BLACK This Out!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]squating_bear wrote:
ZEB wrote:
squating_bear

Where exactly is Ron Paul in the latest polling? Do you know? According to every legitimate pollster SINGLE DIGITS!

As I have said and have been saying, Ron Paul will be lucky to break into low double digit support nation wide.

Right where he belongs.

Now how much media attention does that warrant?

Uh huh…

And are you now admitting that you were wrong? Because in this post you said “latest polling” but in the earlier post you said “ever”[/quote]

(eye roll) I am going to try to be kind but this is really difficult.

I referenced the latest poll to point out the correctness of my statement. Just as anyone would point out a piece of evidence to back up a claim.

My claim: Paul will be very lucky to break into low double digit figures. ( I doubt it will ever happen).

Reference: In fact the latest polls show him in single digits.

Please tell me that you understand this.

[/quote]

hahahaha

Yes I understand that. I wasn’t disputing that. This is what I was disputing.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:
When someone finishes third in a poll and is not mentioned in the results what would you call it?[/quote]

When has he ever finished third and not been mentioned. Name it and I want specifics!

[/quote]

1:54

The example of him being third is just that, an example. The video I linked shows the pervasiveness of him not getting a fair shake in media coverage.

It really doesn’t matter if you don’t like him or his ideas. If he’s really ineffectual and wasting his time running for the Republican nomination then he will lose head to head with any other candidate despite getting fair coverage.[/quote]

You proved nothing with that video - NOTHING! I wanted specifics and unless you can give them to me you don’t know what you’re talking about. He gets a fair shake on every network that I’ve ever viewed.

From what I’ve seen and read which ever place he finishes that’s exactly how it’s reported. He gets no more, or less coverage than any other candidate who finishes as low as he usually does. What you guys want is a big splash every time the old guys shows up and breaths, It aint happening. Here’s a clue the real world is not in love with him the way you are so however much coverage he gets will never be enough to please you Paulies.

You guys need to breath the fresh air of reality. Eh…someday you will…someday soon.

[/quote]

This part in particular -

“From what I’ve seen and read which ever place he finishes that’s exactly how it’s reported. He gets no more, or less coverage than any other candidate who finishes as low as he usually does.”

That statement is demonstrably false by the Politico article. Did you even read it?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61412.html[/quote]

I’m sorry Paul is so insignificant a player I don’t feel that it matters. But if you look at the totality of the reporting for someone so insignificant I’d say over all that he’s gotten far more coverage than the other insignificant players like Huntsman and what’s his name Gary Johnson the former Governor of New Mexico.

Paul is um…how can I say this? Insignificant. No, I’ve already said that huh? Let’s put it this way, he’s looked at as a nut by those who actually know who he is (other than his 20 something supporters who think he’s God). But I guess the good part for Paul is most don’t and never will know who he is.

No one really cares except a few people on T Nation and of course me. And I like him for what YOU would say are all the wrong reasons. :slight_smile:

If he was cheated out of an additional 15:00 of fame…well that’s why. And one more point, don’t kid yourself into thinking that if he only got more air time he would then suddenly become significant…he wouldn’t. There would just be more people out there who thinks he’s a nut.

42

[quote]ZEB wrote:

I’m sorry Paul is so insignificant a player I don’t feel that it matters.

[/quote]

Nah see, because at this point in the discussion it isn’t even about him anymore. You put to much trust in the media. That’s a verifiable FACT, we just showed it. So you have learned something here, assuming you don’t let emotion and irrationality prevent you. If you can absorb that factual knowledge, there are some heavy implications.

Now that doesn’t even prove anything about Ron Paul. So don’t reply with anything about him. Don’t reply with anything about conspiracy theories.

Was that a verifiable fact? Can you personally accept that? → then… what does this mean?

43

these Ron Paul fanatics are creepy.

Creepy like zombie creepy.

44

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
these Ron Paul fanatics are creepy.

Creepy like zombie creepy.
[/quote]

Hey Irish outside of boxing there isn’t much that we can agree on. But you’ve just touched on a topic that we are in lock step with. Otherwise fairly normal people go all ga ga (and not the Lady kind) over Ron Paul.

