The Ron Paul Strategy Going Forward

[THEBIRD]

NOTE: The following is written with the assumption that Rudy will be the GOP candidate. I know the website is supporting Fred Thompson but he is not leading in any of the main stream polls in the upcoming primary states. Rudy is the only one consistently leading in primary polls one after the other.

************************************


Over and over up until this point, mainline republicans and some wary conservatives have been stating that Ron Paul has no chance. This is probably correct but the reason behind those statement is changing and republican strategists around the country are stumbling backward and looking for a place to sit down as they begin to realize what's really happening.

Some of you know that I have volunteered a lot for political campaigns in the past such as Rep. Bill McCullom, Senator Kit Bond and various other state campaigns around the country. And so I talked to a friend yesterday who is very politically connected and we discussed the Ron Paul issue and folks at GOP HQ and the WH are getting worried, and its not about Ron Paul actually winning the nomination.

After recent fundraising successes, Ron Paul's campaign strategy is now not about winning the nomination for the GOP. His strategy will be to launch a huge media blitz for the upcoming primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and Michigan. Ron Paul is only hoping to place in these competitions....not win them. Placing 4th, 3rd, or perhaps even 2nd in one or more of these primaries will garner him enough media attention and name recognition that he will be able to put his plan into full effect.

That is to pull out and run as an independent in 2008 and upset the applecart enough to ruin the GOP's chances in 2008.

The Libertarian and Constitution parties together have already had talks that they will support Ron Paul jointly if something like this were to occur.

If this were to happen, then Rudy knows its over.

My friend and I discussed how too much of the base has already decided that they will never vote for Rudy because of his stance on abortion and gun rights.

Ron Pauls best chance to make history is to take his massive amounts of money that continues to grow and urge his supporters to get behind him as an independent candidate. It looks like this strategy is well in motion. The campaign is already in full swing uniting meet-up groups around the US with campaign HQ in order to prepare states that will require a certain amount of signatures before he can be placed on the ballot as an independent. This infrastucture is almost fully in place to allow him ballot access.

Like I said, this is something that has only come to light with the growing money surge and media popularity of Ron Paul. Strategists are taking a step back to ponder how to deal with this wild card that could in fact make big trouble for any GOP candidate.

Going forward as an independent with the combined support of both the Libertarian and Constitution parties along with maybe beating out McMCain or even Romney in at least one of the primaries would propel him to the forefront of conservatives looking for another option.

The fact that you have this many conservatives from the religious right and gun owners not satisfied with the choices before them, you have the makings of a third choice that will send a clear message to the GOP and the republican leaders that liberal government growing candidates will not beat out their democrat opponents. Conservatives will simply stay home or search for third party options.

Anyway, the conversation I had last night with this person was very informative and the mere fact that leading candidates now have Ron Paul on their radar is encouraging.

He was worried. I'm glad he is worried. I want the establishment to be worried. It means we're on the right track. :claps:

[Jack_Savage]

After recent fundraising successes, Ron Paul's campaign strategy is now not about winning the nomination for the GOP. His strategy will be to launch a huge media blitz for the upcoming primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and Michigan. Ron Paul is only hoping to place in these competitions....not win them. Placing 4th, 3rd, or perhaps even 2nd in one or more of these primaries will garner him enough media attention and name recognition that he will be able to put his plan into full effect.

That is to pull out and run as an independent in 2008 and upset the applecart enough to ruin the GOP's chances in 2008.


Anyone who is for this whacky notion, that somehow being part of an Ass-Headed Ron Paul campaign, thinking that is original thinking and thrilling, is selling pure evil. There incentive is Their own self promotion over what is good for America. When cowardace attracts the religious right, we fall down. When Ideas and plans no longer mean anything, only hollow vacant plans filled with resentment, it shows what a sorry state of affairs conservatives have fallen to. When running away becomes easier than going forward, and cowardace is the clarian call, we as a country will lose. Its about as smart as that little Hitler H. Ross Perot, who's only contribution was to get Bill Clinton in the White House.

Ron Pauls strategy is right out of Soros.com. If only conservatives would work to do what works instead of insisting on being right maybe we got a chance of fixing the mess but If Ron Paul if allowed to run amok, he will hurt conservatives chances by taking votes away from the nominee. He won't take any votes from Hillary or Obama. No. His efforts, now raising its ugly head, need to be slammed down so hard it never raises up again. He is an embarrassment to all that made America great.

[CzechPrince]

Interesting article. The only thing I'm perplexed about is the part of Libertarians and Constitutionalists supporting him. Both parties are radically different from each other.

[TeenageRepublican]

Good post. But I'm still a Fredhead. My my to-do list for republican canidates are:
1. Keep the right to bear arms.
2. Lower Taxes/Tax cuts.
3. Keep troops in Iraq until he feels they have won the war.
4. Support the death penelty.
5. End Amnesty.
6. Deal with Illegals.

I would put Abortion on the list, but I feel that's a state issue. I would support Ron Paul if he supported point 3 and 4.
I don't think we would move forward if Ron Paul became president.

[Naturalized-Texan]

The hate-America leftist establishment is propping up Ron Paul's candidacy with their contributions.

[Madbomber]

You keep thinking that.

[THEBIRD]

You keep thinking that.

No kidding. N-T, your so diluded. Sure there are some anti-war liberals supporting Paul but its mostly the pro-gun, pro-life, pro-small government, anti-illegal immigrant conservatives sending him money.

Wake up N-T.


Feel free to continue supporting globalist punks who overspend and are willing to sign away your freedoms for the benefit of the Global Community.



Again, 5 years ago on this site.....you folks were praising Paul on everything and saying how great he was.....now because he disagrees with our globalist care bear Bush on the issue of an Unconstitutional war.....you throw him under the Bus.

Hypocrites....all of you.

[Jack_Savage]

No kidding. N-T, your so diluded. Sure there are some anti-war liberals supporting Paul but its mostly the pro-gun, pro-life, pro-small government, anti-illegal immigrant conservatives sending him money.

Wake up N-T.


Feel free to continue supporting globalist punks who overspend and are willing to sign away your freedoms for the benefit of the Global Community.



Again, 5 years ago on this site.....you folks were praising Paul on everything and saying how great he was.....now because he disagrees with our globalist care bear Bush on the issue of an Unconstitutional war.....you throw him under the Bus.

