[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Message from Ron Paul (Page 1 of 4)
Posted: 12/15/2009 5:52:46 PM EDT
|
I know some of you don't want anything to do with Ron Paul. Just ignore this. Congressman Ron Paul Dear Friend of Liberty, My son Rand has the status quo running scared in his race for Kentucky Senate. First, he outraised his opponent. Next, Rand took the lead in the polls. And now, the party insiders are scrambling. We just found out that the National Republican Senatorial Committee has formed a joint fundraising committee to support Rand's opponent. These party bosses are desperate to keep Rand out of the Senate because they know he will fight against the big government, high taxes and out of control spending that they helped create. Rand can win, but he needs your help. On Wednesday December 16th, the grassroots are holding a Money Bomb for Rand. This date is of course the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party and the day we made history together by raising $6 million in one day. Please visit www.RandPaul2010.com and consider contributing whatever you are able. Every single contribution will help. This situation reminds me of my return to Congress in 1996. A host of big name national Republicans did not want me back and came into my district to campaign for my opponent. But, with hard work and real grassroots support, I was able to win and come to Washington to fight for Liberty. We can achieve the same type of victory for Rand if we all come together! Again, I hope you can participate in Rand's Money Bomb on December 16th at www.RandPaul2010.com Thing is, Rand Paul is running on the republican ticket. Guess the republican committee is going to pull a New York 23rd cong. dist. and support the democrat.  |
It looks like a certain chunk of office-holding Republicans are more about keeping the status quo than any real conservative mission. 
The problem is whether to save the GOP from the RINOs and DEM supporters, or jump ship to a third and create two conservative parties and help out a massive Dem party. WTF 
|
|
Quoted:
TEA party - may take some time, But we can't continue down the same path............................. I gotta tell ya, I was screaming at Rush on the radio today about this very thing. Rush, and many on here are all whining about how a third party will permanently kill the republican party and empower the Dems. Truth is I agree, it WILL kill the republican party. I think it needs killing at thid point. After new york 23, and now this, fuck it, and fuck them. The republican party isn't worth saving. They're all a bunch of whores. Understand this, I LOVE THIS COUNTRY. I love the ideas and principals that brought this coutry into existence. I will, however, sit back and watch it burn to the ground at the hand of BHO and his fucking merry band of communist whores before I jump back into bed with the painted up, perfumed up, denture wearing whore that is the republican party. So listen up Repubs, Democrats, and any other contenders, I WANT SOME REPRESENTATIVES WITH SOME FUCKING PRINCIPALS. PRINCIPALS YOU ARE WILLING TO FALL ON THE SWORD FOR. I WANT SOMEONE WITH SOME BALLS AND INTEGRITY!!!! I WANT YOU TO PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS COUNTRY WITH YOUR POLITICAL LIVES. If you meet the above definition, you will get my vote, my money, and my time. I don't care about your pedigree. I don't care where you went to college or even if you went to college. I don't care what your political affiliation is. I don't care about your gender. If you'll swear to protect, defend, and uphold the constitution and then back those words up with deeds I will always support and fight for you. All others can FOAD. I.C. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
what the hell is wrong with republicans these days? With friends like the GOP, who needs enemies? We truly need to throw all RINO's the fuck out. They are all fucking RINO's Libertarians are the only ones that could put this country back on course. |
| I don't give a damn what anyone does to try to prevent it, I think Rand Paul is going to be pretty damn hard to beat. He's developing quite a following. Most of the people I've heard discussing this senate race hold a favorable opinion of him and his positions. I don't yet know what his views on defense are, but as long as he supports maintaining a strong and well equipped military (something that has been found wanting in Ron), I will be inclined to vote for him myself. |
|
Quoted:
Is there someone who can confirm that the Republicans are helping (or even raising money) for the Democratic candidate, or is this just a great strategy to piss people off and get them to reach for their wallet to help the underdog? he isn't the underdog 
|
|
Quoted:
Is there someone who can confirm that the Republicans are helping (or even raising money) for the Democratic candidate, or is this just a great strategy to piss people off and get them to reach for their wallet to help the underdog? Link They are supporting his opponent, but its in the primary, not the general election, so they are still supporting a Republican. |
|
Quoted:
Is there someone who can confirm that the Republicans are helping (or even raising money) for the Democratic candidate, or is this just a great strategy to piss people off and get them to reach for their wallet to help the underdog? I would be interested in hearing the "truth" of this as well. |
|
