Saturday, December 31, 2011

Re: GOP Establishment wrong to ‘disenfranchise’ Ron Paul supporters

I don't agree with Newt on a number of issues, and I would like for him to adopt a more "Limited Government"  attitude;  by his actions and not just words....(Newt talks a good game of limited government now)
 
I do think that Gingrich looks for solutions to a number of problems that this Nation faces,  from a conservative viewpoint, and that he could be an inspiration to this Nation, just as Reagan was after Carter.   I cannot think of any major issue where Gingrich does not have a conservative point of view or policy.   Example?
 
 
 


 
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Mark <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
"Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow conservatives".  

I think of Romney as a liberal and Newt as a fence sitter or moderate at best. Newt is too fast to compromise. It is truly time for a true conservative hard liner based on the bill of rights.....especially the tenth amendment.


On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
Good Morning Perp and Mark!
 
I agree with both of you......Sorta.......
 
I am one that believes the Republican candidates should adhere to the Republican 11th Commandment:  "Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow conservatives".   Ron Paul broke this rule in Iowa, as he blasted both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in Iowa with false, misleading and prevaricate commercials.   We've seen Paul's legions here in PF  inundate the board with many of these false assertions.  (See MJ and PlainOl). 
 
Just as important,  for months, the Paul supporters all had their panties in a wad,  claiming that the media was ignoring Paul; that Paul wasn't getting his fair share of press coverage.   Well, once Paul's numbers went up in Iowa,  the press did in fact start covering Paul, and the light got a little brighter on Paul's past record.  Just as it did on Gingrich and other candidates who have been raked over the coals by pundits;  (See John Sununu,  Ann Coulter,  Glenn Beck, and a number of pseudo RINO assholes who are in Romney's camp and who have attacked Gingrich unmercifully and unfairly).  You don't see Gingrich supporters crying like women, the way that Paul supporters are crying!  I was listening to Rush Limbaugh and several other talk show hosts yesterday, and the barrage of Paul supporters crying foul was unbelievable! 
 
The truth is Paul has a number of skeletons in his closet and his legions of crackpot supporters are now pissed that the truth is coming out about Crazy Uncle Ron. 
 
Paul is not electable on a national scale,  but as both of you pointed out,  IF  Paul chooses to break away and run as a third party candidate,  it will no doubt cost the Republicans the election, and we will see another four years of socialist/communist presidential directives and executive orders, of which our Nation may not be able to recover.  
 
I trust that Paul has enough sense and wisdom to know that his running as a third party candidate will do serious damage to our Nation and that his candidacy would be an open ticket to a second Obama Administration.  
 
I'm all for throwing Paul a bone.....Give him a prominent night for a speech at the Convention here in Tampa in August, and I would whole heartedly support "Secretary Of The Treasury Paul".
 
 
 


 
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 9:39 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
Perplexed has it right... if he cuts and runs as an independent Obama
will win... he has 15% of the vote in his pocket.

On Dec 31, 7:35 am, Perplexed <openlyincogn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Keith, I agree with you that a lot of his views are those of a
> crackpot.  But I noticed yesterday watching some discussion on one of
> the Fox News shows that the pundits are being downright stupid in how
> they are stepping up the talking points of "he's not electable".  To
> say he couldn't win in a general election is likely very true, but
> that's not what they were doing.  The person actually referred to his
> candidacy as a "joke".
>
> Personally I think that kind of nonsense will backfire and encourage
> Paul to run as an independent and republicans can kiss any chance of
> defeating Obama good-bye.  These ignorant assholes who make up the
> "GOP establishment" and their mouthpieces in the media are apparently
> too stupid to realize they should be respectful and leave room to
> encourage Paul to join whoever the eventual nominee is - because
> without him AND his supporters voting for whoever that is, republicans
> stand no chance of winning, and that's just a fact.
>
> On Dec 31, 12:49 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > > Posted on Thu, Dec. 29, 2011
> > > *GOP Establishment wrong to 'disenfranchise' Ron Paul supporters
> > > *BY COLIN MCINTOSH
>
> > > Don't tread on me.
>
> > > Recently, something's been amiss in the mainstream media when discussing
> > > Ron Paul's candidacy. As the Texas congressman's support has surged to 15
> > > percent nationally in the latest Washington Post poll, the "Very Serious
> > > Republicans" who write columns and give their opinions on TV and radio
> > > shows have changed their tune. They aren't as confident, as cocky or as
> > > arrogant as they used to be when predicting the 2012 presidential election.
>
> > > Now, they sound scared; they sound nervous; they sound shaken. But most
> > > important, they sound resolute that they, and not their audience, represent
> > > the opinions of mainstream America. They are wrong, and their gamble will
> > > be costly.
>
> > > In the absence of facts to support the Establishment candidates, the media
> > > have turned to personal insults, childish mockery, and deliberate
> > > misinterpretation of Dr. Paul's lessons. Their goal, quite shamefully, is
> > > to convince Ron Paul supporters that the candidate that they believe in has
> > > no chance of winning the nomination, let alone the general election. Here
> > > are some recent headlines from around the web: "Huckabee slams Ron Paul,
> > > says he has 'no chance' to win Republican nomination"­ The Hill "Ron Paul
> > > can't be allowed to win Iowa" ­ Daily Caller "Why Ron Paul Can't Win" ­
> > > Wall Street Journal "If Ron Paul wins Iowa, does that make the state
> > > irrelevant?"­ Christian Science Monitor
>
> > > This type of overt pressure from our media to change your vote because
> > > "your candidate can't win" constitutes a form of disenfranchisement.
> > > Despite Paul's rise to the front of the pack in Iowa, the media still
> > > ignore that his national support from Republicans has risen from 9 percent
> > > to 15 percent in a month (Washington Post/ABC poll, Dec. 18). They refuse
> > > to report the fact that he would lose only by 49-44 in a hypothetical race
> > > against Obama, down from 52-42 just one month ago.
>
> > > They will never tell us that 21 percent of Americans polled chose to vote
> > > for Ron Paul as a third party candidate over the hypothetical choices of
> > > President Obama or Romney/Gingrich.
>
> > > This last statistic leads me to my main point: if the GOP nominates anyone
> > > besides Ron Paul, Barack Obama will win the 2012 election.
>
> > > Why?
>
> > > Currently, Establishment Republicans are issuing an obvious warning to
> > > Paul's base: vote for Romney, or the Democrats will win in November.
> > > Clearly, they hope this ominous bit of advice also reaches the millions of
> > > Americans who are still learning about Ron Paul's views. Well, Dr. Paul's
> > > supporters have a retort: we don't give a damn.
>
> > > There are worse things than having a Democrat in the White House, and
> > > disenfranchisement is among them. We will not vote for whom we are told. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate who espouses a policy of preemptive war. We
> > > will not vote for the continuation of a flawed, costly, discriminatory drug
> > > war. We will not vote for the circumnavigation of the U.S. Constitution. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate (Romney) who has received just 10 percent of
> > > his campaign donations from actual people (from opensecrets.org). And we
> > > will not feel remorse for a Republican Party that has abandoned us.
>
> > > I am a registered Republican, but when I listen to my so-called party
> > > leaders, I become infuriated and despondent. When did preemptive war become
> > > our national defense? When did the desire to police the world become so
> > > mainstream that we forgot that our nation was birthed from a repugnance to
> > > imperialism? When did we concede that the federal government has the right
> > > to regulate our lives to the point of quiet despotism?
>
> > > And most important, when did we become convinced that our votes and voices
> > > only matter if we support the perceived frontrunner?
>
> > > As an advocate of liberty, I will vote on principle over party, every
> > > time. If the Republican Party took the time to educate its members on the
> > > issues, rather than simply bullying them into submission, their party
> > > wouldn't be so splintered right now, and perhaps Dr. Paul would have a
> > > unified force behind him heading into November. Instead, GOP leaders seem
> > > committed to promoting the status quo, to increasing their own power and
> > > influence, and to keeping the support of moneyed interests.
>
> > > If the GOP Establishment is successful in convincing Republicans to
> > > nominate Romney instead of Paul, and Paul does indeed run as an
> > > independent, Obama will win with 45 percent of the vote, and the GOP will
> > > have no one to blame but themselves.
>
> > > Colin McIntosh, a resident of Fort Lauderdale and graduate of St. Thomas
> > > Aquinas High School, is a senior at Emory University in Atlanta and will
> > > graduate this spring with bachelor degrees in economics and business
> > > administration.
>
> > >http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/29/2566016/gop-establishment-wrong...
>
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> >  crackpot.jpg
> > 9KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.