Hypocrites....all of you.

didn't you report Ron Paul was not against the war then. Didn't you ever figure, when people find someone they supported came out of the closet and turned coward, it would have an effect.

What would lead you to conclude that when he was lying back then, those people would still follow him. Thats what he was lying for, to get their vote.
When the weather vane changes direction, Ron Paul will be for something different, you may be the only one who is still for him. But you supported "Kip" to, and look at how many important votes he didn't show up for.

We need people in our Congress who care about what is good for the country, not anymore who are lost into personal ambition like Ronny Paul.
C'mon, at least take a look at that. What plan are you operating out of other than political advancement?

[garlicguy]

What plan are you operating out of other than political advancement?

D4R, you keep asking for the step-by-step plans that Ron Paul has on the issues, most particularly (it seems) the Iraq and Middle East war, et alia.

To get it straight from Dr. Paul, please visit the website:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ (Ron Paul's official campaign website) (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/)

And click on either "Issues" or on "Learn" and then read what the man, Ron Paul has been saying for many, many years in his own words.

The information from other sources may not be reliably reporting his positions or values and many have been mislead in this way.

gg :cowboy:

[UnkHiram]

No kidding. N-T, your so diluded. Sure there are some anti-war liberals supporting Paul but its mostly the pro-gun, pro-life, pro-small government, anti-illegal immigrant conservatives sending him money.

Bovine Droppings, the only people I know supporting Ron Paul are nut cases and people who are more intrested in defeating a less than perfect Republican than they are in defeating a Democrat.



Feel free to continue supporting globalist punks who overspend and are willing to sign away your freedoms for the benefit of the Global Community.



Feel Free to continue to support the Democrats best insurance policy for their victory in 08.



Again, 5 years ago on this site.....you folks were praising Paul on everything and saying how great he was.....now because he disagrees with our globalist care bear Bush on the issue of an Unconstitutional war.....you throw him under the Bus.

Again Bovine Droppings. I have never "Praised" Ron Paul, I have allways opposed this Libertarian LYING about being a Republican. Personally, I dont give a tinkers damn if you agree or disagree on the war --------- But This "Conservative Republican" that you are supporting voted to cut off funding to our troops WHILE THEY WERE BEING SHOT AT! Given the Chance, I would love to throw him under the bus!


Hypocrites....all of you.

Fanatic Idiots ... All of you Ron Paul lunatics

[UnkHiram]

D4R, you keep asking for the step-by-step plans that Ron Paul has on the issues, most particularly (it seems) the Iraq and Middle East war, et alia.

To get it straight from Dr. Paul, please visit the website:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ (Ron Paul's official campaign website) (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/)

And click on either "Issues" or on "Learn" and then read what the man, Ron Paul has been saying for many, many years in his own words.

The information from other sources may not be reliably reporting his positions or values and many have been mislead in this way.

gg :cowboy:

Forget Ron Paul's Site -- To to the Libertarian Party Platform Site. Remember he ran as a Libertarian and endorsed their platform. http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml

Let me quote a few passages for you


The Issue: We oppose any abridgment of the freedom of speech through government censorship, regulation or control of communications media, including, but not limited to, laws concerning:

a) Obscenity, including "pornography", as we hold this to be an abridgment of liberty of expression despite claims that it instigates rape or assault, or demeans and slanders women;



Free Porn for everyone ---- Real Conservative



All public lands and resources, as well as claims thereto, except as explicitly allowed by the Constitution, shall be returned to private ownership, with the proceeds of sale going to retire public liabilities.



Kiss your National Parks and Highways goodbye. You think we got badly maintained roads now? Wait till everyone of them is a toll road owned by some company in Spain.



We also oppose police roadblocks aimed at randomly, and without probable cause, testing drivers for intoxication and police practices to stop mass transit vehicles and search passengers without probable cause.

Get Drunk, Drive your Car, Kill an innocent person. Thank the Libertarians!



Repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act and state laws and amendments defining marriage.

Doesn't sound like a conservative philosphy to me.



Repeal all laws establishing criminal or civil penalties for the use of drugs.

Oh Yea, thats real Conservative

To be understand Ron Paul and his Libertarian philosphy either go to this site http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml or take out a power drill and drill into you head right between your eyes.

[TeenageRepublican]

Hypocrites....all of you.

I came here in July and I didn't know a thing about Ron Paul until two weeks in to this site. I do not think the posters on this board are hypocrites. Ron Paul was a lot better back then. But he slowly started going down the liberal path.
First, he opposed the death penelty. Then, he went against the war. God knows what will be next. Gun Control? Amnesty? Abortion?
Ron Paul had his good years, I'll admit that. Ron Paul's good years are flushed down the toilet, next to Clinton's cyber sex chat transcripts of M0nica and Bubba93.

[Jack_Savage]

Forget Ron Paul's Site -- To to the Libertarian Party Platform Site. Remember he ran as a Libertarian and endorsed their platform. http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml

Let me quote a few passages for you



Free Porn for everyone ---- Real Conservative

[/font]

Kiss your National Parks and Highways goodbye. You think we got badly maintained roads now? Wait till everyone of them is a toll road owned by some company in Spain.



Get Drunk, Drive your Car, Kill an innocent person. Thank the Libertarians!



Doesn't sound like a conservative philosphy to me.



Oh Yea, thats real Conservative

To be understand Ron Paul and his Libertarian philosphy either go to this site http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml or take out a power drill and drill into you head right between your eyes.


What a great post. I was going to respond to GG but you were right on. I can only add, what you and I have already said, his plan is to do just what Iran and her Hezbollah forces want us to do, to return home to the United States with our tail between our legs so they can follow us here with acts of terror that would make Saddams son's Uday and Qsay proud. Anyone who advocates retreat for political purposes is a slime-ball. He will be remembered as a loser. A grim shallow pandering pol, who places his personal interest over his countrys. The only purpose he serves is a spoiler, not any contribution to the people he promises his support, but to their enemy.

[Naturalized-Texan]

No kidding. N-T, your so diluded. Sure there are some anti-war liberals supporting Paul but its mostly the pro-gun, pro-life, pro-small government, anti-illegal immigrant conservatives sending him money.

Wake up N-T.
You're the one who needs to wake up to the FACT that Ron Paul advocates and votes for surrendering to the terrorists, thereby endangering the lives of tens of millions of innocent American men, women, and children by making us vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

Feel free to continue supporting globalist punks who overspend and are willing to sign away your freedoms for the benefit of the Global Community.
What "globalist punks"? I haven't see any conservative here support any globalist punks.

