Posted on 11/29/2007 9:26:18 AM PST by nsmart
“Ever looked at Dr. Paul’s voting record? He has a near 100% conservative rating.”
ROFL...
You just made it obvious that YOU havn’t looked at his rating.
Out of all of the Republicans in the Texas congressional delegation, paul is dead LAST.
In fact there are Republicans from liberal states who have a more conservative record than paul has.
And for comparison, paul is tied with McCain.
“Let me tell you something CAV, my boy is in 2/506th PIR, 4th Brigade, 101st Airborne. Lots of people in his particular Company (withheld) are supporting Paul.”
“so you can believe all the lies you want.”
Uh huh, ask your son how that Interceptor body armor is working out for him and the “lot’s of people” in his company that support paul.
You know that same body armor that ron paul voted against.
ron paul has also voted against funding for the MRAP’s.
“So i guess that you’re not as plugged in as you seem to think.”
Same can be said about you, and frankly I highly doubt that there is anything close to your claim of “lots of people”.
A GS-5 cubicle rat civilian in the Pentagon could give paul a donation and it would be considered as being from the military.
Or it could be just people not even remotely connected to the military making it up.
The Paul donation page has a space for "Occupation." The Paulies can put anything in there that they want. I don't believe anybody tries to verify that field.
It's ust another way for Paulies to spam and tell lies.
I highly doubt it, too. I work and associate with "lots of people" who are serving right now. There is not a Paultard among them. Most of them just think he's a leftie moonbat if they think about him at all.
Well, I see that you do not understand some basic principles of Constitution interpretation.
While the Constitution grants the power to declare war to Congress, it does not state how that power is to be executed leaving that completely up to Congress. Congress chose to execute that power through an Authorization of the Use of Force. When you say that Congress must issue a Declaration of War, you are putting words into the Constitution that simply are not there. This is as flagrant a violation of the Constitution as those who look for ‘eminating preumbras’.
The Constitution delegates the power to conduct a war to the Commander in Chief, the President. This power is just as total and complete as the power to declare war. Once Congress passed the “Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq” it is within the Constitutional powers of the President to decide when and where force is required. It is a violation of the Constitution to claim that the President does not have complete and total discretion over the employment of force.
“Further, the legislative history demonstrates that Members of Congress who voted for the Iraq resolution were not voting to declare war.”
The clear language of “Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq” takes precedent over any statements. The legislative history is only useful where the law is ambiguous. This is clearly not the case here.
"LIES"????
We could fill pages with opinions on whether a statement is a "half-truth" or "distortion"... but the word "lie" takes us past those disagreements.
Since a "lie" is a false statement purposely put forward as truth, whether a statement is a "lie", is not a matter of opinion. The statement is either true or false on its own.
You used the word, now prove it! Point to a statement of mine that is a "lie" and prove it to be one.
Another masterpiece from the CDL strawman factory.
Let Don Black donate money to whomever his cowardly little heart desires. It's his right as an American citizen, no matter how disloyal a citizen he is.
The point is that no one is obligated to accept his dirty money.
Ron Paul chooses to accept his money. Ron Paul allows himself to be financed by a neo-Nazi, despite the fact that Ron Paul has every right as an American citizen to reject Don Black's blood money.
I wouldn’t put it past them.
The point is that you have a non-issue...as usual.
Frankly, i wish my boy had Dragonskin, but the Congressional-Industrial-Military complex made it so that the troops can't use the stuff without risk of loosing their insurance benefits...yet another example of how the neocon bastards "support the troops".
As for the bill in question. What you really need to ask is "What else was in that bill that Paul found to be unconstitutional?" You DO know that a bill rarely gets through congress "naked", don't you?
Same can be said about you, and frankly I highly doubt that there is anything close to your claim of “lots of people”.
Unfortunately, you can say the same for ANY republican. If you want to "deconstruct" Paul's numbers, you have to deconstruct theirs too. i keep hearing this crap about how Only Retired, and DOD employees...as if any of them would support a Ron Paul, LOL...but the fact is that Paul's critics haven't provided any evidence to support their assertions.
Nice try, but the fact is CAV, you don't have a friggin clue.
I highly doubt it, too. blah,blah,blah...
That's called cognitive dissonance. You don't want to believe because if true, if Paul is elected, you're going to have to get a real job.
Taking money from neo-Nazis is an issue.
Assuming one has a conscience.
“Frankly, i wish my boy had Dragonskin”
Really? That’s despite the fact that it has failed testing?
Spill JP-8 or diesel fuel on it and you have a extremely high chance of first shot failure of the armor.
Also has first shot failures after being dropped, dragged, etc. And such a vest will get dropped, dragged, bumped, etc during the rigors of combat.
The vest also can not be exposed to heat. With solar loads regularly generating vehicle interior temperatures well in excess of 150 degrees, the DS vest disks delaminate themselves and fall to the bottom of the vest, effectively reducing the armor protection to nearly nothing. All panels shot after high temperature exposure failed in the first shot.
Not to mention heat exposure from fires too.
According to the X-Rays in the Army report, all hits were in protected areas with full disk coverage. Also easily seen in the X-Rays is the complete failure of the vests adhesive to retain the disks in place during extreme hot and cold weather testing.
The Dragonskin also weighs 20 pounds heavier than the Interceptor WITH the Enhanced Side Ballistic Inserts and the Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert.
“but the Congressional-Industrial-Military complex made it so that the troops can’t use the stuff without risk of loosing their insurance benefits.”
Yeah God forbid that the Pentagon doesn’t allow troops to buy substandard or inadequate body armor.