--
Mark M. Kahle H.



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Ron Paul: Out of the Mainstream

I like Dr Paul very n=much, but he was never nor that catch of the
day. Its Romney,l get used to it, for good or illl.

On Dec 31, 1:12 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > *Ron Paul: Out of the Mainstream
> > *Posted by Charles Burris <anarchteac...@yahoo.com> on December 30, 2011
> > 12:04 PM
>
> >  Yes, Mitt.<http://news.yahoo.com/romney-says-paul-doesnt-represent-mainstream-16...>Ron Paul's ideas are "out of the mainstream." And what is that
> > "mainstream?" In 1944, in the midst of World War II, the heroic journalist
> > John T. Flynn wrote<http://mises.org/store/Product.aspx?ProductId=346&utm_source=Resources>:
> > *The test of fascism is not one's rage against the Italian and German war
> > lords. The test is how many of the essential principles of fascism do you
> > accept and to what extent are you prepared to apply those fascist ideas to
> > American social and economic life? When you can put your finger on the men
> > or the groups that urge for America the debt-supported state, the
> > autarchial corporative state, the state bent on the socialization of
> > investment and the bureaucratic government of industry and society, the
> > establishment of the institution of militarism as the great glamorous
> > public-works project of the nation and the institution of imperialism under
> > which it proposes to regulate and rule the world and, along with this,
> > proposes to alter the forms of our government to approach as closely as
> > possible the unrestrained, absolute government. Then you will know you have
> > located the authentic fascist.* We have become exactly what our fathers
> > and mothers in uniform then gave their lives to oppose. The establishment's
> > approved and sanctified political spectrum -- stretching from Mitt Romney
> > to Barack Obama -- advocates fascism. The same special interest predatory
> > elites that supported Mussolini and Hitler now support this " friendly
> > fascism<http://www.amazon.com/Friendly-Fascism-Face-Power-America/dp/08960814...>"
> > of the welfare-warfare state.
>
> > Ron Paul advocates freedom, peace, and competitive free enterprise – not
> > tyranny, militarism, and bailouts/subsidies for the Wall Street corporate
> > elites preying on the poor and middle classes.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
>
>
>  I Support Uncle Ron!.jpg
> 38KViewDownload- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: GOP Establishment wrong to ‘disenfranchise’ Ron Paul supporters

I too agree with Paul's call for limited government....Something that sounds very Reaganesque.   With a trillion dollar deficit,  I do believe that the next Administration  (providing it is Republican)  "Get's It"...... 

They may "Get It" but neither the ever compromising Newt nor the liberal Mitt will actually do it. I don't believe that either has the balls that this would take.





On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
I would agree that Paul has been influential.....All of the Republicans are now calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve, and we do have Ron Paul to thank for this.  
 
I too agree with Paul's call for limited government....Something that sounds very Reaganesque.   With a trillion dollar deficit,  I do believe that the next Administration  (providing it is Republican)  "Get's It"......
 


 
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Mark <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
The big difference that I can see between the candidates is that Paul's positions and "transgressions" are indeed and actually factually defensible.... It is kind of like you and I being held responsible for what is posted here. Yes, I know that those three sentences that were written in the "first person" and attributed to Paul are horrendous...but then are they really untrue or just said in a bad way?? 

These are not, at least to me, disqualifying statements even if they are his actual feelings.

His stance on a return to constitutionality is extremely important to me and the longer he stays in this the better chance that SOME of his points will stick and become part of the platform.


On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
Good Morning Perp and Mark!
 
I agree with both of you......Sorta.......
 
I am one that believes the Republican candidates should adhere to the Republican 11th Commandment:  "Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow conservatives".   Ron Paul broke this rule in Iowa, as he blasted both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in Iowa with false, misleading and prevaricate commercials.   We've seen Paul's legions here in PF  inundate the board with many of these false assertions.  (See MJ and PlainOl). 
 
Just as important,  for months, the Paul supporters all had their panties in a wad,  claiming that the media was ignoring Paul; that Paul wasn't getting his fair share of press coverage.   Well, once Paul's numbers went up in Iowa,  the press did in fact start covering Paul, and the light got a little brighter on Paul's past record.  Just as it did on Gingrich and other candidates who have been raked over the coals by pundits;  (See John Sununu,  Ann Coulter,  Glenn Beck, and a number of pseudo RINO assholes who are in Romney's camp and who have attacked Gingrich unmercifully and unfairly).  You don't see Gingrich supporters crying like women, the way that Paul supporters are crying!  I was listening to Rush Limbaugh and several other talk show hosts yesterday, and the barrage of Paul supporters crying foul was unbelievable! 
 
The truth is Paul has a number of skeletons in his closet and his legions of crackpot supporters are now pissed that the truth is coming out about Crazy Uncle Ron. 
 
Paul is not electable on a national scale,  but as both of you pointed out,  IF  Paul chooses to break away and run as a third party candidate,  it will no doubt cost the Republicans the election, and we will see another four years of socialist/communist presidential directives and executive orders, of which our Nation may not be able to recover.  
 
I trust that Paul has enough sense and wisdom to know that his running as a third party candidate will do serious damage to our Nation and that his candidacy would be an open ticket to a second Obama Administration.  
 
