Ron Paul supporters who will not support the GOP nominee are Liberals

Sure you did.

LOL Sure you did. Getting a little nervous I can expose your lies now are we?

Ok, you asked for it. Remember that.

Thats right. I support defeating Obama. You being a liberal don't. We get it.

hahahahhaha

You got it:

And exposing your LIES about defending Bush:

And more lies claiming to defend Bush

And when Obama was called out about his promises for a recovery that failed , what a shocker, you defended him:

More slamming Bush and defending Obama:

And another defense of Obama:

All too Easy. And this was the short list. You are a die hard Obama supporter and you slam Bush wherever you can as has been proven.

All the lies about "context" will never shield your deception.

And once again a perfect example of your liberalism claiming the rest of the GOP is as bad as Obama in the White House.

Because I vote against Obama I hate my country? Thanks for yet another example of your liberalism

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA I'm willing for it to burn? Thats been my entire point about Paul supporters who wont vote for anyone but him even if he doesn't win the GOP nomination. Where are you been? Praising Obama some more?

 

There is an establishment, and there are those who want to disrupt this internationalist/corporatist establishment. Republican/democrats are just meaningless labels when it comes down to their overall plan for America. You all underestimate how insider politics in America has really become. Romney is another one of them, that is, a republic/constitution-destroying globalist.



Mitt Romney’s Wall Street Advisors Raise Serious Questions
November 4th, 2011
By Dr. Harold Pease

In October Presidential contender Mitt Romney released the 20 names of those he had selected to advise him in foreign policy and national security matters, more than half of whom, eleven to be exact, are members of the elite, semi-secret Council on Foreign Relations. It isn’t that most of these persons are not qualified to advise, nor is it that very few of the twenty can be said to be conservative, even in a stretch, but it is the fact that for decades the CFR has been the special interest group, Think Tank if you prefer, that provided a majority of the “experts” in every administration, Democrat or Republican.

No special interest group has had more impact than the CFR over foreign policy in the 20th Century, leading many to question if we have but one political party in the United States with two arms. Indeed, many see no significant difference in foreign policy between George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Nor was there between George Bush and Bill Clinton. CFR candidate Barack Obama, probably the most anti-war candidate in a couple of decades, and so condemnatory of his predecessor in this area, as president not only continued the Bush wars but added Libya and central Africa to the list while sponsoring drone killings in Pakistan, Syria, and Somali. History will view him as having been as pro-war as his predecessor.
http://www.libertyunderfire.org/2011/11/mitt-romneys-wall-street-advisors-raise-serious-questions/

 

Well, you probably really hate me. I will vote for Paul in the primary. If he does not run in the general, I will write him in, just as I did in '08.

 

I dont hate anyone. But if you write Paul in you might as well vote for Obama.

 

If you vote for anyone other then Ron Paul in the primary, you have voted for Obama in the general election, using your logic. Ron Paul doesn't get nomination, Obama gets four more years in the white house, so don't be a liberal and not vote for Paul.

 

No its not. It will be Paul supporters fault for handing Obama another election win.

This isn't about guilt. Its about reality.

Do you really beleieve a GOP candidate not Ron Paul will really be as bad as Obama considering everything Obama has done so far?

Let's take some basics. Do you really believe any of the GOP candidates would have pushed for national universal health care? And before you scream Romney he has never supported universal heath care nationally and he was wrong to do it state wide of course.

How about getting 2 far left judges on the Supreme Court?

How about a Trillion dollar spending Bill?

Billions wasted on green energy?

Far left judges on Federal Courts?

Do you really believe they are equal?

 

Wrong again. I said already twice if Paul won the GOP nomination I would vote for him because I want Obama defeated above all else. That is where we differ.

 

Weld flipped from being a chairman for Romney's campaign to backing Obama over McCain in 2008.




Conclusive evidence that Romney's policies are CFR policies and that he is supported by the CFR

Written by John Green
Date: 08-11-2009
Subject: Politics: Republican Campaigns

William Weld is the former Governor of Massachusetts and also a high ranking member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/8102/
As a CFR member, William Weld helped create policies leading to the integration of the United States, Canada, and Mexico.

William Weld was the New York state co-chairman for Mitt Romney's campaign for president. Weld was active in campaigning for Governor Romney and both Governors were known to travel together during the New Hampshire primaries.

William Weld resigned the governorship of Massachusetts after being appointed United States Ambassador to Mexico by President Bill Clinton. He was never confirmed by the United States Senate, however, and hence never served as Ambassador. This was due mainly to opposition from Senate Foreign Relations committee chairman Jesse Helms, who refused to hold talks on the nomination, effectively blocking it. Though both were Republicans and though that party held the majority in the chamber, Helms objected to Weld's moderate stance on several social issues.

When George W. Bush was running against John Kerry, it was William Weld that helped Bush prepare for the debates.
William Weld co-chaired the Independent Task Force on North America for the Council on Foreign Relations. Here is the May 2005 report titled "Building a North American Community."
http://www.cfr.org/publication/8102/
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/055364-2009-08-11-romney-exposed-as-new-world-order-puppet.htm

 

I don't know what Romney would do, and neither do you, he changes his mind every couple of months. The things he did do in his state, would lead anyone to believe he just a white Obama, and that's the only real difference.

 

Wow, very black and white. So is this some sort of " if you are not with us, your against us" speech. What about me? I'm a left wing Socialist who believes both Paul and Obama are Facist corportist. Where does that put me? Because I don't support Ron Paul that automatically makes me an Obama lover? That's crazy talk.

 

I did. Better than your wasted Obama vote.

And you are willing to sell your country out to RINOs and Neo-Cons to do it.

Why do you hate America so much?

