Banning Ron Paul

bah - First Reagan's plan led to growth thru the 80's and 90'
You make no sense in your comments, because the only group that calls names are the libs, they hold people back

A little news for you corporations give jobs, that pay people so they can live, they create items in which to use.

Socialism or being closed to the world does not work either.

Please tell us what Clinton or Carter has done for this country?

All I know is they weakened it and gave power to terrorists and our enemies.

America and Conservatives are the most giving people in the world.

Lets compare A Lib mayor gave political hate speeches while the people of his city needed help. A republican mayor was working on scene with rescuers in his city.

Republican governors help their people in times of crisis, Libs blame everyone else and do nothing!

If you do not like the liberty here move to Cuba or Venezuela

republicans call names and try to hurt mostly ,but rhetoric and hyperbole aside, i really honestly dont hear any substantive (or believable) arguments to support +/- 98 % of what they preach, from abortion to stem cell research to foreign policy to economic policy , (remember r. reagan and his "trickle down" economic theory??" RIGHT!!),their obtuse and ignorant official stand on climate change, alternative energy, immigration etc etc etc....they dont care about those things if a profit isnt attached to them somewhere, they are takers, not makers.

anyone who seriously keeps up with politics in america can see the republicans and their ideals are going the way of the dinosaur (the hillary comet will do them in!) and additionally anyone with one iota of political savvy can see that ron paul is ,sadly,their last best chance to fool the ever dupe-able american voter once more so they can run amok politically,socially,militarily and economically for 4 more years.

..............!!

He speaks the truth whether he's Rep., Dem., Lib,Con, right or left.
He's record speaks for it's self.
I can handle the truth!

bah - First response to you - I think you mostly talking about the Libs.

Miranda - Ok Are the candidates really alienating them or are they alienating themselves because they looking for one of two issues which the President really has no control other then putting judges up, But in truth who are they going to hurt more if they allow Hilary to win, themselves because Hilary will put judges far more liberal then other (if you believe there can be)

Thompson did not repeat did not lobby for an abortion group he was a lawyer in a firm that appointed him to represent them on something, and a lawyer has to be ethical (if you believe that) and represent his client not his views, Thompson has received 100% approval from the pro-life. As far as gay unions he wants to leave it up to the states, (which a libertarion should agree with) but if it gets out of control he he then would support a amendment. He is a Strong conservative. Again you do not need to agree with a candidate on 100% of the issues, if you try you will have Hilary and all you support will be gone.

Side Note: anybody notice how Libs care more about illegals and other countries them american citizens?

Uniblogger01 - Huchabee is a very good candidate, but unfortunately his name recognition

Miranda - The Republican Liberty Caucus, founded in 1990 in Tallahassee, Florida by ex-Libertarian Party member Eric Dondero Rittberg, claims to represent the GOP's libertarian Republican movement.

What helped Reagan were Blue collar Dems, now called Reagan Dems, Economic Conservatives and social Conservatives

What helped Pres Bush 43 were the Religous conservatives.

What will help Hilary is the in fighting which is being fueled by her.

But your reference then is they will not support the Republican then how are they for what you say they are, because they will not even have a voice under Clinton. So who loses!

Ron Paul's comment about the problems in the world being our fault is not a Republican stance, it is a liberal stance. Funny thing is I kinda said he was not that bad until I noticed the liberals faking support for him and his other nutcase followers, Like I said in previous posts they are the ones hurting him the most.

As far as Perot, he did not win a state so it could not of been 1/3, it just was enough for Bush 41 to lose, and what you say is true they hurt themselves more then anybody. Bush 43 would of won in 2004 either way.

Andrew Actually if you belive pols then it is 40% the 20% is the Dems in congress

If a candidate is a member of the CFR, DO NOT vote for them. Ron Paul is the only one who isn't a part of the "Establishment" and owned. How can any person with a brain not want Ron Paul for their leader??...I really don't understand alot of you bad mouthers of Ron Paul, the only thing that comes to mind is you are way ignorant on how this country is actually operated. RON PAUL 2008 !!!

i hope it works out that way chuck,but given the intellect of the avg american and their propensity to be a sucker 110% of the time , i see a possibility ,albeit small,that ron paul could be elected president.

i mean, even hitler and even saddam were pretty popular ,owing that popularity almost in total to huge political campaigns organized by their fanatical supporters with a specific purpose,ie; to make these monsters appear more palatable to the more sway able citizens which ,when added to the censoring and silencing of any alternative or differing points of view, led to a mostly total, reverential, almost god like respect and following for those tyrants.inexplicable you say,but it happened.

not saying that exact scenario is possible here, but i am concerned and
discouraged with the inability of the american voter to not be hoodwinked by 21st century snake oil salesmen such as ron paul...

If Rep. Paul no longer feels welcome in his political party (and there is increasing evidence that he does not), he most definitely should run as a third-party candidate. Then, all the Republicans who were cheering for Ralph Nader in 2000 for taking votes from VP Gore will know exactly how it feels as Rep. Paul siphons off vote after vote from their candidate.

heh i like that term "moderate republicans" andy.

true dichotomy if i ever heard one.

are those the republicans that support health care for kids? or just SOME kids?

a moderate republican is like a flying whale, i havent ever seen one personally...

shame on you ron paul.

being a blatant republican like rush limbaugh and saying you are one is one thing, but by renaming yourself something other than a republican eg;,libertarian,independent,etc...thereby trying to fool the gullible american voter into voting for you as some kind of better alternative to the republicans,you are, in essence and deed patently enabling those same republicans (and their twisted agenda) to have even more time wielding the veto sword from the bully pulpit)and consequently you are showing your true nature ;ie good subservient republican lackey.

vote for ron paul!!!!!! mr clean cut libertarian!!