I will never understand the fascination with that guy as he is absolutely wrong on virtually every issue. AND on top of that he comes off like a nut.

And now that they see their hero’s campaign going south they are already making excuses as to why he won’t win.

45

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
these Ron Paul fanatics are creepy.

Creepy like zombie creepy.
[/quote]

Hey Irish outside of boxing there isn’t much that we can agree on. But you’ve just touched on a topic that we are in lock step with. Otherwise fairly normal people go all ga ga (and not the Lady kind) over Ron Paul.

I will never understand the fascination with that guy as he is absolutely wrong on virtually every issue. AND on top of that he comes off like a nut.

And now that they see their hero’s campaign going south they are already making excuses as to why he won’t win.

[/quote]

I do agree with that. It’s like they fall under some spell and lose all their sense.

Some social issues I agree with him on, but that’s it. And the rest of the stuff he’s just out in left field, talking to his parade of senseless zombies who recite his garbage and don’t have their own ideas.

46

[quote]ZEB wrote:
The first time you said this I gave you a pass and simply said that it was weak. But now you’re alluding to the fact that Paul be here to defend himself or I shouldn’t talk about him. [/quote]
I never said you shouldn’t talk about him. If I failed to convey my message, then totally my fault. I don’t have over ten thousand posts ; )

I feel that Paul will lead this country on a far better road than our current President. Please tell me one area Obama is correct, while at the same time Paul was wrong.

[quote]ZEB wrote: Public figures, especially those running for President, get talked about. Our system is such that when a political leader makes a claim, that claim and the person who made it, are talked about across America.

Talked about in bars, gyms, social gatherings and of course on the Internet. That I had to explain this to you is shocking and at the same time disappointing. [/quote]
Again, my fault if that is the way I came across. I try to talk and listen about a candidate and draw my own conclusions. Rather than insisting a person has no chance, simply because I don’t see it.

And I will respond by asking you to show me your case, rather than just a claim. Defend your stance shrug

You make the claims. How about why Ron cannot be President? Is he lacking in a certain trait/s? Is it because he doesn’t smoke? What is he lacking? Experience?

[quote]ZEB wrote: I’m sorry I thought it was obvious who they were. But I will spell it out for you if you like.

I believe that the following people could possibly beat Obama if they run a near flawless campaign:

  • Romney

  • Perry

  • Christie

But Ron Paul is certainly NOT one of them.
[/quote]
Who stands up for the people who have no voice? Who defends all life, no matter how small? Who is the most consistent of all? Which one will lead America better than the road we are currently on? I am simply asking because you insist on knowing so much more than me, or any Ron Paul supporter.

47

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
I never said you shouldn’t talk about him. If I failed to convey my message, then totally my fault. I don’t have over ten thousand posts ; )[/quote]

When you claim that I am talking about a man who is not here to defend himself that was beyond weak it was border line crazy. And then you made the claim twice. So your claim that you were misunderstood is way off base. You were understood quite well. If you want to take it back, go ahead I don’t blame you.

Oh and good post count slam. But you’ll catch me just keep going the way you have been.

Everyone acts on their own self interests. Come on you know this right? Stop it…And by the way no one has a voice. Did you know that? NO ONE. Each of us has our own needs and desires. We then try to pick a candidate who we feel will gives us those needs and desires. That Ron Paul even has 8% of the vote nationally is scary. That they are mostly young males is predictable.

Here are two reasons why many like him (might not be you so relax)

-He’s against drug laws. Drugs are taken mostly by young males. Plenty of drugs taken by other groups but law enforcement statistics show that the demographic that uses drugs most are young males.

-Against foreign wars–This is a no brainer. Who fights our wars? Young males.

So it’s about needs and desires. All I am saying is that the candidate who you feel represents your needs and desires does not have what it takes to win the nomination. Just as I said about him in 2008.

Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman, Herman Cain and a long list of many others.

I agree consistently wrong. And by the way it takes intelligence to actually change ones mind. And when I have these debates with someone in their 20’s I always caution them that if they are as intelligent as I think they are they will change their mind on many issues by the time they’re 40.

