Skip to comments.
Ron Paul Nearly Doubles Donations Since Butting Heads with Rudy Giuliani
www.transworldnews.com ^
| 5/31/07
| Finditt
Posted on 06/01/2007 11:15:17 AM PDT by tmp02
Ron Paul Nearly Doubles Donations Since Butting Heads with Rudy Giuliani
Monroe, Ga. 5/31/2007 3:09 PM GMT (FINDITT)
The general feeling after the Republican Presidential debate held in South Carolina on May 15 was that Rudy Giuliani got the better of Texas Republican Ron Paul but according to Paul backers the congressman has seen his donations nearly double since challenging Giuliani on the U.S. involvement in Iraq.
During the debate Paul was asked whether a Republican could stay true to their party and support a measure to bring American troops home at the same time. In response Paul remarked I think the party has lost its way, because the conservative wing of the Republican Party always advocated a non-interventionist foreign policy. Senator Robert Taft didnt even want to be in NATO. George Bush won the election in the year 2000 campaigning on a humble foreign policy - no nation-building, no policing of the world.
TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: alexjones; americanpatriot; constitutionalist; kook; losertarian; moonbat; notafraud; paulnuts; rino; ronisright; ronpaul; trueconservative
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-131 next last
To: Oberon
I find it shameful that anyone would dare call themselves a Republican and at the same time support America’s defeat and humiliation.
101
posted on
06/01/2007 6:12:16 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: Sleeping Beauty
Why are they supporting him in secret? Let’s hear their names.
102
posted on
06/01/2007 6:28:27 PM PDT
by
mimaw
To: billbears
>Guess its upsetting that Paul is the only one out of the lot that actually knows what the Constitution says and follows it to the letter.<
Very upsetting to a neocon.
103
posted on
06/01/2007 6:38:07 PM PDT
by
B4Ranch
(Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.)
To: wagglebee
I find it shameful that anyone would dare call themselves a Republican and at the same time support Americas defeat and humiliation. Yeah, that funny belief that Congress is the branch of government empowered to declare war...what was he thinking?!?
104
posted on
06/01/2007 6:38:24 PM PDT
by
Oberon
(What does it take to make government shrink?)
To: tmp02; Allegra
That "guy" is SO 80's!
And kind of fruity.
To: Oberon
Are you saying that Congress DIDN’T authorize the use of force in Iraq?
106
posted on
06/01/2007 6:40:33 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: tmp02
Ron Paul Nearly Doubles Donations Since Butting Heads with Rudy Giuliani
107
posted on
06/01/2007 6:49:20 PM PDT
by
unspun
(What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
To: Old Retired Army Guy
When are you Paul fans going to give it up?Never.
If it isn't him this time, you'd better pray it will be somebody like him soon.
To: Sleeping Beauty
I know of some very wealthy and influential people (including former congress critters) who are backing Paul. They are old-school conservatives hardcore.Same here.
To: The_Eaglet; Irontank; Calvinist_Dark_Lord
I would also like to see a link to Malkins retraction, even if it is weak. It's here, but it ain't much of a retraction. After acknowledging that she was dead wrong, she proceeds to try to smear Paul with innuendo. Yeah, I know it's hard to believe that Michelle Malkin would do such a thing, but it's true! She did! And by "do such a thing" I mean admit she was wrong.
110
posted on
06/01/2007 8:21:07 PM PDT
by
JTN
("I came here to kick ass and chew bubble gum. And I'm all out of bubble gum.")
To: Shazolene
I say let him be honest - run as a Libertarian - he is NOT a Republican!Works for me.
That's what some said about Ronald Reagan.
To: LeoWindhorse
ever wonder why so many Republicans jumped ship in the last election and thus allowed the current crop of idiots to control Congress ? A glimpse at the Paul camp might hold some clues...Prior to that, there was the Goldwater camp.
History repeats itself.
To: oldfart
I read through the first 50 posts and noticed the usual suspects flaming Dr. Paul. I have to wonder: If he has no chance and hes really a nut-case, then why do they keep clicking on these threads? Is it a sort of cyber-whistle as they pass the cyber-graveyard? Perhaps they know something we all know, only theyre afraid to admit; maybe, just maybe, Dr. Paul is right, theyre wrong and he stands a good chance of being the next President of the United States. If theyre right and he does stand no chance of winning why do they spend so much time and energy arguing against him? Inquiring minds want to know I notice the same thing. I don't think Paul would get the nomination. He's way too "early American." But it is amazing to watch how terrified people are of Ron Paul -- and the absurd lengths they go to to smear him. We usually reserve that for our opponents.
(I'm a Romney supporter, so I have no skin in this game.)
To: JTN
Thanks for the info. It was not much of a retraction, but it was thorough coverage among the negative spin.
To: oldfart; tmp02; The_Eaglet; George W. Bush; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Austin Willard Wright
I read through the first 50 posts and noticed the usual suspects flaming Dr. Paul. I have to wonder: If he has no chance and hes really a nut-case, then why do they keep clicking on these threads? Is it a sort of cyber-whistle as they pass the cyber-graveyard? Perhaps they know something we all know, only theyre afraid to admit; maybe, just maybe, Dr. Paul is right, theyre wrong and he stands a good chance of being the next President of the United States. If theyre right and he does stand no chance of winning why do they spend so much time and energy arguing against him? Inquiring minds want to know.It's actually our fault really. You see, we're easily amused, and sending the RINObots on a Pavlovian tail chasing frenzy gives us great amusement.
Cheaper than booze or drugs, and far less damaging to our health.
115
posted on
06/01/2007 11:26:57 PM PDT
by
Calvinist_Dark_Lord
((I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper))
To: The_Eaglet
Malkin was flinging more garbage. It certainly was not a retraction of any inuendo that she tossed out on FAUX NEWS.
Her interests in pathetic attempts to destroy Dr. Paul’s credibility and paint him as an anti-Semite and/or 9/11 truther are self-evident.
116
posted on
06/01/2007 11:34:54 PM PDT
by
Calvinist_Dark_Lord
((I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper))
To: mnehrling
“So, Paul went from $10 to $20 in the bank?”
The monthly charge is going to eat that up pretty fast.
To: Huck
“Ron Paul is the Dennis Kucinich of the right.”
Is his wife as hot as Dennis’s?
To: wagglebee
“RINO Liberaltarian Traitor Paul has LESS THAN $1 million on hand, in modern campaigns thats essentially a zero balance.”
If he can’t run a campaign, why should I believe he can run the Executive Branch?
To: Old Retired Army Guy; humblegunner
When are you Paul fans going to give it up? When the Mother Ship comes to get them. ;-)
120
posted on
06/02/2007 12:56:45 AM PDT
by
Allegra
(Socks.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-131 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson