Replies

I think you are wasting your time and effort answering folks who are only here (probably under several names) to slander and calumny Ron Paul. All they do is make stupid, unfounded accusations with nothing to back it up. When you try to reason them, it’s just more of the same. It’s a game, and not something you need be drawn into. The above sentence, you’ve made at least 3-4 times, but you will notice, it’s being ignored-again.

I think it's worthwhile, draw them out, put them on the record, point out the variations in their tactics (accusations, insinuations, etc.). Our candidate is not a member of the Washington establishment so we have to expect attacks from liberals, many of whom think they're conservatives and even post at FR. The fact that RP and many of us oppose liberal big-government agendas from both parties makes us 'fringers' or 'wingnuts'. Basically, anything not in agreement with their particular slice of the liberal agenda, whether that's open-borders or foreign aid (but notice how they only focus on Israel's foreign aid as though RP's opposition to all foreign aid is only opposition to Israel's slice of it and that therefore RP is targeting Israel and that could only be because he is an antisemite). They often make those posts rather vaguely, deliberately creating a false impression we've corrected many many times. It is deliberate and malicious.

I figure these guys are either working for the campaign of one of the “First Tier” candidate losers, or for the Democraps. Earlier in the thread we talked about infiltration of communists in the government. They infiltrate parties, too, and you are now seeing their tactics. These folks have been to the Saul Alinsky school for troublemakers.

Generally, the most strident opposition to Ron Paul is from the cagier variety of Juliebots who survived the purge. Some of them won't say who they support, others pretend to support Fred Thompson, knowing that JimRob likes him. However, the pattern of their support and their general hostility to social conservatives makes it clear that they are, despite protestation, very dubious prospects to actually vote for Fred Thompson, given his own voting record in the Senate.

“I think it’s worthwhile, draw them out, put them on the record, point out the variations in their tactics (accusations, insinuations, etc.). Our candidate is not a member of the Washington establishment so we have to expect attacks from liberals, many of whom think they’re conservatives and even post at FR.”

That’s true, but for a few examples. Once it is clear that they are not interested in logic or reasonable assumptions, and it is clear that they are only here for calumny and slander, any continuation of discourse with them is wasting your time.

These fellow(s) are only here to disrupt any meaningful discussion. They have no facts, they have no answers, they have no logic. They only have name calling rights. They aren’t conservatives, because they obviously can’t (or won’t) think. That’s a sign of a liberal/communist.

I feel the need to post something previously posted on FR about Bulverism. Maybe I will. -Glenn

“Generally, the most strident opposition to Ron Paul is from the cagier variety of Juliebots who survived the purge.”

That’s my thinking as well.

Since the setup debate in SC, juliebots everywhere have been trying to link RP with the Rosie crowd. Diabolically twisting his statement while applauding julieannie’s response. They are fervently trying to bar him from future debates. Imagine, a 10 term congressmen being barred from presidential debates and labelled a wacko because he upholds the US Constitution.

RP never said Americans “invited” the attack. He never blamed Americans for the attack. He blames the foriegn policy of the US govt driven in large part by the UN.
We american citizens have no control over it. RP is the lone congressman who fights this battle for American citizens. And then to deny that US govt foreign intervention in the middle east played no role in the 911 attack is like denying that dropping nuclear bombs on hiroshima and nagasaki had no effect on the japanese people. But get this, while RP blames the attack on US policy of intervention and meddling, the juliebots are busy trying to link him to the 911 truther crowd. Talk about dishonesty.

Sure, julieannie got the applause of the audience when he interupted to twist and contort RPs statement, with “I’ve never heard that one before...we invited the attack...” yada yada yada, but, was he being truthful? He’s never heard that foreign intervention has a cause and effect? He’s never heard of the cia concept of blowback?
One would think that anyone hawking themselves as an expert on terrorism might have considered the possibility of cause and effect associated with blowback.

I am considering whether or not the debate scenario was a set up. The question asked RP, then the follow-up (”are you suggesting we invited the attack” from Wendell) and then allowing julieannie to interrupt him with his dishonest smackdown and the resulting applause. Was julieannie’s mic supposed to be on? Were the mics of the others on too?

America deserves a fair and honest debate of the issues. I smell a skunk.

I think it's worthwhile, draw them out, put them on the record, point out the variations in their tactics (accusations, insinuations, etc.). Our candidate is not a member of the Washington establishment so we have to expect attacks from liberals, many of whom think they're conservatives and even post at FR.

DON'T flatter yourself; you are lookling more and more decidely like whack jobs ... the contrast you show - nay, the parallels you show with DU and DailyKOS are beginning to become very unnerving.