This is from the thread where all you Cons were having one of your Obama hate circle-jerks about a non-issue (specifically his vacations). You have seem to have on blinders when it comes to Obama. There's a lot to not like Obama about, the comparatively small amount of time he spends on vacation isn't one of them.

Why should I defend a president's record of spendning 7 months on vacation?

Nevermind, that may be too much for a partisan hack like yourself to understand.

The cut back on spending and increased savings are helping America. If we could get America off the drug that is cheap credit and back to conserving and saving entirely we wouldn't have booms and busts.

Basic Hayek and Bastiat.

Was my statement somehow incorrect?

Nothing more than a demonstration of Rightwing hypocrisy. You guys will happily knock Obama for his vacations and golf, but say NOTHING about the months that Bush spent on vacation.

Yep, I love Obama so much that I called for his impeachment.

http://www.politicalforum.com/4544891-post14.html

Really, all you have shown is that your irrational hatred for Obama is so strong that you'll ignore a President who spend months on vacation to call out Obama for a couple hours of golf.

You hate your country because instead of standing by small and Constitutional government principles, you will happily sell us out to satisfy your irrational insane hatred.

Really, your no different than the Libs who voted for Obama because they hated Bush.

Gingrich and Romney will destroy our country just as well as Obama.

Why should we abandon our principles for partisan hacks to be happy?

Just because you have no principles beyond hating Obama does not mean that the rest of us are willing to sell the country out like you are.

 

How could Ron Paul be a fascist corporatist? I'm not even a supporter of his and this sounds ridiculous.

 

If beating Obama is all you are worried about, then not voting for Paul in the primary is counter intuitive.

As I said above, I will not be guilted, or persuaded by your fear of Obama to vote for anyone other then a small government capitalist, constitutionalist, america first candidate.

 

Indeed.

You are voting based on irrational hatred and the rest of us are voting based on Constitutional principles.

 

Irrational hatred? If were really all about Constitutional principles, you would hate what Obama has done, too.

 

What he's done is no different than every President for the last 30 years. Every president in my life has been a big government, pro-war, corporatist statist and Obama is no different.

I wouldn't say I hate him, but I am definitely disappointed in him and I'd put him near the bottom of the best president list.

And yes, irrational hatred. When you make threads hating on a President for playing golf, going to Petsmart, and his baseball pitch, that's irrational hatred.

 

Gee, he seems to support everything that corporations want: free markets, free trade, Austrian school economics, and extremely low taxes. Sounds just as much a Fascist Corporist as any other GOP challenger and/or Obama.

 

Then you vote for Obama if you go against the one party that has a chance to defeat him. This isn't about guilt. Its about reality.

 

You're not worth any more of my time or effort Tex. I don't debate with people who have blinders on.

This is a debate site, not a partisan hack rant site. Your irrational hatred isn't worth the effort.

Go ahead and vote for whoever you want. Help Romney or Gingrich win. I'll be here in two years to quote this thread to you when they turn out to be Bush Redux and do nothing to actually fix America.

 

No, I vote for Paul not for party. No matter how you try to spin it, im voting for Paul. If you party first country second guys want to beat Obama, you better find a candidate that can do it with out my vote if you don't like the guy im voting for. Its your problem not mine. I will sleep well election night knowing I didnt sell out my morals for so my "team" could get a "win".

 

Anyone who doesn't realize that Obama is no different than the stooges in the GOP, is either in deep denial, or plain oblivious.

You're either one or the other.

 

Let's call a spade a spade.

Anyone who votes for someone other than Ron Paul is an Obama supporter, because there is zero difference between Obama and the rest of the Republican candidates.

True conservatives see Obama as the most damaging president to this country in modern history, and realize that any non-Paul replacement is going to be even worse than Obama was. Knowing this anyone who doesn't vote for Ron Paul is an Obama supporter.

No more pretending. All of the GOP candidates would govern from the far left as Obama has done. And most importantly they would put in Collectivist neo-con judges that will continue to abuse the Constitution just as much as their liberal counterparts. To cheer for any of these GOP candidates is to cheer for more liberal judges who base their rulings off emotion not the law and spit upon almost everything conservatives believe in.

Even if you don't like Ron Paul, you have to admit that he will refuse to answer to the GOP and will side with the Constitution, which neither of the two parties do. If you refuse to vote for Ron Paul, you are against the Constitution, support treason, the police state, and socialism, and you will be from now on called as such: a Socialist.

 

Sure, that's exactly why big business interests have spent the past hundred years supporting central banking, managed trade through state-globalism, state-enforced monopoly, and regulations that empower them by suppressing their smaller competitors.

The simple fact is that "free markets, free trade, Austrian school economics, and extremely low taxes" are exactly the opposite of Obama's economic policies. If Obama's a corporatist, Ron Paul can't also be a corporatist, because they have antithetical economic policies. Big corporations couldn't possibly favor them both, only one or the other.

 

Congratulations! You just won the stupidest post of the week award.

 

The thing is that Ron Paul has the best chance of defeating Obama of any of them. I'd say only Romney and Paul have a hope of winning the nomination at this point and going on to face Obama in the general.

Both Romney and Paul do about equally well in the polls against him. But Paul's foreign policy and civil liberties positions would devastate Obama's base, while at the same time, Paul would get almost all the GOP/conservative anyone-but-Obama vote, all except for a handful neoconservatives so hawkish they'd jump to Obama over Paul. Paul is the only candidate that could attack Obama from both his right and his left, uniting both sincere antiwar, pro-civil-liberties progressives and small-government, pro-life, pro-gun conservatives to his cause.

Romney is just another center-left Dole/McCain-type and will likely meet the same fate as them.