I'm all for throwing Paul a bone.....Give him a prominent night for a speech at the Convention here in Tampa in August, and I would whole heartedly support "Secretary Of The Treasury Paul".
 
 
 


 
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 9:39 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
Perplexed has it right... if he cuts and runs as an independent Obama
will win... he has 15% of the vote in his pocket.

On Dec 31, 7:35 am, Perplexed <openlyincogn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Keith, I agree with you that a lot of his views are those of a
> crackpot.  But I noticed yesterday watching some discussion on one of
> the Fox News shows that the pundits are being downright stupid in how
> they are stepping up the talking points of "he's not electable".  To
> say he couldn't win in a general election is likely very true, but
> that's not what they were doing.  The person actually referred to his
> candidacy as a "joke".
>
> Personally I think that kind of nonsense will backfire and encourage
> Paul to run as an independent and republicans can kiss any chance of
> defeating Obama good-bye.  These ignorant assholes who make up the
> "GOP establishment" and their mouthpieces in the media are apparently
> too stupid to realize they should be respectful and leave room to
> encourage Paul to join whoever the eventual nominee is - because
> without him AND his supporters voting for whoever that is, republicans
> stand no chance of winning, and that's just a fact.
>
> On Dec 31, 12:49 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > > Posted on Thu, Dec. 29, 2011
> > > *GOP Establishment wrong to 'disenfranchise' Ron Paul supporters
> > > *BY COLIN MCINTOSH
>
> > > Don't tread on me.
>
> > > Recently, something's been amiss in the mainstream media when discussing
> > > Ron Paul's candidacy. As the Texas congressman's support has surged to 15
> > > percent nationally in the latest Washington Post poll, the "Very Serious
> > > Republicans" who write columns and give their opinions on TV and radio
> > > shows have changed their tune. They aren't as confident, as cocky or as
> > > arrogant as they used to be when predicting the 2012 presidential election.
>
> > > Now, they sound scared; they sound nervous; they sound shaken. But most
> > > important, they sound resolute that they, and not their audience, represent
> > > the opinions of mainstream America. They are wrong, and their gamble will
> > > be costly.
>
> > > In the absence of facts to support the Establishment candidates, the media
> > > have turned to personal insults, childish mockery, and deliberate
> > > misinterpretation of Dr. Paul's lessons. Their goal, quite shamefully, is
> > > to convince Ron Paul supporters that the candidate that they believe in has
> > > no chance of winning the nomination, let alone the general election. Here
> > > are some recent headlines from around the web: "Huckabee slams Ron Paul,
> > > says he has 'no chance' to win Republican nomination"­ The Hill "Ron Paul
> > > can't be allowed to win Iowa" ­ Daily Caller "Why Ron Paul Can't Win" ­
> > > Wall Street Journal "If Ron Paul wins Iowa, does that make the state
> > > irrelevant?"­ Christian Science Monitor
>
> > > This type of overt pressure from our media to change your vote because
> > > "your candidate can't win" constitutes a form of disenfranchisement.
> > > Despite Paul's rise to the front of the pack in Iowa, the media still
> > > ignore that his national support from Republicans has risen from 9 percent
> > > to 15 percent in a month (Washington Post/ABC poll, Dec. 18). They refuse
> > > to report the fact that he would lose only by 49-44 in a hypothetical race
> > > against Obama, down from 52-42 just one month ago.
>
> > > They will never tell us that 21 percent of Americans polled chose to vote
> > > for Ron Paul as a third party candidate over the hypothetical choices of
> > > President Obama or Romney/Gingrich.
>
> > > This last statistic leads me to my main point: if the GOP nominates anyone
> > > besides Ron Paul, Barack Obama will win the 2012 election.
>
> > > Why?
>
> > > Currently, Establishment Republicans are issuing an obvious warning to
> > > Paul's base: vote for Romney, or the Democrats will win in November.
> > > Clearly, they hope this ominous bit of advice also reaches the millions of
> > > Americans who are still learning about Ron Paul's views. Well, Dr. Paul's
> > > supporters have a retort: we don't give a damn.
>
> > > There are worse things than having a Democrat in the White House, and
> > > disenfranchisement is among them. We will not vote for whom we are told. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate who espouses a policy of preemptive war. We
> > > will not vote for the continuation of a flawed, costly, discriminatory drug
> > > war. We will not vote for the circumnavigation of the U.S. Constitution. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate (Romney) who has received just 10 percent of
> > > his campaign donations from actual people (from opensecrets.org). And we
> > > will not feel remorse for a Republican Party that has abandoned us.
>
> > > I am a registered Republican, but when I listen to my so-called party
> > > leaders, I become infuriated and despondent. When did preemptive war become
> > > our national defense? When did the desire to police the world become so
> > > mainstream that we forgot that our nation was birthed from a repugnance to
> > > imperialism? When did we concede that the federal government has the right
> > > to regulate our lives to the point of quiet despotism?
>
> > > And most important, when did we become convinced that our votes and voices
> > > only matter if we support the perceived frontrunner?
>
> > > As an advocate of liberty, I will vote on principle over party, every
> > > time. If the Republican Party took the time to educate its members on the
> > > issues, rather than simply bullying them into submission, their party
> > > wouldn't be so splintered right now, and perhaps Dr. Paul would have a
> > > unified force behind him heading into November. Instead, GOP leaders seem
> > > committed to promoting the status quo, to increasing their own power and
> > > influence, and to keeping the support of moneyed interests.
>
> > > If the GOP Establishment is successful in convincing Republicans to
> > > nominate Romney instead of Paul, and Paul does indeed run as an
> > > independent, Obama will win with 45 percent of the vote, and the GOP will
> > > have no one to blame but themselves.
>
> > > Colin McIntosh, a resident of Fort Lauderdale and graduate of St. Thomas
> > > Aquinas High School, is a senior at Emory University in Atlanta and will
> > > graduate this spring with bachelor degrees in economics and business
> > > administration.
>
> > >http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/29/2566016/gop-establishment-wrong...
>
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> >  crackpot.jpg
> > 9KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.



--
Mark M. Kahle H.



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.



--
Mark M. Kahle H.



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: GOP Establishment wrong to ‘disenfranchise’ Ron Paul supporters

"Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow conservatives".  

I think of Romney as a liberal and Newt as a fence sitter or moderate at best. Newt is too fast to compromise. It is truly time for a true conservative hard liner based on the bill of rights.....especially the tenth amendment.


On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
Good Morning Perp and Mark!
 
I agree with both of you......Sorta.......
 
I am one that believes the Republican candidates should adhere to the Republican 11th Commandment:  "Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow conservatives".   Ron Paul broke this rule in Iowa, as he blasted both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in Iowa with false, misleading and prevaricate commercials.   We've seen Paul's legions here in PF  inundate the board with many of these false assertions.  (See MJ and PlainOl). 
 
