Posted on 05/18/2010 4:51:19 PM PDT by Tribune7
Or maybe I’ll just keep telling the truth about the Pauls and you can watch nothing at all happen to me. How about that?
Well, if you support Jack Conway in the General Election, I certainly encourage you to have the courage of your convictions to declare your support loudly and proudly, on any thread related to the Kentucky General Election.
That is, if you have any courage of your convictions. I actually rather doubt that.
You'll either openly declare your support for the Obama-Democrat and get banned, or you'll try to hide your support for Jack Conway and prove yourself a snivelling little coward.
My bet is that you'll lack the courage to loudly proclaim to FReepers far and wide your support for Jack Conway. I'm just judging by what I can tell of your personality; but based on that, I'm betting that you'll take the coward's way out.
But either way, I win. My popcorn's buttered.
Yeah, I saw the bait the first time. Sniff, sniff... swim, swim. No sale.
I’m going to keep doing what I’m doing, thanks.
Try not to spill your popcorn on your pants. That butter might leave a nasty stain.
Right. You haven't the courage to loudly and openly proclaim your support for Jack Conway.
You'll take the coward's way out, trying to avoid being Banned by keeping quiet about your support for the Obama-Democrat in the race.
Just as I expected; I already had you figured for a yellow-belly.
That looks a lot like the same bait I just passed on. Got anything else? Besides a bucket of popcorn in your lap? Because this is getting dull.
Just as I expected; I already had you figured for a yellow-belly.
That looks a lot like the same bait I just passed on. Got anything else? Besides a bucket of popcorn in your lap? Because this is getting dull.
(Shrugs).
Well, tell you what -- I'll try to liven things up in the future by pointing out your support for Jack Conway whenever you post on Free Republic.
You may not personally have the courage to loudly proclaim your support for the Obama-Democrat, but don't worry: I'll be happy to help advertise your inclinations.
Nope. You lied like a trojan, and you are not enough of a man to admit it. If Ron or Rand had been truthers or even close, I would be one of the first to ridicule them. As it is, there is no one left to ridicule and mock but the hatepimps too stupid to realize that all you have is some guilt by association, and the links are weak even there.
Only pvssies whine to the mods.
This is something I don't expect kool aid guzzlers like you to understand, but in the event that someone with his cervical vertebrae NOT embedded in Michael Steele's rectum is logged on........
Rand Paul's appeal is PRECISELY the areas you term a "bazooka to shoot him with." The bawling imbeciles who screech "RACISM" and could find a closet Klansman in a board meeting of the Southern Poverty Law center have expended their capital. Got that? THEY HAVE OVERPLAYED THEIR HAND. Reasonable persons no longer have to cower in fear that someone who mentions STATE SOVEREIGNTY might be drummed out of polite society. Maybe you hang around on K street and think THAT is reality, or maybe you work as some underling in a news room for an alphabet network. Maybe not, and you are just a wannabee.
Either way, have a hint, Homer. Those people no longer call the shots. Neither Rand Paul nor the majority of the American public really give a tinker's damn about the righteous harrumphing of the annointed moralists we call newsies. They will scream and bawl and tingle their legs or vibrate themselves or whatever, but people just laugh at them....and your histrionics about Rand Paul speaking THE TRUTH are just fuel for more laughter.
You know who Chris Hightower is? If you don’t, you will.
I know who he is. So did Grayson. Grab another hint, Homer. So did Grayson.
Suck on these, boy >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihCP3cfS88E and >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGyhlNY0y1k&feature=related
Paul stutters, stumbles, squeaks, and finally says that he had “abandoned that rhetoric.” He knew it wasn’t getting him anywhere among thinking people.
Where are we now? Longer than WW1 and WW2 combined?
Wow, liar proves he is a liar. Nothing left to say.
I watched them. I had seen them before. I don't know if you are so hate-obsessed that you are paying more attntion to the radio signals "they" are sending you through your tooth than the actual dialogue, but the video simply does not even HINT at what you say it does. Paul never implies in any shape manner or form that he has any sympathy at all with the Truthers, and you simply LIE when you say he does. What he says is that he does not believe that there is an attempt by the government TO HIDE, DISTRACT FROM AND OBFUSCATE ITS OWN INCOMPETENCE in the 911 review studies. A retarded garden snail could follow that. Sorry it got past you. Maybe you could ask him to speak slower for you next time? Actually, your problem is not intelligence, but ethics. You lie. And you know you are lying.
Another garden snail rises to the occasion!
So now you’re pissed because I proved you wrong - you, on the other hand, have proved yourself, AK_47_7.62x39, to be an ignorant coward.
the only thing you have “proved” is that you are a liar. The videos simply do not in any way shape manner or form imply Ron Paul is or ever has been a truther. It is like posting a link to a jihad website for “proof” of the virgin birth. It not only doesn’t prove what you cite, it is just stupid.
