Ron Paul on New Hampshire TV

F

fossten

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
12,460
Reaction score
6
Location
Louisville
Kind of a fluff piece, very informal round table breakfast and not filled with very hard hitting questions, but nevertheless it does give a very different picture of the man that is painted by many ignorant conservatives as a "crazy loon." There's no way you come away from this clip thinking the man is a nut. Clearly the man knows how to deal with people - notice that he only reserves his more strident tones for opponents.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mc07JtpzS4&eurl=http://www.dailypaul.com/
 
If you spent as much time examining Hillary's or Oprahbama's electability instead of always coming up with something snide to say about Ron Paul, you might actually learn something.
 
fossten said:
If you spent as much time examining Hillary's or Oprahbama's electability instead of always coming up with something snide to say about Ron Paul, you might actually learn something.
Click to expand...

Hillary is electable, Obama is not.

If you would spend your time working to get a viable Republican candidate elected, you'd be much happier. Otherwise, with Ron Paul, you are in wonderland. He shouldn't even be running as a Republican. Why doesn't he run as a libertarian or constitution candidate?

All you Paulies would blindly support him in a general election and toss the election to the democrats. But hey, you'd feel so much better inside having known you handed an election to your fiscal and political enemy.
 
MonsterMark said:
Hillary is electable, Obama is not.

If you would spend your time working to get a viable Republican candidate elected, you'd be much happier. Otherwise, with Ron Paul, you are in wonderland. [whiny voice] He shouldn't even be running as a Republican. [whiny voice] Why doesn't he run as a libertarian or constitution candidate?

All you Paulies would blindly support him in a general election and toss the election to the democrats. But hey, you'd feel so much better inside having known you handed an election to your fiscal and political enemy.
Click to expand...
Oh, so it's "All you Paulies" now? Bryan, it's very surprising to hear you resort to pejoratives toward a fellow conservative. I assume by "you Paulies" you mean, weed smoking, war-hating, truther types, right? What else could you have possibly meant by that snide remark? You ought to know better. You've seen me post on here for years and you know exactly where I stand. The fact that Paul has gotten my attention would, to an intelligent, thoughtful person, raise the question "Why is he so attracted to that candidate? What is it about this candidate that has attracted this lifelong conservative?" But instead, with you I get called names and insulted.

Yours is the typical knee-jerk response that stems from a deep-rooted fear of what might happen if we elect a statist like Hillary, so what we really need to do is elect ANOTHER statist like Rudy, just because he wears an 'R' after his last name??? Can you explain the reasoning behind that sort of thinking? No, you can't. Neither can you predict the results of an election. This from the guy who predicted that Bush's numbers would rise to over 50%. Hey, with those kinds of skills, you should go play the horses or the stock market.:rolleyes:

I don't give a crap who you vote for, ok? But it is telling that you throw insults in my direction every single time I bring Ron Paul's name up. Bryan, you've ceased being a thoughtful, intelligent conservative and are now a demagogue.

And by the way, your question why doesn't Paul run as a libertarian or constitution candidate is one of the most ignorant-on-the-surface questions you could ask. He's answered this question numerous times, and if you'd done eighteen seconds worth of research you'd already know the answer. Did you by any chance ever bother looking up what he's been doing for the last 20 years? D U H.

While you're at it, why don't you spout off some conspiracy-related reason that explains why Ron Paul has outraised the other GOP candidates this quarter? I'm sure you've got some insulting spin for that as well.
 
From National Review Online:


Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Last Night, I Helped Huck [David Freddoso]

Last night, I went to my favorite watering hole. It's part of my job. That's what I tell myself, anyway.

At various times, I was chatting with Capitol Hill's second-most disgruntled Democratic staffer, the ethnic oil lobbyist, the Catholic priest (he was just passing by), the beautiful flak, the ugly flak, the charming but troubled daughter of a congressman, and a few of the conservative weekday regulars. We talked earmarks, AMT, the energy bill, Crisis Magazine, NR's presidential endorsement, Notre Dame football, the theology of the body, Fred Thompson, and last night's special elections in Ohio and Virginia, both of which concluded in the Republicans' favor.

Out front of the bar, while smoking a cigarette and drinking my pint of Capitol Amber, I was approached by a young lady with a clipboard, who was gathering signatures to put Mike Huckabee on the D.C. ballot. She said she is looking for 300 signatures from D.C. Republicans — a harder task than you might think. If you happen to be a Republican working in D.C., chances are you live in Virginia, because it's much safer and taxes are lower (unless you own a car — but no one realizes that).

