three polls to calculate the average, and the August 24th Rasmussen poll wasn't included because as it clearly states, it's an average of polls from 8/2 - 8/21. Doh!
"Wil, This impish reverse psychology that you're desperately trying to use is taken right out of the Sal Alinsky playbook…to accuse others of what you yourself are doing."
Uh-huh. Just in case you plan on throwing that one around more in the future, you might want to try to get his name right. The dude's name ws Saul Alinsky. You might also keep in mind that even if I am hurting Ron Paul's campaign, that in no way excludes the possibility that you are too. The thing about it is, you want him to win.
"Tell me something…who harms Ron Paul more..."
Ron Paul does. They were his newsletters, his decisions to associate himself with racists, his unpopular "'verifiable political' stances", etc. I would hope that critics of Ron Paul, myself included, have had an impact on his efforts to become POTUS, but I also credit many of his supporters with contributing to his lack of success and relatively low levels of popularity. And I'm not the only one who feels that way. "Among the Paultards" by self-described "conservative with strong libertarian overtones" Matt Labash is a good read. And I thought the previously-mentioned Thomas L Knapp put it well:Ouch!
"You bet I will blame the media for their blatant biases and proven censorship."
Good luck with that. I'm sure that between blaming the media, all that copying and pasting, and your "Sal [sic] Alinsky playbook" accusations, your efforts will guarantee that absolutely nothing can stop Ron Paul from finally taking his rightful place in the Oval Office. LOL!
Ron Paul Polling 10x Stronger in August 2011 vs August 2007 ... Aug 18, 2011
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/smartpolitics/2011/08/ron_paul_polling_"
Dr. Ostermeier's math seems to be a little bit off. Even if we take his numbers as accurate (no links to the actual polls, so we'll just have to take his word for it), I get a 1.2 average for the 2007 polls, and 11 for the 2011 polls. And my calculator says that 11/1.2=9.167. If we're talking whole numbers, that rounds down to 9, and if we're going to keep the decimal point it rounds up to 9.2. Neither of which is 10.
I'm not saying there isn't some combination of polls out there somewhere that show that Ron Paul's polling numbers are 10 times higher than they were at this point in 2007. After all, he was doing so poorly at that time, he pretty much had nowhere to go but up. But if that combination of polls exists, neither you nor Dr. Ostermeier have managed to produce evidence of it.
-------------------------------------
You back for more? God grief...you really are like a gnat.
When you catch the media red handed again and again rigging polls this is the terminology you use.
They do not include him in all polls. Then when they compare polls of candidates many times they are not even comparing the SAME polls. Can you not read?
Here's another perfect example..
FIND Ron Paul in this poll. Good luck because he isn't there.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_US_0823424.pdf
THis was another poll NewsMax did For Donald Trump- now they have pulled it..NO Ron Paul. You may want to ask NewsMax why they pulled their own poll after they got busted for not including Ron Paul.
http://www.newsmax.com/404?aspxerrorpath=/surveys/DonaldTrump/Donald-Trump-for-President-/id/11/kw/default?PROMO_CODE=BEFE-1
The funny thing about telling me how I feel about not liking results is this…. When Ron Paul wins we have talk show host saying their OWN polls were rigged, we have national media outlets taking down their own polls and changing results. Good grief, do you need video and screen shots to believe it ? As if it would matter at all to someone who has gone to great lengths to trash Ron Paul.
Video: CNN Disinfo. Refuses to Use OWN Poll; Ron Paul Win at 79% - Reports 0% Poll
http://youtu.be/OPY_6mjL3xY
UPDATE: Screenshot:
http://oi52.tinypic.com/24yqt7o.jpg
Sampling of 5 major polls, including CNN's own poll
http://twitpic.com/5bkyjm/full
Ok...then you bring in Matt Labash... Thanks for telling me which writers you hold in high enough esteem to quote..
Here is what Matt Labach says about Ron Paul - May 5, 2011
I LIKE Ron Paul. He’s quirky. He’s un-slick. HE SAYS WHAT HE MEANS, and HAS ACTUAL CONVICTIONS. I sincerely regret not taking his buy-gold advice 20 years ago. Now that it’s going for around $1,400 an ounce, if I’d listened, I wouldn’t need to write this foolish column to pay for my Primobolan steroids (I’m trying to get shredded like Paul Ryan, so that I look good by the hotel pool at the Republican convention in Tampa). There are many good reasons not to vote for Ron Paul, as you’ll find out if you ever attend a Ron Paul convention.But don’t worry about those. IF THERE'S ONE THING THAT SCARES VOTERS, IT'S HONESTY. And Ron Paul IS WAY TOO HONEST TO BE PRESIDENT.
That article you quoted has all to do with Knapp fearing that his very limited group of Libertarians (15,000) would be flooded with Paul supporters that would include GOP members that they hate. They fear losing their party base so they wage war on Ron Paul that could increase their party base? Meanwhile at the same time they admit that Ron Paul has brought more American's around to Libertarian ideas more then anyone else has in a very long time. So they spite themselves to target the man who has helped their party? Sounds like the same old dirty politics they claim to decry against with establishment parties.
Here is one of Knapps own friends who is in the same party setting him straight on his attack against Ron Paul.
Like I said..these were nameless, faceless, baseless hateful accusations made against Paul by Knapp. But when a dirt digger like yourself is looking for anything you can find you will "cherry pick" the part you like best while leaving out all the rest.
Tom Knapp and the "Cult" of Ron Paul, by L. Neil Smith Publisher, The Libertarian Enterprise 2007
I was was surprised to read Tom Knapp's. . . shall we say rather "sinuous" hit-piece on the Ron Paul campaign in last weekend's The Libertarian Enterprise. My old and respected friend is usually more direct.
And yet my old friend begins by listing for us what "The Problem with Ron Paul" is not, smearing the candidate just as badly—and, I might add, a great deal more disingenuously—than if he'd made his damning assertions directly. For example, in his very best FBI Hostage Rescue Team "This is not an assault!" manner, friend Tom accuses the maverick Texas congressman of being "the Houston area's most assiduous pork-barreler".
Now I don't know what that means, and neither do you, although you probably thought you did when you read it. If, as one assumes, Ron is the Houston area's only Congressman, then he is, at once, its most assiduous pork-barreler and its least assiduous pork-barreler. He's also the Houston area's most average pork-barreler. So I think it's incumbent upon friend Tom to make his non-accusations a little more specific.
If that's logically possible.
Next, friend Tom informs us that "The Problem with Ron Paul" is not his "longstanding associations with racists, of both subtle and not-so-subtle varieties", and then skittles off to hide behind some other unsubstantiated non-accusation without so much as an asterisk or a footnote to explain precisely what he intends by saying such a thing.
I don't know Ron Paul personally, although I've met him a couple of times. I'm willing to bet—and have been told by countless individuals who do know him—that there isn't a racist corpuscle in his bloodstream. To attack a man for what some of his acquaintances may or may not think (especially when the fellow's a celebrity—like a congressman, movie star, or, ahem, a novelist—with thousands and thousands of them) is a particularly nasty little liberal habit, entirely unworthy of the principled individual I know my old friend to be.
Therefore, I think it's absolutely obligatory that he name some names and supply some information about the nature of Paul's relations with these alleged racists—unless he'd like a banner at the top of the page like the one I've given the Democrats: "[523] Days Since Tom Knapp Accused Ron Paul of Associating with Racists Without Backing It Up".
Or, I suppose, he could apologize.
Next, Tom brings up the congressman's "anti-libertarian positions on issues like immigration and same-sex marriage" while maintaining that even these pecadillos are not "The Problem with Ron Paul". One might wonder why Tom failed to mention the good doctor's most anti-libertarian position, his opposition to a woman's control over her own reproductive system. That is, one might wonder if one didn't already know that Mr. Knapp suffers from exactly the same affliction himself.
