Ron Paul Wins DC Poll With Landslide And Give AWESOME Speech!

Originally posted by Wookiep
Check the history of this one. You'd be wrong about the "unbiased" part. This is an extreme left wing liberal

You hear that boys? Im an extreme left winger (that should make me communist? why not just say that?) and I have it in for Ron Paul. Watchout!

but he/she isn't someone who would listen to a libertarian, any more than they would listen to George Bush. He/She apparently is so politically biased, that it wouldn't matter what anyone says,

Listen to libertarians? I've had plenty of that, plenty of that on this forum. To put the political agenda of libertarians straight, they want to give state governments absolute power. This has litte to do with individual liberty, no no, they want state governments to dictate invasive laws over the individual as they once did before. Slavery? Once a matter dictated by state governments. Millions of americans were enslaved by their state governments, communities. Racial segregation, ban on interracial marriages? Once mandated by many state governments. As an american citizen you could not move freely and mix with a loved one, friends, merely because of the colour of your skin, in your own state! Each an every time, the federal government, for all their imperfections, had to step in to protect fundamental individual rights. State governments, libertarians want absolute power to state governments, well... excepting for guns.... yep, who needs individual rights when you got your gun assured huh?

Right, as if the 2nd ammendment is the only thing in this country that should qualify as individual liberty. You want me to take you seriously on this? Really? Is Ron Paul going to run on over the same nonsense that kept this country backwards through all these years. Please, by all means, I'm all ears, continue to explain your position as a libertarian and a Ron Paul supporter.

You hear that boys? Im an extreme left winger (that should make me communist? why not just say that?) and I have it in for Ron Paul. Watchout!

What is that even supposed to mean?? You're a total biased left wing fraud. I don't care how many different ways you try to paint it. You come in to all these "Ron Paul" threads and tell lies like clockwork. Go tell your "boys" lol. Who the hell cares about your little shout-outs to your "boys". You're exposed. Tough shiz for you, pal.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


I merely stated RP's name wasn't in your article, I didn't say it wasn't in others. take a chill pill.

You answered your own question, RP didn't want the stimulus, he voted against it, when he lost that, he and other reps voted to allocate the unspent funding to Nasa. I've heard RP back scientific research before.

I mean, what is so hard to understand here? I would've done the same thing as him.


Jeez, you make RP seem like he is the rest of the bunch, when he obviously isn't. what? an honest person? can't be...somebody that actually speaks out against the fed!? how dare he! somebody that wants to stop policing the world? get out! stop printing money out of thin air? who are you!

reply to post by Southern Guardian


And to your next little quote

To put the political agenda of libertarians straight, they want to give state governments absolute power

You have GOT to be the most ignorant poster I've ever seen. You just keep thinking that pal. ABSOLUTE power?? No, more like powers given to them that the FEDERAL government doesn't need to be controlling, like...I dunno.... Abortion?? Keep up the lies tho, as long as you can remain a left wing liberal, without bias.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


oh just stop with your individual rights, PLEASE, I beg you to prove where Ron Paul says he is against individual rights.

And find another politician that wouldn't fight harder than him to fight for you individual rights. Now I truly believe your trolling here.


p.s. if you're truly for individual rights, you'd declare your sovereignty and help your fellow man to get on that path, instead you just complain about abortion-actually that is why you always complain about. please...

Heres a plus though, I prefer conversing with you over the megatroll tinfoiltp.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

I merely stated RP's name wasn't in your article,

Hey buddy, I provided a source for you with Paul's name. I'm glad you got it.

RP didn't want the stimulus,

No he didn't, he voted twice against it and criticized the supporters behind it as being part of problem. Insisted that the "states" and "businesses" needed to sort out this issue themselves.

he voted against it, when he lost that, he and other reps voted to allocate the unspent funding to Nasa.

I loved the way you tried to word that. Let me just put it another way:

Ron Paul voted against it twice, insisted it was going to cause this government more trouble, and criticized those folks who supported and took from it. Then he goes in the backround, and votes to use some of that very stimulus to save jobs.

He's a hypocrite.

I mean, what is so hard to understand here? I would've done the same thing as him.

Yes you would. Your views are the same as his, all talk, no walk. If you are against the stimulus and you feel government has no authority using that money, you'd be against using it, period.

Jeez, you make RP seem like he is the rest of the bunch,

I do? Really? I must be doing a great job bringing that point back to ya'll then.

when he obviously isn't. what? an honest person? can't be...somebody that actually speaks out against the fed!? how dare he! somebody that wants to stop policing the world? get out! stop printing money out of thin air? who are you!