Someone who can beat Obama and that is not Ron Paul. But I do prefer Obama’s sanity over Paul’s. But I don’t think I could pull the Obama lever. I would have to stay home if by some weird unprecedented circumstances Paul were to get the nomination. Let’s see what would have to happen for him to get the nod? All the others drop out and no one at the republican convention accepts a draft. Yes, that would be the only way Ron Paul ever gets the nomination. Of course then he’d go down to defeat with the worst numbers of any Presidential race in history.

[quote]I am simply asking because you insist on knowing so much more than me, or any Ron Paul supporter.
[/quote]

Okay, I didn’t like the tone of that sentence. Up to now you’ve been respectful and so have I. If you don’t like my political commentary don’t read it. All I can say is that on this topic I do have a great amount of experience and I’ve been correct many more times than I’ve been wrong. You don’t like my commentary on Paul. But instead of reacting out of emotion towards me you should be thinking “why doesn’t Zeb like Paul, is there any truth to all of this?” Are you able to look beyond your own desire to elect Paul to give my theories a closer look? Doesn’t seem so.

Bottom line, you’re a smart guy right? And your how old? Let’s just say 20 something. Do you think you’ll be smarter, have better control of the facts, have read more and have done far more things in 25 years? Let’s hope the answer to all of them is yes.

48

[quote]ZEB wrote:
When you claim that I am talking about a man who is not here to defend himself that was beyond weak it was border line crazy. And then you made the claim twice. So your claim that you were misunderstood is way off base. You were understood quite well. If you want to take it back, go ahead I don’t blame you. [/quote]
In these forums and in real life, when I make mistakes I claim responsibility and change my behavior.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Oh and good post count slam. But you’ll catch me just keep going the way you have been. [/quote]
I am NOT mak who jumps on threads and makes random pointless contributions. At least I attempt to voice my stance and reasons.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Everyone acts on their own self interests. Come on you know this right? Stop it…And by the way no one has a voice. Did you know that? NO ONE. Each of us has our own needs and desires. We then try to pick a candidate who we feel will gives us those needs and desires. That Ron Paul even has 8% of the vote nationally is scary. That they are mostly young males is predictable. [/quote]
Again, please back your claims! Plus I could care less about who supports the candidate I chose! I am far from fuckin’ hs!

Never made that claim.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
-He’s against drug laws. Drugs are taken mostly by young males. Plenty of drugs taken by other groups but law enforcement statistics show that the demographic that uses drugs most are young males. [/quote]
I know plenty of kids who smoke weed, everyday. I can guarantee they will not get off their ass and go to any polls. So where did the original numbers come from? Plus I know many ‘old’ people who smoke heavier than kids younger than me. Your point please.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
-Against foreign wars–This is a no brainer. Who fights our wars? Young males. [/quote]
Your point please? Last time I checked this country is split right down the middle. These day and ages of equality, this isn’t the case. I know more girls in the military right now. Your position is weak Zeb, in that department especially.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
So it’s about needs and desires. All I am saying is that the candidate who you feel represents your needs and desires does not have what it takes to win the nomination. Just as I said about him in 2008. [/quote]
Until Obama became President I never cared about politics and my rights. I am completely opposite now IMHO.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman, Herman Cain and a long list of many others. [/quote]
Will one of these candidates end abortion in this country? Fuck no! They all lack a consistent and solid moral base to stand on!

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I agree consistently wrong. And by the way it takes intelligence to actually change ones mind. And when I have these debates with someone in their 20’s I always caution them that if they are as intelligent as I think they are they will change their mind on many issues by the time they’re 40. [/quote]
Do you know ALL at 40? You think your morals and views won’t change? You are far from full of yourself! Modest doesn’t even cover or describe how humble you are.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Someone who can beat Obama and that is not Ron Paul. [/quote] You say this over and over and over again still. Your point with facts please? [quote]ZEB wrote: But I do prefer Obama’s sanity over Paul’s. [/quote] Really? Why? What has Obama done to make you think he is any thing close to that adjective? [quote]ZEB wrote: But I don’t think I could pull the Obama lever. [/quote] Point please. [quote]ZEB wrote: I would have to stay home if by some weird unprecedented circumstances Paul were to get the nomination. [/quote] They will run a different Presidential election simply because the almighty Zeb stayed home. That will teach those political figures! facepalm [quote]ZEB wrote: Let’s see what would have to happen for him to get the nod? All the others drop out and no one at the republican convention accepts a draft. Yes, that would be the only way Ron Paul ever gets the nomination. Of course then he’d go down to defeat with the worst numbers of any Presidential race in history. [/quote]
Glad you know how the world turns and how this world will turn out. Should I stay home as well, to shove it up ‘the man’s’ ass and give ‘him’ the finger?