"The problem with Ron Paul," Tom finally says, "is the uncritical cultism which so quickly took root in the rich soil of a maverick campaign and has since overgrown that campaign like a cross between kudzu and poison ivy. . . proceed[ing] from dismissive shrugs. . . to shrill denials and cries of 'smear!' in reaction to any mention of the. . . smaller problems. . . to excommunicative declarations on the part of some cultists: 'Anyone who claims that they are against Ron Paul and are also 'libertarian' are not libertarians.'. . .
I'm saddened to see this same cult mentality taking root [in] The Libertarian Enterprise."
I would be saddened by that, myself, if there were anything to it. But it turns out that the burr under Mr. Tom's saddle consists of an article we published by another old and good friend, Alan Weiss, an individual whose personal experiences with the Libertarian Party have deeply disgusted him and led him to abandon it for other libertarian undertakings. If there were some kind of "cult mentality" operating within The Libertarian Enterprise, we would hardly have published Tom's article, ironically enough, in the same issue as Christine Smith's uncompromisingly lyrical expression of her hopes for that organization.
Tom, my old friend, please pay attention. Listen closely. The name for what's going on in the freedom movement right now isn't "cultism". It's HOPE, back again for the first time in over thirty years—back "again" for the very first time in the lives of many a younger libertarian.
http://www.rationalreview.com/content/category/feature-articles
In it you will find many of the same exact political stances Ron Paul has. But Paul is the enemy eh? The only thing that makes Paul the enemy is the fact that he is running on the GOP ticket and this burns Knapps backside. Knapp is too dense to get it that America is not ready for a Third Party Presidential winner. In his arrogance to bite the hand that fed his movement a lot of members he has attacked it instead and brought unwarranted scrutiny to Ron Paul supporters. If you want to see who radicals are LOOK at their ideas for plans. THIS is the image that Knapp is trying to put on Ron Paul supporters. Yet in their own words you can see where they call themselves radicals and anarchists. which is ironically what all his ranting was supposed to prevent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you serious? lol
Ok, I added the U for UnAmerican. SaUL...Happy now?
Is this the depth you are reaching to now since all of your lies continue to be ousted about Ron Paul?
How about you add the A for asshole that is missing in your "ws" above. That'll make us even for me leaving out the U in your idol's name.
They are under no obligation to do so.
"FIND Ron Paul in this poll. Good luck because he isn't there."
So what? You also won't find Gingrich, Huntsman, Johnson, Karger, Martin, McCotter, McMillan, Moore, Roemer, Santorum or Shockley. All of whom, I believe, are officially running for the Republican nomination, although I apologize in advance if I left somebody out, or included somebody I shouldn't.
You also won't find any Green Party candidates in that poll. Or Socialist Party, or Libertarian Party, or Prohibition Party candidates. They've also excluded independent candidates Rosanne Barr and The Naked Cowboy Robert Burck!
"The funny thing about telling me how I feel about not liking results is this…. When Ron Paul wins we have talk show host saying their OWN polls were rigged, we have national media outlets taking down their own polls and changing results."
I looked at the images you provided. Those were easily-gamed online polls. I think it's dumb when people pull their online polls if they don't like the results, but I think it's even dumber when people act as if online polls mean much of anything.
"Ok...then you bring in Matt Labash... Thanks for telling me which writers you hold in high enough esteem to quote.."
I don't have to hold a person in high esteem to quote them. Do you?
"I LIKE Ron Paul."
That was the point of his article, and that's why I provided a link to it. He likes Ron Paul, but the behavior of some of Ron Paul's supporters puts him off. As the article points out, that off-putting behavior isn't limited to online forums and such, but occurs out in the "real world" too.
"Right here is a link to a truckload of articles that were written by or posted as an endorsement by Thomas L Knapp....In it you will find many of the same exact political stances Ron Paul has."
Again, that was my point. Knapp shares many of Ron Paul's political stances, but has issues with the behavior of many of the "cultists" who support him.
"Ok, I added the U for UnAmerican. SaUL...Happy now?"
If it was a typo, I understand. I make them all the time myself, although I'm probably more apt to actually leave out entire words. It happens to all of us. I wasn't sure if it was a typo or if you either didn't know the man's name, or if you were copying and pasting stuff without taking the time to actually read it and make sure it was correct, or not knowing enough about what you were copying to know if it was correct or not. You know, like the incorrect title of Barack Obama's book that you repeatedly used, which clearly isn't a typo. For future reference, it's Dreams From My Father, not Dreams of My Father.
Pamela: "FIND Ron Paul in this poll. Good luck because he isn't there."
Wil, So what? You also won't find Gingrich, Huntsman, Johnson, Karger, Martin, McCotter, McMillan, Moore, Roemer, Santorum or Shockley. All of whom, I believe, are officially running for the Republican nomination, although I apologize in advance if I left somebody out, or included somebody I shouldn't.
Pamela, Maybe not, but those candidates are not winning the same polls that these same media outlets championed as "great achievements" when other media darlings have won them. When Ron Paul wins they act like those polls suddenly mean nothing. If any other candidate wins and they get the same cold shoulder it is wrong and that is my point. You seem to be A-ok with blatant media bias and censorship to the extremes of fixing and election and some of us are not ok with that.
Pamela: "The funny thing about telling me how I feel about not liking results is this…. When Ron Paul wins we have talk show host saying their OWN polls were rigged, we have national media outlets taking down their own polls and changing results."
Wil, I looked at the images you provided. Those were easily-gamed online polls. I think it's dumb when people pull their online polls if they don't like the results, but I think it's even dumber when people act as if online polls mean much of anything.
Pamela, so now your 're an expert on polls enough to know if they are gamed? Read the above again and tell me how far you think the media should be allowed to go in order to fix an election? Tell me you do not think they use these polls to greatly shape the publics perception? They do not bother running them if they have not been proven effective in helping them to get the public to buy into their chosen puppet candidates.
"I LIKE Ron Paul." That was the point of his article, and that's why I provided a link to it. He likes Ron Paul, but the behavior of some of Ron Paul's supporters puts him off. As the article points out, that off-putting behavior isn't limited to online forums and such, but occurs out in the "real world" too.
Pamela, fair enough…my word usage of "high esteem" not yours. Still, it's your quote and as you can see he is not hardcore against Ron Paul. On this issue of the "behavior" of Paul supporters…it's called freedom Wil. I know it must be an extremely foreign concept to you to think that people act independently of group, of their own accord, but that is real life. The mix of supporters that Ron Paul has amassed is the pulse of what compiles America as a whole. It really astounds me that a group that compiles men, women, young students, seniors, veterans, small business owners, republicans, democrats, independents, etc, etc…would be so villianized because of the acts of a few. But this is the political way to marginalize, silence, and downgrade any movement today isn't it? Hand select the bad seeds and brand a whole group of individuals with that same broad brush of censorship and labeling. The reality is this country is in the shape it is in today because our people have allowed themselves to be so divided to the point that they cannot mount any real defense against the tyranny of what we are facing in government today. Divided we fall.
We are all brought together because we are tired of seeing our government act outside the constitution to steal more of our rights under the guise of safety. But by being united it does not mean we "all" take the fall for the unacceptable actions of individuals. Because we are "individuals" we expect that the blame for any behavior of an "individual" to rest solely on their shoulders to make amends for it. It's called personal responsibility which is sorely lacking in our society today. We have democrats who look away as the country is robbed blind of it's rights, while more wars are waged because their preferred candidate is in office and we have republicans who look away as their rights were taken and more wars were waged because their preferred candidate was in office. The people lose and the government grows in those instances. My point is this..not one candidate could or should try to control every supporter they have if they value freedom. The actions of that individual is where the blame should rest. But if we want to restore our freedoms we have all got to figure out how to come together.
I personally do not like the behaviors I see in some of Ron Paul's supporters either. But I recognize that this is not Ron Paul's behavior in question and I realize he cannot babysit and hold the hand of everyone who has come to his campaign. These are "individuals" who are responsible for their own actions. The same could be said of the supporters of any other group. But we do not see that same scrutiny do we? The media selects who they will label and which politician will not get a free pass for the same actions they see in the 'individual" supporters of others. As long as we as society refuse to keep the blame on the person who committed the action no one will be made to accept responsibility for their own actions.