He wants to end the FED!
He wants to withdraw TROOPS!
He will continue to protect your gun rights!
So ignore the rest of his invasive policies, many of whom he wishes State governments dictate over individuals, just ignore that and support him on those issues! Yes! Great logic!

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Your agenda and bias became clear as soon as you said "Ron Paul doesn't have a media blackout". The media has blacked out almost every positive poll result he's received, frozen him out of every GOP debate he's participated in recently, and when he does get some precious air time, they ask him ridiculous questions and/or attempt to make him look like a candidate with no chance.

Your entire stance seems to ignore the whole dilemma of the election/debates/MSM coverage being rigged and bought. You're acting as if this is a fair, legitimate race, where the best man will win.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


what are you talking about? he voted against it, twice. Applause.

The stimulus was passed, so he and other texas congressmen and/or women voted to put the unspent funds in a place that was agreed upon. He walked his walk, he couldn't stop the stimulus bill so he made a bad situation into a better situation for his constituents. What do you want him to do? pout, kick and scream until they reversed the stimulus bill?

What world did you come from?


edit: after this post, I realized this conversation is going nowhere so this will be my last post to you. Feel free to take the last word, I'm not against that.

Afterall, its your individual right!

Originally posted by MysticPearl
You're acting as if this is a fair, legitimate race, where the best man will win.

It is very fair. Are you not a libertarian? Do you not support the free market? Why must things be fair for you and you only?

Why must the private media report to your liking? Because you think something is biased in the media, the media must cater to your own needs and views as to what's not biased? That's rich. It would have been enough to just say you think the media is biased, but then you go on and equate this to the entire GOP primaries being illigimate. Please, if Ron Paul wins the primaries, he'll get the attention. What you view as personally significant and insignificant before hand means little, so stop whining and let him actually prepare for the primaries to prove he has what it takes to get the vote.

If this is what Paul supporters are going to do every election, whine about how they don't like the fact Ron Paul is not getting attention to their liking in the media, how people shouldn't "hate on Ron Paul", how do ya'll expect him to have the backbone to get the presidency? Seriously?

reply to post by Southern Guardian


well said.

they ignore the obvious.

so no sense expounding.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

what are you talking about? he voted against it, twice. Applause.

And then he ended up using it to save jobs in his own states, and he gets your applause. Nothing is going to change your mind evidently.

He walked his walk, he couldn't stop the stimulus bill so he made a bad situation into a better situation for his constituents.

By using the stimulus that he voted against using in the first place for his constituents and others. Right.

What do you want him to do?

Be self reliable as he claims. Refuse the stimulus federal money that he saw as unconstitutional, socialist, and prove that his district and private businesses within his district could solve the problem by themselves. But no, he ended up requesting the stimulus funds be used anyway.

I don't have an issue with the stimulus being used to save jobs, I just have an issue with his hypocrisy, and your clear attempt to brush it under the rug. That's fine though, it's your deal. The more I look into this man, the more holes I see through his ideology.

my last post to you.

Feel free to rejoin the conversation when you wish. I'm not going anywhere.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Why must the private media report to your liking? Because you think something is biased in the media, the media must cater to your own needs and views as to what's not biased?

Yeah, that's funny considering you're always complaining about the "bias" the right wing media performed and continues to perform against Obama. Why do you even bring that up if you are so "unbiased"? You only support the media when it's in your parties favor. Why not call it like it IS and be against ALL political biased lies and nonsense from the media??

Southern Guardian = Hypocrite.


ETA: you obviously support the LIES about Ron Paul all the way from 2008!

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by MysticPearl
You're acting as if this is a fair, legitimate race, where the best man will win.

It is very fair. Are you not a libertarian? Do you not support the free market? Why must things be fair for you and you only?

Why must the private media report to your liking? Because you think something is biased in the media, the media must cater to your own needs and views as to what's not biased? That's rich. It would have been enough to just say you think the media is biased, but then you go on and equate this to the entire GOP primaries being illigimate. Please, if Ron Paul wins the primaries, he'll get the attention. What you view as personally significant and insignificant before hand means little, so stop whining and let him actually prepare for the primaries to prove he has what it takes to get the vote.

If this is what Paul supporters are going to do every election, whine about how they don't like the fact Ron Paul is not getting attention to their liking in the media, how people shouldn't "hate on Ron Paul", how do ya'll expect him to have the backbone to get the presidency? Seriously?

I actually feel a little sorry for you. You think it's all legitimate. You think your vote counts. You think if the MSM presents a candidate as a front runner, it must be true, and he's deserving of being there. You don't see the influence corporations have on the elections and debates. You seem to think the news is in fact fair and balanced, and we're getting honesty.

