Valin Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Of Course it goes without saying Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levine are just a couple of establishment RINOs Note click on the video and read some of the comments..... Red State: Why Ronald Reagan would STRONGLY OPPOSE the candidacy of Ron PaulWhile I have not decided who I do support, I have decided who I do NOT support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepper Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Valin! My two reasons. Ron. Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Valin! My two reasons. Ron. Paul. Obviously you are a Neo-Con RINO who works for the Illuminati NWO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Well so much for the 11th commandment. Good thing he's not spinning or anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestVirginiaRebel Posted December 5, 2011 Share Posted December 5, 2011 Ron Paul: "I'd Like To Think Of Myself As The Flavor Of The Decade" "Of course it is very encouraging because we’re getting pretty close to it being within the margin of error," Ron Paul said of his status as a top-tier presidential candidate. "So, I think we continue to do what we’re doing. We’ve had the flavors of the month up and down so far in this campaign. I’d like to think of myself as the flavor of the decade." You mean like this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Ron Paul: My critics 'misunderstand Zionism' (Snip) The Republican hopeful suggested that "America doesn’t want anyone to be self-reliant," saying "we want to rule the world and be the saviors of the world and we are going broke in the process." (Snip) Given the above...why would anyone support this person? Just one of the many many many things I don't understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestVirginiaRebel Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Glenn Beck: I’d consider Ron Paul as third party over Newt Gingrich I think Glenn's choo-choo is going off the rails... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clearvision Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Don't even go there with 3rd party stuff (unless of course it is a green party...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Glenn Beck: I’d consider Ron Paul as third party over Newt Gingrich I think Glenn's choo-choo is going off the rails... Right Scoop This is suicide and it doesn’t get any simpler this: voting third party on our side for whomever guarantees Obama a victory. That’s it. And if Newt’s the nominee and Beck wants to go that road, then I tell him what I tell others: enjoy the hell that will be a second Obama term. You combine this with his attacks on Breitbart, the near constant doom & gloom, and ideological purity...question...is he going down the Michael Savage road? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestVirginiaRebel Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Paul closes in on Gingrich Via Hotair I’ll bet Romney’s kicking himself now for not having abandoned Iowa early on. If he had done that, he could have sent his supporters out to caucus for Paul, thereby detonating Newt’s chances; if he tried that now, having competed in earnest in the state, the headlines would be all about Romney’s shockingly poor finish in Iowa, which would actually help Gingrich in New Hampshire even if he finished second to Paul in the caucuses. (On the other hand, per Rasmussen, Paul’s just four points back of Gingrich for second place in New Hampshire too.) Two exit questions for you, then. One: As chances of a Paul upset grow, will Iowa’s Republican leaders swing behind Newt or Mitt? They want the caucuses to remain relevant to choosing the eventual nominee, and if Paul wins, that’ll be two elections in a row where the Iowa winner realistically had no chance. Two: Could a Paul victory achieve a real “none of the above” outcome for the nomination? We live in strange times... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 In my wanderings I came across this blast from the past Right Scoop: Jeffrey Lord on Mark Levin Show: Ron Paul is a neo-liberal, not a conservative 8/25/11 Mark Levin and Jeffrey Lord discuss Lord’s article that reveals how Ron Paul is no conservative, but rather a neo-liberal. They go into quite a bit here, but some of what they talk about is Paul’s secessionist views, how he view the articles of confederation, the danger of leftism in Paul’s philosophy, his view of the ‘non-interventionist’ founding fathers, and more. It’s a very in-depth interview and I recommend you listen to all of it, but you can also read Jeffrey Lord’s article here. (Snip) Anyway just thought I'd share. Ron Paul just scares the hell out me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestVirginiaRebel Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 Ron Paul calls for criminal charges against Eric Holder. Today, Texas Congressman Ron Paul became the first GOP president candidate to call for criminal charges against Eric Holder. Speaking to syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones, Paul called for Holder to be "immediately fired." Paul went on to say "I think it was criminal," and called the operation a "false flag." He said that there needs to be an immediate investigation into Holder himself, and said Holder "deserves charges." Paul went on to discuss a now infamous memo from White House lawyers who claim Obama has the right to