Again, 5 years ago on this site.....you folks were praising Paul on everything and saying how great he was.....now because he disagrees with our globalist care bear Bush on the issue of an Unconstitutional war.....you throw him under the Bus.

Hypocrites....all of you.
You don't know what you are talking about. I haven't seen any patriotic conservatives supporting Ron Paul since I've been here. I haven't supported Ron Paul since he was our Congressman back in the 1970s and early 1980s when he was still sane and was still a Reagan conservative. The only ones supporting Ron Paul are unpatriotic conservatives.

You're the one who is a hypocrite for supporting a traitor for president.

[THEBIRD]

You better get a grasp on the fact that Nov 2008 is going to leave you with 3 options.

1. A liberal Communist (Hillary)
2. A Social Liberal (Rudy)
3. A Constitutionalist who doesn't support undeclared wars, running as an independant (Paul)

You will either vote for one of the above or stay home. Let me know how that goes.

[Naturalized-Texan]

You better get a grasp on the fact that Nov 2008 is going to leave you with 3 options.

1. A liberal Communist (Hillary)
2. A Social Liberal (Rudy)
3. A Constitutionalist who doesn't support undeclared wars, running as an independant (Paul)

You will either vote for one of the above or stay home. Let me know how that goes.
No, I'll vote for Fred Thompson.

Ron Paul is no more a Constitutionalist than Hitlery Clinton, especially when it comes to a war for which he voted to declare on September 14, 2001. The declaration of war that Ron Paul voted for states, in part, that "the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States."

Ron Paul is a Kerry-type flip-flopper. He voted for the war before he voted against it.

It's shocking that Ron Paul and his supporters have swallowed the loony left's Big Lie Propaganda about the War on Terror being an illegal war.

[Madbomber]

You're the one who needs to wake up to the FACT that Ron Paul advocates and votes for surrendering to the terrorists, thereby endangering the lives of tens of millions of innocent American men, women, and children by making us vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

We are more vulnerable becuase of our borderes being wide open than we are from terrorists spouting off rhetoric half a world away. Until our borders are closed properly it is debateable wether or not having the troops away from home is making us more safe. Open borders with troops patroling them is more safe than open borders with no one patroling them. I dont know how you dont understand that.


You don't know what you are talking about. I haven't seen any patriotic conservatives supporting Ron Paul since I've been here. I haven't supported Ron Paul since he was our Congressman back in the 1970s and early 1980s when he was still sane and was still a Reagan conservative. The only ones supporting Ron Paul are unpatriotic conservatives.

You're the one who is a hypocrite for supporting a traitor for president.


Hate to break it to you but you dont have a monopoly on patriotism. For instance I consider it unpatriotic to want/desire/lust for our troops to stay in harms way after we have achieved our goals in Iraq. We wanted saddam out of power, He is. We wanted to make sure there were no WMDs, there is nothing there. We wanted a Democratic government there, They have it. If they want to keep that form of government then it is time for them to take the reigns. The only reason I can conclude that you want us to stay there is becuase you like seeing your fellow Americans killed.... Now that is treason.

MB

[Naturalized-Texan]

We are more vulnerable becuase of our borderes being wide open than we are from terrorists spouting off rhetoric half a world away. Until our borders are closed properly it is debateable wether or not having the troops away from home is making us more safe. Open borders with troops patroling them is more safe than open borders with no one patroling them. I dont know how you dont understand that.
However, it's against the law for our troops to patrol our borders, and it's probably unconstitutional.

Hate to break it to you but you dont have a monopoly on patriotism. For instance I consider it unpatriotic to want/desire/lust for our troops to stay in harms way after we have achieved our goals in Iraq.
Nonsense. We are far from reaching our goals in the Iraq Campaign, much less of reaching our goals in the much broader World War IV that Ron Paul voted to declare.

We wanted saddam out of power, He is.
That was merely one of the first steps in the Iraq Campaign.

We wanted to make sure there were no WMDs, there is nothing there.
They were definitely there. We just don't know where they were hidden yet. When all of Saddam's tons of secret documents are translated, we will know where he hid them.

We wanted a Democratic government there, They have it. If they want to keep that form of government then it is time for them to take the reigns.
But many of the terrorists who infiltrated into Iraq from Iran and Syria are still there, so we must keep troops there until all those terrorists are either killed or captured.
The only reason I can conclude that you want us to stay there is becuase you like seeing your fellow Americans killed.... Now that is treason.

It's much better to fight the terrorists where they are than to have to fight them on the streets of American cities and towns, which is exactly what will happen if we surrender to them before we win WW IV. Of course, it's clear that you don't care a diddly squat about the tens of millions of innocent American men, women, and children who will be slaughtered if we do as Ron Paul wants - surrender to the terrorists.

[Seabee]

3. A Constitutionalist who doesn't support undeclared wars, running as an independant (Paul)


This is another problem with the Ru-Paul supporters. They do not evenknow what Ru-Paul is. So far I have heard he is a Republican, then a Libertarian, then a Libertarian-Republican, then a Constitutionalist, then an Independent, then a Libertarian-Constitutionalist, then an Idependent-Contstitutionalist, then a Reagan-Republican. I am sure the list of confusion goes on an on. And please do not give me that Paul just appeals to a wide demographic crap, that is simply a cover for your confusion.

[Kathy30]

As awful as the prospect is, we will have to have terrorist attacks in our cities and towns, in our streets and buldings. Even at that, I don't think it will make a difference. There will still be those who deny we are at war, deny that muslim terrorists are committing the terrorist acts and will still want to surrender, make peace and accommodate. I don't think we are capable of appropriate reaction to a threat.

Look at our border. We are incapable of appropriate reaction to our police and border patrol being attacked by the mexican army! As ineffectual as they are, as cowardly as they are, the mexican army makes incursions and attacks our personnel AT WILL. Any reaction is to prosecute our own agents.

Look at what's happening in our cities. Gangs the size of armies with military grade weapons have siezed control of entire cities. They murder American citizens at will with no fear of being caught or prosecuted.

That's the situation now. No one could tell me that Hamas, Hezbollah or even Al Qaeda could not conduct their business in an atmosphere of the same kind of apathy. Even if YOU personally are not apathetic, even if you personally are willing to fight back, you can't. Try and it is you in the wrong at the very least a racist and a bigot.