Quoted: It looks like a certain chunk of office-holding Republicans are more about keeping the status quo than any real conservative mission. The problem is whether to save the GOP from the RINOs and DEM supporters, or jump ship to a third and create two conservative parties and help out a massive Dem party. WTF Ron does not qualify as 'conservative'..... The same reasons that apply to keeping liberal RINOs out of congress also apply to libertarian RINOs. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Is there someone who can confirm that the Republicans are helping (or even raising money) for the Democratic candidate, or is this just a great strategy to piss people off and get them to reach for their wallet to help the underdog? he isn't the underdog Money raised does not equal support, as Ron himself found out in 2008 |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
TEA party - may take some time, But we can't continue down the same path............................. I gotta tell ya, I was screaming at Rush on the radio today about this very thing. Rush, and many on here are all whining about how a third party will permanently kill the republican party and empower the Dems. Truth is I agree, it WILL kill the republican party. I think it needs killing at thid point. After new york 23, and now this, fuck it, and fuck them. The republican party isn't worth saving. They're all a bunch of whores. Understand this, I LOVE THIS COUNTRY. I love the ideas and principals that brought this coutry into existence. I will, however, sit back and watch it burn to the ground at the hand of BHO and his fucking merry band of communist whores before I jump back into bed with the painted up, perfumed up, denture wearing whore that is the republican party. So listen up Repubs, Democrats, and any other contenders, I WANT SOME REPRESENTATIVES WITH SOME FUCKING PRINCIPALS. PRINCIPALS YOU ARE WILLING TO FALL ON THE SWORD FOR. I WANT SOMEONE WITH SOME BALLS AND INTEGRITY!!!! I WANT YOU TO PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS COUNTRY WITH YOUR POLITICAL LIVES. If you meet the above definition, you will get my vote, my money, and my time. I don't care about your pedigree. I don't care where you went to college or even if you went to college. I don't care what your political affiliation is. I don't care about your gender. If you'll swear to protect, defend, and uphold the constitution and then back those words up with deeds I will always support and fight for you. All others can FOAD. I.C. I couldn't have said it better myself! 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
It looks like a certain chunk of office-holding Republicans are more about keeping the status quo than any real conservative mission.
The problem is whether to save the GOP from the RINOs and DEM supporters, or jump ship to a third and create two conservative parties and help out a massive Dem party. WTF Ron does not qualify as 'conservative'..... The same reasons that apply to keeping liberal RINOs out of congress also apply to libertarian RINOs. 
What are your "conservatives" conserving, other than the status-quo? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
TEA party - may take some time, But we can't continue down the same path............................. I gotta tell ya, I was screaming at Rush on the radio today about this very thing. Rush, and many on here are all whining about how a third party will permanently kill the republican party and empower the Dems. Truth is I agree, it WILL kill the republican party. I think it needs killing at thid point. After new york 23, and now this, fuck it, and fuck them. The republican party isn't worth saving. They're all a bunch of whores. Understand this, I LOVE THIS COUNTRY. I love the ideas and principals that brought this coutry into existence. I will, however, sit back and watch it burn to the ground at the hand of BHO and his fucking merry band of communist whores before I jump back into bed with the painted up, perfumed up, denture wearing whore that is the republican party. So listen up Repubs, Democrats, and any other contenders, I WANT SOME REPRESENTATIVES WITH SOME FUCKING PRINCIPALS. PRINCIPALS YOU ARE WILLING TO FALL ON THE SWORD FOR. I WANT SOMEONE WITH SOME BALLS AND INTEGRITY!!!! I WANT YOU TO PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS COUNTRY WITH YOUR POLITICAL LIVES. If you meet the above definition, you will get my vote, my money, and my time. I don't care about your pedigree. I don't care where you went to college or even if you went to college. I don't care what your political affiliation is. I don't care about your gender. If you'll swear to protect, defend, and uphold the constitution and then back those words up with deeds I will always support and fight for you. All others can FOAD. I.C. /thread |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It looks like a certain chunk of office-holding Republicans are more about keeping the status quo than any real conservative mission. The problem is whether to save the GOP from the RINOs and DEM supporters, or jump ship to a third and create two conservative parties and help out a massive Dem party. WTF Ron does not qualify as 'conservative'..... The same reasons that apply to keeping liberal RINOs out of congress also apply to libertarian RINOs. What are your "conservatives" conserving, other than the status-quo? That's what they're supposed to be conserving - well, with a few adjustments here or there... Ron & his 'movement' aren't 'conserving' anything - they are trying to create something new - something that has never before existed in the US since the ratification of the Constitution.... That's not 'conserving' anything... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Fuck Ron Paul. Fuck the Libertarians. Go Status Quo! Because its working out so good! Pre Obama, yes it was.... 
