...and FreeRepublic.com. Another basher of FR at Fox News. Like BORe calling us a "hate site" recently.
Posted on 09/06/2007 10:52:38 AM PDT by freedomdefender
Scientific polls taken after the earlier debates, but, only polling people who actually watched the debates, showed Ron Paul won the earlier debates among the viewing audience.
I didn't say it's hopeless. I said it was a mistake.
No, according to the Fox News text poll.
I am also grateful that the terrorists are fighting each other in their homeland. Besides they are all terrorists now. Well at least since Bush II converted those who supported Bush I in the first Gulf War.
As Rumsfeld put it - we don't know if we are creating more terrorists and we are destroying. Now we can't tell the difference. Terrorists fighting terrorists, why get in the middle. Or are they both AQ.
He didn't say that. If he had, they would have been way over the top for me, too.
Chris Wallace - son of CBS liberal Mike Wallace - tried to smear Paul by saying whay you said, but it was a smear, not the truth. (But what can you expect from the son of a CBS liberal?)
Maybe because, instead of interviewing Ron Paul - or even debating him - Hannity chose to try to smear, slime and bash him, in a most juvenile fashion.
Better be careful asking such logical questions. Some people's heads might explode.
Really? I did try to vote but my cell service will not process the text. Now that poll was open to one and all explain that then.
As for the choces though being DEM? Rudy is running far left of Jimmy Cater and that makes him what? Mitt isn't far behind. McCain is running for Rudy's VP slot. Now there's your Liberal Dems. A Gun Grabbing one theme I wanna be your King former Mayor. A night manager from Kerry's House of Waffles Mitt. Or John McCain who had been a pack mule for every bad idea Bush has had in the pastr seven years to help the DEMs.
Three persons last night looked presidential and it sure wasn't the three that FAUX News made sure got the most questions and air time. It amazes me people hate the MSM but will trip over themselves to fall in line immediately when the MSM backs Liberals as being the chosen ones.
What a crock of B@llSh!t. Just because the Ru Paulians made text after text after text vote (how many times each is the question to ask), doesn’t mean this moron won the debate. He was clearly unhinged during at least one exchange last night, demonstrating clearly why this bozo shouldn’t even be in Congress, let alone on a stage with legitimate Presidential candidates. The only reasonable explanation for why some on FR are pulling for this guy is that they are wanting RP to split the GOP vote and thereby assuring Hitlery’s ascention to the throne. He’s not a serious candidate by any stretch of the imagination. But, he will hurt this country greatly by being on stage with those who are.
I found the prevailing attitude that we owe Iraq something disturbing myself. I would expect that kind of logic from DEMs but not the GOP. If we had done it right we owed Iraq nothing but smoldering ruins. That is war. But Iraq was the least of our M.E. worries and not the actual source of the 9/11 attacks. Yep it was the Sauds the very ones both Dems and Neo Cons kiss up to who bank rolled 9/11. We had more reasons to attack Yemen than Iraq yet an attack by Yemen went unanswered.
Ron Paul is right. Our Foreign Policy is insane and needs work. As for Israel I support her. I think Ron Paul realizes something others do not. Israel's existence is not dependent on man and any nation who stands against her will not prosper. Our foreign policy as of late has put us way too many times aiding and abetting her enemies. Israel if we step aside can handle herself quite well.
I liked I think it was Tancredo's comment maybe Hunter's about not ever allowing the hands of our troops to be tied in combat also. At least some are finally getting it.
>> “Your problem is that so many of us Dirty Hippies got here eight years ago ... And you show up here with your few months of signup time and some Dirty Hippie scoffs at you, perhaps even posts sarcastically in your general direction. It’s so unfair. Really.”
No need to condescend, professor ... I’ve been a member for almost a year LONGER than you have. Perhaps you assume too much. I recently acquired a new handle (Hemorrhage), but have been a member since September 1998 under a different handle (ThePatriot1776).
My credentials are plenty well established.
