[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Santorum exposed Paul for the joke he is. I can’t believe how blatant Paul’s appeasement platform is. Shameful.
[/quote]
Actually Ron Paul schooled that neocon sociopath and put him in his place. So many mindless drones around here.
[quote]cloakmanor wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Santorum exposed Paul for the joke he is. I can’t believe how blatant Paul’s appeasement platform is. Shameful.
[/quote]
Actually Ron Paul schooled that neocon sociopath and put him in his place. So many mindless drones around here.[/quote]
Really…the only thing that Ron Paul put in their place was his dentures. I know, I know he’s great free drugs, no wars, we all just mind our own business and the bad guys won’t even know we’re here bla bla bla…
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
More Ron Paul kookiness:
‘I’d like to get rid of the Department of Education, the Department of Agriculture, just go down the list get rid of it…cut the budget in half. Everything that’s not constitutional, that’s a good place to start…the Department of Education should be cut, it’s unconstitutional!’[/quote]
Yeah fuck the Constitution. Who the hell needs it? It’s just a goddamn piece of paper anyway right. Hell, let’s toss the Bill of Rights. We don’t need limited government. We need our wise overlords to tell us what is true and what isn’t. Haven’t you figured out yet that politicians lie as often as they blink?
Ah, yes. The wonderful Department of Education. Yes we see how great of a job they have done with America’s kids. It’s so “kooky” to cut wasteful spending. Why? Well because that is what my 3rd grade teacher and the idiot box taught me. Are you really THAT thick?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]cloakmanor wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Santorum exposed Paul for the joke he is. I can’t believe how blatant Paul’s appeasement platform is. Shameful.
[/quote]
Actually Ron Paul schooled that neocon sociopath and put him in his place. So many mindless drones around here.[/quote]
Really…the only thing that Ron Paul put in their place was his dentures. I know, I know he’s great free drugs, no wars, we all just mind our own business and the bad guys won’t even know we’re here bla bla bla…[/quote]
Only in your own deluded mind pal.
It’s looks like Pawlenty is all but officially out.
(I think he announces tommorrow).
Mufasa
[quote]Toby Queef wrote:
I agree with this- except I think it will be a Romney/Bachmann ticket unfortunately. I was at the straw poll today and voted. I predicted the top three finishers correctly, but when I was there I was nervous because Paul had a massive crowd and Bachmann’s while sizeable, didn’t seem substantially larger than Paul’s like I had anticipated. I got into it with Bachmann’s media campaign manager and humiliated her. She deserves to lose her job over what she’s done. I wasn’t entirely set on voting for Bachmann today, but that sealed the deal.
I wish Cain would have finished higher than Santorum- that would’ve done some good for his momentum.
It was pretty much what I expected (since I was there in '07 too). I got to meet Laura Ingraham (among others) and get a picture with her and that’s about all I cared about. I told her all about the Bachmann thing too. I don’t think she’s a fan…[/quote]
This is interesting, Toby.
To me, Bachmann is loose and “in-her-element”…when she is “in-her-element” (like she was with Evangelical voters in Iowa).
However; when she is pushed or is “out-of-element”; she seems to turn into an “Automaton/Stepford Wife” with short, “snippy” answers that she seems to have memorized out of a book.
This has her not coming off so well in the Media; OR when she is “on-the-stump” and has to respond to “unfriendly” questioning.
What happened yesterday? (Just curious).
Mufasa
[quote]cloakmanor wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]cloakmanor wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Santorum exposed Paul for the joke he is. I can’t believe how blatant Paul’s appeasement platform is. Shameful.
[/quote]
Actually Ron Paul schooled that neocon sociopath and put him in his place. So many mindless drones around here.[/quote]
Really…the only thing that Ron Paul put in their place was his dentures. I know, I know he’s great free drugs, no wars, we all just mind our own business and the bad guys won’t even know we’re here bla bla bla…[/quote]
Only in your own deluded mind pal.[/quote]
I have a deluded mind because I think Paul is insignificant? When in fact he’s proven himself in prior elections to be insignificant. If there is anyone, or I should say a group of people who are truly delusional it would be the Ron Paul supporters. They will be forced from their stupor when he gets destroyed in the first real primary (as they were in 08’). That was a bitter pill to swallow if I recall correctly. Do you think it will taste any better this time around?