I'm am literally laughing out loud. My girl friend is coming in the room to see why I'm laughing. Thanks for that, Dave. ETA: I'm picturing him saying it, and then a guy on a drum set behind him knocking off a perfect rimshot. Read it aloud, then hit this: Rimshot |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Fuck Ron Paul. Fuck the Libertarians. Go Status Quo! Because its working out so good! Pre Obama, yes it was.... I'm am literally laughing out loud. My girl friend is coming in the room to see why I'm laughing. Thanks for that, Dave. Laugh all you want, but the fact is, things were working just fine... The only 'issue'? We seemed to have settled into a once-every-8yrs economic down-cycle - there was a recession when Clinton came into office, one when Bush came into office, and of course, the present one... That said, as far as the rest is concerned, it's working fine... Now of course, if you're one of those strange people who believes we are 'destined' for hyperinflation, or that there are a bunch of rich people secretly plotting to take over the world... You may have issues with this... But if you believe that stuff, you're either ignorant, crazy, or both... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It looks like a certain chunk of office-holding Republicans are more about keeping the status quo than any real conservative mission.
The problem is whether to save the GOP from the RINOs and DEM supporters, or jump ship to a third and create two conservative parties and help out a massive Dem party. WTF Ron does not qualify as 'conservative'..... The same reasons that apply to keeping liberal RINOs out of congress also apply to libertarian RINOs.
What are your "conservatives" conserving, other than the status-quo? That's what they're supposed to be conserving - well, with a few adjustments here or there... Ron & his 'movement' aren't 'conserving' anything - they are trying to create something new - something that has never before existed in the US since the ratification of the Constitution.... That's not 'conserving' anything... Respectfully disagree The Republicans have wavered on their original ideals and become progressive. Paul has stayed the same. The Republicans used to espouse the positions of the founding fathers, now they adopt the positions of the progressive liberals of the early 20th Century. Under your definition keeping the status-quo is "conservative" So when Republicrats take control after Obama - it will be conservative just to hold things as they are, not to correct the government back to their conservative ideals. That explains a lot, it's not about ideals to you, it's about politicians having an (R) after their name. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Fuck Ron Paul. Fuck the Libertarians. Go Status Quo! Because its working out so good! Pre Obama, yes it was.... Wow.  Yup, it was working out so well with the RINO Bush...Have we figured out a way to reincarnate Barry Goldwater yet? Why reincarnate a guy who couldn't win? Reagan is the ideal, and W was almost an exact clone policy wise (slightly more pro-gun)... The difference, was speaking ability... |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It looks like a certain chunk of office-holding Republicans are more about keeping the status quo than any real conservative mission. The problem is whether to save the GOP from the RINOs and DEM supporters, or jump ship to a third and create two conservative parties and help out a massive Dem party. WTF Ron does not qualify as 'conservative'..... The same reasons that apply to keeping liberal RINOs out of congress also apply to libertarian RINOs. What are your "conservatives" conserving, other than the status-quo? That's what they're supposed to be conserving - well, with a few adjustments here or there... Ron & his 'movement' aren't 'conserving' anything - they are trying to create something new - something that has never before existed in the US since the ratification of the Constitution.... That's not 'conserving' anything... Respectfully disagree The Republicans have wavered on their original ideals and become progressive. Paul has stayed the same. The Republicans used to espouse the positions of the founding fathers, now they adopt the positions of the progressive liberals of the early 20th Century. Under your definition keeping the status-quo is "conservative" So when Republicrats take control after Obama - it will be conservative just to hold things as they are, not to correct the government back to their conservative ideals. That explains a lot, it's not about ideals to you, it's about politicians having an (R) after their name. My 'Ideals' hold that somewhere between 1985-1989 and 2001-2004 was 'good'... So holding on to that is the first issue to 'focus on'... Ron is off the mark on almost every issue besides guns & trade - but out in loony-tunes land on foreign policy & economics... Simple rule for me: Hamilton Test - if a modern 'Republican' politician would not have agreed with Hamilton's economic roadmap for the early USA, don't vote for them... That means no anti-Federalists or Bank Troofers... |
|
Quoted:
Simple rule for me: Hamilton Test - if a modern 'Republican' politician would not have agreed with Hamilton's economic roadmap for the early USA, don't vote for them... Now-a-days, I subscribe to the Dave_A Test for similar reasons, through opposite application. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Simple rule for me: Hamilton Test - if a modern 'Republican' politician would not have agreed with Hamilton's economic roadmap for the early USA, don't vote for them... Now-a-days, I subscribe to the Dave_A Test for similar reasons, through opposite application. You probably have no clue what so ever, about what A.H. wanted to do with this country's economy... Vs his opponents... Read some history.... Hamilton may not have been 'right' on individual rights/forms of government... But he had economics dialed in dead-on... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It looks like a certain chunk of office-holding Republicans are more about keeping the status quo than any real conservative mission.
The problem is whether to save the GOP from the RINOs and DEM supporters, or jump ship to a third and create two conservative parties and help out a massive Dem party. WTF Ron does not qualify as 'conservative'..... The same reasons that apply to keeping liberal RINOs out of congress also apply to libertarian RINOs.
