Anyone Else Notice The Intentional Ignoring Of Ron Paul ?

[Leonidas]

Funny. The Paulistinians have raved and ranted about his honesty and character. Now, dead silence. Where's the round of excuses for the crooked expense claims. "He didn't know." "Somebody else did it." "It was a setup by you stupid meanies who don't like him." "Everybody else does it, too." wah, wah ,wah.

SOS, different cult leader.

 

[aard3]

Honestly, I have no idea about the expense claims, I haven't been following the news lately.

That said... my personal opinion is that people (including a lot of people here that should know better), quickly claim he is a "nut" or "quack", etc because they are trying to find a way to dismiss him, because they are scared of his message. They don't want to admit the truth to themselves.

What I mean is:

1.) They realize that some of the things they have supported (wars, civil liberty violations, etc) are WRONG, and they don't want to admit it
and/or
2.) Accepting what he is saying would make the realize how bad of a position the US is really in, and they sadly just don't want to believe it. They would rather stick their heads in the sand.

It's really pretty obvious, instead of debating his positions on things, they quickly find ways to try to dismiss him (newsletters from 30 years ago he didn't even write, or some mistakes on expense returns)...when the other candidates are pro gun control, pro abortion, voted for funding for planned parent hood, etc... C'mon Son!

I mean, watch the debates... no one even attempt to argue something with him...wow... I wonder why? lol

 

[Jack]

For crying out loud, I haven't logged in for 6 weeks, and this Paul crap is still the same. Its like herpes, it lasts forever.

That would be correct. Because he's too busy with the paperwork necessary to claim expense reimbursement for the same items from two sources. Yep, that's the kind of integrity I crave.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/21/did-paul-know-about-double-reimbursements-for-travel-expenses/


Jeez, this guy resigned the Republican Party in 1987 to run for President as a Libertarian. And he's been running for 25 years since. That's a tie with Socialist Norman Thomas. What a pathetic, sick, weak crock of ................

That's awesome. The best thing you can bring up, is what some guy is saying about conversations in 2005, about him not getting paid back 403.70? It says he took double reimbursements a few times, but it also says he made double payments a few times. I think this is much more likely to be bad accounting practices than theft.

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/57_9...-Paul-About-Flights-212541-1.html?pos=htmbtxt

 

[returningliberty]

Honestly, I have no idea about the expense claims, I haven't been following the news lately.

That said... my personal opinion is that people (including a lot of people here that should know better), quickly claim he is a "nut" or "quack", etc because they are trying to find a way to dismiss him, because they are scared of his message. They don't want to admit the truth to themselves.

What I mean is:

1.) They realize that some of the things they have supported (wars, civil liberty violations, etc) are WRONG, and they don't want to admit it
and/or
2.) Accepting what he is saying would make the realize how bad of a position the US is really in, and they sadly just don't want to believe it. They would rather stick their heads in the sand.

It's really pretty obvious, instead of debating his positions on things, they quickly find ways to try to dismiss him (newsletters from 30 years ago he didn't even write, or some mistakes on expense returns)...when the other candidates are pro gun control, pro abortion, voted for funding for planned parent hood, etc... C'mon Son!

I mean, watch the debates... no one even attempt to argue something with him...wow... I wonder why? lol

I don't think any real people would claim he intentionally fudged numbers. I really dislike him and I wouldn't say that lol.

He is a nut and Should be dismissed lol.

You're damn right I'm scared of his message, it's scary!

Which war was wrong to you? Call me biased cause I actually served in the military but I support going and killing people Over There so they're not killing people Over Here. One taste on 9/11 was enough for me. Never again. And I don't care what justification they try to use about our CIA mucking with their governments in the 50's-70's, killing Americans means war. Period.

I never supported the patriot act, or a myriad of other things (including the most recent NDAA), but my emailing my representatives didn't seem to matter much.

I think we all fully understand the truckload of crap that's about to dumped on us due to our centralized government. But Paul wouldn't help except to ease regulation on business. Unfortunately, that's not even our biggest problem at the moment.

You really need to understand the geopolitical ramifications of the man's foreign policy and his ridiculous notion of phasing out the fed in a fiat based currency (this notion about returning to a gold standard is the most asinine thing since "The rent is too damn high!" party. There's not enough gold in the world to run our economy, much less our economy And back up our debt.)

I'm not going to argue about his newsletters. He didnt write them, yet defended them on CNN in the 90's because apparently the public is too stupid to understand ghost writers. Either racism on parade or gross negligence, both of which we have in the white house right now. Look how good that's turning out.

No one bothers arguing with him because all he says is "end these WARS! Gold Standard! Liberty! End the fed! Legalize drugs!"

 

[kenny]

I don't think any real people would claim he intentionally fudged numbers. I really dislike him and I wouldn't say that lol.

He is a nut and Should be dismissed lol.

You're damn right I'm scared of his message, it's scary!

Which war was wrong to you? Call me biased cause I actually served in the military but I support going and killing people Over There so they're not killing people Over Here. One taste on 9/11 was enough for me. Never again. And I don't care what justification they try to use about our CIA mucking with their governments in the 50's-70's, killing Americans means war. Period.