>> I think there’s something on satellite called FreeSpeechTV in the 9400 channels and it might have connection with these DemocracyNow people but they’re all nutjobs.
I listen all the time - she’s a kook, no doubt. The problem is, on foreign affairs and national securituy, your buddy Ron Paul sounds JUST like her (as do virtually all of his supporters). Leaving the Arabian peninsula (including Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Saudi, Kuwait, etc.) at the demand of a terrorist organization (as Paul advocated last night) is tantamount to surrender. Such a blundering decision will have long-lasting detrimental effects when every two-bit dictator and terrorist organization around the world concludes that we don’t have the stomach to withstand a drawn-out war against our enemies, even after we lose 3,000 people in an attack on our home soil.
Ron Paul and his supporters are no less dangerous than Hillary Clinton, Amy Goodman or the dirty hippies that support her. I’d rather a Democrat win than Republican Ron Paul, because if a President is going to send the country down the toilet, I’d rather he didn’t have an (R) beside his name.
>> I hope I didn’t ruin your little Reds-under-the-bed thing you had going. But you can still obsess over the evils of Dirty Hippies if you like.
I still maintain, your credentials aside, that much of the online support garnered by Paul is from Democrats and Communists. This is why he does so well in random online polls, but cannot break 2-3% in polls of likely Republican voters ... the vast majority of likely Republican voters think he’s a nutjob.
>> Seems like a harmless hobby if you don’t shoot them.
I don’t shoot them, yet ... but my aim is improving.
H
Debates this early are obscene. Campaigns this long are obscene.
When the real campaaign starts, Paul will be supporting the Democrat nominee.
Ron Paul’s lingering impression upon this voter was this:
1. America is to blame for the attacks on 9/11
2. To prevent more attacks, simply wave the white flag.
With candidates like this in the GOP, we are doomed as a country and asw a party. Of course, the GOP can legitimately claim to be diversified, which is not the case with the Democrats. They OTOH are afraid of a pro-lifer on the podium and cower with the thought that a candidate might also be a practicing Christian.
Don’t matter. Barbarians have no place on this civilized Earth. We place very high value on the lives sacrificed for the cause of freedom. Barbarians have no value on life or they wouldn’t randomly detonate car bombs in markets killing women and children.
Any religion that tolerates barbarian activity so to further it’s hold on people is not compatable with humanity as a whole.
Bush did not create terrorists. Jimmy Carter was the President who showed weakness and emboldened the islamic revoloution. Bill clinton empowered terrorist networks because he would not do what was necessary to knock them out before they got strong. Clinton was responsible for allowing terror networks to gain power and raise money to operate.
Yep. Blame Bush. At least he took it to them. The rest of them brought it to us.
Face it, as we pointed out on another thread GW Bush is a Dem Plant as are 3/4 of the RP supporters. This is the latest $0R0$ trick. Don’t bother with these Plants.
No Republican would be that passionate about Pat Paulson, period. You are arguing w/some well established Plants.
Pray for W and Our Troops
>> So why did we take out Iraq who was the enemy of Iran?
A simple enough answer ...
Because BOTH were our enemies, and you have to start somewhere. Having Iraq and Iran, both of which are hostile to the U.S., in a nuclear arms race would not have been good for the U.S or our allies in Israel or Europe - partiuclarly considering that they sit atop a vital oil supply.
Iraq was a less formidible enemy than Iran, had connections to terrorist organizations, and we had reason to believe were producing WMD’s (perhaps we were mistaken, and perhaps not) ... so they got the first wave. Our attack on Iraq immediately brought Libya into line - thus eliminating another enemy state in the process.
Iraq, once stabilized, will provide a sufficient staging ground for further intervention in the region - in Iran, Sudan, or Saudi.
The entire middle east is a mess, and is a threat to the safety and prosperity of the United States. However, as impressive as our military is, we cannot slay all dragons at once. Due to connections with Al Qaeda and broad suspicions of WMD’s, Iraq and Afghanistan drew the short straws.
H
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.