It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul is a feeble old man

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by obamafan14
reply to post by justamomma
 


Not at all, He seemed completely lost during the debates, he could not debate at all.


i thought he was the only candidate that
made any sense at all at the debates.

even with all the LOADED QUESTIONS he had to put up with..
he still kept his cool.....not like all the other SELL OUT POLITICIANS.




posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 02:47 AM
link   
First of all, why is this even in the breaking political news? Unless I've missed something and "Obamafan14" is actually some alias for someone who matters this isn't even remotely newsworthy. Rather it should go into the "Political opinions & bullquackery" forum which should probably be created immediately just for threads like this.

Secondly, if you actually judged the man based on the charades that were advertised as debates, then you really weren't paying close attention this political season. Those so-called "debates" were nothing more than tossing BP fastballs at the politically "elite" candidates while throwing 100 MPH chin music at the faces of the non-MSM friendly candidates like Paul, Hunter, and, to a lesser degree, Gravel on the DNC debates.

The instant it became apparent that Paul had a rapidly building appeal and was starting to smoke everyone in internet fund raising and grass roots support, the MSM ran out their machine to discredit the man. I saw on the same night Chris Matthews say (paraphrasing all of these examples) "Why are people throwing money away on Ron Paul when he doesn't have a prayer?", one of CNN's analysts said "Paul's not even a long shot, this race is between Guiliani and Romney with McCain playing the spoiler." and Bill O'Rilley went down the list of candidates saying every one had a chance until he got to Paul and he said "Ron Paul, no chance at all. He can't win." This was fairly early in the campaign and, interestingly enough, it was just about the time his campaign started losing steam in public polls (once again, convenient that media polls show exactly what the media wants them to.)

If you spend anytime at all on the internet you should be smart enough to know that we're not our parent's generation anymore. We can NOT allow the media's garbage to pull the wool over our eyes like they grew up doing. I also would say that anyone who claims to have been a supporter of Ron Paul's ideals but then switches over to Obama because Ron Paul is "feeble" is either a blatent liar and was an Obama-ite from day one or else they have a weak grasp on their personal political morals. The two men are on totally different ends of the political spectrum with Paul being a conservative constitutionalist and Obama being a liberal socialist. This is like going from eating 64 oz steaks with every meal to being a strict vegan cold turkey... the two simply don't agree with each other and are in conflict.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by obamafan14
Before I began to support Obama, I was a really enthusiastic Ron Paul supporter. I was in a local shopping square where I was handed a Ron Paul flyer. I read the flyer and realized I support everything Ron Paul was running on. There was one problem it turns out Ron Paul is a feeble old man. What first made me come to this realization is the reporting of the racist posts of Ron Paul's newsletter. Now I have no doubt in my mind Paul is not a racist but he is very incompetent for allowing this writings to go on in his name for so long. Also Ron Paul is a pathetic debater. His debating style during the debates is to seem like a crazy old man or become exasperated. If he was half a decent speaker he would of destroyed those weak republican candidates. Instead he just looked a little crazy. His campaign ran a terrible campaign, look at his christmas ad it looks like a family video made on final cut.


I am honestly sorry, but I must have woken up in the twilight zone today..

This is absolute insanity, he has given more substance to his debates than any candidate i have ever seen in my entire life. He was the only one FIGHTING for our constitution. What in the heck is going on? Did I miss something?

How judgemental of a person are you? Do you even know who funds and who Obama really is? This is utter madness!



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 06:53 AM
link   
Why is this in the Breaking Political news forum? I wasn't aware personal opinion passed for that.

[edit on 3-7-2008 by Parabol]



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 07:43 AM
link   
he is the only person who told the truth, the only person ive ever thought wanted to really make a difference to peoples lives and to stop this stupid war.

he was and still is swimming agaisnt the tide of current ideas in america, it was never going to be easy! people like hype in the states they (not all i might add) dont have the brain power to work out whats really been said and from watching some obama and clinton rallies all they do is say "change" and people lap it up.

The average person will only vote for people they see on tv the most!! you think the people in power dont know that?



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by obamafan14
 

I can't imagine you would sit there and tell me Bush looked any better in his debates. Is there anyone that looked more lost in front of a camera. This fellow has said so many stupid things they are to numerous to mention.
If you really paid attention to the debates no other candidate would even challenge Paul on issues. They with the help of msm would rather paint Paul as a nut case, a loose canon who would take us under. But if you really think about it, what else could they do. He was correct on all the issues they discussed, and a lot more informed on issues of importance's to the people.
Look at what he said about our economy, and he has been bringing this up in Congress for years. Now where i am disappointed in Ron Paul is that he didn't back the impeachment bill that just went through Congress. That worries me some. If he really was on the side of truth why wouldn't he back this impeachment. Its not like it would cost him his seat in Congress. he won his district by a landslide. Just food for thought.