Just as important,  for months, the Paul supporters all had their panties in a wad,  claiming that the media was ignoring Paul; that Paul wasn't getting his fair share of press coverage.   Well, once Paul's numbers went up in Iowa,  the press did in fact start covering Paul, and the light got a little brighter on Paul's past record.  Just as it did on Gingrich and other candidates who have been raked over the coals by pundits;  (See John Sununu,  Ann Coulter,  Glenn Beck, and a number of pseudo RINO assholes who are in Romney's camp and who have attacked Gingrich unmercifully and unfairly).  You don't see Gingrich supporters crying like women, the way that Paul supporters are crying!  I was listening to Rush Limbaugh and several other talk show hosts yesterday, and the barrage of Paul supporters crying foul was unbelievable! 
 
The truth is Paul has a number of skeletons in his closet and his legions of crackpot supporters are now pissed that the truth is coming out about Crazy Uncle Ron. 
 
Paul is not electable on a national scale,  but as both of you pointed out,  IF  Paul chooses to break away and run as a third party candidate,  it will no doubt cost the Republicans the election, and we will see another four years of socialist/communist presidential directives and executive orders, of which our Nation may not be able to recover.  
 
I trust that Paul has enough sense and wisdom to know that his running as a third party candidate will do serious damage to our Nation and that his candidacy would be an open ticket to a second Obama Administration.  
 
I'm all for throwing Paul a bone.....Give him a prominent night for a speech at the Convention here in Tampa in August, and I would whole heartedly support "Secretary Of The Treasury Paul".
 
 
 


 
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 9:39 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
Perplexed has it right... if he cuts and runs as an independent Obama
will win... he has 15% of the vote in his pocket.

On Dec 31, 7:35 am, Perplexed <openlyincogn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Keith, I agree with you that a lot of his views are those of a
> crackpot.  But I noticed yesterday watching some discussion on one of
> the Fox News shows that the pundits are being downright stupid in how
> they are stepping up the talking points of "he's not electable".  To
> say he couldn't win in a general election is likely very true, but
> that's not what they were doing.  The person actually referred to his
> candidacy as a "joke".
>
> Personally I think that kind of nonsense will backfire and encourage
> Paul to run as an independent and republicans can kiss any chance of
> defeating Obama good-bye.  These ignorant assholes who make up the
> "GOP establishment" and their mouthpieces in the media are apparently
> too stupid to realize they should be respectful and leave room to
> encourage Paul to join whoever the eventual nominee is - because
> without him AND his supporters voting for whoever that is, republicans
> stand no chance of winning, and that's just a fact.
>
> On Dec 31, 12:49 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > > Posted on Thu, Dec. 29, 2011
> > > *GOP Establishment wrong to 'disenfranchise' Ron Paul supporters
> > > *BY COLIN MCINTOSH
>
> > > Don't tread on me.
>
> > > Recently, something's been amiss in the mainstream media when discussing
> > > Ron Paul's candidacy. As the Texas congressman's support has surged to 15
> > > percent nationally in the latest Washington Post poll, the "Very Serious
> > > Republicans" who write columns and give their opinions on TV and radio
> > > shows have changed their tune. They aren't as confident, as cocky or as
> > > arrogant as they used to be when predicting the 2012 presidential election.
>
> > > Now, they sound scared; they sound nervous; they sound shaken. But most
> > > important, they sound resolute that they, and not their audience, represent
> > > the opinions of mainstream America. They are wrong, and their gamble will
> > > be costly.
>
> > > In the absence of facts to support the Establishment candidates, the media
> > > have turned to personal insults, childish mockery, and deliberate
> > > misinterpretation of Dr. Paul's lessons. Their goal, quite shamefully, is
> > > to convince Ron Paul supporters that the candidate that they believe in has
> > > no chance of winning the nomination, let alone the general election. Here
> > > are some recent headlines from around the web: "Huckabee slams Ron Paul,
> > > says he has 'no chance' to win Republican nomination"­ The Hill "Ron Paul
> > > can't be allowed to win Iowa" ­ Daily Caller "Why Ron Paul Can't Win" ­
> > > Wall Street Journal "If Ron Paul wins Iowa, does that make the state
> > > irrelevant?"­ Christian Science Monitor
>
> > > This type of overt pressure from our media to change your vote because
> > > "your candidate can't win" constitutes a form of disenfranchisement.
> > > Despite Paul's rise to the front of the pack in Iowa, the media still
> > > ignore that his national support from Republicans has risen from 9 percent
> > > to 15 percent in a month (Washington Post/ABC poll, Dec. 18). They refuse
> > > to report the fact that he would lose only by 49-44 in a hypothetical race
> > > against Obama, down from 52-42 just one month ago.
>
> > > They will never tell us that 21 percent of Americans polled chose to vote
> > > for Ron Paul as a third party candidate over the hypothetical choices of
> > > President Obama or Romney/Gingrich.
>
> > > This last statistic leads me to my main point: if the GOP nominates anyone
> > > besides Ron Paul, Barack Obama will win the 2012 election.
>
> > > Why?
>
> > > Currently, Establishment Republicans are issuing an obvious warning to
> > > Paul's base: vote for Romney, or the Democrats will win in November.
> > > Clearly, they hope this ominous bit of advice also reaches the millions of
> > > Americans who are still learning about Ron Paul's views. Well, Dr. Paul's
> > > supporters have a retort: we don't give a damn.
>
> > > There are worse things than having a Democrat in the White House, and
> > > disenfranchisement is among them. We will not vote for whom we are told. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate who espouses a policy of preemptive war. We
> > > will not vote for the continuation of a flawed, costly, discriminatory drug
> > > war. We will not vote for the circumnavigation of the U.S. Constitution. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate (Romney) who has received just 10 percent of
> > > his campaign donations from actual people (from opensecrets.org). And we
> > > will not feel remorse for a Republican Party that has abandoned us.
>
> > > I am a registered Republican, but when I listen to my so-called party
> > > leaders, I become infuriated and despondent. When did preemptive war become
> > > our national defense? When did the desire to police the world become so
> > > mainstream that we forgot that our nation was birthed from a repugnance to
> > > imperialism? When did we concede that the federal government has the right
> > > to regulate our lives to the point of quiet despotism?
>
> > > And most important, when did we become convinced that our votes and voices
> > > only matter if we support the perceived frontrunner?
>
> > > As an advocate of liberty, I will vote on principle over party, every
> > > time. If the Republican Party took the time to educate its members on the
> > > issues, rather than simply bullying them into submission, their party
> > > wouldn't be so splintered right now, and perhaps Dr. Paul would have a
> > > unified force behind him heading into November. Instead, GOP leaders seem
> > > committed to promoting the status quo, to increasing their own power and
> > > influence, and to keeping the support of moneyed interests.
>
> > > If the GOP Establishment is successful in convincing Republicans to
> > > nominate Romney instead of Paul, and Paul does indeed run as an
> > > independent, Obama will win with 45 percent of the vote, and the GOP will
> > > have no one to blame but themselves.
>
> > > Colin McIntosh, a resident of Fort Lauderdale and graduate of St. Thomas
> > > Aquinas High School, is a senior at Emory University in Atlanta and will
> > > graduate this spring with bachelor degrees in economics and business
> > > administration.
>
> > >http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/29/2566016/gop-establishment-wrong...
>
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> >  crackpot.jpg
> > 9KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.