THe will to fight is gone. The will to survive is gone. That's why the terrorist situation will grow, expand and get worse because their goal is to cause islam to dominate. They are willing to fight and do whatever it takes. That's why we will have them in our streets, schools and building, cities and towns. No one is going to stop them.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Since Ron Paul and his supporters oppose the use of our military to defend the American people from terrorist attacks, who would they want to trust to defend us? The UN? I suspect that they would prefer to hand over the defense of the American people from terrorist attacks to the UN. Yeah, that must be their plan.

[garlicguy]

Since Ron Paul and his supporters oppose the use of our military to defend the American people from terrorist attacks, who would they want to trust to defend us? The UN? I suspect that they would prefer to hand over the defense of the American people from terrorist attacks to the UN. Yeah, that must be their plan.

:violin::thud::yawn:
You need a new song Tex.. You done wore that one out.

gg:cowboy:

[Naturalized-Texan]

You need a new song Tex.. You done wore that one out.
So, since you don't want our military to protect you from terrorist attacks, you want to entrust your security to the UN. Thanks for making that clear.

[DesertFox]

5 years ago on this site.....you folks were praising Paul on everything and saying how great he wasYou're smoking something. We never did that.

[garlicguy]

So, since you don't want our military to protect you from terrorist attacks, you want to entrust your security to the UN. Thanks for making that clear.

............................................... :icon133: .........................................

[Timberwolf]

No kidding. N-T, your so diluded. Sure there are some anti-war liberals supporting Paul but its mostly the pro-gun, pro-life, pro-small government, anti-illegal immigrant conservatives sending him money.
There is a wise old axiom that goes something like this..."A fool and his money are soon parted."

Wake up N-T.
Oh, he is wide awake...you oughta perk up yer ears and listen.

Feel free to continue supporting globalist punks who overspend and are willing to sign away your freedoms for the benefit of the Global Community.
Like it or not (trust me, I don't), we live in a GLOBAL economic environment. We CAN'T "go back to a simpler time"...not gonna happen. YOU Paulinites need to wake up to this stark REALITY. You guys want us to go BACKWARDS and I'm not falling for it.

RP's policies, if put into action, would ruin what precious little is left of this country.

As for the overspending...you have a point...BUT, that is on CONGRESS, not the President.

Again, 5 years ago on this site.....you folks were praising Paul on everything and saying how great he was.....now because he disagrees with our globalist care bear Bush on the issue of an Unconstitutional war.....you throw him under the Bus.
Quite likely because he wasn't flip-flopping on a war HE VOTED FOR and wasn't throwing OUR TROOPS "under the bus".

btw Chuckles, this is by no means an unconstitutional war. Congress gave Prez Bush the authority to wage it. If CONGRESS wants this war to end, it need do only ONE THING...cut the funding.

Hypocrites....all of you.
Not at all. I'm a pragmatist. Nothing hypocritical in my position, whatsoever.

[Naturalized-Texan]

TW: :claps::claps::claps::claps:

[Lubbock]

My prediction for the srategy of the Paul Loon going forward:

At the end of the Hawkeye Cauci, we will have something from Paul akin to, if not identical to, the Howard Dean Scream.

The Loon will fade into absolute obscurity, only to pop his head up on the rare occasions when his keepers fall asleep on the job, allowing him to make truly off-the-wall pronouncements ala Howard Dean.

Seriously. Isn't there anyone here who can see the parallells --via the internet fund raising and the Loony Platform, between the Dean Run and the Paul Run?

Dean and Paul are both just crazier than bedbugs; both appeal to Loons who are crazier than the two of them; both were/are being propped up with money from their Loon Minions and George Soros.

On a side note: Suzie's and Rhino's plan for "Loon Containment" seems to be working.

[Suzie]

On a side note: Suzie's and Rhino's plan for "Loon Containment" seems to be working.

Wasn't me, I just work here.

[THEBIRD]

As for the overspending...you have a point...BUT, that is on CONGRESS, not the President.





BS Timberwolf. The president has the power to veto any overspending (and that's putting it lightly) he wants to. But because he is in the back pocket of all the other globalists and gets his kickbacks as well, he allows it to go through.

This government is corrupt through and through and I can't find one time where Ron Paul has taken a handout for a favor.

The President is Bankrupting this country.....take a look at the dollar you fools!:shame:

[THEBIRD]

So, since you don't want our military to protect you from terrorist attacks, you want to entrust your security to the UN. Thanks for making that clear.


Again your way off. Ron Paul says on his website and in public over and over again that he will force the UN out of this country and withfraw membership.....something that folks on this site have been wanting for some time now.....again how soon we forget.

Texan, you've just shown how much you don't know about Ron Paul.:sad:

[THEBIRD]

No, I'll vote for Fred Thompson.




Thompson is a non-starter....he'll withdraw from the race in the next 3 months. The money is not coming in....in fact, Ron Paul is about to over take him and McCain in donations.

"Now you've got to wake up, you're going to be late for scho....oh you wet the bed....why can't I have a normal child without these problems!":biggrin:

[Lubbock]

You Isolationists need to get yourselves a new Front Man.

Someone with at lease a modicum of credibility.

Paul doesn't have any.

[Lubbock]

Wasn't me, I just work here.

Well, whoever thought it up, it's better in the long run than my, "Ban Their Asses" idea.

:rotflmbo:

[TeenageRepublican]

Thompson is a non-starter....he'll withdraw from the race in the next 3 months. The money is not coming in....in fact, Ron Paul is about to over take him and McCain in donations.


I'm willing to bet on that. If Thompson withdraws from the race in 3 months or less then I'll change my screen name to TeenageDemocrat for 3 weeks.
How does that sound?

[Suzie]

Well, whoever thought it up, it's better in the long run than my, "Ban Their Asses" idea.

:rotflmbo:

I am with you on that one.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Again your way off. Ron Paul says on his website and in public over and over again that he will force the UN out of this country and withfraw membership.....something that folks on this site have been wanting for some time now.....again how soon we forget.


