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

Voting for Paul will give us exactly the same thing his 35 years in Congress gave us..............NOTHING AT ALL.

35 years, his accomplishments? Getting reelected many times while lying that he was for term limits.

 

Paul has worked with many people to accomplish things. You can thank him for the Federal Reserve "audit" that took place.

What Congressman or Woman has a long list of solo accomplishments?

 

perhaps you should try opening your eyes.
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/ron-paul-plan-to-restore-america/

 

then you should vote for the statist offered you, shut up and be happy with the results. Seems to be working out for you so far. Why change now ?

 

He has a plan out to cut 1 trillion the first year and the actually be paying down the debt in three. How is that not doing anything?

Yes he was in a congress full of bought and paid for stooges of course he couldnt get much done. What is Congress approval rating again? And you think its a bad thing he didnt "compromise" and join in with the rest of the jackals?

 

Having just finished justifying one form of welfare, you have no grounds to decry any other. If you can justify one form, others can justify theirs.

 

Federal Reserve audits have been authorized by law for many decades. Paul wanted legislation that would CHANGE the audit procedure. As is usual, Paul's sponsored bill has not passed.

What Congressman or Woman has a long list of solo accomplishments?

NOT Paul. How many are running for president on an empty record.

Gingrich got bipartisan agreement to balance the budget and to cut welfare, and he was Speaker of the House. At least that's something to balance his baggage. Paul is just empty baggage,,,,,,,,,,,,,old empty baggage. We have never elected a person over 70 to go to the White House. Paul would have to survive past age 85 to serve 2 terms. WHO is his running mate becomes more important than Paul.

 

It did pass the house. The Senate toyed with it.

Those are not solo accomplishments for Newt. He required LOTS of help to make that happen. Try again.

 

Gingrich GOT the agreements. Gingrich got the job done. Did he have to negotiate? Sure. Paul has accomplished NOTHING in Congress. Did he have to negotiate? Sure. Has Paul formed a coalition to get ANY significant legislation passed into LAW? No, 35 years and the answer is NO.
Romney got elected Gov. Romney ran a successful business. Paul ran a failed business.

Head to head, obama could say that he has only failed for 3.5 years while Paul, has failed for 10 times that long.

If Paul wins the Republican nomination, I'll vote for him because he's not obama. That is Paul's ONLY positive. He's not obama.

I'd vote for Paul because he's not obama, but obama and the left wing media would SAVAGE Paul. And he has no comeback.

 

Gingrich got the agreement because he was speaker. A position he got by kissing ass in Congress.

Its easy to accomplish things when you sell out to get a position of power.

 

Idealism doesn't win elections.
Misguided Idealism doesn't win elections.
Failed, misguided Idealism doesn't win elections.
Failed, misguided Idealism by a tired old man doesn't win elections.

Our type of Government is not the type where all, or ANYTHING, is as it SHOULD be. Because we are all free to speak our minds and we would never agree on how everything SHOULD be. Our type Government is not an Idealistic govt. It is a govt of what CAN be achieved, not what should. It was never meant to be the perfect govt since we would always have different opinions of what IS perfect.
So politicians have to work within the system. They always have had to do that. Gingrich and Clinton did that. Today we have a Congress and a president that refuses to work within the system. Each, like spoiled children insist on their way or NO WAY. Paul is one of them. We need no more of that idiocy by both parties and the president.
obama is a dogmatic ideologue.
Paul is a dogmatic ideologue.

NEITHER is what we need. A wheeling, dealing, ass kissing, "get er done," politician is what we need. The nation is in gridlock when we need action.

NOTHING in Paul's past shows him to be a man of action. "He tried, but he couldn't do it," is NOT action.

I've fired people that tried their best but their best was a failure and it didn't put money in the company account. None I disliked, some I really liked, but trying without results is FAILURE!

 

His audit the fed bill would have went through if the Democrat co-sponsers didnt jump ship right before the vote.

 

So you would prefer a sell-out ass kisser as opposed to someone principled who you know is going to do what is right regardless?

Gotcha...I am going to write in Ron Pauls name, this anyone but Obama (*)(*)(*)(*) has got to stop.

 

voting for tools wins you nothing but an election.
Congratulations, you pass the political stooge test.

 

At this point, I would prefer Obama to Romney. I would rather have someone who is OPENLY a statist (like Obama) than a CLOSET statist (like Romney).

 

Don't you understand the stacked deck, nothing changes for a reason: By DESIGN

Quote From Tragedy and Hope http://www.robodoon.com/carol_quigley.htm


Ron Paul is the exception to this trick, that is why he is hated by the establishment.

If we vote for a left or right establishment pick, the trick continues....but then again we have another road block.
We don't vote for the president.

 

ARe you baked?

 

wHo, ArE, YoU, tAlKing tOO!

A reply to a poster normally helps. Forums can be confusing, you know.

Because right now, you are asking me.

 

Yes, I am asking you. Let me make it clearer. Robo: are you currently stoned, sloshed, baked, medicated, wasted, wacked-out, levitating, feelin' groovy, feeling no pain, blaasted, snockered, smashed, lit, flying, or otherwise under the influence of mind-altering chemicals?