--
Mark M. Kahle H.



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: GOP Establishment wrong to ‘disenfranchise’ Ron Paul supporters

I would agree that Paul has been influential.....All of the Republicans are now calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve, and we do have Ron Paul to thank for this.  
 
I too agree with Paul's call for limited government....Something that sounds very Reaganesque.   With a trillion dollar deficit,  I do believe that the next Administration  (providing it is Republican)  "Get's It"......
 


 
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Mark <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
The big difference that I can see between the candidates is that Paul's positions and "transgressions" are indeed and actually factually defensible.... It is kind of like you and I being held responsible for what is posted here. Yes, I know that those three sentences that were written in the "first person" and attributed to Paul are horrendous...but then are they really untrue or just said in a bad way?? 

These are not, at least to me, disqualifying statements even if they are his actual feelings.

His stance on a return to constitutionality is extremely important to me and the longer he stays in this the better chance that SOME of his points will stick and become part of the platform.


On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
Good Morning Perp and Mark!
 
I agree with both of you......Sorta.......
 
I am one that believes the Republican candidates should adhere to the Republican 11th Commandment:  "Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow conservatives".   Ron Paul broke this rule in Iowa, as he blasted both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in Iowa with false, misleading and prevaricate commercials.   We've seen Paul's legions here in PF  inundate the board with many of these false assertions.  (See MJ and PlainOl). 
 
Just as important,  for months, the Paul supporters all had their panties in a wad,  claiming that the media was ignoring Paul; that Paul wasn't getting his fair share of press coverage.   Well, once Paul's numbers went up in Iowa,  the press did in fact start covering Paul, and the light got a little brighter on Paul's past record.  Just as it did on Gingrich and other candidates who have been raked over the coals by pundits;  (See John Sununu,  Ann Coulter,  Glenn Beck, and a number of pseudo RINO assholes who are in Romney's camp and who have attacked Gingrich unmercifully and unfairly).  You don't see Gingrich supporters crying like women, the way that Paul supporters are crying!  I was listening to Rush Limbaugh and several other talk show hosts yesterday, and the barrage of Paul supporters crying foul was unbelievable! 
 
The truth is Paul has a number of skeletons in his closet and his legions of crackpot supporters are now pissed that the truth is coming out about Crazy Uncle Ron. 
 
Paul is not electable on a national scale,  but as both of you pointed out,  IF  Paul chooses to break away and run as a third party candidate,  it will no doubt cost the Republicans the election, and we will see another four years of socialist/communist presidential directives and executive orders, of which our Nation may not be able to recover.  
 
I trust that Paul has enough sense and wisdom to know that his running as a third party candidate will do serious damage to our Nation and that his candidacy would be an open ticket to a second Obama Administration.  
 
I'm all for throwing Paul a bone.....Give him a prominent night for a speech at the Convention here in Tampa in August, and I would whole heartedly support "Secretary Of The Treasury Paul".
 
 
 


 
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 9:39 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
Perplexed has it right... if he cuts and runs as an independent Obama
will win... he has 15% of the vote in his pocket.

On Dec 31, 7:35 am, Perplexed <openlyincogn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Keith, I agree with you that a lot of his views are those of a
> crackpot.  But I noticed yesterday watching some discussion on one of
> the Fox News shows that the pundits are being downright stupid in how
> they are stepping up the talking points of "he's not electable".  To
> say he couldn't win in a general election is likely very true, but
> that's not what they were doing.  The person actually referred to his
> candidacy as a "joke".
>
> Personally I think that kind of nonsense will backfire and encourage
> Paul to run as an independent and republicans can kiss any chance of
> defeating Obama good-bye.  These ignorant assholes who make up the
> "GOP establishment" and their mouthpieces in the media are apparently
> too stupid to realize they should be respectful and leave room to
> encourage Paul to join whoever the eventual nominee is - because
> without him AND his supporters voting for whoever that is, republicans
> stand no chance of winning, and that's just a fact.
>
> On Dec 31, 12:49 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > > Posted on Thu, Dec. 29, 2011
> > > *GOP Establishment wrong to 'disenfranchise' Ron Paul supporters
> > > *BY COLIN MCINTOSH
>
> > > Don't tread on me.
>
> > > Recently, something's been amiss in the mainstream media when discussing
> > > Ron Paul's candidacy. As the Texas congressman's support has surged to 15
> > > percent nationally in the latest Washington Post poll, the "Very Serious
> > > Republicans" who write columns and give their opinions on TV and radio
> > > shows have changed their tune. They aren't as confident, as cocky or as
> > > arrogant as they used to be when predicting the 2012 presidential election.
>
> > > Now, they sound scared; they sound nervous; they sound shaken. But most
> > > important, they sound resolute that they, and not their audience, represent
> > > the opinions of mainstream America. They are wrong, and their gamble will
> > > be costly.
>
> > > In the absence of facts to support the Establishment candidates, the media
> > > have turned to personal insults, childish mockery, and deliberate
> > > misinterpretation of Dr. Paul's lessons. Their goal, quite shamefully, is
> > > to convince Ron Paul supporters that the candidate that they believe in has
> > > no chance of winning the nomination, let alone the general election. Here
> > > are some recent headlines from around the web: "Huckabee slams Ron Paul,
> > > says he has 'no chance' to win Republican nomination"­ The Hill "Ron Paul
> > > can't be allowed to win Iowa" ­ Daily Caller "Why Ron Paul Can't Win" ­
> > > Wall Street Journal "If Ron Paul wins Iowa, does that make the state
> > > irrelevant?"­ Christian Science Monitor
>
> > > This type of overt pressure from our media to change your vote because
> > > "your candidate can't win" constitutes a form of disenfranchisement.
> > > Despite Paul's rise to the front of the pack in Iowa, the media still
> > > ignore that his national support from Republicans has risen from 9 percent
> > > to 15 percent in a month (Washington Post/ABC poll, Dec. 18). They refuse
> > > to report the fact that he would lose only by 49-44 in a hypothetical race
> > > against Obama, down from 52-42 just one month ago.
>
> > > They will never tell us that 21 percent of Americans polled chose to vote
> > > for Ron Paul as a third party candidate over the hypothetical choices of
> > > President Obama or Romney/Gingrich.
>
> > > This last statistic leads me to my main point: if the GOP nominates anyone
> > > besides Ron Paul, Barack Obama will win the 2012 election.
>
> > > Why?
>
> > > Currently, Establishment Republicans are issuing an obvious warning to
> > > Paul's base: vote for Romney, or the Democrats will win in November.
> > > Clearly, they hope this ominous bit of advice also reaches the millions of
> > > Americans who are still learning about Ron Paul's views. Well, Dr. Paul's
> > > supporters have a retort: we don't give a damn.
>
> > > There are worse things than having a Democrat in the White House, and
> > > disenfranchisement is among them. We will not vote for whom we are told. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate who espouses a policy of preemptive war. We
> > > will not vote for the continuation of a flawed, costly, discriminatory drug
> > > war. We will not vote for the circumnavigation of the U.S. Constitution. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate (Romney) who has received just 10 percent of
> > > his campaign donations from actual people (from opensecrets.org). And we
> > > will not feel remorse for a Republican Party that has abandoned us.
>
> > > I am a registered Republican, but when I listen to my so-called party
> > > leaders, I become infuriated and despondent. When did preemptive war become
> > > our national defense? When did the desire to police the world become so
> > > mainstream that we forgot that our nation was birthed from a repugnance to
> > > imperialism? When did we concede that the federal government has the right
> > > to regulate our lives to the point of quiet despotism?
>
> > > And most important, when did we become convinced that our votes and voices
> > > only matter if we support the perceived frontrunner?
>
> > > As an advocate of liberty, I will vote on principle over party, every
> > > time. If the Republican Party took the time to educate its members on the
> > > issues, rather than simply bullying them into submission, their party
> > > wouldn't be so splintered right now, and perhaps Dr. Paul would have a
> > > unified force behind him heading into November. Instead, GOP leaders seem
> > > committed to promoting the status quo, to increasing their own power and
> > > influence, and to keeping the support of moneyed interests.
>
> > > If the GOP Establishment is successful in convincing Republicans to
> > > nominate Romney instead of Paul, and Paul does indeed run as an
> > > independent, Obama will win with 45 percent of the vote, and the GOP will
> > > have no one to blame but themselves.
>
> > > Colin McIntosh, a resident of Fort Lauderdale and graduate of St. Thomas
> > > Aquinas High School, is a senior at Emory University in Atlanta and will
> > > graduate this spring with bachelor degrees in economics and business
> > > administration.
>
> > >http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/29/2566016/gop-establishment-wrong...
>
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> >  crackpot.jpg
> > 9KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.



