RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Hillwilliam -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 8:03:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

And no Democratic primary probably because they know they're going to lose anyway. Now if there (was) a Democratic primary of course I'd vote in that!


Obama is running unopposed... why in the hell would they need a primary?

Actually, taz, both parties will have primaries as I understand it because there are more seats than just POTUS up for election this november. It's just that Obama will likely be the only choice for Prez on the D side.



Lucylastic -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 8:04:40 AM)

thankyou for that Tazzy, I knew I wouldnt get a response!!!!!!
WTF ????



Hot4 ..IMNSHO Paul is the sanest insane one out of all of em. he may well pull them up on their bullshit, but he hasnt been much good in his time.. if it takes him 20 years to get this level of backing and approval, hes gonna be six foot under pushin up daisies before big money will let him do half what he wants once he is inside the WH.
WRT Perry...Theres only one way he will tap into the occupy movement. Thru a seance held at a GA in Houston






tazzygirl -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 9:16:06 AM)

quote:

Actually, taz, both parties will have primaries as I understand it because there are more seats than just POTUS up for election this november. It's just that Obama will likely be the only choice for Prez on the D side.


You are correct, Hill. That wasnt what pops meant.

And no Democratic primary probably because they know they're going to lose anyway. Now if there (was) a Democratic primary of course I'd vote in that!

Now, why assume there would be no Democratic primary because they are going to lose? pops only speaks in presidential terms.

The first step in South Carolina’s delegate selection process will be the February 28, 2012 Presidential Primary. South Carolina will use a proportional representation system based on the results of the primary to apportion its delegates among presidential candidates. If President Obama is the only candidate who files for the primary, the Democratic primary will be cancelled and the President will be awarded all of the delegates.

http://www.p2012.org/chrnsouc/scdem092911pr.html



Winterapple -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 9:48:02 AM)

I didn't give anyone a pass including my theoretical young male in the 60's self.
I think my post was relatively clear when
taken in context by anyone not being deliberately obtuse. It helps to know what
a neocon hawk is. Helps to acknowledge I
was posting in the framework of Paul's
actions towards Newt in the debate and my
speculation as to why. Helps to read an
entire thread.
My dad is a libertarian Ron Paul supporter.
He has never been on the left politically.
As a young man he used the legal outs for
the draft Newt and Chaney did. Like Newt and
Dick be was disinclined to risk having his ass
blown off and had no interest in serving in the
military in any capacity. He had some vague
opinions Viet Nam wasn't a great idea but he
was no conscientious objector or peace loving
hippie.
As a old man, to his credit he isn't a hawk nor
does he spout neocon interventionist rhetoric.
He backs the strictly noninterventionist Paul.
Like Paul he was against the wad in Iraq and
shares his views on countries like Iran ie
it's nothing to us so stay out of it. I think in
light if these views and his past whatever you
can say about him he isn't a hypocrite.
I don't think Newt and Dick are safe from
being accused if hypocrisy. As old men they
are gung ho to send young men and women
to all sorts of far-flung places for the most
capricious of reasons and in Dicks case some
of the most self serving.
I'm not really one to defend Clintons character.
I'm a democrat but I am to the left of a
centrist like Clinton. I voted for him, liked
many things he did as president and disagree
with others. When I said he wasn't a neocon
hawk I was referencing his political philosophy
not his draft dodging. I don't think candidate
Clinton or post presidential has ever tried to
weak shit his avoidance of military service.
He's not a hawk and he was a reluctant
interventionist.
Do you understand what I'm saying?
It's not about giving people passes.
It's old Newt pimping stuff young Newt
wanted no part of. I think that might be
one definition of a hypocrite. I stated in my
post that I thought Paul was calling Newt
on this.




thishereboi -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 11:17:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

And no Democratic primary probably because they know they're going to lose anyway. Now if there (was) a Democratic primary of course I'd vote in that!


Obama is running unopposed... why in the hell would they need a primary?


Living in the Detroit area, I just have to ask. If they did decide to have a primary...would they put Obama's name on it this time?



hot4bondage -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 11:57:13 AM)

~FR~

Here's CNN's take on the Paul/Gingrich skirmish.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/09/politics/debate-five-things/index.html

The article ends with a quote of Newt scolding Ron for lying. Their exchange actually ended like this:

RP: "I was married, with two kids. I went."
NG: (trying to be heard above the crowd's applause) "I was ineligible. I was ineligible."

Seriously, could the media bias against Ron Paul be any more obvious?



hlen5 -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 12:09:05 PM)

You're right, it's very dishonest where they ended that exchange!!

I want to know what Paul meant by calling Santorum corrupt?



MrRodgers -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 12:30:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Meh.....it wasn`t that bad.

It`s not like anyone`s listening to Paul anyway.

Ron is a good street fighter tho for a small man.

I've listened to him and agree with him on most things about govt. and most issues but not all.

