Ron Paul is a L-O-S-E-R !!!

[Valley Oak]

At this stage of the campaign game, it is abundantly evident that fascist presidential candidate Ron Paul has absolutely NO CHANCE of winning the White House. He is now what he always was: A CIRCUS JOKE !

Ron Paul is a politician, in the worst sense of the word, with a long list of reprehensible stances on the issues (including wild subjects that are too ludicrous to have on the table). It is an American shame that such a scumbag as Ron Paul not only runs for President but also garnered as much support as he did, evidenced not only here in the Wacco List but in many other spheres of this sick and pathetic society that we live in. This speaks very poorly of the people who gave him their support.

Ron Paul is a radical reactionary who has made it public that he is against abortion; that he is against the U.N. as an entity (he would like to see it abolished or essentially castrated from almost all authority or power of any kind); that he is against almost all public service programs (not just welfare, food stamps, etc), and defended many other stances of the extreme right and religious fanatics.

Edward

[Lenny]

OK, you got me. You are almost SO right. He did lose the election, though a bunch voted for him.
He had as much chance of "winning" as, say Sam Brownback, on the Democratic ticket, or a bunch of other losers. And those hicks in Texas that keep voting him in for 28 years! What a bunch of....well, hicks, I suppose.
I suppose they don't know better. I thank you for telling us you are right, and all those hicks are.....well, stupid.
I wonder if he REALLY thought he would be president. I mean, he's such a weak, old man, and most folks around here want a strong, vibrant, do stuff, kind-of-guy. To hell with your legislators. They only MAKE the laws, and pass the money bills, up or down. The president should be strong, and ride in on a white horse and take over the place. Not weak. Right?

You are right again. He thinks the UN should be outside US, and not funded by US. For all they do to US and for US, he figures why fund them to the tune of 70% of their costs. Silly man. Do you really think he thought he had a chance? Is he THAT stupid? I mean the guy IS a medical doctor!
And thanks for sparing us all those subjects too wild to mention.
And as for running for POTUS. Wow, they shouldn't just let ANYBODY run. Only people picked by those few that are in the know. I mean if HE can run for that office, then something IS wrong, no? I mean, he just shows that ANYBODY could be president. Right? Can't have that.

And I suppose you are right about speaking about those of us who voted for him. We are losers. Truth is, I've never voted for a winner yet in that race. What a loser I am. I am often told that I am throwing my vote away, instead of voting for the "lesser of two evils". I keep thinking that evil is not to be compromised with, so I vote what I think is the right thing. Loser that I am, I just can't vote for evil, even when it is "lesser than". I suppose I should grow up in this political world and learn to embrace "lesser than" candidates, but then I've always had a heart for "losers" and underdogs. When I see the world of politics and how it brings out the hatred folks cleave to in their hearts, it reminds me of the middle ages and folks looking for stuff to hate over religion. I guess that's why we avoid those two things mostly.

Or course, you are right. This is a sick and pathetic place we find ourselves in. And we keep voting for the same folks over and over again. Strange, eh? I mean there is a whole voting generation that knows ONLY Bush and Clinton. And the world is a better place for that? No! You are right. Do you think another Clinton will make it all better? Or is she the "lesser than" canidate? It's all so complicated at my age!

Again, you are right. Ron Paul introduces, every year, a bill, which is defeated or simply overlooked, that says, in short, that every bill put forth should also have a derivation back to a specific point in the Constitution. If the sponsor of the bill can find it in that document, he will vote for it. I too find that to be VERY radical, but I don't think it is fascist as you claim. You play fast and lose with the language, me thinks.

But you are still right. I mean his approach to abortion!; so personal an experience, so devastating to all participants, that he does not want ONE RULE for ALL people. As a medical doctor, an OB/GYN, I suppose he knows that over the years about 60% of doctors that preformed abortions have turned away from that practice and allow others to "specialize" due to some perceived unpleasantness. He thinks that some alternatives should be given voice, instead of shouted down at every turn.

You are right: he IS a loser. All of us that voted for him also lost.
You are dead right.
And I thank you for allowing this experience to be as cathartic as it was.
And as the sign says, "Don't feed the trolls".