--
Mark M. Kahle H.



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: GOP Establishment wrong to ‘disenfranchise’ Ron Paul supporters

The big difference that I can see between the candidates is that Paul's positions and "transgressions" are indeed and actually factually defensible.... It is kind of like you and I being held responsible for what is posted here. Yes, I know that those three sentences that were written in the "first person" and attributed to Paul are horrendous...but then are they really untrue or just said in a bad way?? 

These are not, at least to me, disqualifying statements even if they are his actual feelings.

His stance on a return to constitutionality is extremely important to me and the longer he stays in this the better chance that SOME of his points will stick and become part of the platform.

On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
Good Morning Perp and Mark!
 
I agree with both of you......Sorta.......
 
I am one that believes the Republican candidates should adhere to the Republican 11th Commandment:  "Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow conservatives".   Ron Paul broke this rule in Iowa, as he blasted both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in Iowa with false, misleading and prevaricate commercials.   We've seen Paul's legions here in PF  inundate the board with many of these false assertions.  (See MJ and PlainOl). 
 
Just as important,  for months, the Paul supporters all had their panties in a wad,  claiming that the media was ignoring Paul; that Paul wasn't getting his fair share of press coverage.   Well, once Paul's numbers went up in Iowa,  the press did in fact start covering Paul, and the light got a little brighter on Paul's past record.  Just as it did on Gingrich and other candidates who have been raked over the coals by pundits;  (See John Sununu,  Ann Coulter,  Glenn Beck, and a number of pseudo RINO assholes who are in Romney's camp and who have attacked Gingrich unmercifully and unfairly).  You don't see Gingrich supporters crying like women, the way that Paul supporters are crying!  I was listening to Rush Limbaugh and several other talk show hosts yesterday, and the barrage of Paul supporters crying foul was unbelievable! 
 
The truth is Paul has a number of skeletons in his closet and his legions of crackpot supporters are now pissed that the truth is coming out about Crazy Uncle Ron. 
 
Paul is not electable on a national scale,  but as both of you pointed out,  IF  Paul chooses to break away and run as a third party candidate,  it will no doubt cost the Republicans the election, and we will see another four years of socialist/communist presidential directives and executive orders, of which our Nation may not be able to recover.  
 
I trust that Paul has enough sense and wisdom to know that his running as a third party candidate will do serious damage to our Nation and that his candidacy would be an open ticket to a second Obama Administration.  
 
I'm all for throwing Paul a bone.....Give him a prominent night for a speech at the Convention here in Tampa in August, and I would whole heartedly support "Secretary Of The Treasury Paul".
 
 
 


 
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 9:39 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
Perplexed has it right... if he cuts and runs as an independent Obama
will win... he has 15% of the vote in his pocket.