Really cloakster he’s not winning the Presidency - You guys have to stop playing dress up.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Paul will never be taken seriously.
Pawlenty is worthless.
Bachmann doesn’t have it.
Newt has too much controversy around him.
I see Romney and Perry in the GOP final, and Romney winning (I don’t see people forgiving a Texan just yet). And Obama beating Romney in the end. But the GOP takes the Senate.[/quote]
Max:
I was following your line of reasoning…until you had Romney beating Perry.
Do you feel that there is that much of a lingering “Bush Effect” among the electorate?
I just don’t think so. (But I have been wrong before about this stuff!)
Mufasa[/quote]
You know, I gave my position another thought, and think that perhaps Perry might win because he was able to bring in tax revenue while creating jobs. Perry also gave illegal aliens in-state tuition, so he might be able to court the Latino vote too. So in a sense, he gave both parties a little piece of the pie. I think that if he doesn’t go overboard with the religion, he could give Obama a real push.
[/quote]
But how will he do against the press? It’s the MSLM that will paint him as another GW Bush. Obama gets to take the high road as his partner in crime the liberal media takes down either Perry for being another Bush, or Romney for being a Mormon.
[/quote]
I actually think Perry has the brass balls to handle the Liberal media. The media also has also lost cred in my book, because despite their painting the Tea Party first into an astroturf movement, then a racist extension of the KKK, the Tea Party has STILL managed to create enough uproar to gain that 41st seat in the Senate, with Scott Brown, and helped to gather more Senate seats and take back the House.
What the Tea Party did, and did successfully, was show the lame stream media, that screaming racism is no longer working. Liberal groups in the past, have used that tactic to their advantage, because quite honestly it worked. But what the media failed to do, ultimately neutering their power, was to not call the news fairly. When white people screamed about the health care law, the media said “the Klan has risen.” But when Black Panther thugs show up at a voting place with baseball bats, it’s “activism.” All this did, was destroy any credibility they might have had.
Make no mistake, the Liberal media is going to label the Conservative movement as the Klan reincarnate, but it’s just not working. The GOP already pulled Obama’s bitch card, and has proven that he has no balls. He has lost the respect of his own party, Independents, and shown that he is vulnerable. Question is, can the GOP relax their sphincter enough to win the 2012 vote ? All these wing-bat stooges have no chance, it will be the guy who hasn’t left planet Earth who can beat Obama.
Mufasa, what I have seen here in California, where Dems rule this land, yet we Conservatives have upstaged their attempts, can also be done in the WH. People exposing the truth, calling out their opponents, and FUCKING SCREAMING TIL YOUR BALLS SWELL, is what it takes. You want to beat Chocolate Jesus, it can be done, but not quietly.
Ron Paul is playing his part, so is Sarah Palin, the way I see them are as soldiers in the field. They are rallying the troops. Paul uses some great principles and his being taken as not serious is good because he can bring up issues yet not cause damage to the Conservative movement. Palin is using her ability to rally and captivate people (even if it’s because they want to bone her).
Republicans are playing chess, FINALLY.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
This is interesting, Toby.
To me, Bachmann is loose and “in-her-element”…when she is “in-her-element” (like she was with Evangelical voters in Iowa).
However; when she is pushed or is “out-of-element”; she seems to turn into an “Automaton/Stepford Wife” with short, “snippy” answers that she seems to have memorized out of a book.
This has her not coming off so well in the Media; OR when she is “on-the-stump” and has to respond to “unfriendly” questioning.
What happened yesterday? (Just curious).
