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 The Dirtiest Most Negative Campaigner Of All Republican Candidates

page: 8
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


He should run as an independent.

The Republican and Democratic parties are TAINTED. They are one and the same.

A vote for either Ron Paul or Obama is STILL a vote for a one-party system masquerading as a two-party system!




posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 
Eric, is that you bumping your own site on ATS? Conservatives Network is laughable, uses selective post approval to control the flow of discussion, and refuses to post or consider any information that rebuts what they present (then accuses anyone providing of not being interested in discussion and bans them from further posting).

In this article, they talk about the "Gestapo"-like tactics of Paul supporters (as compared to the same of Paul opposers, the party in general, the media, primary election 'irregularities' in NH and other states and party conventions in 2008, and so forth).

They talk about being rude to Giuliani - but discount the treatment Giuliani, other candidates, and the media itself in the debates and post-debate follow-ups gave Paul and his supporters.

They aim for guilt by association by discussing actions of individual Paul supporters (worthless argument there).

They dig into pork spending talk regarding earmarks, which is laughable as earmarks merely allow congress to assign the funds for allocation instead of leaving it up to the executive to spend the funds at will (best for the taxpayers to actually get some benefit from this as compared to providing an even larger blank check for Obama with no accountability).

Then the discussion of the ads - none of which attack the personal lives of any candidates, but reveal how they have handled themselves (and the taxpayers) in the public sector - how terrible.

The Reagan/Perry ad - this gave me a chuckle. So Paul supported Reagan's stated goals of small government and low spending, which Reagan then ended up not upholding once in office (at which point Paul left because the party had betrayed it's values and wasn't living it's supposed conservative talk), while Perry supported Gore's views on bigger government. Not sure I'm seeing the issue...

As to Santorum and Bachmann hating gays and muslims? Well, just listen to their jingoism and demagoguery on these topics sometime, and the fact that their policies paint all in these groups with the same brush as well as endanger civilians and liberty to a large degree - it's not a hard conclusion to draw.

Such a tragically laughable site, quite simply.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


He should run as an independent.

The Republican and Democratic parties are TAINTED. They are one and the same.

A vote for either Ron Paul or Obama is STILL a vote for a one-party system masquerading as a two-party system!


He could still staff his administration with his own picks, if he can find anybody not bought by TPTB. CFR surrounds every President. Did you know that the Secret Society Skull and Bones has many members go on to become CFR and are put into many positions of power in industry and banking as well. That is why one individual is hard-pressed to make any real change. The media is complicit. It is not just about corporations, it is about the secret societies who staff all the organizations who are tied in to the conspiracy on one level or another. It is too bad popular activist movements are blaming Capitalism and not the Secret Societies dedicated to the NWO.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Can a mod please delete this unnecessary thread please? This is political trolling at its best the OP is not offering anything but slandering; no evidence, no reasoning, no refutation on a view but rather attacking an individual.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiracy Now
 


I second this motion.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 


nor as it seem the political experience as one so long in the tooth as i am

all i am saying is this . IF we want America restored to past greatness, we must do ALL we can to bring about the desired results . so we must try to find and elect the man that at least has the right ideals.
ending the fed is one giant step in the right direction.
RP is the ONLY one that advocates this of all the candidates



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 


Epic coming from you when you are defending the OP's right to verbally attack Ron Paul, slandering a real person. So I do not have the right to express myself in the same manner towards a fictional character online. And you claim I'm the hypocritical one.

There's a time to choose what you stand for and what you fight for, and if you don't choose - then others choose for you. In this case you are defending the OPs slander and expressing your hurt e-feelings about being talked down to. I love practical examples...don't you?



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
The Ron Paul supporters are asking for the banning of members that oppose him...hmmm thought you guys were all about freedom and such.

I am guessing that only goes for people who are with you.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 

Ron Paul is our hope you are committing treason.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
When they/them say that best future president Ron Paul is dirty or negative read dirty meaning "honest" and negative is "realistic"



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Just skimmed this thread and it's only good for agitators seeking some more prey. Suggest Ron Paul supporters to just take it in humor and save replies for a real conversation. Just a waste of time here with a few playing games.
Other ATS threads may be more informative and intellectual.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
Source


Who is the most negative candidate in the 2012 election race for Republicans? Ron Paul is the dirtiest and most negative campaigner in the 2012 Republican race for president.



Oh the irony, Ron Paul is the king of Mud.
The good doctor of integrity who has been thowing tantrums and raging away from CNN interviews is actually the dirtiest campaigner out of them all.

This is a great article with sources to back up every point they make.


If ever there was a perfect description of a "shill", it is you buddy.

Seriously, I'm not even a RP fanatic, and I can see your post is intentionally inflammatory. Shouldn't there be some kind of moderator rule set against bringing onto these forums any kind of negative and misleading campaign propaganda?

If not, there should be. This site is sorely lacking a contingency plan for handling disinformation such as this.
edit on 25-12-2011 by yourignoranceisbliss because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by kerazeesicko
 


A swing and a miss...

their posts should be removed because it is political trolling and baiting. I don't mind reasonable discussion, but to slander someone to such a degree without any evidence...it is clear what mods should do. However they don't. Why they don't remove it? My guess is they are busy or just not paying proper attention.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 


All Ron Paul supporters have ever done is complain about bad coverage on their now proven less than transparent leader.