On Dec 31, 7:35 am, Perplexed <openlyincogn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Keith, I agree with you that a lot of his views are those of a
> crackpot.  But I noticed yesterday watching some discussion on one of
> the Fox News shows that the pundits are being downright stupid in how
> they are stepping up the talking points of "he's not electable".  To
> say he couldn't win in a general election is likely very true, but
> that's not what they were doing.  The person actually referred to his
> candidacy as a "joke".
>
> Personally I think that kind of nonsense will backfire and encourage
> Paul to run as an independent and republicans can kiss any chance of
> defeating Obama good-bye.  These ignorant assholes who make up the
> "GOP establishment" and their mouthpieces in the media are apparently
> too stupid to realize they should be respectful and leave room to
> encourage Paul to join whoever the eventual nominee is - because
> without him AND his supporters voting for whoever that is, republicans
> stand no chance of winning, and that's just a fact.
>
> On Dec 31, 12:49 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > > Posted on Thu, Dec. 29, 2011
> > > *GOP Establishment wrong to 'disenfranchise' Ron Paul supporters
> > > *BY COLIN MCINTOSH
>
> > > Don't tread on me.
>
> > > Recently, something's been amiss in the mainstream media when discussing
> > > Ron Paul's candidacy. As the Texas congressman's support has surged to 15
> > > percent nationally in the latest Washington Post poll, the "Very Serious
> > > Republicans" who write columns and give their opinions on TV and radio
> > > shows have changed their tune. They aren't as confident, as cocky or as
> > > arrogant as they used to be when predicting the 2012 presidential election.
>
> > > Now, they sound scared; they sound nervous; they sound shaken. But most
> > > important, they sound resolute that they, and not their audience, represent
> > > the opinions of mainstream America. They are wrong, and their gamble will
> > > be costly.
>
> > > In the absence of facts to support the Establishment candidates, the media
> > > have turned to personal insults, childish mockery, and deliberate
> > > misinterpretation of Dr. Paul's lessons. Their goal, quite shamefully, is
> > > to convince Ron Paul supporters that the candidate that they believe in has
> > > no chance of winning the nomination, let alone the general election. Here
> > > are some recent headlines from around the web: "Huckabee slams Ron Paul,
> > > says he has 'no chance' to win Republican nomination"­ The Hill "Ron Paul
> > > can't be allowed to win Iowa" ­ Daily Caller "Why Ron Paul Can't Win" ­
> > > Wall Street Journal "If Ron Paul wins Iowa, does that make the state
> > > irrelevant?"­ Christian Science Monitor
>
> > > This type of overt pressure from our media to change your vote because
> > > "your candidate can't win" constitutes a form of disenfranchisement.
> > > Despite Paul's rise to the front of the pack in Iowa, the media still
> > > ignore that his national support from Republicans has risen from 9 percent
> > > to 15 percent in a month (Washington Post/ABC poll, Dec. 18). They refuse
> > > to report the fact that he would lose only by 49-44 in a hypothetical race
> > > against Obama, down from 52-42 just one month ago.
>
> > > They will never tell us that 21 percent of Americans polled chose to vote
> > > for Ron Paul as a third party candidate over the hypothetical choices of
> > > President Obama or Romney/Gingrich.
>
> > > This last statistic leads me to my main point: if the GOP nominates anyone
> > > besides Ron Paul, Barack Obama will win the 2012 election.
>
> > > Why?
>
> > > Currently, Establishment Republicans are issuing an obvious warning to
> > > Paul's base: vote for Romney, or the Democrats will win in November.
> > > Clearly, they hope this ominous bit of advice also reaches the millions of
> > > Americans who are still learning about Ron Paul's views. Well, Dr. Paul's
> > > supporters have a retort: we don't give a damn.
>
> > > There are worse things than having a Democrat in the White House, and
> > > disenfranchisement is among them. We will not vote for whom we are told. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate who espouses a policy of preemptive war. We
> > > will not vote for the continuation of a flawed, costly, discriminatory drug
> > > war. We will not vote for the circumnavigation of the U.S. Constitution. We
> > > will not vote for a candidate (Romney) who has received just 10 percent of
> > > his campaign donations from actual people (from opensecrets.org). And we
> > > will not feel remorse for a Republican Party that has abandoned us.
>
> > > I am a registered Republican, but when I listen to my so-called party
> > > leaders, I become infuriated and despondent. When did preemptive war become
> > > our national defense? When did the desire to police the world become so
> > > mainstream that we forgot that our nation was birthed from a repugnance to
> > > imperialism? When did we concede that the federal government has the right
> > > to regulate our lives to the point of quiet despotism?
>
> > > And most important, when did we become convinced that our votes and voices
> > > only matter if we support the perceived frontrunner?
>
> > > As an advocate of liberty, I will vote on principle over party, every
> > > time. If the Republican Party took the time to educate its members on the
> > > issues, rather than simply bullying them into submission, their party
> > > wouldn't be so splintered right now, and perhaps Dr. Paul would have a
> > > unified force behind him heading into November. Instead, GOP leaders seem
> > > committed to promoting the status quo, to increasing their own power and
> > > influence, and to keeping the support of moneyed interests.
>
> > > If the GOP Establishment is successful in convincing Republicans to
> > > nominate Romney instead of Paul, and Paul does indeed run as an
> > > independent, Obama will win with 45 percent of the vote, and the GOP will
> > > have no one to blame but themselves.
>
> > > Colin McIntosh, a resident of Fort Lauderdale and graduate of St. Thomas
> > > Aquinas High School, is a senior at Emory University in Atlanta and will
> > > graduate this spring with bachelor degrees in economics and business
> > > administration.
>
> > >http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/29/2566016/gop-establishment-wrong...
>
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> >  crackpot.jpg
> > 9KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.



--
Mark M. Kahle H.



--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: GOP Establishment wrong to ‘disenfranchise’ Ron Paul supporters

I trust that Paul has enough sense and wisdom to know that his running
as a
third party candidate will do serious damage to our Nation and that
his
candidacy would be an open ticket to a second Obama Administration.

I'm all for throwing Paul a bone.....Give him a prominent night for a
speech at the Convention here in Tampa in August, and I would whole
heartedly support "Secretary Of The Treasury Paul".
-----------------------

I don't think he cares as much about what a third party candidacy will
do to the nation as he does getting air time, quite frankly.

If the morons in the GOP establishment would preface all of their
pathetically veiled disdain for him with "I'd like to see whoever does
win appoint RP to Sec of the Treasury or to give him free reign to
pursue his dream of auditing the Fed", that would be constructive and
showing respect to a guy poised to win Iowa and maybe more. But
that's not what they're
doing; they're insulting him instead, and I can't imagine that doesn't
piss off him and his supporters enough to encourage him to run as an
independent even more.

Those who have said all along that this election is the republicans'
to
lose are right. But damn if they don't seem to be making the very
mistakes that will ensure it.