Well, since Ron Paul and his supporters refuse to let American troops defend the American people from terrorist attacks, who, if not the UN, would he and his supporters allow to defend us from terrorist attacks? Mexico? Canada? Britain? France? Germany? Iran? Syria? Spain? Egypt? Cuba? Venezuela? Israel? (Oops! Not Israel, since Ron Paul is an anti-Semite)

Texan, you've just shown how much you don't know about Ron Paul.:sad:
I know a helluva lot more about Ron Paul than you'll ever know. Back in the 1970s and early 1980s, when he was still sane and was still a Reagan conservative, Ron Paul was our congressman. After the Democrat legislature gerrymandered him out of office following the 1980 Census, he deserted the ranks of Reagan conservatism and went off the deep end. He hasn't been sane since.

[Naturalized-Texan]

"Now you've got to wake up, you're going to be late for scho....oh you wet the bed....why can't I have a normal child without these problems!"
You must hear that from your mommie a lot when you're late for school.

[d'urville]

Seriously. Isn't there anyone here who can see the parallells --via the internet fund raising and the Loony Platform, between the Dean Run and the Paul Run?
Some parallels, but Ron Paul will never poll as well as Dean did, and he won't end up as RNC chairman in a couple of years.

Another deviation, and there'll be many of them when you talk about these two, is that Dean was a REAL Democrat, third party wan't an option for him, and it doesn't look like it will be for Ron Paul:

Hunt interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUO9r36bVsQ)

LOL, same old, same old.


On a side note: Suzie's and Rhino's plan for "Loon Containment" seems to be working.

Present company excepted, of course. Of course.

[Timberwolf]

BIRD...you haven't been paying attention to FDT if you think he's a "non-starter"...he said MONTHS ago that he's going to run his campaign the way HE sees fit, not as some pundit or journalist does.

I think you're going to be unsettlingly surprised in the coming 3 months.

[THEBIRD]

he deserted the ranks of Reagan conservatism and went off the deep end. He hasn't been sane since.

lol...yeah....sure sounds like it. Anybody with the following posted on their website is a class A nutjob for sure.

* Small federal government with limited power (security, commerce ect.)

* Strong state government meeting the needs of the citizens

* No corporate bribery of politicians

* No endless wars and imperial expansion

* No vapor backed currency

* Strong borders, strong national defense.

* Free trade

* Citizens prospering according to their labors.

:thumb:

[The_Elucidator]

* No endless wars and imperial expansion



This one is brilliant!!! :rolleyes:

This is the very point as to why this freakin' nut job will not get the GOP nomination. Imperial expansion??? No "endless" wars???

[Madbomber]

This one is brilliant!!! :rolleyes:

This is the very point as to why this freakin' nut job will not get the GOP nomination. Imperial expansion??? No "endless" wars???


Technically the Korean war was never concluded.... guess that would count as endless.

[THEBIRD]

This one is brilliant!!! :rolleyes:

This is the very point as to why this freakin' nut job will not get the GOP nomination. Imperial expansion??? No "endless" wars???


I may not agree with that either....however, you won't find any politician that agrees with you 100%. Looking at the rest of his views.....I can't find anything I disagree with.

Either way, the war effort is going to bankrupt this country very soon at the current spending rate. You can only print so much money before it turns worthless....thus the drop in the dollar value.

I'm with Ron Paul on bringing the troops home, stop extreme spending and begin to refit the military with modern weapons.

MY POINT: When brain dead repub monkeys like Texan start spouting off that Paul is a nutjob, its good to come back with EXACLTY what Ron Paul's message is. WHAT ELSE ON THAT LIST MAKES RON PAUL A NUTJOB!?!

That list above has been mostly what real conservatives have been wanting for years!!

I really wish I could see Rhino, DesertFox and some others posts back before 2003 about Ron Paul. I remember distinctly that folks around here used to think very highly of him. But because his position of the Iraq war is different than our spending happy president, they throw him under the bus.

Isn't is convienent that the search options only take you back to 2005-2006.

[THEBIRD]

This one is brilliant!!! :rolleyes:

This is the very point as to why this freakin' nut job will not get the GOP nomination. Imperial expansion??? No "endless" wars???

Oh and Elucidator, he's not trying to get the nomination.....he is golden to run as an independent as long as he places in the coming primaries......did you not even read the beginning of the thread?

[Naturalized-Texan]

lol...yeah....sure sounds like it. Anybody with the following posted on their website is a class A nutjob for sure.
* strong national defense.

You're joking , of course. :hahaha::hahaha::hahaha:

Ron Paul has repeatedly voted to cut off funds to our troops who are fighting to give him the right to continue to undermine them with his treasonous rhetoric.

Ron Paul wants to surrender to the terrorists, thus endangering the lives of every American. What's even more despicable, he doesn't even appear to care that surrendering to the terrorists, as he advocates, will result in the slaughter of millions, if not tens of millions, of innocent American men, women, and children. Since it's clear that that's what Ron Paul wants to happen, is that what you want?

Every member of our family lives close enough to a major target for terrorist NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) attacks that we will all be slaughtered is Ron Paul gets his way. It's a sure bet that the terrorists already have or will soon have biological and chemical weapons (and in about 5 years or so, nuclear weapons) that can easily be delivered to major targets in the U.S. if we don't win World War IV - the War on Terror. Instead of surrendering to the terrorists, as Ron Paul advocates, it's imperative that we destroy the terrorists and win this war.

When you support Ron Paul's policies, you are supporting policies that threaten the lives of not only our family, but also the lives of every American man, woman, and child.

Yes, Ron Paul is a loony nutjob for advocating policies that endanger the lives of every American man, woman, and child. He is certifiably insane!

[The_Elucidator]

WHAT ELSE ON THAT LIST MAKES RON PAUL A NUTJOB!?!


Why does anything else on the list matter if he thinks we are imperialists? :limp:


Isn't is convienent that the search options only take you back to 2005-2006.

New software? Board crash? Why don't you just ask Rhino? :question:


did you not even read the beginning of the thread?

Yep, sure did. But apparently you haven't been keeping up with the rest of the forum where your buddies, cough, hack, wheeze... like madbomber think that Paul has a very good shot at winning the nomination. :rolleyes:

[garlicguy]

Yes, Ron Paul is a loony nutjob for advocating policies that endanger the lives of every American man, woman, and child. He is certifiably insane!

Sanity is overrated. Especially in a world like ours that has gone way off the rails. Who would actually want to be called normal in a society such as ours?

:D gg

[The_Elucidator]

Sanity is overrated. Especially in a world like ours that has gone way off the rails. Who would actually want to be called normal in a society such as ours?