Wil, Again, that was my point. Knapp shares many of Ron Paul's political stances, but has issues with the behavior of many of the "cultists" who support him.
Pamela, Really? THis was your point? Come on Wil..your point was to brand ALL Ron Paul supporters as a radical fringe group of cultist. Which you did again right here. Read the above again on what I said about personal accountability. If you read Knapp's work you will see where the tones are far more radical which is why Ron Paul started to pull away from that movement. Does this mean Knapp is responsible for the actions of all people in that group? Nope..read the work in the above link again and you will see these are Knapps words and not his supporters. Knapp is responsible for his own actions and his own words were to go after Ron Paul with unsubstantiated slander in order to cause him as much harm as possible. Why? Because Ron Paul managed to get a gathering of supporters in numbers that Knapp could only dream of? Who knows.
Either way, Knapp targeted the very man that could also help his group…which is probably why he still only has 15,000 members (his words not mine) and he is constantly begging for donations to stay afloat. There is room for us to come together but when infighting happens and peep start turning on each other..nope…it is not going to happen. Ron Paul has indeed shifted the perception of Libertarian ideas greatly in this country so for any Libertarian to admit that and then turn on him to such an extreme extent is self defeating IF their cause meant so much to them. To kick out everyone who does not immediately share the same ideology is also very self defeating and it is also why Ron Paul continues to gather more supporters. Not everyone who joins his base agrees with all his policies. His supporters are educated enough to explain those policies to them and many come around after they understand. That is how you get more support.
Now after saying all this I am sure you will be ready to drag out all the accusations and racist rants..spare me please that horse is beaten to death already. As revealed by the friend of Knapp's…there isn't a racist bone in Ron Paul and he doesn't have it in him to even go full force to get into the political mess of attacking his opponents on anything "personal" he attacks their "political positions" and there is a difference. For people who want a vicious political leader who makes it personal..he is not the guy for them. He stands on the principals of his positions for his campaign and he tries his best not to get dragged into a media created tabloid headline. Not always successfully but considering the great efforts the media takes to drag everyone into the cesspool of filth it's a wonder he has managed as many bullets as he has when they try to force him to comment on some other scandal they have dragged another candidate into. That is a class act and it is one we do not see often in politics. If Ron Paul's votes did not protect our freedom he would lose a lot of support. That has yet to happen which is why more supporters continue to come.
I don't know which polls you're taking about, but in any case, my point is that there are so many candidates, people will talk about some and not others. And that includes people in the media.
"You seem to be A-ok with blatant media bias and censorship to the extremes of fixing and election and some of us are not ok with that."
So you think people in the media should not have the freedom to talk about some candidates at the exclusion of others? You think they should be forced (by whom?) to talk about all the candidates? Or to talk more about Ron Paul because he's your preferred candidate?
"On this issue of the "behavior" of Paul supporters…it's called freedom Wil."
And I fully support their freedom to be annoying, both in person and online. But not their freedom from criticism, or from being held accountable for their behavior.
"I know it must be an extremely foreign concept to you to think that people act independently of group, of their own accord, but that is real life. "
Does that "freedom" stuff count for people who work in the media, too? Or are they different somehow?
"Because we are "individuals" we expect that the blame for any behavior of an "individual" to rest solely on their shoulders to make amends for it."
Last time I checked, "the media" and "the government" were made up of individuals, too.
"As long as we as society refuse to keep the blame on the person who committed the action no one will be made to accept responsibility for their own actions."
You mean like when you make accusations against "the media" instead of against specific individuals? Thanks for clearing that up.
Yes, that was my point.
"Come on Wil..your point was to brand ALL Ron Paul supporters as a radical fringe group of cultist."
Psychic powers again? FAIL! If I wanted to comment about ALL Ron Paul supporters, I would've said ALL Ron Paul supporters.
"As revealed by the friend of Knapp's…there isn't a racist bone in Ron Paul"
I don't think that's "the friend of Knapp's" call to make. But even if it's true, then I wonder how and why all those racist and homophobic comments ended up in those Ron Paul newsletters. It's a real shame that Paul has chosen not to provide straight answers about that.
Throughout this thread you have repeatedly posted about how Ron Paul Supporters harm him when they make post online and you also stated this happens even when you talk to them in person. As if supporters who tell people how great he is would harm him. Pahlease. The word you used for supporter was "plural" as in supporter(s) so give it a rest.
Still Not convinced of media bias? LOL
I gave you a truckload of examples of blatant media bias. Take your little finger and scroll up to see them again if you have already forgotten. No, I will not go out and do the homework for you to show you that every media talking head is guilty because quite frankly you would come up with some asinine excuse and it would be blown efforts on the likes of you.
Let's face it..this is not about you hearing any facts about this hateful crap you are spewing online. Now you think it's not Knapp's friends' call to make? Well whoop-di- doo. As if anyone cares who you think is credible.
I am beginning to wonder if you are the one who is "racist and homophobic" and you are really ticked off that these weren't Ron Paul's words because you would have voted for him if they were. If that's the case you do need to keep looking for another candidate because he's not your man if this is your cup of tea.
It seems to me that you're the one who might want to go back and reread what I've written. If you do, you might notice that I have mentioned "[a] lot of Ron Paul supporters" and "many of his supporters", but not ALL of his supporters. I've also talked about what I believe and what I think, but I don't pretend I'm psychic.
With regard to my belief that Ron Paul's supporters often turn people off, in addition to the examples I provided, I think the Urban Dictionary entries for various labels used for Ron Paul supporters offer more evidence for my belief:
Paultard: Yet another amongst the handfuls of insanely rabid supportes of the Ron Paul 2008 campaign for president.
People who feel compelled to relentlessly 'inform' the entire world about how Ron Paul is going to save America from the ravages of DC.
ronulan: Ron Paul freak who has no real grasp of reality. Some one who sits online and spams Ron Paul crap all day.
"Now you think it's not Knapp's friends' call to make? Well whoop-di- doo. As if anyone cares who you think is credible. "
No, I don't think it's Knapp's friend's call to make? Why would it be? And why would you think you know whether or not anyone cares who I think is credible?
How about pondering this definition because it fits you to a tee.
PROVOCATEUR
1. Agent provocateur
2. One who provokes < a political provocateur>
Examples of provocateur
A calculating provocateur, he has made a career out of controversy for it's own sake.
Related to provocateur:
Synonyms: Demagogue (also demagog), exciter, firebrand, fomenter, incendiary, inciter, instigator, kindler, agitator, rabble-rouser, troublemaker, goader, prodder, provoker; agent provocateur.
What used to be largely unappreciated and unknown to people in this country was the degree in which people were planted online with one purpose. That is to viciously slander a directed political target. Those days are over because the people are wising up to the same old filthy tactics after seeing them so repeatedly. One post that spreads malicious vile filth is marked down to curiosity. Repeated nonstop posts that are filled with nothing but provoking, incriminating slanderous filth is a public indictment.
To use your own words: Wil: "At some point, a group of "isolated" events becomes a pattern."
I could not agree more. Everyone has your "pattern" down now because it is not an "isolated event" it has been a steady and constant malicious attack. I should feel sorry for you because you seem to be too ignorant to get how transparent your vindictiveness is.
You have proven that you are serving no other agenda but to slander Ron Paul and attack his supporters. I cannot speak for Steve but good grief..accusing him of being a part of a "secret cabal" of thieves and murderers ??? That is way over the top even for a simpleton agent provocateur like yourself. I hope the paycheck is worth it. Then again, I may be giving you way too much credit to think anyone would even pay you to do this. You appear to be ignorant enough to be willing to be an agent provocateur for free. Your hate filled ignorance is reeking all over this board. Put down the tabloids and read a book of substance for a change it will do you wonders. You can start with Ron Paul's books but be very prepared to be very disappointed on the end of not seeing all the hate and vile you are accusing him of because it will not be found in his books. Nor will it be found in any of the hundreds of documented congressional records during his 12 terms of as an honorable congressman.
