Ron Paul the flunkie

[Lobotomy Boy]

This guy lost me when he made the outrageous statement that nothing Bush has done has affected us personally. I talked to my cousin who just moved from Fallujah to Camp Taqaddum, about half-way between Fallujah and Ramadi. He was talking about his roommate, who was killed in December. My cousin's a tough kid and he'll be all right, but he's never going to be the same. That will affect everyone in our family, but not as much as my best friend's family. His cousin was killed January, and the family was devestated.

Anyone who can make such a bone-headed statement as that made by Stage 2 is far worse than a troll in my book. Being a troll would be a huge evolutionary step up for someone of this caliber.

 

[poor_richard]

...I don't tote party line. I vote my rights, and in this election my rights wil be best served by a R in the whitehouse....

You keep mentioning "your rights". I don't know what you may consider those to be, but those of us who disagree with you understand that it's about all of everyone's rights, not just the one's I (or you) personally hold sacred. It would be interesting to hear what "rights" you keep referring to since the GOP has eviscerated the BOR, and helped pass the first AWB, and since the candidates you claim to support if they get the nomination are so blatantly anti-2nd Amendment.

Problem is that if you don't stand up for everyone's rights (not just your own), you are destined to loose your own.

Vote for whoever you want. I once held the same beliefs as you now do, and finally realized how empty those beliefs were when I was faced with what they brought about. That is that President Bush has done more damage to the BOR in the past six years than President Clinton could only dream of doing. The GOP front-runners seem to indicate only more of the same. I can’t imagine what “rights” your talking about (espically since you earlier indicated that you didn’t have a problem with some of the constitutional violations that have happened in the past six years), but if you think the likes of RG or MR will preserve them, then I can’t say much about it. However, someone else has already said it, so I’ll just repeat what he said.

“...We ask not your counsels or your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."

Samuel Adams​

 

[STAGE 2]

If ,"going down with the ship does nothing," then the Americans who freely chose to stay at and defend the Alamo, well knowing their staying there was signing their death warrants, died for nothing. I believe the residents of the state of Texas would have something to say about that.

Yet another wonderful comparison that tugs at emotions but is completely inapplicable. As a former texas resident I'm quite familiar with the history of the alamo. The defenders there died because they believed that there was a very good chance that if they bought Houston more time, he would be able to defeat the mexican army. Lo and behold they were right. The difference here is that there is no chance for Paul. There is no Sam Houston waiting in the wings to save the day.

Reading this thread keeps making me think of the quote, "Better to be a live dog than a dead lion."

So when if the Democrats win are you going to start shooting ATF agents? Are you going to start converting your AR's for full auto? I don't think so. This internet fuffery is ridiculous. Cute little quips sound great but in reality they mean nothing.

This guy lost me when he made the outrageous statement that nothing Bush has done has affected us personally. I talked to my cousin who just moved from Fallujah to Camp Taqaddum, about half-way between Fallujah and Ramadi. He was talking about his roommate, who was killed in December. My cousin's a tough kid and he'll be all right, but he's never going to be the same. That will affect everyone in our family, but not as much as my best friend's family. His cousin was killed January, and the family was devestated.

Anyone who can make such a bone-headed statement as that made by Stage 2 is far worse than a troll in my book. Being a troll would be a huge evolutionary step up for someone of this caliber.

If you had bothered to take the time to read my post, my statement was that likely no one here has had their rights personally violated by Bush. Your cousin's friend did not have his rights violated. He died during wartime. Since we don't have a draft, it was his choice to sign up, ann he did so fully aware of the possibility that he might be killed.

Yet another story designed to tug at the heart strings but doesn't have anything to do with the issue at hand.

In the spirit of dispassionate observation, your initiation of this thread and subsequent posts appear consistent with the actions of a troll.

How dare I question the validity of the great Ron Paul. How dare I present a realistic assessment of voting 3rd party or writing in Paul during the general election. Because I don't tow the party line of THR I must be a troll. Yes, even though I've been a member far longer than most who have responded by a matter of years, why I must be a troll.

Call me names if it makes you feel better. It won't change the nature of this election. It wont change the fact that Paul can't win. It won't change anything except my opinion of some of you who can't discuss things like adults.

 

[Titan6]

flun·ky also flun·key (flngk)
n. pl. flun·kies also flun·keys
1. A person of slavish or unquestioning obedience; a lackey.
2. One who does menial or trivial work; a drudge.
3. A liveried manservant.

