Posted on 03/06/2008 7:16:40 AM PST by jdm
>> Tough. I’m organizing a write-in campaign for you anyway!
“If elected, I will not serve!”
You wouldn’t want me anyway — if you think McCain’s temper is bad...
On the other hand, ordering a fast attack submarine to sink Teddy Kennedy’s sailboat would be kinda cool. “Swim, sucka! We KNOW you can!!”
A neocon conspiracy. I bet the Jews are behind it. Bill Belichick too.
I would recommend one good, symbolic test of our nuke arsenal just to ensure they are still in working order and to remind the world we have teeth. Maybe somewhere in Iran? A high level burst to give them a little EMP?
Paul is done - stick a fork in him. The movement may or may not continue.
To all those gloating on this site, I trust you’ll enjoy 4-8 years of Obama. I don’t see McCain winning. Why elect yesterday’s-news, liberal-lite McCain when you can have a rock star. I guess McCain will appeal to Republicans who want open borders, etc. I don’t need to spell it out - you know his positions.
And after amnesty, I trust you’ll look forward to liberal Democrats in office for years (maybe decades).
And when the Democrats embrace a foreign policy that actively colludes with and appeases our enemies instead of Paul’s hands-off policy, I trust you concerns with Paul’s anti-semitism will be a comfort.
As for me, I’ll be digging my bunker.
Hey, no skin off my back. All that's happened is that I've returned to the non-voting position I was in before Paul entered the race. Just kindly don't complain when you see Obama's hand on the bible in January. I'm here to be convinced why I should care who of he or McCain wins, but if calling people like me "Paultards" is how you intend to do it, then I wouldn't get your hopes too high in expecting results.
It's my vote. The burden of proof over why I should do anything else with it is on you.
Did I call you that?
..and there is your fundamental problem... if you don't see that, what's the point of going forward (or backward and replying to the other comments.) I'm not sitting back breathlessly waiting for pupdog to jump up and say something.. I say what I want, make my case. If you want someone else to do the thinking for you, check the mirror.
Dude, check the narcissism at the door. None of this conversation is about pupdog or directed toward pupdog.. I hate to tell you, but pupdog doesn't even cross my mind.
In fairness, I don't recall Ehrling using the "Paultards" label. He's actually one of the more civil freepers out there, though I do have a suspicion he's a nasty Cowboys fan.
Screw the Steelers. One of their jerky fans had to go and complain about "Gate D parties" at Jets games and now I can't see breasts at halftime. I had to re-consider re-upping my season tickets.
Very good point.
+1
Totally off topic, but I met Tom Caughlin and Chris Snee the other night. Very nice guys with great families.
The burden of spreading on a message is on those who hold it to make the case of it, not on those who hear it to strain themselves to understand something that doesn't make sense to them. I don't expect you to be "sitting back breathlessly", but I also have no expectation that if I don't make my argument that you should ever accept it. The same way, if you don't make your case, specifically when it is asked for, doubly specifically when it is asked for after you specifically invited me to your own thread first, then you have no cause to complain when I stay home in November. Of course, maybe you don't care about what President Obama will do either. Hey, if you do, more power to you.
But somehow I doubt it. So until you do, I'm forced to conclude that your case simply doesn't exist. Sad, but unsurprising. And like I said, more the norm around these parts anymore.
I’m still on board!
What the heck... add a plank about prosecuting NYT journalists who divulge state secrets under the guise of “quoting unnamed sources”, and I’ll even send you a campaign contribution!
I love how they call anyone who rejects him sheep who hate freedom.
Who is this "they"? You didn't define that word, and so one is left to draw conclusions about what you mean; it seems most likely that by "they" you mean "Paul supporters", of which I am one. So unless you meant something different, then yes, you were talking about pupdog.
Of course, it also begs the question: "anyone who rejects him"? So you've followed every single word spoken by "they", and have definitive proof that "they" have called every last person who rejects him "sheep who hate freedom"?
OK, I'll skip the obvious step. Of course you don't. But see, there's the whole point. You have one of "they" right here, saying he doesn't do this. But if you aren't, in fact, talking about me, then I'm not "they". "They" are someone else, someone over there, and you're so busy guffawing about what "they" do, that you just don't have time when someone who seems to awfully be that "they" but somehow isn't comes directly to you and says, "OK, convince me. You want my vote so bad, here you are. You have the floor. I'm all ears."
And this is why I left this board, and mostly the only convincing you're doing is that I made the right decision. Waging war against "they" may make you feel good. But when you have one of "they" here and "they" say, "Hey, I want to talk it out", and you still turn your back... well, I think the Christian faith that I guess you believe in has a thing or two to say about that.
But, as I said, it doesn't say anything to me, because I offered my hand. I can only do my half. Just do remember this question in the future: the next time that someone says, "You can't reason with those kinds of people", is it because they weren't willing, or you weren't?
Actually, we don’t really know how many Republican primary voters “buy it”. Most Republicans (and some Dems) I know agree with most of what Paul says, but they were told that he was “unelectable”. Many did not vote their conscience for this reason, or they simply did not know who he was. Of course, the same applies to varying degrees with some of the other more conservative R candidates. IOW, Republicans allowed the media to anoint one of the most liberal Republicans in the country.
I see, it is those darn ignorant voters. They just couldn’t see enlightenment.
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.