Here are a few titles. Do yourself a favor and really learn about the man you are going to extremes to trash.
"A foreign Policy of Freedom" by Ron Paul
"PIllars of Prosperity" By Ron Paul
"The Revolution: A Manifesto" By Ron Paul
"Gold, Peace, and Prosperity" by Ron Paul
"End the Fed" By Ron Paul
"Liberty Defined" By Ron Paul
Just in case you get "selective amnesia" that you are getting to be known for..here are your own words again revealing your hateful accusations against Steve.
"I hope you find the courage to tell your kids or grandkids that you...Were part of a "secret cabal" of thieves and murderers" who conspired against others to elevate Ron Paul to a position of power to act as their agent for the purpose of "extort[ing], plunder[ing], and murder[ing] the people who reside within the codified geographical territory called 'the United States'", even though he "can have no legal, rightful authority over anyone"?
Could you be more viciously incriminating and vague at the same time? No…because agent provocateurs have the sole mission to incite, provoke, goad, and do whatever it takes to get people to focus on their filth and hate instead of the merits of the person who is thrown into the pit of their unfounded, unwarranted, self propelled damnation.
What on earth did Steve say to provoke such a hateful and incriminating response from you?
Steve: Ron Paul is the only candidate right now who has a solid understanding of how we got into the economic trouble we're in, what is needed to get us out of it, and what policies are conducive to liberty, justice, progress and prosperity, for ourselves and for our descendants.
Making up excuses to not vote for him -- "he's unelectable" (which amounts to letting some self-interested pundit tell you who is "electable" and who isn't; might as well give him/her your ID and SSI# and let them go into the booth and cast your vote, too), or the "theory vs. reality" canard -- I hope you find the courage to tell your kids or grandkids that you had a chance to vote for someone who would have reversed the tide that swept them into mass poverty and serfdom, but let a bunch of propagandists convince you to vote for some cookie-cutter status quo candidate instead.
Wow…that really is a threatening message right Wil?
It takes a special kind of creep to go to these depths. It really does. Just when I think you cannot sink any lower Wil…you come through again and reveal..oh but yes you can and you will keep sinking lower and lower and do whatever it takes to reveal that there are no limits to what you will do if you could reap even the smallest of rewards to get just one voter to turn away from the only man who holds the promise to turn this country around.
Just by telling yourself, and anyone ignorant enough to listen to you that Ron Paul is not gaining supporters does not make it true at all. He IS gaining a LOT of supporters every day in spite of hateful actions like yours. Staying in that denial only reveals that you are the one who needs some serious help. But I can see now that staying in the grand delusions of denial is a way of life for you. Good luck with that.
LOL. Did you click the link? If you did, then you should have discovered that I was quoting Steve himself, in his Gather article, The Secret Cabal of Thieves and Murderers Who Walk Among Us, aka 'The American People'. In that article, he was, I believe, expressing the view expressed by some libertarians and anarchists, that voting is an immoral act. I don't agree with that view myself, but I can understand why some libertarian/anarchist types hold it.
"Just in case you get "selective amnesia" that you are getting to be known for..here are your own words again revealing your hateful accusations against Steve."
Actually, they're Steve's words. I only borrowed them. And provided an attributive link back to the source, as appropriate.
Thanks for proving my point again Wil. You're nothing but an agent provocateur who goes out of their way to manipulate messages in order to set up a misconstrued version of your provoked intent. Was that not enough of a response for your hate baiting agenda?
Wanna know what's funny Wil? I just let a teenage neighbor boy whose visiting his mom allowed him to read your work online. It took him about 5 minutes to size you up. He said "Whoa dude…this guy is seriously messed up. Does he know Ron Paul at all? Man, does he hate this country or what? Looks like the dude is trying to keep us on a path of socialism. Screw him…he is messing with my future too." His mother just said you're obviously an idiot. their words..not mine.
As you would say..OUCH.
LOL and you think grown adults online cannot see through your smear campaign and agent provocateur tactics? I guess it will work against uninformed voters who go for the tabloid trash. Too bad for you the internet is at the disposal of all people to check Ron Paul's proven Congressional records and see his plan at RonPaul2012 to help this country get out of the mess it is in.
No one else is saying they would end all these wars.
No one else would bring all our troops home from all over the world and make sure they are serving only in the role as the constitution mandates and that is protecting and securing this country and our sovereignty
No one else has consistently voted against raising the debt ceiling
No one else has consistently voted against higher taxes
No one else has consistently throughout decades voted to fight for our constitutional rights
No one else would get rid of the federal reserve, the IRS, TSA, Homeland Security, FEMA, or any of these other grossly overreaching unconstitutional government institutions.
No one else would eliminate the Patriot Acts which steal more of our constitutional rights
No one else would go after these unconstitutional trade agreements like NAFTA. CAFTA an the WTO
No one else would pull us out of the sovereignty threatening UN
No one else would stop the NAU
No one else would push back the FDA and reverse the new Food Tyranny bill
No one else would end the EPA and make sure that our current laws and current constitutional rights were used to the fullest to protect our land and assets against large corporations who are currently getting away with polluting vast tracks and then getting off the hook via these unconstitutional government created committees.
No one else would stop a draft as Chuck Rangel continues to try to shove in
No one else would stop all the foreign aid that is gutting our vital resources
No one else would stop the government from creating more monopolies on private industries such as student loans, car manufacturing etc, etc.
No one else would stop the federal government from unconstitutionally mandating that all people had to buy their monopolistically created healthcare plan
No one else would end these sham drug wars that are locking up nonviolent citizens and ruining their lives.
Sure, some of these other puppets may have similar stances..but when you LOOK at their votes in office (that is IF they have ever held office unlike Herman Cain) you see their votes do not back up what their new "campaign" promises say they would do in office.
Indeed…it doesn't take long to see why Ron Paul is such a threat to all these establishment puppets who would keep us on this same road to socialism induced poverty.
Unless you have a better candidate to offer and you are educated enough to clearly reveal how they would be better then Ron Paul you have nothing worth while to bring to this discussion. Some of us would like to see this country turn around to the betterment for "all" the citizens living in it and not just the "select' groups who have powerful lobbies behind them.
Severely. Limited. As in averaging 8.7% as of this week, down from 8.8% last week. Down from the 9.6% average peak he enjoyed briefly in the run-up to his loss in the Ames Straw Poll.
As in trailing a distant 4th behind Perry, Romney, and Bachmann.
Or a distant 6th if you consider the fact that Palin and Giuliani are consistently out-polling him even though they aren't officially in the race.
Severely. Limited.
I have asked you repeatedly to offer up a better candidate and reveal why you think they would be better and you cannot come up with anything?
You have no one to offer at all as an alternative to Ron Paul and yet you continue to extend a lot of energy attacking Ron Paul? Seems to me that your time is wasted if this isn't even a guy you would vote for. But hey it works for me because I have a selected candidate and I am well versed on his plan to turn this country around so I can educate others and help to gain even more support. So keep it coming. Who knows, there may be hope for you yet. I would like t have you on our team so you could put all this energy to good work for our country ; )
You have fun "educating" people about how awesome you think Ron Paul is, and whining about how you've been "enslaved" by the government and about how you think that "taxation is theft" and about your fight to win the race war you think you're engaged in.
As I said before, I think posts like yours are actually one of the many reasons why Ron Paul's popularity as a Presidential candidate remains so severely limited. 8.7%. Ouch!
You have fun "educating" people about how awesome you think Ron Paul is, and whining about how you've been "enslaved" by the government and about how you think that "taxation is theft" and about your fight to win the race war you think you're engaged in.
As I said before, I think posts like yours are actually one of the many reasons why Ron Paul's popularity as a Presidential candidate remains so severely limited. 8.7%. Ouch!