:D gg

I believe the term is mainstream... :biggrin:

[Madbomber]

Why does anything else on the list matter if he thinks we are imperialists? :limp:




What do you call having our troops stationed to the four corners of the earth so that we can "protect" other countries. Please.

[Sarah]

I bet ron paul hates spicy food.

[THEBIRD]

Texan.....find me one example where Ron Paul voted to end military funding other than the Iraq war......surely with all his years in congress it should be an easy task.

When you lie, it just lets me know I've won the argument.

Trying to put him in the same group of folks like John Kerry who has almost never voted for military spending is very low and absurd.

Ron Paul is very clear that the military is one of the few things that should be getting our tax dollars. But keep on getting your marching orders from GOP RINO Martinez.....continue to spout the lies....

[Suzie]

Why not read his own speech?

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2007/cr032007.htm

[d'urville]

I really wish I could see Rhino, DesertFox and some others posts back before 2003 about Ron Paul. I remember distinctly that folks around here used to think very highly of him. But because his position of the Iraq war is different than our spending happy president, they throw him under the bus.

Isn't is convienent that the search options only take you back to 2005-2006.

All you have to do is to set it to "ascending" order and the older posts will come up - Example:

http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showthread.php?p=58325&highlight=Paul#post58325

Oh, and Mel Martinez resigned over a month ago.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Texan.....find me one example where Ron Paul voted to end military funding other than the Iraq war......surely with all his years in congress it should be an easy task.
Every Sunday, when Congress is in session, the Houston Chronicle publishes the votes of every Texas member of Congress. I look at his votes as well as the votes of our Democrat Congressman. Ron Paul has repeatedly voted with the Democrats, including our Democrat Congressman and Sheila Jackson Lee, on resolutions to cut off funding to the troops and resolutions to force withdrawal of the troops fighting for our freedom. To deny that he has voted that way is to lie.

When you lie, it just lets me know I've won the argument.
Since you lied, I know that I've won the argument.

Trying to put him in the same group of folks like John Kerry who has almost never voted for military spending is very low and absurd.
Ron Paul has repeatedly voted with his hate-America allies like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, John Kerry, Teddy Kennedy, et al., to cut off funding to our troops and to force a surrender to the terrorists.

Ron Paul is very clear that the military is one of the few things that should be getting our tax dollars. But keep on getting your marching orders from GOP RINO Martinez.....continue to spout the lies....
Yet, he has repeatedly voted with hate-America leftists as noted above. You know as well as I do that that is an undeniable fact.

[Naturalized-Texan]

A few months ago I heard an interview of Ron Paul conducted by a leading local conservative talk show host. If I hadn't heard the host introduce him as Congressman Ron Paul, I would have sworn that it was Teddy Kennedy being interviewed because of the far left positions he took and the bald-faced lies he told. About the only issues where Ron Paul differed from Teddy Kennedy were that he supported the Fair Tax and that he favored free trade. Other than that he was a straight down the line lefty.

I don't remember all the lies he told, but these 3 lies that he told are favorites of the loony left:

Lie #1) Reagan paid off Iran to release the Americans being held hostage in the U.S. Embassy in Tehran for more than 400 days.

It's obvious that he believes in the "October Surprise" in which George H. W. Bush supposedly flew in an SR-71 to Paris in October 1980 to work out an agreement with Iran. The problem with that is that at the very instant he was supposedly in Paris, Bush was making a campaign speech before 5,000 people in Indiana.

Lie #2) Reagan supplied arms and funds to Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan when the Afghanis were fighting Soviet troops.

That is false. Reagan supplied arms and funds to the mujihideen fighting in the north (later the Northern Alliance that helped us overthrow the Taliban and drive al Qaeda out of Afghanistan), not to bin Laden in the south. Osama bin laden got all his arms and funds from the Saudis.

Lie #3) We are fighting an undeclared war in Iraq.

There WAS a declaration of war in the War on Terror passed by Congress on September 14, 2001, and Ron Paul voted for it. The Iraq campaign of the War on Terror is as much a part of the War on Terror as the Normandy invasion was part of WW II and it was authorized by that declaration of war that Ron Paul voted for.

Since then I have seen or heard other lies from Ron Paul. Here are a couple more examples:

Lie: The Iraq campaign has nothing to do with the War on Terror.

Lie: The Iraq campaign of the War on Terror was interference with the internal affairs of a country that posed no direct threat to the security of the United States.

I'm sure there are other lies from Ron Paul, but you get the idea.

[The_Elucidator]

What do you call having our troops stationed to the four corners of the earth so that we can "protect" other countries. Please.

After 21 years in the Air Force I know exactly why we have troops stationed all over the world; and their widely varying missions, to include humanitarian and stability. The fact that you put into quotes the word "protect" tells me you don't know jack shit about what our troops do!

I want you to explain:

1) Without utilizing Webster; just what you think the definition of imperialism is?

2) What you think our troops missions are in the various regions of the world?

[THEBIRD]

I said other than the Iraq war but apparently you can't read.

[The_Elucidator]

I said other than the Iraq war but apparently you can't read.

Not only can I read but I can even post! Why don't you read/re-read post #47 where I answered your question.

Heck; I will even repost it for you!


Why does anything else on the list matter if he thinks we are imperialists? :limp:

[Suzie]

I said other than the Iraq war but apparently you can't read.

Speaking as a person who had someone fighting in this war while Ron Paul was carrying on this nonsense, even if it is just "this war" it's enough that he shouldn't be in congress, much less the white house. Why do the troops in this war deserve any less than the soldiers who have fought in any war? Especially after he voted to send them there.

[The_Elucidator]

Speaking as a person who had someone fighting in this war while Ron Paul was carrying on this nonsense, even if it is just "this war" it's enough that he shouldn't be in congress, much less the white house. Why do the troops in this war deserve any less than the soldiers who have fought in any war? Especially after he voted to send them there.

I guess the term "emboldening the enemy" doesn't register for some folks!!

[Naturalized-Texan]

I guess the term "emboldening the enemy" doesn't register for some folks!!
Yeah. They probably don't even understand that those who advocate surrendering to the terrorists, like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Ron Paul, John Murtha, Teddy Kennedy, et al., have prolonged the War on Terror - World War IV - and have caused the deaths of more than 2,000 American troops.

[Madbomber]

Yeah. They probably don't even understand that those who advocate surrendering to the terrorists, like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Ron Paul, John Murtha, Teddy Kennedy, et al., have prolonged the War on Terror - World War IV - and have caused the deaths of more than 2,000 American troops.