Love and Light



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:00 AM
link   
I thought that Ron Paul answered the debate questions well ... when he was asked a question ... you really can't make much of an impression when you are only asked 2 questions during a 2-hour debate and even then the questions are about aliens and other conspiracies to make you seem like a nut to the American people ... the media and those in power don't want a man in office that would actually change this country for the good ... i will still vote for Ron Paul this November and if enough people "Patriots" will do this with me we can make a difference



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:04 AM
link   
lol, I love it, obamafan14 hasn't posted past the first page...

... I guess I wouldn't either if I just made myself look silly.

oh, and I guess to make this post somewhat significant and not off topic...



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Give me a feeble old man who is honest and wants to help America - rather than a strong young man that flip-flops, deceives and only has the corporate interest in mind.

Change? I highly doubt it.

That's the most laughable platform I've ever heard of a candidate running on.

All these hate threads posted on Obama and McCain are just ridiculous. Now, people have reverted back to Ron Paul again. I had planned on voting for Obama since Ron Paul had all but conceded his candidacy a while back. But, now I think I'll just write Paul in on the ballot - more outta protest than anything else.

I like Obama more than McCain, but I think they're both puppets for special interests, so I may just offer up a protest vote ... and let the chips fall where they may. Both of their supporters seem delusional and ignorant of anything they stand for.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Im still going to put Ron Pauls Name in the right in ballot for the 08 Presidential Election. His people didnt even run his campaign, it was ALL grass roots, thats why he lost. People in the USA are tools for thinking that voting will get them the person they want in office. Its not hard to see that this election was rigged from the medias stand point. They never even asked Dr. Paul any serious questions in ANY of those stupid/worthless debates.

Cant wait tell we see how worthless this next Presidents policies are.....we will look back at this election just like that last 2 elections and say, " WHAT THE HECK DID I EVEN VOTE FOR? "



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by tyranny22
 


I agree with everything you said.
I was just not going to vote, even though I would prefer Obama in rather than McCain, but I'm going to write Ron Paul in.
I dont even consider myself a republican, but Ron Paul is the mang!

I'm 23 yrs old and havent been able to vote in an election because I'm not a US citizen...
I get my US citizenship on the 22nd of this month...
My FIRST presidential vote will be for Ron Paul...
I'll be able to sleep easy at night knowing I did the right thing.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kanati
reply to post by obamafan14
 

I can't imagine you would sit there and tell me Bush looked any better in his debates. Is there anyone that looked more lost in front of a camera. This fellow has said so many stupid things they are to numerous to mention.


Except that George Bush actually IS an idiot lol.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:45 AM
link   
I'm a Canadian citizen but I've been watching some of the campaigns and debates on internet feeds and for anyone to say Ron Paul is feeble is ludicrous. This man wants to help you! He can give a great speech when given the opportunity. Like others in this thread have mentioned, all of his questions in debates were slanted and all the commentator's responses were sarcastic, sly, or a simple misconstruing of his words to make him sound like he wouldn't protect the people of his country. He was not given a chance on the media level, it's sad really that the zombies can't even recognize good will anymore.

Ron Paul is not the one who will fix the US, he is an idea man and a dam good one. He will give the American people something to gripe about but by the next presidential election the same people would be grovelling at his feet asking him not to leave. But he would pave the road for someone of the new generation who is willing to put up with all the idiots like the OP of this thread. He is the first politician I've heard myself address the trillions of dollars of debt the "richest" country in the world has, and he has a plan to start repaying it. What will McCain and Obama do about it? NOTHING! They'll ignore that debt and build on it just like all the other tools that came before them.

I think a politician who can't deliver a "perfect" speech is much more trustworthy and reliable than someone who practices how to make people believe them. He is educated, experienced, and exercises common sense, something which we should start calling uncommon sense apparently considering how many people are lacking it.

EDIT: Just wanted to add that if I were an American citizen I would bring in white out to remove the other names from the ballot and write RON PAUL with a fat Sharpie. Probably throw in 18-20 exclamation marks as well just for emphasis.

[edit on 3-7-2008 by Scurvy]



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   
I too, was one of those that foolishly thought that standards, decency and clear unvarnished truth telling would make a good candidate. Once again, I have deceived myself. Paul had too much faith in obsolete ideas like the Constitution, individual Liberty and personal responsibility. Now I see that he was just another Luddite, trying to cling to such unfashionable and outmoded ideals. I have been told so by the more enlightened among us.