;]

I actually look at it as a good thing, Ron Paul supporters now won't waste their time preaching to the 20% of the population that still supports Bush.

Instead they can focus on the moderate republicans.

honestly, the republicans ceased to be a political party whose ideals/thoughts/whims should be given serious consideration when they elected an actor to rule the most powerful nation on in the history of the world.

all they care about is SELF SELF SELF.

as a party;

they dont care if bridges are falling in. they dont care if roads are falling apart.
they dont care if schools are in disrepair and educational standards are falling.
they dont care if the environment gets abused.
they dont care if illegal aliens are running rampant.
they dont care if little kids dont have adequate or even basic health care.
they dont care if old people have any assistance or not.

they dont care about ANYTHING ,except how much their TAXES are going to go up ,or down this year, OR if they can make a PROFIT off of something, even if that profit is made at the misfortune of the nation/its citizens.

that is,in a nutshell,the republican voters' voting agenda, they care about 0 outside their own greedy financial status.

basically,sadly,the republicans,as a party dont care about anything much because CARING COSTS $$.
they are the political party old scrooge wouldve been tightly affiliated with ,no doubt.

"go get/find your own crutch ,tiny tim ,dont bother me ,im too busy getting rich(er)..."

elect ron paul (aka republican) for more of that type mentality.

spock:

"The group with the most influence is the Social Conservative which include the religious right that is what brought President Bush the Largest Popular vote in Election History! in 2004!"

oh don't worry the leadership is awfully busy alienating them as well. You think Romney or Guiliani are going to bring out the religious right? McCain still has his issues with that crowd and even Thompson lobbied for abortionists!

yeah, who cares about smaller gov, 2nd amendment rights, secure borders, pro-lifers, ect...

i guess Murdoch is going to cast enough votes himself to win the WH for the GOP(of course he is also backing Clinton but who really cares right).

let me clarify- he pandered to libertarians, he rarely delivered, and we went along because the other choice was the dems and we were staring at the soviets across the way. things have changed and the Republicans are busy dismantling their own party.

Spock

are we living in the same country?
Reagan absolutely pandered to libertarians: "“Libertarianism is the heart and soul of conservatism.”

libertarians have been a part of the GOP alliance since the 30's. have you never heard of fusionism? They won congress in '94 because of pandering to libertarian republicans small gov values(even campaigning on the abolition of certain departments). Paul isn't for open borders, it's the exact opposite! I suggest you do some research or go back to class little boy. i'll even help a little, look up "The Neoconservative Persuassian" by Irving Kristol(neocon grand daddy) which explains why old right/libertarian/fiscal conservatives HATE neocons.

Spock.. your arguement is illogical. Are you trying to say that no republicans live in "deeply blue states". Did the Dems flood the text lines for Huckabee as well? Or could you admit that he actually did pretty good at the debate. As far as Ron Paul receiving boos, the audience was hand picked and his anti-war stance sets him up for such ridicule by the rest of the war-mongering GOP.

Miranda - Libertarian Republicans sometimes support secure borders, along with a guest worker program. They may be more likely than other Republicans to support LGBT social movements. Some Libertarian Republicans may be considered to be comfortable with higher levels of defense spending and American military presence abroad than Libertarian Party members, paleolibertarians, or other libertarians. They differ from some Republican conservatives in that they may favor the separation of church and state. They may be pro-choice or pro-life and they also may be for or against the death penalty. They are usually advocates of gun rights and some other personal freedoms. They claim to favor limited government involvement in many areas of life.

They are not Libertarians!

Ron Pauls is for no presence outside the US, lower Military spending and Open Borders where does that fall!

Now as far as in Politics Well Lets put it this way I liked Ford, Very Much Loved Reagan who by the way was able to win big not bowing to the Libertarians. Since the Libertarian-Republican movement did not start until the 90's, so where did they ever help the Republicans anyhow, did not Clinton win in the 90's.

The problem here is if the so called Liberatian-Republicans decide to have an ego well then they vote for Hilary, talking about spiting the face besides the nose.

Go with the candidate that you support 80% of the time not the one you never support.

Do you really think the blogging is from true Libertarian-republicans. do not think so.

The group with the most influence is the Social Conservative which include the religious right that is what brought President Bush the Largest Popular vote in Election History! in 2004!

ROYCE:

You think a Ron Paul 3rd party will draw votes away from the GOP like what happened with Perot?

Ask yourself a couple questions: Why would they go 3rd party in 2008, why did they go to Perot then, what are they seeking that the GOP isn't providing, and isn't it kind of important to keep those folks with the GOP by not ridiculing and alienating them. maybe even reach out and show some appreciation to about 1/3 of your own base so you DONT LOSE THE ELECTION when they vote Dem, vote 3rd party, or stay home?

Hey JC, there will still be lots to blame on Bush in 2015. We won't dig our way out of his mess for several decades. And that's assuming we get somebody financially resposible like Bill Clinton in office again.

A vote for Paul as a Libertarian or independent is a vote for Clinton. If Giuliani gets the Republican nomination it won’t really matter. Clinton and Giuliani are politically interchangable.

Whose afraid of this Big Bad Wolf Ron Paul anyway?? Well, neocons and ultra libs should be because he carries the Constitution as his BIG STICK!