I never supported the patriot act, or a myriad of other things (including the most recent NDAA), but my emailing my representatives didn't seem to matter much.

I think we all fully understand the truckload of crap that's about to dumped on us due to our centralized government. But Paul wouldn't help except to ease regulation on business. Unfortunately, that's not even our biggest problem at the moment.

You really need to understand the geopolitical ramifications of the man's foreign policy and his ridiculous notion of phasing out the fed in a fiat based currency (this notion about returning to a gold standard is the most asinine thing since "The rent is too damn high!" party. There's not enough gold in the world to run our economy, much less our economy And back up our debt.)

I'm not going to argue about his newsletters. He didnt write them, yet defended them on CNN in the 90's because apparently the public is too stupid to understand ghost writers. Either racism on parade or gross negligence, both of which we have in the white house right now. Look how good that's turning out.

No one bothers arguing with him because all he says is "end these WARS! Gold Standard! Liberty! End the fed! Legalize drugs!"

Here's a little food for thought.

When I took my first job, minimum wage was $4.75. A pack of cigarettes was $1.25, gas was $1 a gallon, and milk was $1.25 a gallon.

Now, minimum wage is $7.25. A pack of cigarettes is $5.00, gas is $3.75 a gallon, and milk is $5.00 a gallon.

So what's happened? While the price of goods has increased nearly 4 times, minimum wage hasn't even doubled. To be where we were just 15 years ago, minimum wage needs to be $23 an hour...

Our dollar has been devalued. At the same time, the nation has spent more and more money on social programs, and has in turn taxed higher percentages on income and business. We borrowed money in China to keep moving. We send money to foreign countries for "assistance". Were building foreign nations while our's is crumbling.

We need a strong economy, and we need a strong defense. We do night need to fight "un-declared" wars. We do not need troops stationed around the world to protect our "interests". We do not need to send money to other countries. We do not need to arm foreign governments. We do not need to go to war with Iran. We do not need the federal government to regulate anything, or spend money that it doesn't have.

Now, believe it or not, even if all federal laws on drugs were overturned, they would still be illegal for possession in Louisiana. We have state laws restricting the possession of controlled dangerous substances.

The Federal Government should protect our freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, contract obligations between individuals, defend our borders and our allies, deliver mail. That's it, everything else should be handled by local government. The more we tamper in foreign governments the more enemies we make along the way.

 

[Leonidas]

It's really pretty obvious, instead of debating his positions on things, they quickly find ways to try to dismiss him (newsletters from 30 years ago he didn't even write, or some mistakes on expense returns)...when the other candidates are pro gun control, pro abortion, voted for funding for planned parent hood, etc... C'mon Son!

Excuser number one. Read the articles! He was warned to stop.



I mean, watch the debates... no one even attempt to argue something with him...wow... I wonder why? lol


Because he has NO credibility. He's been running for President for 30 FREAKING years. lol

Strange how many paulbots here raved about his honesty more than anything else, even his positions. Now the truth is out that he ain't the lily white virginal creature, and all of a sudden its his positions that are paramount, not his integrity.

Meh.

 

[kenny]

Where do you keep getting the running for president for 30 years? He ran in the '88 election, the '08 election, and the current election. He has been a Congressman in Texas, who consistently votes against unconstitutional bills.

Who's you're pick, and what has he done?

 

[aard3]

I don't think any real people would claim he intentionally fudged numbers. I really dislike him and I wouldn't say that lol.

He is a nut and Should be dismissed lol.

You're damn right I'm scared of his message, it's scary!

Which war was wrong to you? Call me biased cause I actually served in the military but I support going and killing people Over There so they're not killing people Over Here. One taste on 9/11 was enough for me. Never again. And I don't care what justification they try to use about our CIA mucking with their governments in the 50's-70's, killing Americans means war. Period.

I never supported the patriot act, or a myriad of other things (including the most recent NDAA), but my emailing my representatives didn't seem to matter much.

I think we all fully understand the truckload of crap that's about to dumped on us due to our centralized government. But Paul wouldn't help except to ease regulation on business. Unfortunately, that's not even our biggest problem at the moment.

You really need to understand the geopolitical ramifications of the man's foreign policy and his ridiculous notion of phasing out the fed in a fiat based currency (this notion about returning to a gold standard is the most asinine thing since "The rent is too damn high!" party. There's not enough gold in the world to run our economy, much less our economy And back up our debt.)

I'm not going to argue about his newsletters. He didnt write them, yet defended them on CNN in the 90's because apparently the public is too stupid to understand ghost writers. Either racism on parade or gross negligence, both of which we have in the white house right now. Look how good that's turning out.

No one bothers arguing with him because all he says is "end these WARS! Gold Standard! Liberty! End the fed! Legalize drugs!"

What war was WRONG? Ummm.. How about the Iraq one? Iraq had absolutely NOTHING to do with 9/11, and there were NO weapons of mass destruction. How about why are we still fighting in Afghanistan when we have killed bin laden?
You can choose to believe that our actions don't have repercussions, but just remember, we TRAINED and FINANCED Osama. Go back and watch some of those videos when Osama EXPLAINS why they attacked.