Mufasa[/quote]
I stopped by the Bachmann tail-gate the night before the Straw Poll and briefly spoke with her. I asked her why she wouldn’t appear on the Savage Nation to which she responded she loved Michael Savage and would love to go on the show. I told her for the last couple nights he has made a point of it to mention that she will NOT go on the show after she was on it years ago against his listeners for money. Her husband cut me off and said I needed to speak to their campaign media personnel about that. So Saturday at the straw poll that was the first person I sought out. I was finally pointed in her direction and led off with the same question I asked Michele the night before. She responded, “Well why would she go on his show after he bashes her every night?” I said he’s not “bashing” her, he’s only stating that she won’t go on the show and it’s making her look bad. It’s a large audience and it’s not doing her any good. At that point it became this whole chicken & egg game. She asked if I had a card because she thought I was working for him or something. She eventually changed her story and said that it just hasn’t worked out with Michele’s schedule yet. She knew I wasn’t buying that- and I said, then why don’t you have her at least go on there and say THAT’S why she hasn’t been able to be on? Then she asked me HOW to get on the show and I was floored. I said “YOU are asking ME how to get on the show- and you’re in charge of all her media appearances??” She got fairly upset and thanked me for telling her how to do her job and stormed off. It was pathetic. I saw Laura Ingraham literally right after that and told her everything. I don’t think she’s a very big fan of Bachmann.
I love how allllllllllllll the Paul supporters are bagging on her now. Seriously, I’ve never met ONE ron paul supporter that I could get along with- not even outside of politics. They’re just such pieces of shit and incredibly delusional. The bulk of his supporters are all conspiracy theorists and absolutely won’t listen to any other points of view- which ironically they despise others for supposedly doing the same thing. “Oh Ron Paul is different. He won’t play the game.” Ok, well he’s still a politician and different doesn’t always mean better or even GOOD. You could vote a dog into the office and that’d be different, but I don’t see a lot of support for Lassie in 2012.
[quote]cloakmanor wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
More Ron Paul kookiness:
‘I’d like to get rid of the Department of Education, the Department of Agriculture, just go down the list get rid of it…cut the budget in half. Everything that’s not constitutional, that’s a good place to start…the Department of Education should be cut, it’s unconstitutional!’[/quote]
Yeah fuck the Constitution. Who the hell needs it? It’s just a goddamn piece of paper anyway right. Hell, let’s toss the Bill of Rights. We don’t need limited government. We need our wise overlords to tell us what is true and what isn’t. Haven’t you figured out yet that politicians lie as often as they blink?
Ah, yes. The wonderful Department of Education. Yes we see how great of a job they have done with America’s kids. It’s so “kooky” to cut wasteful spending. Why? Well because that is what my 3rd grade teacher and the idiot box taught me. Are you really THAT thick?[/quote]
Are you really so thick that you aren’t aware that libertarians aren’t the only ones in favour of small government? There’s a big difference between cleaning up bloated federal bureaucracies and abolishing entire departments as I have already said. Everything that Ron Paul comes out with is utter batshittery from abolishing fiat currency to ‘the CIA coup’ and the fed conspiracies. No wonder every kook under the sun flocks to Ron Paul like flies to shit. I think you libertarians are all dangerous lunatics to be honest.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]dk44 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]dk44 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Best of Ron Paul kookiness:
‘Because ah…is a…there’s been a coup! Haven’t you heard? It’s a CIA coup! The CIA runs everything! They run the military…they’re every bit as secretive as the Federal Reserve…they’re in drug businesses and ah…(drowned out by applause)’ - Ron Paul[/quote]
Not sure what you are getting at. Sure Ron Paul comes across as loony, but there is a lot of truth in what he says. I would say the odds are greater that the CIA is involved in drugs than the odds they aren’t. (Not sure if that was the point of your post or not.)
I can’t believe the trust some people have in government to do the right thing. Especially when we see they do not, time after time. (not necessarily directed at you SM)[/quote]
Come on that’s crazy talk! The CIA ‘runs the military’, ‘runs everything’ and is involved in ‘drug businesses’?[/quote]
Let’s get real. Regardless of Ron Paul. You think that anytime money is there to be made that people won’t try to manipulate things? Really? I highly fucking doubt the War on Drugs is here to save little Timmy from smoking a joint. I hate to go all conspiracy on you, but no fucking way that what we see on the surface is the truth. Too much money plus human greed. How do you trust they aren’t involved? Look at this shit in Mexico just recently, letting gangs buy assult weapons, I don’t give a shit if it was supposed to be a sting or not. You trust these fucks to tell the truth?[/quote]
Okay, so the CIA has been involved in some shady stuff but they don’t ‘run everything’ and ‘run the military’. That’s crazy talk. Also, neither you, I nor Ron Paul has any reason whatsoever to believe that the CIA is involved in ‘drug businesses’.[/quote]
Except for Iran/Contra, the current gun-running/drug-trading with the Mexican cartels, the handful of people who worked PDs and Gov’t orgs who have spoken out about it, and a mountain of other evidence?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]John S. wrote:
[quote]Dijon wrote:
Didn’t manage to catch it, but who conducted that poll and how?[/quote]
This is Fox News first poll. They pulled it down because Ron Paul dominated, then they started up another one and Ron Paul is winning huge again. To vote you had to put in your zip code and name. I was surprised at the poll as well, kinda shoots the frindge candidate theory out the window now.