At this stage of the campaign game, it is abundantly evident that fascist presidential candidate Ron Paul has absolutely NO CHANCE of winning the White House. He is now what he always was: A CIRCUS JOKE !

Ron Paul is a politician, in the worst sense of the word, with a long list of reprehensible stances on the issues (including wild subjects that are too ludicrous to have on the table). It is an American shame that such a scumbag as Ron Paul not only runs for President but also garnered as much support as he did, evidenced not only here in the Wacco List but in many other spheres of this sick and pathetic society that we live in. This speaks very poorly of the people who gave him their support.

Ron Paul is a radical reactionary who has made it public that he is against abortion; that he is against the U.N. as an entity (he would like to see it abolished or essentially castrated from almost all authority or power of any kind); that he is against almost all public service programs (not just welfare, food stamps, etc), and defended many other stances of the extreme right and religious fanatics.

Edward

[OrchardDweller]

This is a battle that has to be won. A rigged election process, a biased corporate media, or an ignorant population that is more concerned with Britney or football games, aren't going to stand in the way of the peaceful revolution taking place.

While tyranny has been around for a long time, freedom is just a speck on the timeline of humanity. But the human spirit's desire to be free is hard to extinguish.


A Game of Inches
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKMrnp-dJfg


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." -Samuel Adams

[Valley Oak]

Wrong again, Lenny. This is the second time you do this in response to one of my posts, despite the fact that I asked you not to do it again. You are essentially putting words into my mouth. I don't remember ever saying that that Ron Paul is weak and the same for Ron Paul being stupid.

I can understand that you have gotten those attitudes from different elements in this society (but I was not one of them). I am going to say the following loud and clear and publicly to get my little point across (and just in case I need to correct any earlier statements I might have made):

Ron Paul is NOT stupid
Ron Paul is NOT weak (or at least his age and physical condition is not a factor).

But this is not the essential point I was trying to make, which is that Ron Paul as a candidate for president is reprehensible because his views are simply WRONG FOR AMERICA! Ron Paul is not what we need despite what you strongly believe.

Let me try to get something across to you: You have a very specific vision and definition of what America should be; you have a very different definition of what "freedom" and "liberty" are, etc. I very strongly disagree with you on these fundamental values and we both have a right to disagree. The frustrating thing is that you are not seeing this. Congratulations on exercising you right to free speech. Congratulations on expressing your support for the wrong candidate for president because you have a Constitutional right to do so. Good for you.

There comes a point at which there is no more reason to continue arguing a lost cause. For you, Ron Paul might be a 'lost cause worth fighting for.' Go ahead and knock yourself out but you have made the wrong choice because of what he stands for. You need to understand a little bit better what this country was founded on. I have a BA in Political Science and I have done my homework. Please do yours. You need to be a little more self critical about some of the views you espouse.

For example, an anti abortion stance is indefensible, and so on. It's almost as bad as saying: "Let's vote for Jefferson Davis because even though he supports slavery, he will do all of these really good things and so it's worth the sacrifice. Let's just allow each state to vote democratically if they want slavery or not and that will be respecting states' rights. How democratic!"

Sorry Charlie, no dice!

Edward

OK, you got me. You are almost SO right. He did lose the election, though a bunch voted for him.
He had as much chance of "winning" as, say Sam Brownback, on the Democratic ticket, or a bunch of other losers. And those hicks in Texas that keep voting him in for 28 years! What a bunch of....well, hicks, I suppose.
I suppose they don't know better. I thank you for telling us you are right, and all those hicks are.....well, stupid.
I wonder if he REALLY thought he would be president. I mean, he's such a weak, old man, and most folks around here want a strong, vibrant, do stuff, kind-of-guy. To hell with your legislators. They only MAKE the laws, and pass the money bills, up or down. The president should be strong, and ride in on a white horse and take over the place. Not weak. Right?...

[Valley Oak]

We actually agree on some things that you've written in your post here (rigged election, biased corporate media, ignorant population, Britney/football opiates, tyranny, spirit to be free, etc) but your solution to them is to elect a very wrong man for the job. It's kind of like saying: "Things are REALLY bad around here and I'm totally fed up! Let's elect Hitler president!" That's jumping out of the pot and straight into the fire, which will make things A LOT worse. There are actually some points in Ron Paul's foreign policy stances that I agree with but there are too many of his F.P. positions that I bitterly disagree with, such as aid to other countries and the U.N. As for domestic policy issues, Ron Paul fails miserably across the board.