Flunky for who?

Or maybe you mean being a US Congressman is menial or trivial...

Or he works with horses?

Please clarify...

 

[skinnyguy]

Ok Stage 2, Here is the question. The answer is YES or NO. Not a demeaning diatribe, not an answer that says something like "it won't happen", or anything similar.

YES OR NO

If Ron Paul does get the republican nomination in the primary, and he is on November 2008's ballot as President of the United States, WILL YOU VOTE FOR HIM?

 

[Titan6]

And faced with the irrefutable argument that the Post Title is a lie there was peace on earth at last.

You never said anything about a congressman being menial so that is not it.

Because he quits the libertarians and is opposed to their party and several major platforms is not beholden or slavish to them...

And votes against the repubs more than most dems for their anti freedom platforms he is not slavish to them...

So go ahead make some nonsense up as you have been doing all along since the start.....

 

[STAGE 2]

If Ron Paul does get the republican nomination in the primary, and he is on November 2008's ballot as President of the United States, WILL YOU VOTE FOR HIM?

Absolutely. If Paul is the frontrunner then he has the republican war machine with all of its resources and funding behind him. That makes him viable.

The problem, as it has been all along, is that Paul doesn't have the resources to win the nomination. Its simply a numbers game.

So go ahead make some nonsense up as you have been doing all along since the start.....

LOL. You can't find anything that I've said here that's fabricated or even questionable. Facts are facts. A 3rd party will not take the whitehouse in 08. The fact that 3rd parties can't even make a sizeable kink in the house is evidence of their ineffectiveness. Maybe someday this will change, but today is not that day.

And yes, Paul is still a political flunkie. He's apparently got all the right ideas (at least according you some of you here) but nothing to get going. Dead in the water is the appropriate term. While you would be correct not to base everything off the single straw poll that started this thread (as well as various other national polls that put him virtually last, or don't even mention him at all), as time goes on, similar results will show up and everything that I've said will come to be. I don't see the future, but I do understand the past.

 

[publius]

Paul is still a political flunkie. He's apparently got all the right ideas (at least according you some of you here) but nothing to get going. Dead in the water is the appropriate term.

Dead in the water is accurate, at least at the moment, and will probably remain accurate, unfortunately.

"Flunkie"? OK, what's your definition? Because nothing in the one Titan posted fits Dr. Paul.

 

[Titan6]

The post title is a lie

Stage 2 said: 'You can't find anything that I've said here that's fabricated or even questionable.'

- Actually, Yes the post title is a lie you fabricated.....

Stage 2 said: 'Facts are facts. A 3rd party will not take the whitehouse in 08.'

- No this is opinion. Do you not know the difference between opinion and fact? Your posts all indicate you do not.....


Stage 2 said- 'The fact that 3rd parties can't even make a sizeable kink in the house is evidence of their ineffectiveness. Maybe someday this will change, but today is not that day.'

- More opinion. No facts.....

Stage 2 said- 'And yes, Paul is still a political flunkie. He's apparently got all the right ideas (at least according you some of you here) but nothing to get going. Dead in the water is the appropriate term.'

And you just made up some nonsense to try to cover your lie like I said you would.

Stage 2 said- 'While you would be correct not to base everything off the single straw poll that started this thread (as well as various other national polls that put him virtually last, or don't even mention him at all), as time goes on, similar results will show up and everything that I've said will come to be. I don't see the future, but I do understand the past.'

Yet in every post you render your opinion of the future as fact. And then repeat ad nauseum. Your entire argument is an opinion based on a lie. That is why you irritate people and they call you a troll. I do not think you are a troll anymore but you are not honest either.

Now tell me how I am being dishonest because I do not agree with your opinion.

 

[SolaScriptura139]

Well, then, here's the question (not that I pertain to this or not), IF Ron Paul does not win the primaries, can you explain the reason why it will be a good idea to vote 3rd party when historically 3rd parties never win? Don't flame me, I'm just trying to see what the logical reasons for voting 3rd party after the primaries are.


By the way, people here need to calm down on the personal attacks and calling people who disagree with you a troll. Address the issue and try to be civil.

 

[Correia]

Well, it started ugly, and just got uglier. Now it is ten pages of ugly. Nice...