What I do not agree with him on is I think he actually believes that the free market would have removed lead from our gas and paint and also the asbestos from our construction just for two examples.

Of course [it] would not have done any such thing...'merrily profiting on death and sickness.



MrRodgers -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 12:35:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: hot4bondage

Yeah, it was fun to watch Newt squirm. Apparently Newt misled us about the details of his deferment. Shocking. So, why WAS he ineligible?


"Ineligible" isn't quite the right term.  That sounds like it was something that happened to him.  In fact, Newt did everything he could to avoid service - educational deferments, and I suspect he went into an allegedly nonmonogamous marriage situation where he screwed around on the side, mainly for the purpose of avoiding service.

If character becomes a factor in the primary, Newt's out.

...it already is and should always be about character, our leaders have none. Newt is already out, he just doesn't know it yet.

That's OK, a few more paydays for his temp. help anyway.



Raiikun -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 12:53:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

What I do not agree with him on is I think he actually believes that the free market would have removed lead from our gas and paint and also the asbestos from our construction just for two examples.

Of course [it] would not have done any such thing...'merrily profiting on death and sickness.



Once upon a time I would have agreed completely, now I think Ron Paul might be right. After all, once upon a time, the reason snake-oil salesmen were so successful is because they were able to travel faster than the news.

Information spreads so much more quickly and freely now though, that now if some companies are using lead in their paint, there would be demand for companies that didn't, and, well, Ron has pretty much said all this.

Of course, OTOH, I'm not saying regulations against lead in paint is a bad thing necessarily; I can also just see where Ron is coming from.



LookieNoNookie -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 9:29:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Calls him chickenshit in front of the whole Republican Party, and after Newt responds by calling Ron Paul a liar, Paul THEN delivers the coup-d-grace and points out that when he served he was married with 2 kids but he went when he was called.

Newt is then reduced to impotently drooling, "I was ineligable! I was ineligable!".

fin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QJMM_btpmM


Actually, what Paul said was that Newt was a "chickenhawk" which is pejorative for someone who never served in the military....but has a full position on who should serve.



LookieNoNookie -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 9:38:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hot4bondage

Yeah, it was fun to watch Newt squirm. Apparently Newt misled us about the details of his deferment. Shocking. So, why WAS he ineligible?


Interestingly....this is just exactly like when Clinton was asked (with his wife sitting next to him on a couch, while being interviewed by Dan Rather) "are you having sex with (Monica)?"

To which Clinton said...."I am not having sex with that woman".

And at that exact moment in time (when asked) he was not.

Ron Paul stated in a recent debate (essentially) "....like those who get 3 or 4 and sometimes 5 deferments......shouldn't be allowed to...."

He never said that Gingrich asked for (any) deferments...he simply stated that those that do....shouldn't be asking our boys to go to war....ergo....be the/a President.

It's kind of like that other Presidential candidate in the 1800's who put out a flyer that stated that his opponent was a "known and unabashed thespian".

People hear what they want to hear...and candidates know this.



tazzygirl -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/9/2012 9:39:25 PM)

quote:

Information spreads so much more quickly and freely now though, that now if some companies are using lead in their paint, there would be demand for companies that didn't, and, well, Ron has pretty much said all this.


At the time the law passed, very few companies werent using lead. However, in the case of public health, the government should be able to step in when industry refuses to govern itself.



Hillwilliam -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/10/2012 6:34:04 AM)

I don't have a link for this because it was in the local paper but it's funny as hell.

Bob Dole and Newt apparently had a serious dislike for each other when they were in Congress.

One day, Newt asked Dole "Bob, why do people get such an instant dislike for me?"

Dole's reply "Saves time".



Musicmystery -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/10/2012 6:45:57 AM)

quote:

I don't have a link for this

http://rrleader.com/Main.asp?SectionID=7&SubSectionID=7&ArticleID=28711

By the way,
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-presidential-primary/201853-bob-dole-on-gingrichs-temperament-sometimes-its-his-way-or-the-highway



Hillwilliam -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/10/2012 6:49:18 AM)

TY mm. I wasn't perfect on the quote but you get the idea LOL.



Owner59 -> RE: Ron Paul ends Newt's Candidacy... (1/10/2012 7:07:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Meh.....it wasn`t that bad.

It`s not like anyone`s listening to Paul anyway.

Ron is a good street fighter tho for a small man.

I've listened to him and agree with him on most things about govt. and most issues but not all.

What I do not agree with him on is I think he actually believes that the free market would have removed lead from our gas and paint and also the asbestos from our construction just for two examples.

Of course [it] would not have done any such thing...'merrily profiting on death and sickness.


I`ve always liked Paul for his honesty even though we don`t agree on all matters.He`s also not a spiteful jerk type republican.Even democrats and liberals respect him.One gets the feeling that he`s working in good faith with a country-over-party attitude.

But technically,the cons are correct that the free market would eventually remove lead and asbestos from our environments....... through direct absorption by people.[8|]



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875