(One particularly obnoxious passer-by harangued the signature-gatherer over Huck's 1992 position on quarantining AIDS patients. Totally unfair — I was 14 years old in 1992, but I remember the constant clamor, everything they did in school and on television to scare us to death about AIDS. I remember thinking the spread could never be stopped. If you actually cared about people at risk for the disease and not just political correctness, you had to consider a quarantine at some point.)

Anyway, I told the Huckabee lady that I could not sign her petition, because I did not think I was registered as a Republican (for years I have refused to do so, on principle). Then I thought about it a minute, and I found her again. I told her that if she could get me registered to vote in the Republican primary, I would sign her petition to put Huckabee on the ballot. She had all the forms, and so it was a deal.

Now (I think) I can vote in what will be my first presidential primary election ever. I will not be voting for Huckabee, but for Ron Paul — but I still like to think I've helped the cause of Freedom and Democracy by helping Huck get on the ballot.
 
There's lots of support in NH for this guy. I was driving through NH earlier today, and there were TONS of signs for Ron Paul.
 
fossten said:
picture of the man that is painted by many ignorant conservatives
Click to expand...

You fired the 1st salvo my friend. I just returned your shot.

Haven't read past the 1st line of your 'rant' on me which caused me to respond.

I'll get to it later. Should be fun.
 
fossten said:
While you're at it, why don't you spout off some conspiracy-related reason that
Click to expand...

It's Ron Paul's conspiracy related witchhunt theories of which makes him a quack in the 1st place.:eek:

fossten said:
explains why Ron Paul has outraised the other GOP candidates this quarter?
Click to expand...

A fool and his money are soon parted. - Thomas Tusser:shifty:

I don't give a sh!t about the rest of what he has to say.
He is NOT ELECTABLE. It ends there.
Do you hear me whining about Hunter. NO. I know damn well he won't make it so why waste my time.


Ron Paul...He is another Ross Perot as far as I am concerned and might be drawing the same crowd and money as far as I know.
 
Continue choosing to remain ignorant. And since you're moving up to "demagogue" status I guess I'd better be prepared for more insults.
 
fossten said:
Continue choosing to remain ignorant.
Click to expand...

Trust me, if I followed you on this one into Paulie-lala-land, I would be ignorant.

Many of the good conservative things he is pushing I'm all for. His foreign policy is a joke and you know it and the guy comes off mean and nasty, should I say, 50% of the time?

Sorry, the guy is not Presidential and has no chance in the general election. All he does is get a Dem elected.

Let me try it this way for you. A lot of people elect Presidents based on looks, and he doesn't have the Presidential look.

He'd be great doing a Geritol commercial though.:D

And Again and Again, it it not the message, it is the messenger.
 
I was going to start posting a whole bunch of Ron Paul conspiracy letters he has wrote, but why bother. You don't want a guy that can win, only a guy that makes you feel good even though you lose. Whatever floats the boat.
 
Election 2008: Paul vs. Clinton and Obama
Paul Still Lags Top Dems by Double Digits

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

The campaign of Congressman Ron Paul, the Texas libertarian and Republican, continues to generate prolific media coverage about its prolific fundraising, enthusiastic supporters, innovative Internet and other strategies, and its candidate's willingness to sharply differentiate himself from the GOP mainstream. But Paul remains uncompetitive in state primary polls, the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll, and general election match-ups.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows Senator Hillary Clinton leading Congressman Paul 49% to 37%. Senator Barack Obama leads Paul by almost twenty points, 50% to 31%. Both Democrats have gained a couple points since an October poll, when Clinton led by ten points, Obama by 17. [snip]
 
As I've been saying... and where is Ron Paul? Not even on the radar screen, yet. Right?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Who Seems the Most Presidential?

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Intangibles matter in campaigns and 26% of Americans believe that Hillary Clinton seems to be the most Presidential of the Democratic candidates. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 44% of Democrats hold this view of their party’s current frontrunner.

However, unaffiliated voters tend to think that Barack Obama seems more Presidential. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 25% attribute the most Presidential label to Obama while 18% say it applies to Clinton. Thirteen percent (13%) of unaffiliateds say that John Edwards seems the most Presidential.

On the Republican side of the aisle, there is no clear frontrunner in this category. Five candidates—Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, John McCain, and Fred Thompson--are said to seem the most Presidential by between 9% and 15% of adults nationwide.