Oh, and talking about social opiates, please kick your addiction to being informed primarily by YouTube. Thanks!

Edward

This is a battle that has to be won. A rigged election process, a biased corporate media, or an ignorant population that is more concerned with Britney or football games, aren't going to stand in the way of the peaceful revolution taking place.

While tyranny has been around for a long time, freedom is just a speck on the timeline of humanity. But the human spirit's desire to be free is hard to extinguish.


A Game of Inches
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKMrnp-dJfg


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." -Samuel Adams

[Lenny]

Well, I apologize, VO. You did not say he is weak. I did attempt to draw a valid inference. I mean he is running for president and knows his candidacy is not strong. He is about 72, and does not look robust, as does McCain. Also, I concluded from your post that too many people want a strong president, and that is a fallacy that many operate under. Such a strong person is called a dictator. The president does not make laws, nor pass bills incurring money draining our tax dollars, yet all to often folks think he, so far, does. My bad. Although I saw an almost interesting thread here on Wacco-ville questioning why we even need a president.
Nor did you say he was stupid. Another inference on my part. Not all together invalid based on your scree. A circus joke can be clowns which may be considered stupid so it follows. No? You consider it an "American shame" and cast dispersions on those Texans, and all who support him, as sick, pathetic, and associate with scumbags. One would think you were being offensive, no? Or besmirching the intelligence of those that voted for him, and thus positioning yourself in a superior manner. Goodness! I can't think of another word than "stupid" for such a thing. But you are right. You did not call him stupid. Again, my bad.
Your declaration that Ron Paul and his views is "wrong for America" and should be censured, is in itself reprehensible! I mean you declare all that in one paragraph, and then move onto something else without explanation. I am sorry for putting words in your mouth, but you leave a paragraph size hole for insertion. But I digress.
Using your words confuses me. "you have a very different definition of what "freedom" and "liberty" are, etc. I very strongly disagree with you on these fundamental values..". VO, you state that we've a different definition of words, then jump to disagreeing on values. All such such exchanges depend on two things, with definitions being the first. We may have different definitions but these differences are not "values", or at least not yet, since we don't have agreement on the definition! The leaps you make are too large for such dismissive castigations.
But I bow before your B.A. degree in poly sci. Congratulations on that. Quite an achievement for you, I am sure.
As a poly-sci major you would understand the states rights issue, but as a historical process, slavery wasn't on the front burner of that war. Maybe #3 and I've read up to #5. Not that it matters, but eventually the slave issue would have dissolved as it is the most inefficient and costly method of production, especially in light of the industrial revolution which was looming at that time.
As for the abortion issue, you write as if it is a forgone conclusion. While it is black letter law, and as the law is a kind of viable thing, education into how folks may see the consequence of their actions could still be forthcoming. I am not for repealing that findings the courts decreed, although the notion of "right to privacy" never was clarified as to its origins in law, but I find the personal pain and emotional conflict involved in abortion to be compelling to consider that some places could address all the subtleties involved in the various permutations of those acts. IOW: thought and discussion precede the act.
As for Ron Paul actions, a progressive would find the facts to be within the universal beliefs:
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

But then all to often we are fooled by the same old politicians diverting our attention over here, while they do their actions over there. And we suffer for it. Like the current actions of "The Super Delegates".
OMG!

Wrong again, Lenny. This is the second time you do this in response to one of my posts, despite the fact that I asked you not to do it again. You are essentially putting words into my mouth. I don't remember ever saying that that Ron Paul is weak and the same for Ron Paul being stupid.

I can understand that you have gotten those attitudes from different elements in this society (but I was not one of them). I am going to say the following loud and clear and publicly to get my little point across (and just in case I need to correct any earlier statements I might have made):

Ron Paul is NOT stupid
Ron Paul is NOT weak (or at least his age and physical condition is not a factor).

But this is not the essential point I was trying to make, which is that Ron Paul as a candidate for president is reprehensible because his views are simply WRONG FOR AMERICA! Ron Paul is not what we need despite what you strongly believe.

