Posted on 01/04/2008 2:14:49 AM PST by Cyclops08
Fact, Ron Paul came in 5th in Iowa. Might as well be last. His 10% reflects both a LOT of time and money, and a lot of out of states supporters bused in to vote.
10% is NOT something Paul can achieve again, the primary systems deliberately exclude out of state voters.
This is it. This is the pinnacle of Paul's reach. --> From here on out, its down hill. Good Riddance.
Amen and AMEN!!!
Ron Paul needs to get a life (and a last name).
But most of all he needs to get out of the Republican Party. Yeeeeesh!!!
Wait a minute. That ‘nutcase’ more than DOUBLED Rudy’s numbers!!!!.....lol
I think it’s time for both the Paul supporters and the Hunter supporters to finally leave Candyland and get a life.
If Ron Paul needs to get a last name then Duncan Hunter needs to get a First name.
Maybe they can trade... How about Ron Duncan and Paul Hunter?
Ron Paul LOST!
LOST at Sea
by Rep. Ron Paul, MD
Back in the 1970s the United Nations launched its plan for a global program of taxation without representation, called the “New International Economic Order.” The goal of this new economic order was not so new at all, however. It sought the involuntary transfer of wealth and technology from the developed world to the third world under the direction of the United Nations. A cornerstone of this dangerous attempt to loot the prosperous nations was the “Law of the Sea Treaty” (LOST).
Under the Law of the Sea Treaty, an “International Seabed Authority” would control the minerals and other resources of the oceans’ seabed. After taking its own cut, this UN body would transfer whatever is left to select third-world governments and non-governmental organizations.
The Law of the Sea Treaty also would give the UN power to tax American citizens and businesses, which has been a long-time dream of the anti-sovereignty globalists. LOST also would establish an international court system to enforce its provisions and rulings. Imagine not being able to do business internationally without the approval of the United Nations!
It all sounds like something out of a science-fiction novel, but it is real.
Fortunately, when the treaty came before President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, he ignored those warning of impending international chaos and refused to sign the treaty. It was the right thing to do. It appeared that the push toward global governance was – at least temporarily – halted.
But that was not the end of LOST. Determined proponents of the treaty worked to “fix” its most objectionable parts in hopes the United States would become a party. The UN and its supporters know that without the participation of the United States, their schemes are doomed to failure.
Satisfied with their efforts to alter the treaty in the 1990s, LOST supporters sent it to President Bill Clinton, who wasted no time signing the treaty and sending it to the Senate for ratification. Fortunately the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, then headed by Senator Jesse Helms, concluded that despite cosmetic changes the treaty remained hopelessly flawed. He sent it back to the president in 2000 with no action.
It seemed as though this treaty would finally die. But it did not. Undeterred, LOST supporters in the State Department sent the treaty back to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2003. This time the Committee voted unanimously, just this February, to send it to the full Senate for ratification! LOST currently sits before the Senate, available at any time for a full Senate vote on ratification. Despite President Reagan’s rejection and Senator Jesse Helms’ rejection, LOST therefore is still very much alive.
Together with 13 of my colleagues in the House of Representatives, I sent a letter last week to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist urging him to reject this dangerous and foolish treaty. Should the United Nations succeed in its dream of taxing American citizens when they do business abroad, how much longer will it be until they begin taxing us at home? Just last month, in fact, UN bureaucrats gathered in New York to look for ways to revive their dream of imposing UN control and a global tax on the internet. Imagine a global policy on internet content dictated by nations such as Saudi Arabia and China – and paid for by Americans! Let us hope that the Senate does the sensible thing and rejects LOST and any further UN encroachments on our sovereignty.
April 7, 2004
Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.
“Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.”
Maybe a trailer park fool might think so, but educated people know better.
Thanks for playing.
Can someone explain to me why people are gloating over the fifth-place finish of someone who was never expected to do well to begin with? Why is this important to you?
Bussed in voters? I am not a Dr. Whacko supporter by any means but I havent seen any proof of this yet.
“Can someone explain to me why people are gloating over the fifth-place finish of someone who was never expected to do well to begin with? Why is this important to you?”
Because he and his supporters are the most annoying whiney babies I have ever seen. thats why.
Realize no one is making fun of the other low men on the totem pole. No there is respect for those men. Only Paul gets this scorn.
First Romney drops out and throws his support to RP.
Then Huck concedes to the better man and endorses him.
Then Rudy sees him coming and withdraws.
Fred resigns himself to the inevitable and accepts the Vice-Presidential slot on the ticket....
It’s still early. No need to get your hopes so high.
You really should wait until after noon to start the drugs.
That said, it gave me a good laugh!
This was Dr. Paul's state to lose. It is the most anti-war of the Republicans state in the country. ... Making excuses for the official campaign staff will only bring more disappointment.
They are having a complete meltdown over there, everything from conspiracy theories to being mad at the official campaign for not doing enough, to calls to jump on the Obama bandwagon.
We've been hearing over and over from Paul supporters that he would surprise us, some predicting top three, one I recall even saying it would be a first. Watching their forums, they pulled out all the stops for Iowa, bussing in hundreds of college kids to make calls and protest, and dumping tons of money into the State. As one Paul supporter put it, it was his state to lose. I actually think he will do better in New Hampshire, it is a more liberal state.
And how is this contributing to an effort to "roll back decades of federal government largesse"?
60% of the GOP Iowa caucus voters were Evangelical Christians and they didn’t really care about the war. NH’s GOP primary is the opposite. Probably half of that 60% or even less are Evangelical Christians and they care about the war a lot more.
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.