So you’re not only an ignorant coward, AK_47_7.62x39, but a fool as well. At least Ron Paul admitted that he “abandoned” his trutherism.
That is all you have? You post some stupid set of videos that are only semi-relevant to the issues surrounding your claim and think you stand triumphant with someone's scalp in your hand ululating over your... what, your "victory?"
Let me type real slow for you so you can follow it Homer. I-T D-O-E-S-N'T S-A-Y W-H-A-T Y-O-U C-L-A-I-M I-T D-O-E-S.
He clearly stated that the REASON the truthers responded to his campaign was 1) unknown to him for sure 2) although HE DOES NOT ENDORSE THOSE CONCERNS he was also skeptical of the government reports because they tried to cover up our own ineptness, and that might be why they latch on to him. You take that and go waving it around shrieking "OH GLORY OH GLORY. HERE IS PROOF" when a one eyed idiot could look at it and know that is not "trutherism" at all. Yet you trotted it out as "proof." I am torn between whether you are mentally incapable of walking to the sink to get a drink of water (which you would have to be to posit such tomfoolery in seriousness) or just so preoccupied with an irrational hatred here that you just don't give a damn about the truth.
The second video, which you are clinging to like a drowning man clutches a rope, doesn't do you any better.
The moderator, in a debate, asks Ron Paul
Q. Many of your supporters call themselves ‘9/11 Truthers’. They believe that the U.S. government was in some way complicit with the 9/11 attacks or covered it up. Are you tonight prepared to either embrace that rhetoric or ask those supporters to abandon it(emphasis mine) , or divorce themselves from your candidacy?
Paul: Well, I can’t tell people what to do, but I’ve abandoned those viewpoints, I don’t believe that, and that’s all.. that’s the only thing that is important, and so I don’t endorse anything they say, but I would like to take an opportunity to talk about the issue that we’ve been debating here for the last 20 minutes........
You latch onto the word "abandon" which the moderator used and Paul responded to, with a mindless yodel of joy as if THAT proved something, as well. It proves nothing. NOTE CARELFULLY that he followed that sentence immediately by the following (I AM GOING TO TYPE SLOWLY FOR YOU AGAIN SO YOU WON'T GET LOST)
"I d-o-n’t b-e-l-i-e-v-e t-h-a-t, a-n-d t-h-a-t’s a-l-l.. t-h-a-t’s t-h-e o-n-l-y t-h-i-n-g t-h-a-t i-s i-m-p-o-r-t-a-n-t.
Could you process all that at one go? Don't want to overload those circuits. OK, time for one last herculean effort at coherency on your part. Spin up those gyros, plug in those extra data banks and CONCENTRATE and this point might get to you, although I am a little fearful on this one for ya. Anyway, note that he never said "I don't believe that ANYMORE" NO, he simply said "I don't believe that." I know you are just fixated on the word "abandoned" as though it is just a dead ringer for "proving" he once held those views...... and you dance your jig of victory like Adolf learning Paris has surrendered.
HOWEVER, the fact that he had stated the PREVIOUS YEAR that he found such views "bizarre" and repudiated them, rejected them and denied that he held or ever held them. In a Glen Beck interview, Beck states "I have watched the interviews with you" (AMAZING strategy there. You should try it!)
"You don't leave any room for any doubt on a 9/11 conspiracy....." (but poor Glen Beck had never meet the intrepid sleuthertruthertracker chi-townChief... HE is not fooled. nosireeeee) " but I just want to make it clear and ask you, and I don't think these need explanantion, unless I have read your answers wrong elsewhere, but maybe you could just respond to these......"
He then reads a series of standard truther stuff, no plane hit the pentagon, shot down by American missiles, remote controlled planes blah blah.
Ron Paul LAUGHED at the assertions (look at the tape, link below), called them "BIZARRE," and "PREPOSTEROUS" and said he had never even heard of them, and certainly did not BELIEVE them.
Glenn Beck Interview with Ron Paul in 2007
So we have Glenn Beck who says it is CLEAR from his interviews Paul is NOT NOR HAS BEEN a truther and asks Ron Paul to affirm. Paul affirms this, mocks the views, and repudiates them outright, but we are to believe you because you with your scintillating zeroed in grasp of truth have determined that "abandoned" in an interview means HE ONCE HELD SUCH VIEWS..... even though Glen Beck says his interviews prove that is not true.
OK, I think I have it now. Damn! and I thought TRUTHER logic was twisted!
Here is the link, btw, which you clearly had access to, as it is one link UNDER the google hit on "Paul Truther." I guess you were just too busy to address that. I am sure there are no honesty issues with your presentation.
I do wish to thank you, though. I am going to make a vanity of our exchange as a great example of how a Ron Paul hater argues and the high ethical standards to which you hold in making your case. You will be able to find this argument, preserved for all to read, on my home page. Look for the vanity, as well
You have done Free Republic a great service, sir. I thank you.
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.