Thats not a very logical statement. Mind giving some proof to back that up?

[Lubbock]

Anybody with one eye and half sense knows that if this nation had presented a united front from day one, we would be looking at this War on Terror in our rearview morror by now.

I was one of those who was duped into believing that the Democrats were actually My Fellow Americans. I, like a fool, believed that the Democrats had an interest in the survival of the nation after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.

Little did I know.

It took them less than a week to politicize the attacks and try to start turning the event to political advantage.

Any person --be they an elected politician or some dumbass posting in an internet political forum, who advocates turning tail and running from the terrorists --be it Iraq or any other corner of the globe where we have an opportunity to quell Muslim violence, is an unPatriotic, unAmerican traitor to this nation.

Whoever you are on this board who advocates leaving Iraq before the job is done, you are not worthy of citizenship in this nation.

Unworthy.

You are not worthy to of being called "American."

You are a traitor.

[THEBIRD]

Ron Paul and Harry Reid cannot be lumped together....they are polar opposites on way to many fronts and issues.

Each wants to pull out for completely different reasons. Reid wants us to lose the war and destroy the legacy of Bush. Paul wants to save the country from bankruptcy.

Have you seen the dollar lately? They'll keep printing it to fund our so called war effort and in another 6 months to a year.....it'll be worth nothing!

Paul is not against defending our country....he is against nation building....so were the founders of this country.

[Suzie]

He is still playing politics with the lives of our troops. And it was personal for me! :mad:

[UnkHiram]

Ron Paul voted to cut off funding to our troops
Nancy Pelosi Voted to cut off funding to our troops
Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy would love to vote to cut off funding to our troops

But Ron Wasn't smiling when he did it, so that makes him different.


BOVINE DROPPINGS!!!

[Jack_Savage]

Ron Paul voted to cut off funding to our troops
Nancy Pelosi Voted to cut off funding to our troops
Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy would love to vote to cut off funding to our troops

But Ron Wasn't smiling when he did it, so that makes him different.


BOVINE DROPPINGS!!!


Very good. http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/flag0000.gif

[Madbomber]

Anybody with one eye and half sense knows that if this nation had presented a united front from day one, we would be looking at this War on Terror in our rearview morror by now.

I was one of those who was duped into believing that the Democrats were actually My Fellow Americans. I, like a fool, believed that the Democrats had an interest in the survival of the nation after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.

Little did I know.

It took them less than a week to politicize the attacks and try to start turning the event to political advantage.

Any person --be they an elected politician or some dumbass posting in an internet political forum, who advocates turning tail and running from the terrorists --be it Iraq or any other corner of the globe where we have an opportunity to quell Muslim violence, is an unPatriotic, unAmerican traitor to this nation.

Whoever you are on this board who advocates leaving Iraq before the job is done, you are not worthy of citizenship in this nation.

Unworthy.

You are not worthy to of being called "American."

You are a traitor.

You sound very gung ho about this. When do you plan on joining up?

[The_Elucidator]

You sound very gung ho about this. When do you plan on joining up?

When do you?

[Madbomber]

When do you?


Im not the one saying that we need to be fighting over there, guy guys are. The onus is on you to back up your rhetoric not me.

[The_Elucidator]

Im not the one saying that we need to be fighting over there, guy guys are. The onus is on you to back up your rhetoric not me.

Already did; as did such patriots like Rhino who was called a liar about his wanting the troops home safely when the job was over. And many others on this board! I'm sure if Lubbock (sorry dear) was (ducking now) of age (incoming) to honor a call to duty; she probably would.

... "guy guys" ???

[Suzie]

Im not the one saying that we need to be fighting over there, guy guys are. The onus is on you to back up your rhetoric not me.

Uhhh, hellooooo :wave: I didn't go myself but my whole life was, on hold, under stress, living from day to day, I was "with him" in every way. All the while Ron Paul was trying to take away the money to bring mine back safe. You wanna go put up or shut up why don't you look my direction?

[The_Elucidator]

Great point Suzie!!!

[Wyatt_Junker]

... "guy guys" ???

Must be some kind of code for glory hole season at Gold's Gym.

[Lubbock]

You sound very gung ho about this. When do you plan on joining up?

Unfortunately, I'm a little long in the tooth to be thinking about it now --probably the wrong gender, too.

Now, if you've got a silly idea in your head that no one in my family ever wore the uniform and fought for his country, therefore I have no right to speak, you would be wrong.

As to my sounding gung-ho about it, yes, I am.

I very much would like too see the nation that my ancesotrs fought for, survive.

Unfortunately, based on the number of Surrender Monkeys [you included] who seem determined to turn it over to the terrorists, I have my doubts at times.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Ron Paul and Harry Reid cannot be lumped together....they are polar opposites on way to many fronts and issues.
They certainly can since they are bosom buddies when it comes to voting for America's defeat in a war in which our very survival as a nation is at stake.

Each wants to pull out for completely different reasons. Reid wants us to lose the war and destroy the legacy of Bush. Paul wants to save the country from bankruptcy.
:rotflmbo::rotflmbo: You know very well that they both want us to lose the War on Terror - World War IV. Their motives are irrelevant; they are both traitors.

Have you seen the dollar lately? They'll keep printing it to fund our so called war effort and in another 6 months to a year.....it'll be worth nothing!
Not only are you ignorant of the threat of terrorism, but you are also ignorant about economics. The reason that the dollar is declining relative to some other currencies id NOT that the dollar is weak, but because the economies of those other nations are expanding and strengthening their currencies.

Paul is not against defending our country....he is against nation building....so were the founders of this country.
You can't possibly believe that nonsense. We are clearly not nation building when we are fighting to defend the American people from devastating terrorist attacks that could easily make the 9/11 attacks look like a walk in the park.

[Madbomber]

Thats nice. Guees you guys have never seen a typo before. thats alright.

Again, if the fight in Iraq ia so damned important to you why havent you hualed your fat asses on over there yet? Blackwater was trying to recruit my uncle and aunt to help out and they are mid 50s. Im sure you can qualify. You dont have to be in the military to get some so put your money where your mouths are why dont you. Or is it that you are perfectly satisfied to puke out rhetoric as long as it isnt your own ass on the line?

The difference between us is that I wouldnt have the troops do anthing I wouldnt be willing to do myself, and you would. So all that remains is for you to prove me wrong and get on over there and back up your bullshit.