What are your "conservatives" conserving, other than the status-quo? That's what they're supposed to be conserving - well, with a few adjustments here or there... Ron & his 'movement' aren't 'conserving' anything - they are trying to create something new - something that has never before existed in the US since the ratification of the Constitution.... That's not 'conserving' anything... Respectfully disagree The Republicans have wavered on their original ideals and become progressive. Paul has stayed the same. The Republicans used to espouse the positions of the founding fathers, now they adopt the positions of the progressive liberals of the early 20th Century. Under your definition keeping the status-quo is "conservative" So when Republicrats take control after Obama - it will be conservative just to hold things as they are, not to correct the government back to their conservative ideals. That explains a lot, it's not about ideals to you, it's about politicians having an (R) after their name. My 'Ideals' hold that somewhere between 1985-1989 and 2001-2004 was 'good'... So holding on to that is the first issue to 'focus on'... Ron is off the mark on almost every issue besides guns & trade - but out in loony-tunes land on foreign policy & economics... Simple rule for me: Hamilton Test - if a modern 'Republican' politician would not have agreed with Hamilton's economic roadmap for the early USA, don't vote for them... That means no anti-Federalists or Bank Troofers... Crazy opinion, but thankfully it's nothing more than that. Really, you're more Woodrow Wilson than founding father. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Simple rule for me: Hamilton Test - if a modern 'Republican' politician would not have agreed with Hamilton's economic roadmap for the early USA, don't vote for them... Now-a-days, I subscribe to the Dave_A Test for similar reasons, through opposite application. You probably have no clue what so ever, about what A.H. wanted to do with this country's economy... Vs his opponents... Read some history.... Hamilton may not have been 'right' on individual rights/forms of government... But he had economics dialed in dead-on... Base all of your politics on a man who believed that America needed to have a king. In my opinion, many of the ills this nation faces today are Hamiltonian. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Crazy opinion, but thankfully it's nothing more than that. Really, you're more Woodrow Wilson than founding father. Woodrow Wilson is probably Dave's second favorite person, signing in the Fed and whatnot. I was thinking more of a "world police" interventionalist foreign policy. ...among his many other horrendous mistakes |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It looks like a certain chunk of office-holding Republicans are more about keeping the status quo than any real conservative mission.
The problem is whether to save the GOP from the RINOs and DEM supporters, or jump ship to a third and create two conservative parties and help out a massive Dem party. WTF Ron does not qualify as 'conservative'..... The same reasons that apply to keeping liberal RINOs out of congress also apply to libertarian RINOs.
What are your "conservatives" conserving, other than the status-quo? That's what they're supposed to be conserving - well, with a few adjustments here or there... Ron & his 'movement' aren't 'conserving' anything - they are trying to create something new - something that has never before existed in the US since the ratification of the Constitution.... That's not 'conserving' anything... Are you always this ignorant...?
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: Crazy opinion, but thankfully it's nothing more than that. Really, you're more Woodrow Wilson than founding father. Woodrow Wilson is probably Dave's second favorite person, signing in the Fed and whatnot. The Fed is just a restoration of the way things 'Should have been' according to James Madison, who signed the 2nd Bank of the US into law. A little 'problem' with a populist retard in the whitehouse, who exceeded his authority & killed the 2nd BoUS not withstanding.... |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Crazy opinion, but thankfully it's nothing more than that. Really, you're more Woodrow Wilson than founding father. Woodrow Wilson is probably Dave's second favorite person, signing in the Fed and whatnot. I was thinking more of a "world police" interventionalist foreign policy. ...among his many other horrendous mistakes Nothing 'horrendous' about attempting to address the situation with Pancho Villa, or with involving the US in WWI. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Crazy opinion, but thankfully it's nothing more than that. Really, you're more Woodrow Wilson than founding father. Woodrow Wilson is probably Dave's second favorite person, signing in the Fed and whatnot. The Fed is just a restoration of the way things 'Should have been' according to James Madison, who signed the 2nd Bank of the US into law. A little 'problem' with a populist retard in the whitehouse, who exceeded his authority & killed the 2nd BoUS not withstanding.... Well at least Woodrow Wilson regretted it and apologized to the country. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Crazy opinion, but thankfully it's nothing more than that. Really, you're more Woodrow Wilson than founding father. Woodrow Wilson is probably Dave's second favorite person, signing in the Fed and whatnot. I was thinking more of a "world police" interventionalist foreign policy. ...among his many other horrendous mistakes Nothing 'horrendous' about attempting to address the situation with Pancho Villa, or with involving the US in WWI. Right because WWI didn't lead to any other problems of foreign policy.
Or didn't result in a pile of American deaths
|