[quote]ZEB wrote: Okay, I didn’t like the tone of that sentence. Up to now you’ve been respectful and so have I. [/quote] Then please continue, rather than threaten. I personally hate threats, especially on the internet. Behind a keyboard we all think we are the same big, tough guy. [quote]ZEB wrote: If you don’t like my political commentary don’t read it. [/quote] Your point please? [quote]ZEB wrote: All I can say is that on this topic I do have a great amount of experience and I’ve been correct many more times than I’ve been wrong. [/quote] You have age but what does that mean when my opinions are still MY own? [quote]ZEB wrote: You don’t like my commentary on Paul. [/quote] You insisting he will never win is getting rather old. Especially when you fail to back it up, again and again . . . . and again. [quote]ZEB wrote: But instead of reacting out of emotion towards me you should be thinking “why doesn’t Zeb like Paul, is there any truth to all of this?” [/quote] I simply ask for facts and a source to back your stance. [quote]ZEB wrote: Are you able to look beyond your own desire to elect Paul to give my theories a closer look? Doesn’t seem so. [/quote] Where have you backed your stance? ESPECIALLY WHEN ASKED?

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Bottom line, you’re a smart guy right? And your how old? Let’s just say 20 something. Do you think you’ll be smarter, have better control of the facts, have read more and have done far more things in 25 years? Let’s hope the answer to all of them is yes. [/quote]
I will summarize this whole chapter together, rather than line by line. 1) Depends on your definition of smart. But I will spend the rest of my life trying to learn more. I hope to learn from the children I will have with my wife and to my ninety year old grandmother. Learn as much as I can, everyday from who ever deserves my attention. 2) I am 32. I am told I look young though, so I guess ‘Thanks’. 3) Read my first sentence of this paragraph again. 4) Where did I say ‘No’?
Now how would you answer your own questions?

49

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I agree consistently wrong. And by the way it takes intelligence to actually change ones mind. And when I have these debates with someone in their 20’s I always caution them that if they are as intelligent as I think they are they will change their mind on many issues by the time they’re 40. [/quote]
Do you know ALL at 40? You think your morals and views won’t change? You are far from full of yourself! Modest doesn’t even cover or describe how humble you are.

[/quote]

“If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart; if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no head” - Sir Winston S Churchill

I may be doing it the other way around but Winnie and ZEB are right.

50

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
When you claim that I am talking about a man who is not here to defend himself that was beyond weak it was border line crazy. And then you made the claim twice. So your claim that you were misunderstood is way off base. You were understood quite well. If you want to take it back, go ahead I don’t blame you. [/quote]
In these forums and in real life, when I make mistakes I claim responsibility and change my behavior.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Oh and good post count slam. But you’ll catch me just keep going the way you have been. [/quote]
I am NOT mak who jumps on threads and makes random pointless contributions. At least I attempt to voice my stance and reasons.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Everyone acts on their own self interests. Come on you know this right? Stop it…And by the way no one has a voice. Did you know that? NO ONE. Each of us has our own needs and desires. We then try to pick a candidate who we feel will gives us those needs and desires. That Ron Paul even has 8% of the vote nationally is scary. That they are mostly young males is predictable. [/quote]
Again, please back your claims! Plus I could care less about who supports the candidate I chose! I am far from fuckin’ hs!

Never made that claim.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
-He’s against drug laws. Drugs are taken mostly by young males. Plenty of drugs taken by other groups but law enforcement statistics show that the demographic that uses drugs most are young males. [/quote]
I know plenty of kids who smoke weed, everyday. I can guarantee they will not get off their ass and go to any polls. So where did the original numbers come from? Plus I know many ‘old’ people who smoke heavier than kids younger than me. Your point please.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
-Against foreign wars–This is a no brainer. Who fights our wars? Young males. [/quote]
Your point please? Last time I checked this country is split right down the middle. These day and ages of equality, this isn’t the case. I know more girls in the military right now. Your position is weak Zeb, in that department especially.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
So it’s about needs and desires. All I am saying is that the candidate who you feel represents your needs and desires does not have what it takes to win the nomination. Just as I said about him in 2008. [/quote]
Until Obama became President I never cared about politics and my rights. I am completely opposite now IMHO.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman, Herman Cain and a long list of many others. [/quote]
Will one of these candidates end abortion in this country? Fuck no! They all lack a consistent and solid moral base to stand on!

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I agree consistently wrong. And by the way it takes intelligence to actually change ones mind. And when I have these debates with someone in their 20’s I always caution them that if they are as intelligent as I think they are they will change their mind on many issues by the time they’re 40. [/quote]
Do you know ALL at 40? You think your morals and views won’t change? You are far from full of yourself! Modest doesn’t even cover or describe how humble you are.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Someone who can beat Obama and that is not Ron Paul. [/quote] You say this over and over and over again still. Your point with facts please? [quote]ZEB wrote: But I do prefer Obama’s sanity over Paul’s. [/quote] Really? Why? What has Obama done to make you think he is any thing close to that adjective? [quote]ZEB wrote: But I don’t think I could pull the Obama lever. [/quote] Point please. [quote]ZEB wrote: I would have to stay home if by some weird unprecedented circumstances Paul were to get the nomination. [/quote] They will run a different Presidential election simply because the almighty Zeb stayed home. That will teach those political figures! facepalm [quote]ZEB wrote: Let’s see what would have to happen for him to get the nod? All the others drop out and no one at the republican convention accepts a draft. Yes, that would be the only way Ron Paul ever gets the nomination. Of course then he’d go down to defeat with the worst numbers of any Presidential race in history. [/quote]
Glad you know how the world turns and how this world will turn out. Should I stay home as well, to shove it up ‘the man’s’ ass and give ‘him’ the finger?

[quote]ZEB wrote: Okay, I didn’t like the tone of that sentence. Up to now you’ve been respectful and so have I. [/quote] Then please continue, rather than threaten. I personally hate threats, especially on the internet. Behind a keyboard we all think we are the same big, tough guy. [quote]ZEB wrote: If you don’t like my political commentary don’t read it. [/quote] Your point please? [quote]ZEB wrote: All I can say is that on this topic I do have a great amount of experience and I’ve been correct many more times than I’ve been wrong. [/quote] You have age but what does that mean when my opinions are still MY own? [quote]ZEB wrote: You don’t like my commentary on Paul. [/quote] You insisting he will never win is getting rather old. Especially when you fail to back it up, again and again . . . . and again. [quote]ZEB wrote: But instead of reacting out of emotion towards me you should be thinking “why doesn’t Zeb like Paul, is there any truth to all of this?” [/quote] I simply ask for facts and a source to back your stance. [quote]ZEB wrote: Are you able to look beyond your own desire to elect Paul to give my theories a closer look? Doesn’t seem so. [/quote] Where have you backed your stance? ESPECIALLY WHEN ASKED?

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Bottom line, you’re a smart guy right? And your how old? Let’s just say 20 something. Do you think you’ll be smarter, have better control of the facts, have read more and have done far more things in 25 years? Let’s hope the answer to all of them is yes. [/quote]
I will summarize this whole chapter together, rather than line by line. 1) Depends on your definition of smart. But I will spend the rest of my life trying to learn more. I hope to learn from the children I will have with my wife and to my ninety year old grandmother. Learn as much as I can, everyday from who ever deserves my attention. 2) I am 32. I am told I look young though, so I guess ‘Thanks’. 3) Read my first sentence of this paragraph again. 4) Where did I say ‘No’?
Now how would you answer your own questions?
[/quote]

Nice talking with you, good luck with your support of Ron Paul and always stay involved.