[The_Elucidator]

Thats nice. Guees you guys have never seen a typo before. thats alright.

I have see "a" typo before, not as many as you crank out though! :noggin:

Again, if the fight in Iraq ia so damned important to you why havent you hualed your fat asses on over there yet? Blackwater was trying to recruit my uncle and aunt to help out and they are mid 50s. Im sure you can qualify. You dont have to be in the military to get some so put your money where your mouths are why dont you. Or is it that you are perfectly satisfied to puke out rhetoric as long as it isnt your own ass on the line?

Been there, done that, got the t-shirt!!! :shoot:

The difference between us is that I wouldnt have the troops do anthing I wouldnt be willing to do myself, and you would. So all that remains is for you to prove me wrong and get on over there and back up your bullshit.

So are you saying that you are a pussy? :question:

[Lubbock]

Or is it that you are perfectly satisfied to puke out rhetoric as long as it isnt your own ass on the line?

Up until now, you've just been an asshole.

Now, you're an Effin' Asshole.

[Is this thread in Falme Wars, yet? If not, this one ought to do it.]

[Naturalized-Texan]

So are you saying that you are a pussy? :question:
I think that's what all the Paul-heads are saying. At least as bad is that they are all appeasers. They think that if we appease the terrorists, the terrorists will just go away and leave us alone. What a bunch of ignoramuses.

[Suzie]

Again, if the fight in Iraq ia so damned important to you why havent you hualed your fat asses on over there yet? Blackwater was trying to recruit my uncle and aunt to help out and they are mid 50s. Im sure you can qualify. You dont have to be in the military to get some so put your money where your mouths are why dont you. Or is it that you are perfectly satisfied to puke out rhetoric as long as it isnt your own ass on the line?

I had someone more important to me than my own ass go. The people that go over there with those kind of groups make far more than they ever could here. Unlike many guard and reserve troops who leave better paying jobs when called up. And Ron Paul didn't vote send them there and then vote to cut their funding once they got there. So what is your point in bringing up people going over to work for private companies? No one voted to send them there then leave them with out what they need to do the job like Ron Paul did with our Military.

[The_Elucidator]

Up until now, you've just been an asshole.

Now, you're an Effin' Asshole.

[Is this thread in Falme Wars, yet? If not, this one ought to do it.]

Agree with points 1 and 2; as far as point 3, Flame Wars and Fantasy Footpaul are evil twins... :smirky:

[Madbomber]

Up until now, you've just been an asshole.

Now, you're an Effin' Asshole.

[Is this thread in Falme Wars, yet? If not, this one ought to do it.]


So says the "Effin Asshole" that feels like she can call people traitors at the drop of the hat and think they will sit there and take it. No more. Expect to be called on your bullshit from now on.

If you want a civil conversation I can do that too, but if you think Ill take you calling me a traitor again you are sadly mistaken. The choice is yours.

[Jack_Savage]

So says the "Effin Asshole" that feels like she can call people traitors at the drop of the hat and think they will sit there and take it. No more. Expect to be called on your bullshit from now on.

If you want a civil conversation I can do that too, but if you think Ill take you calling me a traitor again you are sadly mistaken. The choice is yours.

You missed dinner at Eddies Rib House!

[Madbomber]

You missed dinner at Eddies Rib House!


You know I thought about it. But then when I realized I was dealing with a crazy person (you) I decided that I would have to go packing becuase crazy people will do just about anything. Once I realized that, I then realized that if you made one wrong move that I would have to then blow your brains out. After that conclusion I then realized that your dumb ass just wasnt worth the effort or the trouble. Sorry to disappoint.

[Jack_Savage]

You know I thought about it. But then when I realized I was dealing with a crazy person (you) I decided that I would have to go packing becuase crazy people will do just about anything. Once I realized that, I then realized that if you made one wrong move that I would have to then blow your brains out. After that conclusion I then realized that your dumb ass just wasnt worth the effort or the trouble. Sorry to disappoint.

Sure!

Sorry bud, but no way anyone buys your lame story. I know, I know, your gonna huff and puff and blow my house down. Ahhhh-haaaa-ha-ha-haaaa!

[Madbomber]

Sure!

Sorry bud, but no way anyone buys your lame story. I know, I know, your gonna huff and puff and blow my house down. Ahhhh-haaaa-ha-ha-haaaa!


Hey believe what you want to. It matters little to me. I'll let anyone else that wants to look at things from the outside decide for themselves wether not my scenerio is logical to them or not. You arent the most stable person on these boards.

[UnkHiram]

You arent the most stable person on these boards.

Isn't this a classic case of the Pot callng the Kettle Black?

[Madbomber]

Isn't this a classic case of the Pot callng the Kettle Black?


Either way if I was going to put myself in a situation like that Id have to resolve myself to the possibility of having to kill someone, which like I said was more trouble than it was worth.

[UnkHiram]

Either way if I was going to put myself in a situation like that Id have to resolve myself to the possibility of having to kill someone, which like I said was more trouble than it was worth.

Kinda proves my point, you are willing to entertain the thought of killing someone because they disagree with you.

[Madbomber]

Kinda proves my point, you are willing to entertain the thought of killing someone because they disagree with you.


No, thats called being rational enough to think about what youre doing ahead of time. I have had to deal with crazies like him before, I know what they are capable of. Never put yourself in a possition where you might be the one getting shot. Its just common sence.


If you had seen some of the road rage crap I'd seen while I was living in Florida you'd know that people get killed over some of the stupidest things.

[UnkHiram]

No, thats called being rational enough to think about what youre doing ahead of time. I have had to deal with crazies like him before, I know what they are capable of. Never put yourself in a possition where you might be the one getting shot. Its just common sence.


If you had seen some of the road rage crap I'd seen while I was living in Florida you'd know that people get killed over some of the stupidest things.

Rationlize it anyway you want. :roar: It's not like any of us believe you anyway :biggrin:

[Jack_Savage]

No, thats called being rational enough to think about what youre doing ahead of time. I have had to deal with crazies like him before, I know what they are capable of. Never put yourself in a possition where you might be the one getting shot. Its just common sence.


If you had seen some of the road rage crap I'd seen while I was living in Florida you'd know that people get killed over some of the stupidest things.


What in the world are you talking about???

You need to sit down and have a long talk with yourself. Something.