You don't support the patriot act or the NDAA, but you are going to support a candidate that will do nothing to repeal them?

WTF do you mean that "paul wouldn't help ease regulation on business"... do you really even know what he stands for? He promotes a "free-market"... which means NO government intervention.

"geopolitical ramifications"... yea, like what? Bringing our troops home to defend our country vs having them spread out over the world? He's a non-interventionist, NOT a isolationist. He just doesn't want to go mucking around in other nations business... how is that a bad thing? How is not giving other countries BILLIONS when we need that money here at bad thing?

You obviously don't understand what they mean by gold standard...and how you can argue that a fiat currency is a good thing is beyond me...we have money that has value only because the government says it does... and through the FED they can play with the supply... Right now the FED claims inflation is around 2-3%...other independent sources say it's closer to 9%... so if you have a $1000 dollars in the bank, next year it will only be work $910... HOW IS THAT GOOD? I'll tell you, it's good for the uber rich, crappy for the poor/ middle class.

Paul says the drug question is a STATES RIGHTS issue, just like machine guns, silencers, etc. He's not advocating people run out and go shoot up with some heroin, he's advocating that they states should be able to have their own laws... and they do! The founding fathers never intending for the federal government to wield the power it now has... it's American history 101.

 

[OneStory]

Strange how many paulbots here raved about his honesty more than anything else, even his positions. Now the truth is out that he ain't the lily white virginal creature, and all of a sudden its his positions that are paramount, not his integrity.

Meh.

None of them are "lily white virginal" and all of them are nuts to a degree.

We are forced to settle for the lesser of the evils. :-(

 

[aard3]

Strange how many paulbots here raved about his honesty more than anything else, even his positions. Now the truth is out that he ain't the lily white virginal creature, and all of a sudden its his positions that are paramount, not his integrity.

Meh.

Again, you aren't even trying to debate on the issues! LOL

I can't respond about the expense reports, because I'm not Paul and I have no idea what happened. You are correct that he needs to make some statement about it... I will say I am pretty sure that I seriously doubt that he sits there and completes expense reports himself, probably some aid or intern... but that's just my suspicion.

 

[aard3]

Where do you keep getting the running for president for 30 years? He ran in the '88 election, the '08 election, and the current election. He has been a Congressman in Texas, who consistently votes against unconstitutional bills.

Who's you're pick, and what has he done?

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Leonidas]

Obama.

Lets tear it down faster so we can get to the business of rebuilding.

 

[kenny]

Obama.

Lets tear it down faster so we can get to the business of rebuilding.

And I'm the crazy one.

 

[Leonidas]

And I'm the crazy one.

If you believe that the current state of the nation can be corrected at the ballot box, you are.

 

[Jack]

Obama.

Lets tear it down faster so we can get to the business of rebuilding.

 

[aard3]

If you believe that the current state of the nation can be corrected at the ballot box, you are.

Unfortunately, if you look at history, when a republic falls, you usually end up with a dictator... can you say "third reich"? I think it's prudent to do everything we can now to keep that from happening... that's just me though.

 

[Leonidas]

The man asked a direct question and got a straightforward answer.

 

[Leonidas]

Unfortunately, if you look at history, when a republic falls, you usually end up with a dictator... can you say "third reich"? I think it's prudent to do everything we can now to keep that from happening... that's just me though.

Isn't what we have now a pretty fair image of tyranny? My perusal of the Declaration convinces me that the founders would agree. So....what's the diff?

 

[aard3]

Isn't what we have now a pretty fair image of tyranny? My perusal of the Declaration convinces me that the founders would agree. So....what's the diff?

We still have the chance to vote someone into office that truly believes in LIBERTY...shouldn't we at least TRY? Come on over to the Paul side Leonidas, at least when things go to crap, you can say with a clear conscience that you tried! ;-)

Edit: I agree, what we have now is tyranny

 

[kenny]

Isn't what we have now a pretty fair image of tyranny? My perusal of the Declaration convinces me that the founders would agree. So....what's the diff?

We're not gonna be fighting a foreign government. Most of the folks that would stand up and fight, are overseas. Those of us that are here are so broke we can't pay attention. The rest of the country is more concerned with what's happening on Jersey Shore. When the checks stop hitting the leaches mailboxes, they're gonna go berserk. The local authorities will be overwhelmed, and the National Guard is gonna step in. We're being marked as domestic terrorists. The Patriot Act, and the NDAA have laid the ground work for rounding the "thought criminals" that would defend this country from tyranny. A revolution, or civil war, or whatever you want to call it does seem inevitable, but look what happened just a few years ago with Katrina. Most people cannot live without someone telling them what to do, let alone defend themselves from an army of people who think that they are protecting us. The comparison to NAZI Germany is a good one, DHS will attempt to protect us from ourselves, and anyone who doesn't want to follow the rules is a threat to national security. Things are bad now, but with Obama as a lame duck president, they will be much, much worse.