Clearly, if he was serious about winning this election, and becoming leader of our rapacious and evil empire (as I have been told it is so) he needed to have more celebrity backing. He needed a gold-tooth, perhaps two, and a chorus of dancing hip-hop girls behind him. He needed a hip, colorful cartoon character to sell his breakfast cereal; which consisted of old dried out flakes of the Constitution, and is unbearable to the modern palate.

Clearly, his refusal to “get with it” and promote quick-fix elixirs and get-rich-quick-at-the-expense-of-your-fellow-taxpayers schemes, was his undoing. He manifestly displayed his crochety old, stubborn clinginess to fossil ideals.

Now I know better, and am ashamed and embarrassed to admit any admiration for him in public. I am fully chastened. I have learned to do as Peter and issue a denial every time the cock crows. You less enlightened supporters should learn to do the same, if only to preserve your remaining dignity.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by passenger
I too, was one of those that foolishly thought that standards, decency and clear unvarnished truth telling would make a good candidate. Once again, I have deceived myself. Paul had too much faith in obsolete ideas like the Constitution, individual Liberty and personal responsibility. Now I see that he was just another Luddite, trying to cling to such unfashionable and outmoded ideals. I have been told so by the more enlightened among us.

Clearly, if he was serious about winning this election, and becoming leader of our rapacious and evil empire (as I have been told it is so) he needed to have more celebrity backing. He needed a gold-tooth, perhaps two, and a chorus of dancing hip-hop girls behind him. He needed a hip, colorful cartoon character to sell his breakfast cereal; which consisted of old dried out flakes of the Constitution, and is unbearable to the modern palate.

Clearly, his refusal to “get with it” and promote quick-fix elixirs and get-rich-quick-at-the-expense-of-your-fellow-taxpayers schemes, was his undoing. He manifestly displayed his crochety old, stubborn clinginess to fossil ideals.

Now I know better, and am ashamed and embarrassed to admit any admiration for him in public. I am fully chastened. I have learned to do as Peter and issue a denial every time the cock crows. You less enlightened supporters should learn to do the same, if only to preserve your remaining dignity.


This post had better be a joke. I would be ashamed and embarassed if I posted what you just said without a [ SARCASM ] ... [ /SARCASM ] around the whole post.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 10:16 AM
link   
I tend to agree this doesn't appear to fit the 'breaking political news' scenario.
Nevertheless, I have to say; if you perceived him a being a 'lost' and 'feeble old man' it is unlikely that your perceptions are entirely trustworthy.

Who you choose to support is your own affair. I hope you enjoy the results.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scurvy
[This post had better be a joke. I would be ashamed and embarassed if I posted what you just said without a [ SARCASM ] ... [ /SARCASM ] around the whole post.


Once again, I have deceived myself. I had a moment of deluded thought where I assumed that the offered opinions of gold-teeth and cartoon characters would boldly emblazon this post with “Sarcasm” made of fifty-foot high neon letters. Apparently not. And yes, this post is a “joke” in the sense of being facetious but apparently that is lost too somewhere.

This also illustrates one of the problems with American political discourse today: too many cannot “read between the lines” or look at what a person is implying or really saying without having it explained to them. That partly illustrates my point above. Voters today are taking everything at face value that the major candidates say, without looking at what they really mean when they say it. Both candidates are taking full advantage of this and Paul failed to do so. Shame on him (SARCASM!!!!).

In fact, you bring up a good idea; not only should my post be tagged with “Sarcasm” in blazing script, I think it should be flashed across the screen every time Obama or McCain opens their mouth. Also the scroll at the bottom of the screen should constantly update us on the speech in progress with: “A lie; Another lie; Biggest lie ever told; So big a lie it staggers the imagination; Can you believe this guy? ” etc.



[edit on 3-7-2008 by passenger]



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by passenger
 


Haha I was really hoping it was a joke. It sounded so much like a standard response from the average joe that I got confused myself. Kudos on the ability to assume the identity of a zombie impeccably.

I do love the idea to flash LIE on the screen every time Obama or McCain opens their mouth... or in the case of Bush a big WTF IS HE TALKING ABOUT?!? in flashy neon letters (perhaps with Flava Flav in the background?).



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Been watching republican debates and so far, Ron Paul outstands them all. I was very much impressed of the ways on how he defends the elegantly simple and consistent philosophy of liberty. However, the consistency of such was very much ideal that I myself, almost forget that we're living in a very imperfect world.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 10:41 AM
link   
So what if he is older and more soft spoken,for that matter that Obama guy looks like a scrawny character,he's much younger so whats his excuse,I'll take Paul over anyone running hands down



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join