Let me try to get something across to you: You have a very specific vision and definition of what America should be; you have a very different definition of what "freedom" and "liberty" are, etc. I very strongly disagree with you on these fundamental values and we both have a right to disagree. The frustrating thing is that you are not seeing this. Congratulations on exercising you right to free speech. Congratulations on expressing your support for the wrong candidate for president because you have a Constitutional right to do so. Good for you.
There comes a point at which there is no more reason to continue arguing a lost cause. For you, Ron Paul might be a 'lost cause worth fighting for.' Go ahead and knock yourself out but you have made the wrong choice because of what he stands for. You need to understand a little bit better what this country was founded on. I have a BA in Political Science and I have done my homework. Please do yours. You need to be a little more self critical about some of the views you espouse.

For example, an anti abortion stance is indefensible, and so on. It's almost as bad as saying: "Let's vote for Jefferson Davis because even though he supports slavery, he will do all of these really good things and so it's worth the sacrifice. Let's just allow each state to vote democratically if they want slavery or not and that will be respecting states' rights. How democratic!"

Sorry Charlie, no dice!

Edward

[Neshamah]

Dear Edward,

Even modest success by an outsider candidacy shakes the establishment and provides a greater opportunity for a future outsider. I am proud to have supported a candidate who could unite supporters from opposite ends of the political spectrum, even if I strongly disagreed with a few of his positions.

You however have been nothing but divisive. Rather than attempt to persuade others to your point of view, you merely attack and belittle them. You continue to repeat the same nonsense even after you have been corrected repeatedly. I cannot believe you are really so thick and can only conclude it is deliberate.

I've put up with it in the past because you do at times seem sincere, but I've begun to wonder if it is just a clever act. I've never tried the "Ignore" list, so you get to be my guinea pig. I guess this is good bye.

Good bye,
Neshamah

At this stage of the campaign game, it is abundantly evident that fascist presidential candidate Ron Paul has absolutely NO CHANCE of winning the White House. He is now what he always was: A CIRCUS JOKE !

Ron Paul is a politician, in the worst sense of the word, with a long list of reprehensible stances on the issues (including wild subjects that are too ludicrous to have on the table). It is an American shame that such a scumbag as Ron Paul not only runs for President but also garnered as much support as he did, evidenced not only here in the Wacco List but in many other spheres of this sick and pathetic society that we live in. This speaks very poorly of the people who gave him their support.

Ron Paul is a radical reactionary who has made it public that he is against abortion; that he is against the U.N. as an entity (he would like to see it abolished or essentially castrated from almost all authority or power of any kind); that he is against almost all public service programs (not just welfare, food stamps, etc), and defended many other stances of the extreme right and religious fanatics.

Edward

[mykil]

Dearest Edward; Any one man that feels the need to be my leader IS A LOSER! Any one man that feels the need to prove him/her/monster as the world leader has to have a few miner issues with power. Any one man that feels the need to control every thing around hi or her might be on the edge. Why we have such a person reflects badly on the whole human population and I for one am ashamed to have one such leader. Continue to vote for our leader if you will, but Ron Paul is just like all the rest. If you are voting in general I feel empathy and sadness will prevail around your soul, your screwed up mind and you might as well be wearing a shirt that sayz GULLIBLE GUPPY I AM!! In one man’s opinion of course!!!!!

At this stage of the campaign game, it is abundantly evident that fascist presidential candidate Ron Paul has absolutely NO CHANCE of winning the White House. He is now what he always was: A CIRCUS JOKE !

Ron Paul is a politician, in the worst sense of the word, with a long list of reprehensible stances on the issues (including wild subjects that are too ludicrous to have on the table). It is an American shame that such a scumbag as Ron Paul not only runs for President but also garnered as much support as he did, evidenced not only here in the Wacco List but in many other spheres of this sick and pathetic society that we live in. This speaks very poorly of the people who gave him their support.

Ron Paul is a radical reactionary who has made it public that he is against abortion; that he is against the U.N. as an entity (he would like to see it abolished or essentially castrated from almost all authority or power of any kind); that he is against almost all public service programs (not just welfare, food stamps, etc), and defended many other stances of the extreme right and religious fanatics.

Edward

[MsTerry]

LOL
only mykil can expose a few miner issues with power and valley oak!

