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 <[email protected]>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 <[email protected]> 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 
>> <[email protected]>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 <[email protected]
>>> > 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00 PM, MJ <[email protected]> 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.

Reply via email to