assassinate American citizens anywhere in the world. Paul stated that Obama is trying to "legalize Martial law." Paul also mocked the FBI's claim of uncovering an Iranian assignation plot against the Saudi ambassador. He said the man arrested "may never be tried because they don't want the truth to come out." He probably should have quit after talking about Holder, but when he's right he's right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 He may be the first GOP candidate to call for criminal charges against Holder, but others have been saying it for months. He and Bachmann are in the House, they can do something about it if they want to. I don't think he will win in Iowa, no matter what the MSM wants to believe, but on the slight chance that he does, it would make the state of Iowa laughingstocks for years to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argyle58 Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 Ron Paul calls for criminal charges against Eric Holder. Today, Texas Congressman Ron Paul became the first GOP president candidate to call for criminal charges against Eric Holder. Speaking to syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones, Paul called for Holder to be "immediately fired." Paul went on to say "I think it was criminal," and called the operation a "false flag." He said that there needs to be an immediate investigation into Holder himself, and said Holder "deserves charges." Paul went on to discuss a now infamous memo from White House lawyers who claim Obama has the right to assassinate American citizens anywhere in the world. Paul stated that Obama is trying to "legalize Martial law." Paul also mocked the FBI's claim of uncovering an Iranian assignation plot against the Saudi ambassador. He said the man arrested "may never be tried because they don't want the truth to come out." He probably should have quit after talking about Holder, but when he's right he's right... I would have thought that the Examiner would have had better proof reading. I don't think that there would be a lot uproar over a plot to have a secret meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 TAS: The Ron Paul Newsletters Jeffrey Lord 12.15.11 Yesterday, during a discussion on Ron Paul with Sean Hannity on the latter's radio show, Hannity brought up with me the impossible-to-get around subject of the infamous Ron Paul Newsletters. As Hannity quite correctly pointed out, with the other GOP candidates having received the political equivalent of an anal exam, somehow Ron Paul has escaped notice. No more. (Snip) & The Right Scoop: Levin: Ron Paul’s excuses about his newsletters don’t add up Clip and Scroll for audio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 TAS: The Ron Paul Newsletters Jeffrey Lord 12.15.11 Yesterday, during a discussion on Ron Paul with Sean Hannity on the latter's radio show, Hannity brought up with me the impossible-to-get around subject of the infamous Ron Paul Newsletters. As Hannity quite correctly pointed out, with the other GOP candidates having received the political equivalent of an anal exam, somehow Ron Paul has escaped notice. No more. (Snip) & The Right Scoop: Levin: Ron Paul’s excuses about his newsletters don’t add up Clip and Scroll for audio Oh this just gets better and better. TWS: The Company Ron Paul Keeps (Snip) In January 2008, the New Republic ran my story reporting the contents of monthly newsletters that Paul published throughout the 1980s and 1990s. While a handful of controversial passages from these bulletins had been quoted previously, I was able to track down nearly the entire archive, scattered between the University of Kansas and the Wisconsin Historical Society (both of which housed the newsletters in collections of extreme right-wing American political literature). Though particular articles rarely carried a byline, the vast majority were written in the first person, while the title of the newsletter, in its various iterations, always featured Paul’s name: Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, the Ron Paul Political Report, the Ron Paul Survival Report, and the Ron Paul Investment Letter. What I found was unpleasant. “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks,” read a typical article from the June 1992 “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism,” a supplement to the Ron Paul Political Report. Racial apocalypse was the most persistent theme of the newsletters; a 1990 issue warned of “The Coming Race War,” and an article the following year about disturbances in the Adams Morgan neighborhood of Washington, D.C., was entitled “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” Paul alleged that Martin Luther King Jr., “the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours,” had also “seduced underage girls and boys.” The man who would later proclaim King a “hero” attacked Ronald Reagan for signing legislation creating the federal holiday in his name, complaining, “We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.” No conspiracy theory was too outlandish for Paul’s endorsement. One newsletter reported on the heretofore unknown phenomenon of “Needlin’,” in which “gangs of black girls between the ages of 12 and 14” roamed the streets of New York and injected white women with possibly HIV-infected syringes. Another newsletter warned that “the AIDS patient” should not be allowed to eat in restaurants because “AIDS can be transmitted by saliva,” a strange claim for