Hey Wil...it's a free country and I am all about protecting your right to live your life how you see fit...ironically this is what Ron Paul wants us all to have the freedom to do. To live our lives and spend our time how we see fit. To be able to prosper in a free market without government interference. His platform has a lot more to do with what he will not let the government do to our freedoms to live our lives as we see fit then what he wants the government to be able to do to us. Funny, that is what the constitution also does eh?
Thanks, I will have fun educating people about the awesome things Paul Paul can offer them as our president. There really is nothing more refreshing then to know we finally have a candidate who has real answers to help all our people.
You sure are a funny character in how your eyes seem to focus on issues and take segments of them way out of context and then how your brain processes them in a whole new very negative way .
THis must make absorbing new information a struggle. The good thing is what I said and the way I said it is on this board so you can re-read it to see it for the way it was written.
Nonetheless, yes I do get concerned anytime I see the freedoms of all our people being stripped away and yes if there is a candidate who has a record that reveals he will go to bat for the restoration of those freedoms for ALL our people..you bet I will go to bat for them.
It is disheartening to see you think so little of those freedoms yourself. But like I said, if we win that hard work to gain them back will also be done for you too.
In terms of the race wars..that too is extremely disheartening when we continue to see that this country needs to be united more now then ever before. We do not hear of other countries segregating themselves the way the US does with so many labels attached to the word American. As I have travelled I do not see it at all and ironically when I do travel I see Americans suddenly remember the common bond they share...that bond comes in the form of their individual rights as "Americans"..not as African Americans, latino Americans, Asian Americans etc, etc..but just as "Americans." THis is what Ron Paul offers to mend and it is why he continues to reach so many disconnected groups and bring them together. I am not sure what it is that sounds so horrible to you about any of this. I guess you will have to figure that out for yourself and decide what you are looking for in a candidate. When you finally decide you have found a candidate worth spending your time on I would be interested in hearing who that was. If you change your mind about Ron Paul..Like I said.. we have room...you are welcome to join anytime.
Poll: Obama would beat Rick Perry (and Sarah Palin) in Texas
Poll: Obama would beat Perry (& Palin) in Texas — but lose to Ron Paul &
Obama Loses To Ron Paul. Rick Perry Loses To Obama. - YouTube
Here's the deal...the clincher of this next election is said to be held in the youth vote
Look what is happening..
He did it last time around ...
Ron Paul Brings the Youth Vote : NPR
and those kids have given him more supporters since Obama has been in office
Ron Paul's Loyal Student Surrogates - CBS News
and he's doing it again
Why Obama is losing the Youth Vote to Ron Paul
Here is how it has helped the GOP...will they get how important this vote is?
Youth vote swinging to the GOP › 2.0: The Blogmocracy
Republicans Have a Shot at Winning the Youth Vote « 2012 ...
EconomicPolicyJournal.com: Will America's Young People Put Ron ...in the White House?
Young people overwhelmingly support Ron Paul for president.
Ron Paul has the youth vote in the bag. College students all over this country and all over this globe are campaigning for Ron Paul on their own. They are writing songs for him, making their own websites, Tshirts, videos, posters and campaigning on campus and online.
Since the job losses have hit college aged students the worst Obama has lost the youth vote that helped to propel him into the WH.
Palin scores dead last with the youth vote and they could care less about Bachman, Rudy, Romney, or Rick Perry. The original Ron Paul supporters in the youth groups want the real leader of that movement. So everyone else who has taken on Ron Paul's platform while emerging it into establishment agendas will not get the youth vote.
Young Voters Not Buying Brand Palin | FrumForum
Now that Ron Paul is gaining an even larger youth following look at what they are trying to pull off...
Bill Clinton claims GOP trying to suppress youth vote - The Hill's ...
Mind you last election season Obama had co-owner of Facebook in his back pocket sending out mass unauthorized notices to all their members for him. This time he has the other co-owner of Facebook and it will remain to be seen if he pulls out that illegal trick. he is also using all of the resources of the WH to hold roundtables and make videos directed at these kids. They are still not buying it because they are still unemployed. These kids are sick of being the most educated unemployed citizens of our country and rightfully so. Thus the "hope and promise" garbage that Obama spewed has been debunked this time around.
Can Obama Keep The Youth Vote Amid A Bleak Job Market?
Nope..
Obama's Young Ex-Fans - Elise Jordan - National Review Online
Survey: Recent college grads wising up about Obama « Hot Air
Obama Has Blown The Youth Vote « Rants & Rage
Romney couldn't get the youth vote last time around and he isn't getting it this time around either..
Romney could have young voter hurdle - Ben Adler - POLITICO.com
That's because I'm not here campaigning for anybody, or comparing Ron Paul to other candidates. I am discussing Ron Paul and why I think he has no chance of winning the Republican nomination, let alone becoming President of the United States.
Do we have to wonder why this country is in the shape it is in? This is what we are dealing with..people who are too afraid to admit what they stand for and people who have no clue which representative would best represent them because they really don't know the candidates. Do you stand for anything more then trying to stop a good thing for everyone else?
Who knows maybe you don't stand for anything but being an antagonist. As the saying goes Wil...if you are not in it to help...get out of the way of the people who are willing to do the work. Thus far you have not gone after any of the actual plans Ron Paul has to restore this country to it's former greatness. So if you are too afraid to claim any stake in any other candidate and too afraid to make a personal stand..let's talk about Ron Paul's political stances.
Do enlighten me and tell me which stances he has..be that on the military, healthcare, economy, taxes etc, etc..that you find are so egregious that you would never vote for him.
Please make up your mind, Pam. Just a few comments earlier you were whining about being enslaved by the government.
"It is disheartening to see you think so little of those freedoms yourself."
It's bizarre that you seem to think you can see what I think. In addition to your amazing psychic powers, do you fart rainbows, too?
"In terms of the race wars..that too is extremely disheartening when we continue to see that this country needs to be united more now then ever before."
I'm sure Ron Paul is quite the uniter, with comments like:and "Poll: Obama would beat Rick Perry (and Sarah Palin) in Texas"
I'm sure that'll come in handy if he ever runs as President of Texas.
" There is no way to prove Ron Paul would be better or worse then your candidate when you are too afraid to admit who that would be."
I'm not trying to prove that Ron Paul would be better or worse than my candidate or any other candidate. I'm not campaigning. You apparently are, and I encourage you to check your guy's numbers to get an idea of how well you're doing.
I also realize that hitting a few key strokes to check Congressional records is asking a lot of anyone who insist on believing lies but it would really serve you better to do just that "if" you truly are interested in Ron Paul and how he feels about racism.
Here I did the work for you and you didn't even have to hit one key...see Ron Paul's own words as found in government records that reveal his take on Racism.
Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.
The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity.
More importantly, in a free society every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Rather than looking to government to correct our sins, we should understand that racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty.
Sorry, wil, but I just couldn't help but notice. This Pam girl is a quick study. Didn't take her long, huh? hahahaha
Yea, I've got his number down. He refuses to reveal he stands for anything, supposedly doesn't represent any other candidate, and he's obviously only in here to dig up old refuted dirt because he has yet to address even one of Ron Paul's policies that he would be against.
This guy seems to have only one agenda…using smearing tactics to try to diminish any favorable news about Ron Paul. These disgusting tactics are getting old and it is increasingly disturbing to see someone like this who is willing to participate in spreading dirty propaganda with the full intent of ruining an innocent man's life. Indeed, what 'type" of person does it take to do something like this?
His tactics of taking things out of context and skewing them to have a whole new negative meaning is taken right of the Propaganda 101 playbook. I am not sure which is worse..the fact that his pathetic tactics are transparent to everyone around him or the fact that he is so clueless as to not grasp that "everyone else" can see what he is trying to do. It also seems they twisted the bell curve big time during his educational years because he keeps trying them again and again thinking he will get different results? I guess some people have to keep hitting their heads against a brick wall before they finally realize they are only hurting themselves.