Nice use of that anti-military liberal code word though.
“yet another example of how the neocon bastards “support the troops”.”
Like I said God forbid that the Pentagon takes steps to ensure that the troops have body armor that STOPS BULLETS.
“As for the bill in question. What you really need to ask is “What else was in that bill that Paul found to be unconstitutional?” You DO know that a bill rarely gets through congress “naked”, don’t you?”
Oh how convienient that you use the “unconstitutional” excuse for someone who whined that the clinton defense cuts didn’t go deep enough.
But IF he “supports” the troops as he claims he would have voted for the bill....OR better yet, he should have sponsored a bill that specifically funded the body armor.
But like I said he doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the troops.
“Unfortunately, you can say the same for ANY republican. If you want to “deconstruct” Paul’s numbers, you have to deconstruct theirs too.”
There’s no need to deconstruct others because THEY don’t go and lie about their donations. And IF they get donations from questionable individuals they return the donation UNLIKE your heerow and don black’s donation to him.
“i keep hearing this crap about how Only Retired, and DOD employees...as if any of them would support a Ron Paul, LOL”
Oh so military retirees and veterans who work for DOD do not support him?
So are you saying that YOU are lying when YOU make claims of his “vast” military support?
“but the fact is that Paul’s critics haven’t provided any evidence to support their assertions.”
No, the FACT is that evidence has been presented, you and your ilk just chose to ignore it
“Nice try, but the fact is CAV, you don’t have a friggin clue.”
So says the fool who has swallowed the BS that paul has spoonfed you.
Congratulations, you let a nobody manipulate you for free publicity, proving that you don't have the intelligence of the Ron Paul Campaign.
Of course, it doesn't really matter to you and your ilk, you can and (as has been documented on this board), have lied concering Paul's associations, and consistently propogate those lies to the ignorant, even after you got caught doing so.
Incidentally, my conscience is fine, it's your lack of one that concerns me.
Your snotty, misogynistic, jealous assumptions are wrong and so typical of you DU types.
You don't want to believe because if true, if Paul is elected, you're going to have to get a real job.
That's called delusional. Paul isn't going to be elected. He's a nutcase, like most of his followers are.
And I have a real job, you Code Pink agent provocateur. I probably work harder in one day than you do in a month.
You MoveOn people are so resentful of those of us who are productive members of society. How sad you are.
Now, get back to work and make my Grande Mocha without any more of your lip.
The guy runs Stormfront - the largest neo-Nazi site on the web and the largest neo-Nazi media presence in the world.
If anyone in your campaign knows anything about the web - and Paulistinians pride themselves on knowing it better than anyone else on the political scene - then they know who Don Black and Stormfront are and what they stand for.
Nice try.
Blah, blah, blah, more bluster, no substance...as usual. FYI, i have never been, am not now, and never will be a member of DU, have never posted there, and do not even visit the site...i even had to ask somebody what the letters 'DU' stood for on this forum once, my posting to boards is pretty limited.
Nice try though. Your apology will be accepted.
That's called delusional. Paul isn't going to be elected. He's a nutcase, like most of his followers are.
That's called a conditional statement...IF...THEN...Incidentally, you now owe an apology to AN ENTIRE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT IN TEXAS, but don't let it stop you, you do provide some amusement value.
And I have a real job,...for the moment...... you Code Pink agent provocateur. I probably work harder in one day than you do in a month.
...She says to the proud parent of a combat soldier who deploys next month before his 20th birthday...Fortunately not to the theater that you are involved with...You don't handle honest dissent very well Dearie, maybe you ought to try posting on some faciast website, they're more in line with your tactics, it's certainly not fitting for this one.
BTW, i work two engineering/technical jobs in the Medical device field, tutor part time, and do my own contracting in the Electrical industry, ...sleep? What's that?...am not, and never will be wealthy.
You MoveOn people are so resentful of those of us who are productive members of society. How sad you are.
More slander, no factual statement Here's the facts:
Now, get back to work and make my Grande Mocha without any more of your lip.
...which tells us more about you and your ilk than anything else that you've posted.
Who you've just given free publicity to, i never heard of the guy until you told me.
i do find it mildly disturbing that you seem to have intimate knowledge of these @$$#oles. First it was David Duke, and now this guy. Maybe a little 'false flag' operation going on here? Care to explain yourself?
If anyone in your campaign knows anything about the web - and Paulistinians pride themselves on knowing it better than anyone else on the political scene - then they know who Don Black and Stormfront are and what they stand for.
And maybe they don't patronise these people, and have no clue, and don't give a damn about what those @$$#oles think, one way or the other.
Of course, you wouldn't be satisfied if there were no such people donating to the Paul campaign...that's not your agenda. Your agenda is merely to discredit Ron Paul by setting up an artificial standard that no candidate can live up to, and applying said standard exclusively to Ron Paul.
Fortunately, most people can see through the nonsense, whether they support Paul or not.
I didn't read past the first two sentences of your latest post because it's clearly just the same old drivel from some insecure little jerk who has to try to feel tough by insulting anyone who doesn't agree with his Moonbat God.
Typical of you lefties to spew hatred at aomeone simply because she is more successful than you are. I don't want to hear any of your blue-collar hero crap...save it for your next Ron Paul Meetup party. You bore me.
I don't associate with crude boors and I'm not going to start now.
Lies only work if the person you are lying to does not know you are lying.
Your agenda is merely to discredit Ron Paul by setting up an artificial standard that no candidate can live up to
Most candidates seem to able to avoid taking money from neo-Nazis.
It really isn't a very challenging standard.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.