I am not whoever you are trying to label me as from that site. I simply did a google search for current articles on Ron Paul and that site showed up on the first few pages.

There are countless articles on how poor Ron Paul is being mistreated by exposing his Newsletters to the public.

This story is great because it sheds light on the fact that his campaign is fighting just as dirty as the rest, using anything from their oppositions past against them mercilessly.
They are distorting Ron Paul's own record to appeal to Reaganites left in the GOP, the article cites the evidence they found for that.
His campaign is not transparent, not perfectly honest, and not the poor red headed stepchild that everyone is being unjustly mean to, that they are desperately trying to portray him as.

The Source not offering open discussion has no bearing on the content and is a moot issue since any and all discussion about it is happening right here. This has included repeated attempts to derail, change the subject, to open pleading for censorship begging this sites Moderators to close this thread.

This little gem made my day though, apparently discussing anything negative about Ron Paul's campaign is now an act of treason?????



Originally posted by southbeach
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 

Ron Paul is our hope you are committing treason.



I sincerely hope that is just an opinion of one disturbed person and the collective of Ron Paul support doesn't seriously consider that an argument. I would not be too suprised if they made that a talking point though judging from recent history.
edit on 25-12-2011 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-12-2011 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


Yea okay, your not doing any political trolling, just informing us all that Ron Paul attacks other candidates with adds and eats babies.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


What a joke, I support RP but am not convinced that he can beat Obama because I think that the GOP will put Mitt or Newt or Huntsman as there front runner against Obama and RP will break off and run Independent which is not bad if he can pull the Republican votes with him, but if most of the votes are spread between RP and the GOP nominee IT WILL NOT BE ENOUGH TO REMOVE the WORST POTUS in history...

Sniper's 1000yrd windage guess...



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


Yea okay, your not doing any political trolling, just informing us all that Ron Paul attacks other candidates with adds and eats babies.


Where in the source or anyone's post in this thread, has there been an absurd accusation that Ron Paul "eats babies" ?
Very disturbing tactics Ron Paul supporters resort to when faced with opposition. Arguments like that are helping to make "dirtiest most negative" fit like a glove.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 
OK - good to know you're not Jeff.


This story is great because it sheds light on the fact that his campaign is fighting just as dirty as the rest, using anything from their oppositions past against them mercilessly.

Well, I haven't seen any of Romney's ads so I can't speak for them, but I hadn't noticed any particularly dirty fighting. As far as Paul's ads, I don't see discussing candidates' political histories as negative either - if a candidate is going to represent themselves a certain way, evidence to the contrary is fine - same with Paul and the newsletter issue. The media (and everyone else), though, should also be willing to look at the issue in full and account for other information that modifies their narrative.


They are distorting Ron Paul's own record to appeal to Reaganites left in the GOP, the article cites the evidence they found for that.

Did you watch the ad in question? Paul stayed true to Reagan's ideals that were mentioned - Reagan and the party didn't, instead expanding government spending and size.


His campaign is not transparent, not perfectly honest, and not the poor red headed stepchild that everyone is being unjustly mean to, that they are desperately trying to portray him as.

Well, I won't speak to anyway "desperately" trying to cast the campaign as abused, but what hasn't the campaign been transparent or honest about? And the media bias against Paul (extending well beyond this issue) is pretty well documented by their own statements as well as independent studies.


The Source not offering open discussion has no bearing on the content and is a moot issue since any and all discussion about it is happening right here. This has included repeated attempts to derail, change the subject, to open pleading for censorship begging this sites Moderators to close this thread.

Fair enough. I won't say some supporters don't overreact or push things to far - we're human, just like all the people who don't like Paul and act in similar fashion.


This little gem made my day though, apparently discussing anything negative about Ron Paul's campaign is now an act of treason?????

...I sincerely hope that is just an opinion of one disturbed person and the collective of Ron Paul support doesn't seriously consider that an argument. I would not be too suprised if they made that a talking point though judging from recent history.

Yeah...see what I said just prior. I can somewhat understand the sentiment, but it's definitely going too far, and definitely lies outside the mainstream view of Paul supporters (who are, despite some claims, generally just regular americans like anyone else who happen to feel that Paul has the best understanding of the issues and represents their most pressing concerns - such as my lifelong-republican parents and the many like them).

Hope you're having a merry Christmas.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


So telling the truth is dirty?


Well then.


In the kingdom of lies, truth is treason. I believe we all know who said those words.
sel

It's clear from your posting trends that you're a bee, maybe paid, maybe not. Who cares. You sting where you can against Paul, then run away once you are proven false, only to die in your own lies.

Well, enjoy. Because now you'll have to run away again.


Attack ads are not bad. You use them to destroy liars. And I would love to design them myself. You're a coward and under the republican whip if you don't run those ads. You must run them if you have any sense in you. Otherwise you're just an oligarchy protecting your brothers and sisters of the same lie.




top topics



 
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join