LOL at Fox.[/quote]
Oh John you do keep trying don’t you? In many ways you’re like your hero Ron Paul. Okay back to reality, as I’ve said countless times Ron Paul will win any poll where one person can call in multiple times, such as the FOX News poll. And he’ll also win where people can be bused in from other locations. And why? Because many of Paul’s followers are like John S. They’re over the top and will do just about anything to make Paul look good, (unfortunately Paul cannot make Paul look good). They’re young males who can drop what they’re doing and take a 3 or 4 hour bus ride to vote. Or, call into FOX News multiple times under different names. That poll means nothing and Paul remains a fringe candidate.
[/quote]
There is some truth to this. Paul’s base is zealous and committed, just because he is winning polls does not mean he has the support of the ‘silent majority’ who will only watch the final debate on Fox News, side with whoever the establishment picks and vote for that guy on election day, and then go hibernate for another 4 years.
I agree with Santorum. He set Perry straight on the 10th amendment at the Western Conservative Summit in Denver:
'First, before a book signing event, Santorum told reporters he had a “difference of opinion” with Perry on gay marriage and said it was wrong and divisive to create a patchwork of marriage laws in the 50 states. Then, during a question-and-answer session with activists, Santorum unloaded on the governor.
“States do not have the right to destroy the American family. It is our business,” he said. “It is not fine with me that New York has destroyed marriage. It is not fine with me that New York is setting a template that will cause great division in this country.”
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Santorum exposed Paul for the joke he is. I can’t believe how blatant Paul’s appeasement platform is. Shameful.
‘Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing…after they have exhausted all other possibilities.’ - Winnie[/quote]
Your failed empire is crumbling with you and people like you with it.
Have fun.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Santorum exposed Paul for the joke he is. I can’t believe how blatant Paul’s appeasement platform is. Shameful.
‘Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing…after they have exhausted all other possibilities.’ - Winnie[/quote]
Your failed empire is crumbling with you and people like you with it.
Have fun.[/quote]
I have an empire now? Oh well, easy come easy go.
Bahahahaha!
The usual suspects are worried.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Santorum exposed Paul for the joke he is. I can’t believe how blatant Paul’s appeasement platform is. Shameful.
‘Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing…after they have exhausted all other possibilities.’ - Winnie[/quote]
Your failed empire is crumbling with you and people like you with it.
Have fun.[/quote]
I have an empire now? Oh well, easy come easy go.[/quote]
LOL…sheesh that Lifty never quits does he?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]Gaius Octavius wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
More Ron Paul kookiness:
‘I’d like to get rid of the Department of Education, the Department of Agriculture, just go down the list get rid of it…cut the budget in half. Everything that’s not constitutional, that’s a good place to start…the Department of Education should be cut, it’s unconstitutional!’[/quote]
The Department of Education costs you like a 100 billion $ a year and hinders your schools considerably. The DoA has been making the populace fat for years and years. How exactly is it kooky to want to get rid of them? And how is it kooky to want to abide by the rule of law?
I think it might be you who’s the kooky one.[/quote]
Yes, who needs a ‘food safety and inspection service’? Off the list.[/quote]
Yeah, because people are too stupid and can’t figure out what to eat on their own.
Meanwhile, according to the FDA modified corn products are a-okay but RAW MILK == evil?
Dude, come down to reality and take a breath of fresh air. Srsly!
edited for grammar