Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In 1996, Paul Wasn't Issuing Denials
Captain's Quarters ^ | Jan. 11, 2008 | Ed Morrissey

Posted on 01/11/2008 6:59:44 AM PST by jdm

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 441-447 next last

bump!


121 posted on 01/11/2008 8:24:01 AM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: been_lurking

Go away troll.

You asked the same question 7 times already and I answered it.

Instead of responding, you keep asking the same question.

Do you still beat your wife, yes or no?

Neither is not an answer.

Of course that’s a silly assumption - there’s no right answer. It’s a logical fallacy.

Yet - That’s the kind of logic you are employing.


122 posted on 01/11/2008 8:24:35 AM PST by GovernmentIsTheProblem (The GOP is "Whig"ing out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentIsTheProblem
I answered your questions several times

No you haven't.

There is essentially one question, one that you have dodged the entire thread:

Was Paul lying in 1996 or in 2001?

He made one statement about the newsletters in '96, and another completely contradictory statement about them in '01.

Only one of the statements can be accurate, which means that the other is a lie.

So again: Which one was the lie?

123 posted on 01/11/2008 8:24:56 AM PST by wideawake (Why is it that so many self-proclaimed "Constitutionalists" know so little about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
One item that is also overlooked is that regarding the Texas Monthly article and the first denial earlier this week was they were referring to just a couple of years of articles in the early 90s. Later Monday or Tuesday evening, after the campaign issued the denial, The National Review released scanned copies of all the newsletters they used and they ranged from 1978 until 1992- far more than the blanket denials issues.
124 posted on 01/11/2008 8:25:15 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: been_lurking

Yes, Paul lied but so did Fred about Aristide. Paul has apolgoized for his lie but Fred hasn’t. Please note that Paul apologized in 2001 when he didn’t have to. If want to destroy Paul, fine, but your moral obligation is clear. You have to do the same or worse to Fred.


125 posted on 01/11/2008 8:25:15 AM PST by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Captain Kirk; GovernmentIsTheProblem
Paul was lying in 1996

So we have one Ron Paul supporter who answers that Ron Paul was lying in 1996.

126 posted on 01/11/2008 8:25:24 AM PST by been_lurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

True, but Chris Peden is running in the primary against Paul, and should Paul win reelection, the GOP leadership could in fact deny Paul the right to caucus with them, in effect ostracizing him. If you pull his ability to use RNC resources for fundraising, you’ve put a helluva kink in his money stream, internet or not.


127 posted on 01/11/2008 8:25:45 AM PST by OCCASparky (Steely-Eyed Killer of the Deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentIsTheProblem

LOL, now that is funny.


128 posted on 01/11/2008 8:26:56 AM PST by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: been_lurking

You’re really a fair guy. You quote out of context but never admit what I said about Fred’s lies or address the double standard. This is apparently a game for you not a give and take discussion.


129 posted on 01/11/2008 8:27:48 AM PST by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

“Only one of the statements can be accurate, which means that the other is a lie.”

1996 was the ‘lie’ which he explained and repudiated in 2001.

When will you live up to your documented lies in this thread, such as those about

- the timetable of Thompson’s support for Aristide

- the nature of Paul’s military service

- how or why Fred was fooled by Aristide

- your claims about what I’ve said or not said in this thread, which I rebutted several times, backed up by links to the posts?


130 posted on 01/11/2008 8:28:15 AM PST by GovernmentIsTheProblem (The GOP is "Whig"ing out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon
LOL, good grief, RG has ZERO to do with RP’s ZERO accomplishments in office.

I know. I'm just busting your chops. There aren't many Rudy people I can gloat to around here these days. Nothing personal.

131 posted on 01/11/2008 8:29:34 AM PST by jmc813 (Don't screw this up, vote for Thompson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentIsTheProblem
One Ron Paul supporter on this thread was honest enough to answer the question.

That is more honesty than the candidate himself showed, and still more honesty than you yourself are willing to show.

132 posted on 01/11/2008 8:29:52 AM PST by been_lurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky
True, but Chris Peden is running in the primary against Paul, and should Paul win reelection, the GOP leadership could in fact deny Paul the right to caucus with them, in effect ostracizing him. If you pull his ability to use RNC resources for fundraising, you’ve put a helluva kink in his money stream, internet or not.

They could. I doubt he'll be using RNC resources, but he's got plenty of his own. Besides, a third party question makes the question moot. Hopefully we won't be looking at a one vote House split.

133 posted on 01/11/2008 8:30:31 AM PST by SJackson (If 45 million children had lived, they'd be defending America, filling jobs, paying SS-Z. Miller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling; Captain Kirk

Picard is a lot more awesome than Kirk.


134 posted on 01/11/2008 8:30:32 AM PST by jmc813 (Don't screw this up, vote for Thompson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Captain Kirk; GovernmentIsTheProblem
Paul was lying in 1996 when he foolishly refused to out the person who wrote the newsletter.

Captain Kirk was able to answer the question, GITP.

He says Paul was lying in '96.

Which leads to the next issue about the authorship of Paul's newsletters.

Captain Kirk says that Paul was foolish not to out the real author of thiose newsletters.

Yet to this day, 12 years later with his credibility on the line, he has not given the names of the authors.

And that issue dovetails with the fact that much of the newsletter was written from a first person perspective using Paul's personal details.

Why was Paul taking money from people on the understanding that they were reading his personal thoughts and reflections on the news of the day, when they were actually reading someone else's?

Why was Paul running this scam on his own fans?

135 posted on 01/11/2008 8:31:06 AM PST by wideawake (Why is it that so many self-proclaimed "Constitutionalists" know so little about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentIsTheProblem

Wideawake won’t answer you. When Fred lies about Aristide (and still continues to lie), it is okay with him. All for the cause, you know. I condemn Paul’s earlier lie but forgive him because the apologize. Wideawake neither acknowledges Fred’s lies.


136 posted on 01/11/2008 8:31:10 AM PST by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Captain Kirk; been_lurking
Fred didn’t lie. He stated he lobbied for the purpose of trade restrictions due to the coup. The signed statement said it was on behalf of Aristide. They are not contradictory. As the elected representative of the country it would be the US Policy to support the democratically elected government over the marxist coup.

Trade is an aspect of that. Supporting and lobbying for US trade policy regarding whom we trade with isn’t a blind support directly for a specific representative.

Maybe I need to dumb it for Captian Kirk. Just because you believe in the right to transport down to a planet doesn’t mean your supporting that right also defines you support Scotty.

137 posted on 01/11/2008 8:31:35 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Your timeline od the Texas Monthly article - another lie.

You said in #9

“. In Texas Monthly and earlier this week he denied writing them and said anyone who thinks them is small minded.”

It was in 2001.

Paul told one white lie in 1996 - I almost need 3 hands to count the whoppers you’ve told on this thread alone. :)


138 posted on 01/11/2008 8:32:04 AM PST by GovernmentIsTheProblem (The GOP is "Whig"ing out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
Picard is a lot more awesome than Kirk.

Oh, HELL NO! Kirk nails green chicks. Picard did WHOOPI GOLDBERG. No comparison!
139 posted on 01/11/2008 8:32:19 AM PST by OCCASparky (Steely-Eyed Killer of the Deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentIsTheProblem
1996 was the ‘lie’

DING! DING! DING!

We have finally gotten an answer to the very simple question.

It's now a total of two Ron Paul supporters who admit that Ron Paul lied.

140 posted on 01/11/2008 8:32:50 AM PST by been_lurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 441-447 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson