[quote]Mick28 wrote:
But they will no more get their wish that Paul become President, or even respected by the majority, than they will get to make out with that cute face of Alba’s.
[/quote]
We’ll see.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Young mens fantasies die hard…
[/quote]
I guess our founding fathers should have just STFU then. I mean they were the original rage against the machiners.
[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Young mens fantasies die hard…
I guess our founding fathers should have just STFU then. I mean they were the original rage against the machiners.
[/quote]
The above is apparently true in relation to the viewpoint of the British Crown. One either adheres to the principles of Big Government or otherwise. Unfortunately, if one desires the latter only one candidate appears to exist in the present presidential nominee race as a viable choice.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
It’s been discussed ad nauseam and proven out in solid polling numbers, Paul really touches many young males in this country. His simple answers to complex problems draw them in like Jessica Alba’s cute smile.
But they will no more get their wish that Paul become President, or even respected by the majority, than they will get to make out with that cute face of Alba’s.
Young mens fantasies die hard…
[/quote]
Right. I should vote for one of the other Republicans. And then sit back and watch as they grow the size of government, continue to mount up debt, continue to stick invade the privacy a free people. I’ll watch as they pass one size fits all laws, instead of leaving power to the states. I’ll watch as they flip, flop, and cave on issues according to polling data…No thanks.
You don’t understand where I am coming from with my support of Ron. I am disqusted with the Republican party. I have no faith in any of the other candidates to cut entire federal departments out of existence. Instead, they’ll slow (not actually cut) government spending by some meager percentage and demand we recognize their fiscal conservatism. I’m sick of it, Mick.
Ron Paul may very well be the last Republican I’ll vote for. Perhaps, I’ll vote Libertarian, or for Constitution party candidates when the option is there. But, I’m not throwing my vote (that’s what I’ve been doing) away at a party that plays lip service to small government and individual liberty. Don’t blame me. Blame the Republicans.
And of the course Democrats aren’t even an option. They put even Republicans to shame with their love of government spending.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Well, I can’t blame you for your attitude, I feel the same way.
And of the course Democrats aren’t even an option. They put even Republicans to shame with their love of government spending.
Again, I agree.
The problem is that there is no viable alternative.
[/quote]
Ah, look at those pretty crocodile tears.
We already established a long time ago (June, as I recall) that:
A) You’re a neocon
B) You support preemptive, undeclared, wars of aggression.
C) You oppose sound money and the gold standard because it’s a “kook idea”
D) You oppose any serious proposal to significantly reduce the size of the federal government because it’s a “kook idea”
You claim you won’t support Paul because you’re a realist, but that’s bunk. When you first launched your tirade this summer, one of my first action plans was to determine if you were really just a pessimistic conservative or a double agent in disguise. Months later, the answer is obvious.
You’re not a conservative, you wouldn’t be voting for Ron Paul, even if you thought he might win.
Mick is a liar and an arrogant prick. I’m not sure why anyone still addresses him. He single-handedly ruined the original Ron Paul thread by spamming the same piece of crap for 20 pages. No person alive who even remotely supported a candidate’s platform would dedicate hundreds of posts over half a year to systematically tearing that candidate down, all because of an alleged “lack of electoral viability”. Come on.
Mick is most definitely NOT one of us.
What, no discussion about the news that Paul has lunched with Nazis?
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
He single-handedly ruined the original Ron Paul thread by spamming the same piece of crap for 20 pages. No person alive who even remotely supported a candidate’s platform would dedicate hundreds of posts over half a year to systematically tearing that candidate down, all because of an alleged “lack of electoral viability”. Come on.[/quote]
Wait, wait, wait - did a Paulnut really just complain about someone barging in on a discussion and railroading it away from its intended purpose?
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
What, no discussion about the news that Paul has lunched with Nazis?
Speaking of which:
http://mvdg.wordpress.com/2007/10/26/owner-of-stormfront-donated-to-ron-paul-campaign/
I wonder if Paul will give Nommy his donation back?[/quote]
No. He won’t give the money back. He’ll spend the idiot’s money. By the way, why would you want the guy to get his money back?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
What, no discussion about the news that Paul has lunched with Nazis?
[/quote]
What are you talking about? Haven’t heard of this myself.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
What are you talking about? Haven’t heard of this myself.[/quote]
Here is a blog that is linking back and forth to commentary.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
What, no discussion about the news that Paul has lunched with Nazis?
[/quote]
Uhh, he did? I know he took money from a white supremacist but what does that have to do with Nazis?
People are acting if he gave money to a white supremacist and not the other way around – that I might be concerned with I if I were trying to get elected.
In either event he’s damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. Better for him just to stick to his principles. He does not support them, they support him.
Freedom means one is free to believe what one wants; it doesn’t mean one condones what they believe.
I’m surprised you don’t understand the difference – no wait, no I’m not…
What’s with this “young-male Ron Paul supporter” fetish of yours, Mick28? I’m sure a large number of Ron Paul supporters are relatively young (I don’t know why that ought to serve as an argument against him in the first place), but I’m also willing to bet that a majority of young male voters aren’t voting for Ron Paul.
So, is it just those young male voters supporting Ron Paul who are succumbing to “simple answers?” What about the larger number who will undoubtedly vote democratic? or for Giuliani? or Romney? etc? 'Cause you know, their “answers” to tough questions are so much more nuanced, so obviously it must be some other attraction, right?
I don’t know why, but I get the feeling you spend your weekends screaming “get off my lawn” at the neighborhood kids.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
What are you talking about? Haven’t heard of this myself.
Here is a blog that is linking back and forth to commentary.
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/
[/quote]
I’ll look it over and keep my eye on the issue. However, I’m not going to pull my support for the man simply because neo-nazis may also support the idea of a small federal government. Now, if this leads to evidence that Ron Paul himself holds such views, I will gladly retract my support for him.
Anyone that has spent some time on this board has seen my back and forths with JtF over his jewish conspiracy beliefs. I’ve repeatedly attacked his use of the “Protocols.” Further, I’ve tried to point out the rampant anti-semitism in the mid-east.
I find it very unlikely Ron Paul is in anyway sympathetic to Neo-nazi ideology.
I do have a question for conservatives who appear to be anti-Paul. Who else running do you consider the small government, return power back to the states, personal privacy and liberty alternative to Ron Paul. My problem is that I see none. Like, at all. And that’s a huge problem for me. I have only one candidate I can support, to no fault of my own.
An article from the American Thinker. It raises the same allegation. But, they seem to be more cautious about the charge. Note the update. We’ll see over the next couple of days how this pans out.