No use in arguing with someone who see's the world that way.

Sure, Ron will get the attention he deserves if the wins the primaries. And why do the other candidates the attention before the primaries? Why is the coverage prior to the primaries so bias? When we point out the complete lack of coverage, you say it's just whining, because you've bought into the propaganda. Either Ron is being blacked out by the media, and we have no business whining, or the media has no agenda, no bias, is honest, and we're all just seeing things. Sure.....

Originally posted by Wookiep
Yeah, that's funny considering you're always complaining about the "bias" the right wing media performed and continues to perform against Obama.

Yes, that is true, I have made accusations of bias on certain websites and news channels and I never denied there was bias in media. By the least I understand and understood before that the media doesn't have to play fair and never have, that they don't have to cater to my views of "impartiality" and "fairness". I already wrote a thread specifically on why the media has the right to report whatever the hell they want. People need to educate themselves, get their facts from a variety of sources. Those who are easily swayed by one media source, or certain media sources, well thats at most a fault of their own ignorance, not necessarly just that of the media.

If you're going to post something from a biased or non-credible source, I'd certainly call them and you out for it, I wouldn't however insist they act to my personal preferences.

You only support the media when it's in your parties favor. Why not call it like it IS and be against ALL political biased

First of all, what party do I represent? I would support a presidential run from Dennis Kucinich and even better as an independent, but he ain't running this elections, and I certainly don't support Obama and the Democrats in general, so, where are you going with this? Sounds like you're just generalizing me and I don't think it does much good to your argument.

Originally posted by MysticPearl
I actually feel a little sorry for you.

Ah, a moment of compassion. I can feel the warmness.

You think it's all legitimate. You think your vote counts.

I do actually, yes. I have not seen any concrete evidence to point to the elections being rigged. I am also fairly certain that if Ron Paul won these elections, you'd automatically change your tune about whether the elections are rigged are not. It's convenient to bring up some conspiracy when elections are not going your way.

It's a shame you know, the primaries are not even around yet and already you're calling the elections rigged. Are you going to even give Ron Paul a chance? Where is your faith in RP?

You think if the MSM presents a candidate as a front runner,

You you can read my mind? Howw??

Look, the primaries have not even started yet and I already stated that the only thing that really matters in these primaries are the actual primaries and voting from the states. The candidate who gains more support than the others in the primaries is clearly the front runner. I don't need the media to confirm that for me. I stated in my first post about the hype of the different GOP candidates in this thread below.

You don't see the influence corporations have on the elections and debates.

I see alot of influence, and the ruling from the supreme court didn't help this issue anymore. But candidates have the choice to refuse corporate influence and money. No corporation is pointing the gun to their heads. I don't believe that corporations should have unlimited donation and lobby rights though.

And why do the other candidates the attention before the primaries?

Once again it depends on perception. The media hops from one candidate to another. Remember Bachmann and all the hype from her following the strawpoll? Now it's almost as if she's not running. The media will play favourites until the primaries come around, and then the candidates will get the opportunity to play their policies to the voters themselves.

reply to post by ModernAcademia

Were there any boos as CNN Cliams?

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Are you blind and deaf?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Ron Paul voted against it twice, insisted it was going to cause this government more trouble, and criticized those folks who supported and took from it. Then he goes in the backround, and votes to use some of that very stimulus to save jobs.

He's a hypocrite.

No he's not a hypocrite, he's a great representative
Allow me to explain

He was always against stimulus money and bailouts, but then why did he vote for NASA money?
Because the stimulus was already approved and if he said I don't want it then remaining dollars would just go to the executive branch or to other districts.
Since this is his district he represents people that want their money back he voted to put it in his district.

It's that simple, it's not hypocrisy it's his stated logic since quite some time now and this is what he always does.

So the answer is simple, he represents people that want their money back. And to not have voted like this would have been irresponsible.

Check this


Also this, please watch the videos then respond

media coverage


CNN acuse Ron Paul to cheat

reply to post by Southern Guardian


You are right.. Straw polls mean nothing. What matters is truth and peace. His message has not even gotten out there yet. He is just getting started. The more he is rejected by the poisoned system the more empowered he becomes to truly speak his mind and heart. He is smart. He is letting it build appropriately so alarmists cannot paint him as an extremist. His true message of Peace and change is radical. Radically true.

As we are forced to support the rotten tooth a growing number of people are encouraging us not to be afraid to allow it to fall out. We can see that yes, it might hurt for a moment but naturally it must come out to allow for the new tooth to come in. Holding in is poisoning us. it is rotten, it is not meant to be saved. Peace and love and courage.