Ron Paul's proven, and documented, impeccable record in office speaks for itself. It really makes you wonder what "kind of a country" this citizen wants when they would extra such efforts to try and trash a candidate like Ron Paul whose efforts in office have always been about preserving "his" rights too? Oh well, we can't save some people from themselves.
If choose to believe Ron Paul when he claims that he didn't write the racist and homophobic comments in his newsletters, that's up to you. Until he provides evidence that somebody else wrote them, I see no reason to believe him.
"But you keep running out there with them because it appears as if you have nothing left in your defense when called to the task of actually revealing to me what issues you have with Ron Paul's political stances as her offers us as presidential candidate. This is what you keep saying you are dead set to focus on right?"
No, I haven't said even once that I am "dead set" to focus on my issues with Ron Paul's political stances. My main focus in this particular discussion thread has been Ron Paul's polling numbers .
But with regard to Ron Paul's claim published in Texas Monthly that he didn't write the newsletter articles, I think it's worth keeping in mind that 5 years earlier in 1996, Paul indicated to the Dallas Morning News that he did write them:Then he changed his story for the Texas Monthly article, explaining that "his campaign staff told him that 'it would have been too confusing' to come right out and say that he didn't write any of those articles." Yeah. Too confusing.
But hey, Ron Paul's "take" on racism sounds real nice, and should be good enough for everybody to just ignore all the racist and homophobic stuff published in the Ron Paul newsletters, and what Thomas L Knapp (2008 Boston Tea Party VP nominee) described as Ron Paul's "longstanding associations with racists, of both subtle and not-so-subtle varieties".
Ironically, you were just served information revealing that all this crap you have been spreading about Paul's "polling numbers going down" were proven to be incorrect and here you are back with the racist rants?
Make up your mind Wil…which is it? Are you here for the "accuracy" of the "poling" about Ron Paul or are you here to do your best to trash him?
For someone who claims to ONLY be interested in Ron Paul's "polling numbers" you sure offer a lot of unsubstantiated trash on what you think you know about what Ron Paul said years ago. He says these were not his words…but you think you know better? Where you there? Seriously..are you even of adult age? I would feel terrible to find out I was dealing with some kid here. Is that your dad in the picture? Tell me something…do You trust a media empire that has been busted repeatedly for ruining reputations based upon lies, for rigging polls, fixing elections and creating the news to fit the climate of the time?
Ah but the "media" wouldn't do that would they will? I am not fan of Rick Perry because "his policies" have been horrible for Texas./ but hey it appears as if the golden boy is not above the media false slanders of racism either.
Ed Schultz Paints Rick Perry Racist With Out-Of-Context Clip. Then ...
MSNBC selectively edits quote to advance claim that Perry is racist
However, it is very interesting that when it is an establishment puppet who has his OWN book published with racist comments..…the media is suddenly dead silent.
Racist quotes from Barack Hussein Obama's "Dreams Of My Father ...
"That hate hadn't gone away"...."white people — some cruel, some ignorant, sometimes a single face, sometimes just a faceless image of a system claiming power over our lives." Barack Hussein Obama from Dreams Of My Father
"There were enough of us on campus to constitute a tribe, and when it came to hanging out, many of us chose to function like a tribe, staying close together, traveling in packs. . . It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names" Barack Hussein Obama from Dreams of My Father
"I found solice in nursing a pervasive sense of grievancee and animosity against my mother's race" Barack Hussein Obama from Dreams of My Father
Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/elections/293823-racist-quotes-barack-hussein-obamas-dreams.html#ixzz1W5xLvIwS
Since you are such an un-informed voter as to have no one "else" in mind for this election…the fact that your education on Ron Paul seems to be severely narrowed down only to racist slander reveals how disinterested you really are in learning about the candidates.
No doubt you will not go near Ron Paul's verifiable political activities while he has been in office for 12 terms because you might just find out that no one else has a record like him in office. That is indeed what matters when someone has been IN office and they are running for the highest office of this land right Wil? Isn't it important to check their proven voting record to reveal the direction they would lead this country into? Or is that important at all to a slander-seeking voter like yourself?
If you can steel away a thin slice from your rigid narrow minded stance about Paul..See how Ron Paul is not racist at all. hear his OWN words from him on video tape. See what he would do for all our citizens of all races who are currently suffering under the current system.
http://www.libertypoet.com/ronpaul/unfairsystem/
Now if you want to open Pandora's box for everyone who has been accused of racism, gay bashing, or any other issue…we can go there too. I assure you very few elected rep's and not one candidate who is currently running for office can escape these accusations. The pathetic thing about all of this is your intense focus on the attack of speech, even when it is what you do not like hearing, or what I do not like hearing, we still have freedom of speech in this country. Barely…but yes it is still there. Not for long if political correctness is allowed to completely silence all opposition. Nonetheless, as I shared before..the ERA changes what is acceptable about speech. It has been this way for decades and decades. Which is exactly why we have gone from a truly open society -free to speak to one that carves up every sentence to brutally scrutinize it to the point of leaving the original intent unrecognizable.
If you decide to get serious about political issues that have to do with what Ron Paul would do as president of this country and you finally wake up enough to want to talk about the real issues on the table.. let me know. Otherwise your antics have become as disgusting as a cheap tabloid photographer who keeps doctoring a picture hoping to score big on the suffering of his victim. This is serving no positive purpose whatsoever for helping our country get out of the nightmare we are currently in. Then again, how silly of me to think that someone who has worked so hard to manipulate this board with asinine allegations would ever take real issues of this country seriously. But hey...I am open to seeing you come around Wil. Surprise me.
Ironically, whatever your information might have revealed, it certainly didn't reveal that Ron Paul's polling numbers aren't going down. Because they are. Also, to whatever extend my comments about Ron Paul's newsletters are rants, they're anti-racist rants.
"Make up your mind Wil…which is it? Are you here for the "accuracy" of the "poling" about Ron Paul or are you here to do your best to trash him?"
I have no interest whatsoever in discussion any "poling" associated with Ron Paul.
"For someone who claims to ONLY be interested in Ron Paul's "polling numbers" you sure offer a lot of unsubstantiated trash on what you think you know about what Ron Paul said years ago."
I have claimed to be ONLY interested in Ron Paul's polling numbers. And all the quotes from the various Ron Paul newsletters that I have quoted have been substantiated. Due to the fact that Ron Paul has, at different times, indicated that he was the author and also insisted that he was not the author, there are questions about who actually wrote those messages, but there is no question that they appeared in his newsletters, and that he and his family profited directed from the sale of those newsletters.
"He says these were not his words…but you think you know better? Where you there?"
No, I wasn't there. Were you? he says they weren't his words, except when he said that they were. And even if they're not his words, I don't think that helps his case much, given that they were published under his name, in his newsletters, and he and his family profited from them. Pretty much any way it all actually happened, it doesn't look good for Ron Paul. Except, I suppose, for those who share the racist and homophobic views expressed in those newsletter excepts.
"Seriously..are you even of adult age? I would feel terrible to find out I was dealing with some kid here. Is that your dad in the picture?"
I'm not sure why it should matter, but yes, I'm of adult age, and I'm old enough to remember Ron Paul from his first failed attempt to become POTUS, when he ran as the Libertarian Party candidate back in '88. That was the first presidential election I was old enough to vote in, and at the time I thought I might want to get involved in the Libertarian Party. Ron Paul was one of the reasons why I didn't.
Those are your racist quotes? Wow, ok. I don't think any of those comments compare to telling people to make sure they're armed and know how to use their guns so that they'll be ready to fight the coming race war of the 1990s. It's a shame you got the title of the book wrong, but oh well. I tell you what, if Barack Hussein Obama ever comes out and says that he can't be held accountable for those comments because he didn't write that book and he doesn't believe anything it says, then I'll not only call him out on it, I'll say he doesn't deserve to be elected Treasurer of an Elks Lodge (they let black guys join the Elks these days, don't they?).
"If you decide to get serious about political issues...let me know."