Dearest Edward; Any one man that feels the need to be my leader IS A LOSER! Any one man that feels the need to prove him/her/monster as the world leader has to have a few miner issues with power. Any one man that feels the need to control every thing around hi or her might be on the edge. Why we have such a person reflects badly on the whole human population and I for one am ashamed to have one such leader. Continue to vote for our leader if you will, but Ron Paul is just like all the rest. If you are voting in general I feel empathy and sadness will prevail around your soul, your screwed up mind and you might as well be wearing a shirt that sayz GULLIBLE GUPPY I AM!! In one man’s opinion of course!!!!!

[Valley Oak]

I am crushed!

Nesh, honey, please speak to me! Come back, please, darling. I already miss you. I promise to suck on your toes the way you like it if you reconsider. I can't survive without you...

Wahaha, boo hoo, sniffle sniffle :-(

Edward

Dear Edward,

Even modest success by an outsider candidacy shakes the establishment and provides a greater opportunity for a future outsider. I am proud to have supported a candidate who could unite supporters from opposite ends of the political spectrum, even if I strongly disagreed with a few of his positions.

You however have been nothing but divisive. Rather than attempt to persuade others to your point of view, you merely attack and belittle them. You continue to repeat the same nonsense even after you have been corrected repeatedly. I cannot believe you are really so thick and can only conclude it is deliberate.

I've put up with it in the past because you do at times seem sincere, but I've begun to wonder if it is just a clever act. I've never tried the "Ignore" list, so you get to be my guinea pig. I guess this is good bye.

Good bye,
Neshamah

[Lenny]

Most interesting, mykil. I wish I knew how to parse into your post, but I don't. So:
are you of the mind to say that anyone running for office is not fit to govern men, as did Plato and others wrote like you? You approach anarchy with that, don't cha' know!

And you are right about Ron Paul, as he being just "another one of them", so to speak. But let me ask you, if there were rules laid out that kept all those buggers in check and stopping them from getting the upper hand on any other person in that game, and especially outsiders to that game, would you agree to vote for any of those guys playing by those rules?
'Cause SOMEWHERE along the line you have to agree to SOME rules, wanting to or not, no? I know, the fewer the rules the better. And the more and faster we can change the rules, the more fun. But somewhere along the line each has to agree to SOME rules. No?
Just wondering a little. No biggie.

Dearest Edward; Any one man that feels the need to be my leader IS A LOSER! Any one man that feels the need to prove him/her/monster as the world leader has to have a few miner issues with power. Any one man that feels the need to control every thing around hi or her might be on the edge. Why we have such a person reflects badly on the whole human population and I for one am ashamed to have one such leader. Continue to vote for our leader if you will, but Ron Paul is just like all the rest. If you are voting in general I feel empathy and sadness will prevail around your soul, your screwed up mind and you might as well be wearing a shirt that sayz GULLIBLE GUPPY I AM!! In one man’s opinion of course!!!!!

[mykil]

I play by all rules, even if I do not approve. I support whoever is going to be in office. I was raised this way and its about as bad for me as being raised Christian, which I am recovering form nicely thank you very much. This is not the point I was trying to make. I think we can do better than a friggin senior in charge of everything in the world person. We are better than this and should conceder an alterative means to run this place. The way things are run now is just plain stupid!!!!!! I said it once and will again. When We Won our independence way back in 1776 everyone gathered around and wanted
Washington to be our king! He replied with lets try it this way for awhile ill be your president. Lets Try It This Way was his response. Well we have tried it for a couple of hundred years and it just dose not WORK!!! Plain and simple lets try something that will work!!! Anything but a one all mighty power that can veto anything he wants go to war with anyone he wants

[Braggi]

Edward,

You can stop it on the Ron Paul thing. He's not running anymore. I think he brought a lot to the election, myself. But then, I'm more of a libertarian than you are.

Ron asked a lot of embarrassing questions and he got far more media coverage than ever before. These are good things.

Stop complaining.

-Jeff

[Valley Oak]

Yes, God.

Edward

Edward,

You can stop it on the Ron Paul thing. He's not running anymore. I think he brought a lot to the election, myself. But then, I'm more of a libertarian than you are.

Ron asked a lot of embarrassing questions and he got far more media coverage than ever before. These are good things.

Stop complaining.

-Jeff