 

LOL There isn't a state out there that could tax their citizens enough to go without Federal Money. This is the 21st century not the 18th. Welcome to the present.

One of the most profound moments in our rights as a citizen taken away and you FORGOT? Were you still in high school?

And you ducked the FACT that the decision was made by liberal judges. How about addressing that.

I just gave you the decision to rob us of our right to property if the state decided. A 5 TO 4 DECISION

Upholding the second Amendment A 5 TO 4 DECISION

Affirmative action A 5 TO 4 DECISION

You are a FOOL if you ignore the impact of liberal judges.

These kind of statements make me think you are a liberal.

Was it legislating from the bench when conservative judges fought to protect your right to holding onto your property? How about upholding the 2nd amendment?

Are you for real in these lunatic statements? You sound EXACTLY like a liberal.

I can't believe this has to be spelled out. They had one thing in common. They belonged to Al Qaeda. Where was Al Qaeda hiding? AFGHANISTAN. Who was protecting them? THE TALIBAN. What part of this is so hard to understand?

LOL Another classic LIBERAL statement. The question was were they found. The answer is YES. You were too busy reading the DNC talking points to notice.

Most isn't all. They were found. Are you sure you aren't a liberal with this defense?

Thats right liberal. Ignore the POSITIVE ID they had on the rest of the WMDs. Whatever pushes your liberal agenda.

The answer is he had WMDs. You were either too stupid or too busy reading DNC talking points to realize the truth.

Thats wasn't the issue and you know it. You said they were the same when clearly they are not when one is forced upon the people. Nice try.

Knowing the difference between billions and trillions is kind of important junior.

And he's dead wrong but it doesn't matter since he isn't going to be the nominee.

It really is pathetic watching you trying to claim Obama and the GOP are the same and your only evidence on immigration is a candidate who has no shot.

But I come to expect nothing less from you.

He also has said repeatedly he would NEVER do it at a federal level. And not once has he wavered on that.

Are you incapable of basic math? 1/5 spending isn't the same as 5 TIMES the amount. Seriously, how did you graduate not understanding basic numbers?

The stupidity of that statement has already been proven in key legislative decisions I highlighted. If you aren't smart enough to see the difference between liberal and conservative judges then you don't believe in anything.

Based on what? Your lack of understating of present conditions for the nation? Are you really so gullible you believe the founding fathers would not change any of their beliefs almost 300 years later?

Of course its a general question. Liberal and conservative judges judge differently. How can you consider yourself learned and not understand the difference looking at basic decisions I highlighted?

Get some education and research decisions like the second amendment, affirmative action, Obamacare, the right to property then get back to us. This ignorance on common knowledge is truly scary on your part.

 

Yes because unlike you I don't think its 1776 anymore and we can ignore the world we live in.

You really need to brush up on grammar. The big difference between welfare to a guy in Chicago and foreign aid to an ally.

 

Outstanding post. A record of failure is not a reason to get behind a candidate.

 

You mean like Mitt Romney's dismal record? The man has won ONE election. Had he run for re-election, he would have lost in a landslide. He will-certainly-lose his home state in a presidential election.

 

Everyone has their reasons for cheering one candidate or another, but personally, I'd sooner support Paul than most of the other candidates (including Obama) just for the sheer fact that most of both parties have supported things like the Patriot Act and the NDAA.

Bachmann voted for the NDAA and Patriot Act, and Rick Santorum voted for the Patriot Act, so I would never vote for either of them.

Obama reauthorized the Patriot Act and passed the NDAA, so I'm not voting for him either.

Paul is the only candidate that has voted against both, and Johnson (even before going independent) voiced opposition to both.

 

I prefer a politician that has the WISDOM and experience to get things accomplished over a dogmatic ideologue that has no clue how to get anything done, has never got anything done and would not accomplish anything as president.

I voted AGAINST Bill Clinton both times he was elected. If he were running against this mob, including b.o., I'd vote for Clinton this time. He is an accomplished politician that knows how to deal, negotiate, and compromise, to get things done.
You Paulists need a dose of REALITY. There are 100 Senators and 435 Representatives. That's 535 individual agendas that have to be worked with, negotiated with, compromised with, to get anything done. Paul has NEVER done that, has no idea how to do that, and has no desire to do that. But that IS how our government functions. Right now it is NOT functioning. Another demagogue in not the answer.

As a CEO, I could issue ORDERS to subordinates. The president cannot issue orders to Congress, they are not his subordinates. But rather than issue orders, things happened much faster and better if I could get everyone agreeing on the best way to proceed. Even better when they thought it was their idea. See, when I agreed with their idea, I was then a brilliant boss.
Paul has never 'gamed' the system. He has accomplished nothing with his rigidity.

And I have serious questions about his sincerity when he champions term limits for more than a DOZEN TERMS.

As I said before, our govt is NOT a govt of what SHOULD be done. It is a govt of getting done what CAN be done. You might write that down.