How about if I just decide for myself which political issues I'm serious about, and I don't really worry about letting you know?
"This is serving no positive purpose whatsoever for helping our country get out of the nightmare we are currently in."
Surely not anywhere near as positive and helpful as you telling me to "be a man", telling me to "get ready for your panties to go in a wad", to "add the A for asshole", etc. I'm sure your doing those sorts of things will go a long way towards helping the country get out of the nightmare you feel that it's currently in.
You say you thought you might want to get involved in the Libertarian party but Ron Paul was one of the reason why you didn't? Ron Paul is the reason why anyone decided to take another look at the Libertarian party today. You're just lucky I do not judge the Libertarian party based upon your support because it would make me say forget it.
You're far more interested in bringing up trash talk then talking about the actual issues. I can get all the tabloid trash I want on hundreds of channels of the clone media and in a majority of the rag magazines they are calling "investigative journalism".
Wil: No, I haven't said even once that I am "dead set" to focus on my issues with Ron Paul's political stances. My main focus in this particular discussion thread has been Ron Paul's polling numbers .
Wil: I have no interest whatsoever in discussion any "poling" associated with Ron Paul.
Wil: I'm not trying to prove that Ron Paul would be better or worse than my candidate or any other candidate.
Wil: That's because I'm not here campaigning for anybody, or comparing Ron Paul to other candidates. I am discussing Ron Paul and why I think he has no chance of winning the Republican nomination, let alone becoming President of the United States.
Wil: If choose to believe Ron Paul when he claims that he didn't write the racist and homophobic comments in his newsletters, that's up to you. Until he provides evidence that somebody else wrote them, I see no reason to believe him.
Wil: But hey, Ron Paul's "take" on racism sounds real nice, and should be good enough for everybody to just ignore all the racist and homophobic stuff published in the Ron Paul newsletters, and what Thomas L Knapp (2008 Boston Tea Party VP nominee) described as Ron Paul's "longstanding associations with racists, of both subtle and not-so-subtle varieties".
Here are his repeated mantras..I wonder if he has them tattooed so he will remember them?
Wil: I said that I believe that the types of comments from Ron Paul supporters seen here and in countless other online discussions are part of the reason why Ron Paul's popularity as a Presidential candidate remains so severely limited.
Wil: As I said before, I think posts like yours are actually one of the many reasons why Ron Paul's popularity as a Presidential candidate remains so severely limited. 8.7%. Ouch!
THis is one of my favorites..
In addition to your amazing psychic powers, do you fart rainbows, too?
I can see why you might think that, if you didn't understand the differences between "polling" and "poling", or the difference between being mainly interested compared to only interested.
"THis is one of my favorites..
In addition to your amazing psychic powers, do you fart rainbows, too?
And there you go again, using those psychic powers to know why people do or do not choose to get involved with the Libertarian Party, or what I am or am not interested in and why.
Wil: I can see why you might think that, if you didn't understand the differences between "polling" and "poling", or the difference between being mainly interested compared to only interested.
Pamela: This is DejaVu of your anal insistence that the U was needed for the correction of the un-American SaUL Alinsky ..I guess you didn't mean it when you said this..did ya Wil?
Wil: If it was a typo, I understand. I make them all the time myself, although I'm probably more apt to actually leave out entire words. It happens to all of us.
Pamela: You say you thought you might want to get involved in the Libertarian party but Ron Paul was one of the reason why you didn't? Ron Paul is the reason why anyone decided to take another look at the Libertarian party today. You're just lucky I do not judge the Libertarian party based upon your support because it would make me say forget it.
Wil: And there you go again, using those psychic powers to know why people do or do not choose to get involved with the Libertarian Party, or what I am or am not interested in and why.
Pamela: Nope..it's called giving someone a taste of their own medicine Wil. You have repeatedly tried to marginalize and degrade Ron Paul and his supporter(s). You were acting like "you" knew why "other people" did not support Ron Paul and you put that blame on his supporters... Which first inclined that people were not coming to him and then blaming his supporter(s) as the reason. You can twist that however you want it is not going to change your words.
How does it feel to be in the receiving position of this same crap? Especially when it paints you in an unfavorable light ?
Indeed, no one sits down for this kind of defamation of character and I am no exception. Neither are you and I only did it once to you.
Read your words again and then scroll through this thread because these are but examples of the many times you did this.
Wil: I said that I believe that the types of comments from Ron Paul supporters seen here and in countless other online discussions are part of the reason why Ron Paul's popularity as a Presidential candidate remains so severely limited.
Wil: As I said before, I think posts like yours are actually one of the many reasons why Ron Paul's popularity as a Presidential candidate remains so severely limited.
Yes, I did. I wondered whether it might be another typo, but since you put the word within quotation marks, I took that to mean that you were attempting to emphasize the word, to try to indicate some kind of special, possibly ironic, meaning.
"You were acting like "you" knew why "other people" did not support Ron Paul and you put that blame on his supporters."
If I wanted to indicate that I knew why they were or were supporting Ron Paul, I would've said so. Go back and read what I said, noting my uses of phrases like "I think" and "I believe" (see, they're right there in the two examples you quoted). It looks to me like you're the one trying to twist my words.
Additional notes worthy for an agent provocateur like yourself..
Agent provocateurs will spin, distort, and twist everything that comes their way. What is commonly perceived in a sentence to all around them is defensibly denied with rigor and contorted to have a whole new meaning to the agent provocateur when he is called to the task to answer for his deliberately worded statement intended to be as provocative as possible.
At least you are good at one thing. Too bad it is not for anything productive. Lest you be reminded that your kind of low life's have become a dime a dozen online. How's it feel to be just another number in a group of hate filled propagandist out there Wil?
You may want to reconsider how valuable your rights are as an "individual". Then again that would mean agreeing with one of the many very good stances of Ron Paul's about our freedoms. We all know that will never happen with an agent provocateur like yourself who is doing all he can to get off topic about Ron Paul's qualities president and turn the discussion into a hate filled Ron Paul bashing. When that doesn't work you go for the asinine debate about semantics. Do you really think you are not transparent?
This is getting extremely sad. I now liken you to small child hiding behind a very skinny tree who thinks no one can see him. We all see you Wil. Find a better hiding place.
I'm not hiding. I'm right here.
I find it bizarre that at the same time you're leveling personal attacks at me, you're also likening me to a small child who's trying to find protection by hiding. Do you feel more comfortable attacking someone whom you imagine to be a defenseless child?
God help us all if this is the pulse of the average voter out there.
Are you proud of yourself Wil…do you feel like your mission is accomplished yet?
Wil: I'm not hiding. I'm right here.
I find it bizarre that at the same time you're leveling personal attacks at me, you're also likening me to a small child who's trying to find protection by hiding. Do you feel more comfortable attacking someone whom you imagine to be a defenseless child?
Pamela: Trust me..no one sees an agent provocateur as a harmless little child. LOL Keep dreaming. You forgot this one..
Wil: Surely not anywhere near as positive and helpful as you telling me to "be a man", telling me to "get ready for your panties to go in a wad", to "add the A for asshole", etc. I'm sure your doing those sorts of things will go a long way towards helping the country get out of the nightmare you feel that it's currently in.
Pamela: If the shoe fits you will wear it. I will go a step further now to say you aren't even a real man. Indeed, here in Texas a real man knows what he stands for and he has no issue at all in revealing what he stands for. A real man also knows who he stands by in his life and in politics. A real man doesn't spend all his time trying to trash an honorable man. A real man also knows the current dismal state of his own country and he rises up to do what he can to turn things around. He doesn't run and hide and cower behind semantics and psychological online nonsense.
Tell me, what kind of a "man" does it take to keep hashing and rehashing trashy garbage with the obvious intent to destroy a good man and all his supporters?
Have you said "racist and homophobic" enough yet to believe it yourself or are Ron Paul's congressionally recorded nonbiased, nonracist, honorable words coming back to haunt you?