a physician to make. Paul gave credence to the theory, later shown to have been the product of a Soviet disinformation effort, that AIDS had been created in a U.S. government laboratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland. Three months before far-right extremists killed 168 Americans in Oklahoma City, Paul’s newsletter praised the “1,500 local militias now training to defend liberty” as “one of the most encouraging developments in America.” And he offered specific advice to antigovernment militia members, such as, “Keep the group size down,” “Keep quiet and you’re harder to find,” “Leave no clues,” “Avoid the phone as much as possible,” and “Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.” (Snip) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geee Posted December 17, 2011 Author Share Posted December 17, 2011 Yikes!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 Yikes!! Ron Paul, a Stormfront favorite Dev Meyers Pittsburgh Elections 2012 Examiner December 15, 2011 Not sure of what to make of this. It could be a "I saw it on the Internet" kind of thing. Something we need to remember, these Neo-Nazi/White supremacist groups are always attaching themselves to other mainstream or more acceptable groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Its All Part Of The Plot! Click Here...If You Dare! H/T PJ Tatler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clearvision Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I guess it is his turn in the "spotlight" now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I guess it is his turn in the "spotlight" now This is what is known as a Target Rich Environment. Not that I would ever think of making fun of Ron Paul. (Seriously) I have some pretty strong Libertarian leanings, but let's face it they have more than their share of conspiracy nuts, and people promoting ideas that have only a nodding relationship with reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted December 30, 2011 Share Posted December 30, 2011 Dr. Ron Paul Picks up a MAJOR endorsement! H/T Weasel Zipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Ricochet: Unhand Us, Greybeard Loon! Paul A. Rahe (Snip) There is, in fact, much in Ron Paul’s record that gibes far better with the nativism of a Pat Buchanan (whose Presidential campaign he supported in 1992) than with mainstream libertarianism. As libertarian Ilya Somin points out, with considerable consistency, Paul has opposed free-trade agreements, school vouchers, and relaxed strictures on immigration, and he has resolutely refused to distance himself from “the Stormfront neo-Nazis, racists, 9/11 "Truthers," and other assorted wackos who have endorsed him.” Those who compare Congressman Paul’s persistent association with unsavory characters to that of Barack Obama with Bill Ayers and the Reverend Jeremiah Wright have a point. It may not be an accident that Ron Paul has less appeal among genuine Republicans in Iowa than among certain Democrats and independents. Like his friend Buchanan, he is, in some respects, the heir of George Wallace. (Snip) Human beings have a propensity for turning half-truths into overarching doctrines that purport to explain everything, and the academy is the natural locus for doctrinaire thinking of this sort. In this regard, today’s libertarianism is not unlike the old Marxism. It starts with an insight into the way the world works, and some of its adherents take the part for the whole. The old Marxists were right to think that transformations in the means of production have far-reaching consequences. They erred, however, when they jumped to the conclusion that these developments can be made to explain everything. Today’s libertarians are right when they argue that central planning cannot work, that the free market is a mechanism for collecting and distributing information, and that the pretense to “rational administration” is madness. When they assert that recessions are a natural and welcome consequence of the business cycle and that attempts to interfere with this process have a tendency to backfire and produce severe and prolonged downturns, they are on the mark. (Snip) Ron Paul wears blinders of a similar sort when he discusses Iran. The truth is that the Khomeini regime has been prosecuting a war against us for more than thirty years. At the outset, when Jimmy Carter was President, the theocrats of Iran seized our embassy and took our diplomats hostage. Later, when Ronald Reagan was President, they arranged for a suicide bomber provided by Hezbollah to take out our embassy in Beirut and a great many of our diplomats. Not long thereafter, they did the same for a marine unit posted elsewhere in Lebanon. Later, they arranged for the bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia; and when we were in Iraq, they carried on a covert war in that country against our troops. (Snip) ABP Anyone But Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4-4nCnMj_k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 ABC: Ron Paul Returns to New Hampshire Fights Back on ‘Dangerous’ Label NASHUA, N.H. – After taking two days off, Ron Paul returned to the campaign trail, again hitting his GOP rivals over criticism that his foreign policy positions are “dangerous.” (Snip) Absolutely nothing dangerous or kooky about him The Paulbots reminds me a great deal of the followers of a certain democrat candidate in 08 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now