All The Best,

Zeb

51

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I agree consistently wrong. And by the way it takes intelligence to actually change ones mind. And when I have these debates with someone in their 20’s I always caution them that if they are as intelligent as I think they are they will change their mind on many issues by the time they’re 40. [/quote]
Do you know ALL at 40? You think your morals and views won’t change? You are far from full of yourself! Modest doesn’t even cover or describe how humble you are.

[/quote]

“If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart; if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no head” - Sir Winston S Churchill

I may be doing it the other way around but Winnie and ZEB are right.[/quote]

Churchill never said that, thank you.

"According to research by Mark T. Shirey, citing Nice Guys Finish Seventh: False Phrases, Spurious Sayings, and Familiar Misquotations by Ralph Keyes, 1992, this quote was first uttered by mid-nineteenth century French historian and statesman François Guizot when he observed, Not to be a republican at 20 is proof of want of heart; to be one at 30 is proof of want of head. (N’être pas républicain à vingt ans est preuve d’un manque de cÅ?ur ; l’être après trente ans est preuve d’un manque de tête.) This quote has been attributed variously to George Bernard Shaw, Benjamin Disraeli, Otto von Bismarck, and others.

Furthermore, the Churchill Centre, on its Falsely Attributed Quotations page, states “there is no record of anyone hearing Churchill say this.” Paul Addison of Edinburgh University is quoted as stating: “Surely Churchill can’t have used the words attributed to him. He’d been a
Conservative at 15 and a Liberal at 35! And would he have talked so disrespectfully of Clemmie, who is generally thought to have been a lifelong Liberal?”

52

Touche. I’m glad you pointed that out to me. Lots of Churchill’s quotes are actually falsely attributed to him. However, regarding Churchill being a conservative at 15 and a liberal at 35; I don’t agree that that is a better description of his career. It’s more complicated than that. In his twenties he wrote of Kitchener’s alleged ‘barbarity’ in the Sudan(liberal) and took up his father’s vehement opposition to rearmament(liberal). Granted he was also very conservative as a young man in many ways also.

I also don’t think that that quote is disparaging to liberals. It’s actually showing the dualities between conservativism and liberalism.

EDIT: I didn’t interpret the alleged quote as meaning the Liberal and Conservative Parties. Churchill was 30 when he crossed the floor to the Liberal Party.

53

Just to fuck with your heads guys, but Burke the father of conservativism where a so-called liberalist.
A better term for conservativism would be moderat-liberalist. In Norway liberalist and conservativist is more or less the same thing. Socialliberal on the other hand is someone beetwen liberalists and socialists and
are perhaps what you anglos call liberals.

Best regards from Europa.

54

[quote]Christine wrote:
Jon Stewart seamed to go pretty easy on him.

I think he felt sorry for the guy.

Actually he likes him a lot and speaks very favorably of him.

55

I like how ZEB was demonstrably proved to be wrong and just plain making shit up, he simply ignored it and continued spouting drivel. Shows some real integrity, not letting the facts of the matter get in the way at all. Some good conservative thinking going on there.

I also found it hilarious when he claimed that Paul was consistently wrong on almost every issue, yet ZEB claims to be a small government conservative. Let’s see, he favors small government, a repeal of the welfare state, is pro-life, wants actual monetary reform(not necessarily a gold standard at all), wants to abolish the income tax aaaaaaaaaaaand is a non-interventionist. Barring being a non-interventionist, all of those are the exact talking points “conservatives” use and champion. Barring the foreign policy issue, he should agree with pretty much all of his stances. But no, blind hatred or just sheer irrational glee at the amount of trolling his supporters have enabled him, has him denying that any of Paul’s stances make any sort of sense whatsoever despite there being numerous posts by him urging the exact same policies as Paul does. I don’t know, I guess ZEB could be a decent poster generally speaking and has some good insights into what’s going on, but when it comes to Paul he just throws sense out the window because he Paul won’t win. Who the fuck cares? Neither will Bachmann and you don’t see him bashing her everywhere.

P.S http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-09-19/republican-poll-gop-perry-romney/50467944/1
That’s a poll where Paul polls in the double digits by a real, respected polling firm. Guess Paul got lucky or something.

56

Recent Ron Paul video.