<Grin>!
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Perplexed <[email protected]>wrote: > I don't think Newt is electable either. He's been as big a whiner as > Obama this past couple of weeks. It's a CAMPAIGN and he thinks they > should all be positive about their opponents - that's just infantile. > > And I hate to say it, but I absolutely couldn't stand to look at his > wife as much as we've seen of Michelle Obama for 3 years. Seriously - > she is one plastic and scary-looking woman! > > On Dec 31 2011, 12:23 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > wrote: > > 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 <[email protected]> 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 < > [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 > > > > ... > > > > read 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. > -- 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.