On Dec 31, 11:38 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good Morning Perp and Mark!
>
> I agree with both of you......Sorta.......
>
> I am one that believes the Republican candidates should adhere to the
> Republican 11th Commandment:  "*Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow
> conservatives*".   Ron Paul broke this rule in Iowa, as he blasted both
> Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in Iowa with false, misleading and
> prevaricate commercials.   We've seen Paul's legions here in PF  inundate
> the board with many of these false assertions.  (*See* MJ and PlainOl).
>
> Just as important,  for months, the Paul supporters all had their panties
> in a wad,  claiming that the media was ignoring Paul; that Paul wasn't
> getting his fair share of press coverage.   Well, once Paul's numbers went
> up in Iowa,  the press did in fact start covering Paul, and the light got a
> little brighter on Paul's past record.  Just as it did on Gingrich and
> other candidates who have been raked over the coals by pundits;
> (*See*John Sununu,  Ann Coulter,  Glenn Beck, and a number of pseudo
> RINO
> assholes who are in Romney's camp and who have attacked Gingrich
> unmercifully and unfairly).  You don't see Gingrich supporters crying like
> women, the way that Paul supporters are crying!  I was listening to Rush
> Limbaugh and several other talk show hosts yesterday, and the barrage of
> Paul supporters crying foul was unbelievable!
>
> The truth is Paul has a number of skeletons in his closet and his legions
> of crackpot supporters are now pissed that the truth is coming out about
> Crazy Uncle Ron.
>
> Paul is not electable on a national scale,  but as both of you pointed
> out,  *IF*  Paul chooses to break away and run as a third party candidate,
> it will no doubt cost the Republicans the election, and we will see another
> four years of socialist/communist presidential directives and executive
> orders, of which our Nation may not be able to recover.
>
> I trust that Paul has enough sense and wisdom to know that his running as a
> third party candidate will do serious damage to our Nation and that his
> candidacy would be an open ticket to a second Obama Administration.
>
> I'm all for throwing Paul a bone.....Give him a prominent night for a
> speech at the Convention here in Tampa in August, and I would whole
> heartedly support "Secretary Of The Treasury Paul".
>
> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 9:39 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Perplexed has it right... if he cuts and runs as an independent Obama
> > will win... he has 15% of the vote in his pocket.
>
> > On Dec 31, 7:35 am, Perplexed <openlyincogn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Keith, I agree with you that a lot of his views are those of a
> > > crackpot.  But I noticed yesterday watching some discussion on one of
> > > the Fox News shows that the pundits are being downright stupid in how
> > > they are stepping up the talking points of "he's not electable".  To
> > > say he couldn't win in a general election is likely very true, but
> > > that's not what they were doing.  The person actually referred to his
> > > candidacy as a "joke".
>
> > > Personally I think that kind of nonsense will backfire and encourage
> > > Paul to run as an independent and republicans can kiss any chance of
> > > defeating Obama good-bye.  These ignorant assholes who make up the
> > > "GOP establishment" and their mouthpieces in the media are apparently
> > > too stupid to realize they should be respectful and leave room to
> > > encourage Paul to join whoever the eventual nominee is - because
> > > without him AND his supporters voting for whoever that is, republicans
> > > stand no chance of winning, and that's just a fact.
>
> > > On Dec 31, 12:49 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > Posted on Thu, Dec. 29, 2011
> > > > > *GOP Establishment wrong to 'disenfranchise' Ron Paul supporters
> > > > > *BY COLIN MCINTOSH
>
> > > > > Don't tread on me.
>
> > > > > Recently, something's been amiss in the mainstream media when
> > discussing
> > > > > Ron Paul's candidacy. As the Texas congressman's support has surged
> > to 15
> > > > > percent nationally in the latest Washington Post poll, the "Very
> > Serious
> > > > > Republicans" who write columns and give their opinions on TV and
> > radio
> > > > > shows have changed their tune. They aren't as confident, as cocky or
> > as
> > > > > arrogant as they used to be when predicting the 2012 presidential
> > election.
>
> > > > > Now, they sound scared; they sound nervous; they sound shaken. But
> > most
> > > > > important, they sound resolute that they, and not their audience,
> > represent
> > > > > the opinions of mainstream America. They are wrong, and their gamble
> > will
> > > > > be costly.
>
> > > > > In the absence of facts to support the Establishment candidates, the
> > media
> > > > > have turned to personal insults, childish mockery, and deliberate
> > > > > misinterpretation of Dr. Paul's lessons. Their goal, quite
> > shamefully, is
> > > > > to convince Ron Paul supporters that the candidate that they believe
> > in has
> > > > > no chance of winning the nomination, let alone the general election.
> > Here
> > > > > are some recent headlines from around the web: "Huckabee slams Ron
> > Paul,
> > > > > says he has 'no chance' to win Republican nomination"­ The Hill "Ron
> > Paul
> > > > > can't be allowed to win Iowa" ­ Daily Caller "Why Ron Paul Can't
> > Win" ­
> > > > > Wall Street Journal "If Ron Paul wins Iowa, does that make the state
> > > > > irrelevant?"­ Christian Science Monitor
>
> > > > > This type of overt pressure from our media to change your vote
> > because
> > > > > "your candidate can't win" constitutes a form of disenfranchisement.
> > > > > Despite Paul's rise to the front of the pack in Iowa, the media still
> > > > > ignore that his national support from Republicans has risen from 9
> > percent
> > > > > to 15 percent in a month (Washington Post/ABC poll, Dec. 18). They
> > refuse
> > > > > to report the fact that he would lose only by 49-44 in a
> > hypothetical race
> > > > > against Obama, down from 52-42 just one month ago.
>
> > > > > They will never tell us that 21 percent of Americans polled chose to
> > vote
> > > > > for Ron Paul as a third party candidate over the hypothetical
> > choices of
> > > > > President Obama or Romney/Gingrich.
>
> > > > > This last statistic leads me to my main point: if the GOP nominates
> > anyone
> > > > > besides Ron Paul, Barack Obama will win the 2012 election.
>
> > > > > Why?
>
> > > > > Currently, Establishment Republicans are issuing an obvious warning
> > to
> > > > > Paul's base: vote for Romney, or the Democrats will win in November.
> > > > > Clearly, they hope this ominous bit of advice also reaches the
> > millions of
> > > > > Americans who are still learning about Ron Paul's views. Well, Dr.
> > Paul's
> > > > > supporters have a retort: we don't give a damn.
>
> > > > > There are worse things than having a Democrat in the White House, and
> > > > > disenfranchisement is among them. We will not vote for whom we are
> > told. We
> > > > > will not vote for a candidate who espouses a policy of preemptive
> > war. We
> > > > > will not vote for the continuation of a flawed, costly,
> > discriminatory drug
> > > > > war. We will not vote for the circumnavigation of the U.S.
> > Constitution. We
> > > > > will not vote for a candidate (Romney) who has received just 10
> > percent of
> > > > > his campaign donations from actual people (from opensecrets.org).
> > And we
> > > > > will not feel remorse for a Republican Party that has abandoned us.
>
> > > > > I am a registered Republican, but when I listen to my so-called party
> > > > > leaders, I become infuriated and despondent. When did preemptive war
> > become
> > > > > our national defense? When did the desire to police the world become
> > so
> > > > > mainstream that we forgot that our nation was birthed from a
> > repugnance to
> > > > > imperialism? When did we concede that the federal government has the
> > right
> > > > > to regulate our lives to the point of quiet despotism?
>
> > > > > And most important, when did we become convinced that our votes and
> > voices
> > > > > only matter if we support the perceived frontrunner?
>
> > > > > As an advocate of liberty, I will vote on principle over party, every
> > > > > time. If the Republican Party took the time to educate its members
> > on the
> > > > > issues, rather than simply bullying them into submission, their party
> > > > > wouldn't be so splintered right now, and perhaps Dr. Paul would have
> > a
> > > > > unified force behind him heading into November. Instead, GOP leaders
> > seem
> > > > > committed to promoting the status quo, to increasing their own power
> > and
> > > > > influence, and to keeping the support of moneyed interests.
>
> > > > > If the GOP Establishment is successful in convincing Republicans to
> > > > > nominate Romney instead of Paul, and Paul does indeed run as an
> > > > > independent, Obama will win with 45 percent of the vote, and the GOP
> > will
> > > > > have no one to blame but themselves.
>
> > > > > Colin McIntosh, a resident of Fort Lauderdale and graduate of St.
> > Thomas
> > > > > Aquinas High School, is a senior at Emory University in Atlanta and
> > will
> > > > > graduate this spring with bachelor degrees in economics and business
> > > > > administration.
>
> >http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/29/2566016/gop-establishment-wrong...
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > >  crackpot.jpg
> > > > 9KViewDownload
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and
>
> ...
>
> read more »
>
>  CrazyUncleRon.jpg
> 44KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.