Indeed, it appears as if I gave you way too much credit for thinking you stood for more then Trashing Ron Paul and his supporters Wil. Shame on me for thinking there was anything of substance underneath all your propaganda. The low down dirty underhanded tactics you have used on this board would not make you a good match for a candidate that is trying to bring integrity back to the office. But hey, you will have your pick of all the other sell out puppets establishment candidates who just LOVE supporters who operate exactly the same way as you have. Forget campaign stances because they have none. That's the game right Wil? Trash a person of integrity over old hateful accusations that were refuted while you avoid his political stances like the plague because you know that would be the death kneel of your efforts to destroy him. He is known by his works. Does this mean anything to a low life like you? Probably not.
If you detect a tad bit of anger…deal with it..it is justifiable. Unfortunately for you, I am not Ron Paul..I will not ignore the personal attacks. I will dish them right back out. Unfortunately for you and all these efforts you have exerted against Ron Paul, he IS gaining a LOT more supporters and he will KEEP getting more supporters in spite of all your trashy efforts to attack him.
Here is what is happening in your own country that you seem to think is not a nightmare. Don't worry no one will expect someone like you to do a thing about it. We need real men to help this country rise up Wil..and you do not fit that description. Americans are fed UP with being sold out and they are fed UP with losing their rights. They know this next election means everything in terms of what will be left of this country 4 years later. When the current sell out in office is spending 3 million dollars a MINUTE…while waging more wars, stealing more of our rights, doubling the size of Bush's government, keeping patriot Acts, adding national enslavement Service Act, taking over student loans, and private industries, bowing down to the UN, unconstitutionally enforcing sham Cap and Trade global taxation schemes, outsourcing more jobs- destroying our critical infrastructure, as 42 million are on food stamps, while more are working for the government, more are dependent on the government, as the tax base continues to dwindle to reveal guess what…who will pay for all those government workers and the people who are now dependent on government? Some of us SEE what is happening IN this country and YES we DO call it a NIGHTMARE. The real estate crash along with the grand foreclosure activity sweeping this country is kicking more Americans out of their homes. Add that mess to the insurmountable debt from the bail outs for Wall Street, the Federal Reserve rip off of the century to the tune of trillions of dollars they have indebted Americans to and you will see why our shelters are filling up, and why our veterans are living in the streets, as unemployment is going into Depression era record levels…but this is NOT a nightmare to you? It is MY nightmare eh? Indeed..the next election cannot come a minute too SOON.
Ron Paul is the only one who would end these wars.
The only one who would go after these insane trade agreements.
The only one who would get us out of the UN to protect our soverignty
The only one who would get the government out of these monopolies of control in student loans, housing, small business red tape, car making, education, food tyranny,etc etc..so the PEOPLE and the states and the free market could finally have freedom to bring this country up to the greatness it is capable of.
Mind you, he can turn this insane deficit around in 3 years. Do any of these other sell outs look like they have an answer like this? NO, they don't, because they all offer us more of the same crap we have already been dragged through. So it really doesn't matter which sell out you prefer over Ron Paul Wil..no one else has the answers to drag us out of this hell hole that socialism has dragged us into.
Who do you think you are fooling? Do you think you are the first low life provocateur instigator in politics? We have seen all your nasty tricks before Wil. These baiting tactics you are using are nothing new. We have had low life's like you for decades in this country. There will be more where you came from I am sure. You repeat the propaganda that Ron Paul is losing supporters hoping there will still be enough sheep followers out there who will believe it and just move on. Think AGAIN…the people are sick of people like you and they are fed up with the sell out media. They want a REAL leader in office and Ron Paul is the ONLY one who has had the answers for YEARS. If the sell outs in office would have listened to him we would not be in this shape today. The fact that he has had the answers to turn this country around are now SO obvious that even his political detractors in office, and in the media, are having to backtrack and admit it. Those are the facts so deal with it. Your hateful diatribe will be met with disgust and disdain from here on out because too much is at stake to lose this next election to another sell out .
If you do not stand for something you will fall for everything…you are the perfect personification of what is wrong with this country.
Is this the "provoked" response you have been hoping for? I sure hope so because you got it and I have plenty more where this came from. This election is TOO important to let a loser like you step in to keep us on this same path of self destruction.
Ron Paul 2012
PROVOCATEUR
1. Agent provocateur
2. One who provokes < a political provocateur>
Examples of provocateur
A calculating provocateur, he has made a career out of controversy for it's own sake.
Related to provocateur:
Synonyms: Demagogue (also demagog), exciter, firebrand, fomenter, incendiary, inciter, instigator, kindler, agitator, rabble-rouser, troublemaker, goader, prodder, provoker; agent provocateur.
Save it Agent Provocateur…you have no political stances you are willing to even admit to "publicly" much less be man enough to back them up. You have No political candidate you will dare to even admit to backing much less put up against Ron Paul. You have nothing to offer but derisiveness, hate filled propaganda, and division.
We the people are ready for a real leader who has the real answers for "all" people and not select groups.
Go back and crawl under the rock you came out of.
His rare (these days) opposition to constantly engaging in wars, which we used to call being a "hawk", or "war-monger", but now seems to be treated like it was some sort of routine procedure . . as well as his insistence on the rule of Law (as in fidelity to the Constitution, our civil rights, shared power and not this 'Unitary Executive' deal) leaves me little choice, I feel. He may be a Republican by Party, and a 'Libertarian' by ideological label, but he's a lot more like what I used to think of as a loyal American than anything else . . . And he's just so consistent and straight forward, that I feel I can pretty much trust him not to play "dictator in chief" or whatever, if he does get into office. So, it's not all that important if some of his positions seem a bit "extreme", 'cause without the bending and twisting of the processes we have seen from the last few Administrations, that don't translate into extreme laws.
I simply don't trust the standard fair the Parties offer up anymore. Those are our rights that are not being respected for goodness sake, every time they reboot that damn Patriot Act . . and that's our tax dollars they are handing to the financiers and "too big to fail" corporations . . This joint is looking more like a Fascist police state all the time to me . . The red/blue game is not for real anymore I don't think, and mass media is just a part of the charade . . just more mega-corporate BS . .
I see no reason why "classic" American Dems would not opt for this guy, in light of the present political climate. Labels be damned I say, they don't mean what they say anymore.
Go back and look at some of the Obama video, and even Bush's constant "sincere" talk about military adventurism and nation building ... they are all liars, and when they get in they really give no excuse for it.
We are in denial that our system even works a little bit. But whatever happens the whole media-govenrnment facade seems like a distraction, a decoy to me, there is nothing there so there is no real way for people to complain about anything, it's all in this idiotic 7x24 mainstream BS.
We have a tyranny with a well hidden and very powerful group of tyrants.
So ... what is there to do about it?
As it sits they are beating the war drums against Iran and they are taking marching orders from the UN to place sanctions on Syria. No one who promotes these wars will get elected..NOR should they. If there is anything we need to add in legislation...while I think we need much LESS legislation...it would be to make these elected reps sign a contract for these grandiose campaign promises..if they do not vote for those stances and follow the platform that got them into office we should have the right to immediately remove them and replace them via a special election. Right now they face no accountability for selling the people out again and again until the next election. That changes when we kick them out and keep them out. If they are already in office and their votes do not match their "new" campaign promises then we should not let them stay in office.
The media needs to be held fully accountable for the role they too are playing in these fixed election.
Thus said, Ron Paul is the man.. I will vote for him and so will my 30 buddies regardless of whether he's on the ticket?? Why? Becase he is the best man suited for job and he is not evil, but right and his record of voting based on individual freedom is impeccable.
I will gladly see the Repubs lose this election if they continue act like hypocrits like the libs.. Obama will destroy our country just as fast as any lesser of 2 evil republicans apart from Ron Paul.
Hey libs.. Ron Paul will even let you vote to legalize marijuana in your state. California might be an Red state if Paul is the man
Liberals who want freedom and end to foreign wars! Vote Ron Paul
These drugs wars are only destroying our young people's lives and locking them up like hardened criminals.