Among Republican adults, 21% say that Mike Huckabee looks the most Presidential. Seventeen percent (17%) of the GOP faithful say that title belongs to Rudy Giuliani and 16% think it describes Mitt Romney. Ten percent (10%) see John McCain as most Presidential while 8% hold that view of Fred Thompson.

Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 16% say that Giuliani is the Republican candidate who seems most Presidential. John McCain and Mike Huckabee are seen that way by 11% of unaffiliateds.

Forty-three percent (43%) of Republicans can’t identify any Democratic candidate as seeming most Presidential. Forty-one percent (41%) of Democrats can’t identify any Republican candidate as seeming most Presidential.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the seven days ending December 9, 2007 show that Mike Huckabee earns 21% of the vote while Rudy Giuliani attracts 20%. Mitt Romney is at 13% while John McCain and Fred Thompson are each the preferred candidate for 11%. Ron Paul’s support for the week is at 6%, Tom Tancredo is at 2%, Duncan Hunter earns 1% and 16% are undecided (review history of weekly results).
 
The more I hear Ron Paul the more he sounds like a broken record, particularly regarding the war in Iraq.
 
No comments on the video? Nobody BOTHERED to watch it? Nice. Intellectual honesty is severely lacking in the conservative ranks on this forum. (GASP) Could it be a conspiracy??? :shifty:
 
I'm glad you feel good about the puff piece.

I'm not really worried about Ron Paul sitting around a table with people he doesn't know 'trying' to act extremely nice.

I'm worried about Ron Paul in the thick of being President, maybe with a crisis on his hands and little sleep.

Watching MY President of the United States 'WIG-OUT' is not something I would look forward too. This is the simple point you seem to be missing again and again.

Do you really think Hillary would be calm, cool and collected if she were in the White House? Hell no. She would be a raving b!tch and everyone knows it. Same goes for Ron Paul. He'd be a snarly old man with a huge chip on his shoulder. Sorry you can get past the message to see the messenger.

You are in a extreme minority with support for this guy as C.I.C. Like I said, there are better spots within Congress for him to be more 'useful'.
 
Be glad to see any and all evidence you can crap out of your arse that shows Ron Paul wigging out. (cue Jeopardy music)
 
MonsterMark said:
I'm glad you feel good about the puff piece.

I'm not really worried about Ron Paul sitting around a table with people he doesn't know 'trying' to act extremely nice.

I'm worried about Ron Paul in the thick of being President, maybe with a crisis on his hands and little sleep.

Watching MY President of the United States 'WIG-OUT' is not something I would look forward too. This is the simple point you seem to be missing again and again.

Do you really think Hillary would be calm, cool and collected if she were in the White House? Hell no. She would be a raving b!tch and everyone knows it. Same goes for Ron Paul. He'd be a snarly old man with a huge chip on his shoulder. Sorry you can get past the message to see the messenger.

You are in a extreme minority with support for this guy as C.I.C. Like I said, there are better spots within Congress for him to be more 'useful'.
Click to expand...
All kidding aside, though Ron Paul may not be my first choice I would vote for him over Hillary or any democrat. I think Paul is someone that can be reasoned with and is overall a reasonable person. I also tend to believe he would be inclined to listen to the wishes of the American people. I have no confidence that Hillary would listen to anyone because she has a socialists big government and higher taxes agenda which, if elected, would fight relentlessly to try to implement. As far as my first choice is concerned--it's a republican.
 
I agree with your sentiments.

I also would vote for Ron Paul over any Democrat but I think Ron Paul will not be as pliable as you seem to suggest. He might even lead himself to impeachment for some stuff he might pull (just raising the hair on Fossten's back).
 
Bryan you continue to mischaracterize me. It's unprofessional and ignorant. I am not a "Paulie" or a "Paulbot" or a "Paulnut." I've simply looked at his positions in the areas that are important to me and found him to be the best in those areas. Period. I'm not emotional about Ron Paul despite your attempts to satirize or smear me.
 
Easy David.

I'm not trying to do anything to you or call you any names.

It would be great if you would have at least on one occasion acknowledged what I have said on the subject.

I LIKE MANY OF RON PAUL'S IDEAS, or call them ideals.
But, he would be a disaster waiting to happen in many areas, foreign policy for one.

I DON'T LIKE RON PAUL PERSONALLY. I have met many people like him in my life and I think I have a good feel for his character traits. He is too belligerent for my taste. Let's leave it at that.

If I thought he had a chance of winning, I might (might) take a closer look. Until then, I'll leave you and the 'Paulie' supporters to your own devices. Peace.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 448 (members: 1, guests: 447)
Back
Top