Posted on 09/20/2007 6:40:58 PM PDT by Petronski
Over the last two days The Oregon Poll was seen by almost 400 "unique visitors," most of them in support of Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul. The majority of these people came from these two links on the web.
ronpaulforums.com
stormfront.org
You’re calling Dick Cheney “Machiavellian”?
Is that you, Keith Olbermann?
I think you’re on the wrong forum, buddy.*****
Well, the neocons have openly supported Machiavellian ideas, so if he supports them, he must be Machiavellian.
****The source was the office of Congressman Ron Paul.
He blamed it on a staffer. Real classy.
So basically Ron Paul vets his closest staffers about as well as the Clintons vet their campaign donors?
Is that excuse supposed to fly?
Where does the buck stop, Ronny-boy?
And he wants to be President of the United States of America!
What a joke.****
Oh, whoever your horse is has never had a mistake in his/her life?
***It is hard for me to imagine that a forum that advocates free speech would bar almost any type of discussion.
As JimRob has stated clearly several times, FR is not a free-speech soapbox for leftists, racists, and nutjobs to spout off*****
On TH, leftists and nutjobs were defeated by reasoned arguments or by ignoring them. A few racists were barred.
****That is because Ron Paul and his supporters don’t merit anything above derision.****
If Ron Paul supporters are so bad, you could show it in reasoned arguments. Name calling and stupid pictures do not constitute debate.
****We cannot allow ourselves to be hijacked by a bunch of mental patients. FR stands out in the world as a legitimate voice for the conservative movement.
We must be clear every step of the way that people like Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan do not represent our views, and we do not endorse or condone them.****
I would agree with you if it was still the FR of the middle to late 90’s. Now I am not so sure. One of the reasons I left FR a few years back was its barring of dissenting opinion. Surely if dissenting opinion is so bad it can be shown so by intellectual arguments, not by barring it.
Pat B. is still one of my main men. It was not advocating anything in the middle east that he was not advocating for the rest of the world. I do not believe that he is an anti-semite. He was advocating for the middle east the same thing he was advocating for the rest of the world. He had a Jewish co-host that came out in support of him.
****Most of these Paul Qaeda types are just here trying to make us look bad so people like Bill O’Reilly has a boogeyman on the right to demagogue so he looks “Fair and Balanced”.****
I think the site provides more ammunition for Bill O’Reilly by barring speech than if would if it allowed open speech. I read somewhere earlier today that Giuliani threads are forbidden on this site. Pretty silly. Giuliani probably has less than ten supporters on this site. A Giuliani thread would probably not make it past the first page. In contrast almost any post about Ron Paul generates several hundred responses.
You are welcome, now keep posting those racist links, maybe you can trick a few more freepers to go to your linked site to boost the numbers of freepers to visit the racist site so someone down the road can come out with a note saying 20% of stormfront visitors come from Freerepublic.
Tactics that would make DU proud, amirite?
Neither does saying "Ron says he'll defend the Constitution and He will and if you are against him you're not really for the Constitution" constitute a debate. And that pretty much sums up >50% of the Paulites content on the thread.
LOL, win!
unlike you guys who'll vote 3rd party if Paul winsLOL!
lulz
Lol, how about room for more actual important stuff like Kim Jong Il having fits of dementia or the Canadian dollar reaching parity with the greenback?
You sound proud of that. If you are, shame on you.
Putting your own vindictiveness over the U.S.'s best interests...is that a Ron Paul supporter's agenda?
No thanks.
These attacks are getting so weak. Now I'm suppose to not vote for Ron Paul because some loser skinheads like him? As if I'm really going to change my vote and who I support based on what those idiots think.
Is this really the best straw the rabid Ron Paul haters can grasp? Seriously?
Ron Paul got an autograph and we’re supposed to think that Reagan was a big fan?
I think it was the other way around.
I can only say that I am surprised to see you,a very bright man,who I've always enjoyed but seldom agreed with,making the kind of comments you're making on this thread. What's happening?
Quit trying to drag Reagan down.
What's with the massive stormfront obsession among you Paul-haters? Secret fans of them or something? How else would you know it's "asseenonstormfront"?
Exactly. If Reagan was such a fan, where was Pual’s cabinet appointment or other such reward?
Somehow I doubt Reagan asked Ron Paul for an autograph.
“Thanks for helping me out here in Texas, have a Photo Op wit me....”
Truth... There are a total of 8 (EIGHT) votes for Ron Paul...
What are you trying to prove with this post? It is just plain dishonest (Which, by the way, is the real reason the “Republican” base is self destructing... You can only blatently and purposefully lie so many times before people turn off.)
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.