Paulbots' opinions requested

[KG1]

If RP's economic policy is totally contingent on gutting the military then we are still totally screwed. (we'll just ignore that big 800lb. entitlement gorilla standing in the corner)

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Plain and simple, Ron Paul is the only candidate I trust to keep his word. It all boils down to trust!

Do you trust Romney?

Do you trust Gingrich?

Do you trust Santorum?

Instead of trying to get us to drink your anti-Ron Paul hate-o-rade , tell us how great your candidate is!

Come on, tell us how great your candidate is!

Here is a video why I think my candidate is great:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvXpkjHIuIE&feature=youtube_gdata_player

So you trust a guy who says one thing while voting a different way, who has spent 23 years in Congress with nothing of nothing of distinction to show for it, who calls for actions he would be powerless to implement without acknowledging such, and who wants to send pirates after terrorists? Didn't we do that a couple years ago (except for the pirate part)? How did that work out for us?

My candidate? I don't have one yet. Not happy with any of them.

 

[Olive Drab]

I didn't qualify to get my money back. I gues they had to give it to someone else. Maybe you really go mine and you didn't realize it

You didn't qualify but I got yours. Wow .... You're a genius!

IYou might want to watch a little more news, or practice your Google-fu:

Iran's export ban pushes oil prices up - UPI.com

Fars News Agency :: Iran Refrains from Oil Delivery to Greece

Iran plans oil export ban to ‘hostile’ European countries | euronews, world news

Read the articles. That's all those words below the headlines. Iran blocked exports after the sanctions and embargo's were imposed.

EU Formally Adopts Iran Oil Embargo As Iranian Lawmakers Ramp Up Hormuz Threats | Fox News

We get it, you hate anybody the party doesn't tell you to vote for. So if Ron Paul is not the right candidate, who is?

Tell us how great your candidate is!

 

[g00n24]

Plain and simple, Ron Paul is the only candidate I trust to keep his word. It all boils down to trust!

Do you trust Romney?

Do you trust Gingrich?

Do you trust Santorum?

Instead of trying to get us to drink your anti-Ron Paul hate-o-rade , tell us how great your candidate is!

Come on, tell us how great your candidate is!

Here is a video why I think my candidate is great:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvXpkjHIuIE&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Settle down there skippy, I don't like too much about any of these candidates but I will vote for a dead pig before I sit out of this election and help barry win. RPs economic ideas are top notch, his foreign policy when it comes to shutting down military bases throughout the world and acting like the only reason islamonazi's want to hurt us is because we provoked it is absolutely wrong IMHO. I do like his stance on cutting of foreign aid though.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

You didn't qualify but I got yours. Wow .... You're a genius!

Pretty much.

Read the articles. That's all those words below the headlines. Iran blocked exports[STRIKE] after the sanctions and embargo's were imposed[/STRIKE].

You could have stopped right there and you would have been more correct than when you kept going. Cause see, that's what all the words after the headlines said - Iran blocked exports.

We get it, you hate anybody the party doesn't tell you to vote for. So if Ron Paul is not the right candidate, who is?

That's funny stuff. You equate thoughtfulness with acquiescence to the Establishment. You are a true Disciple of Paul (DoP for short).

Tell us how great your candidate is!

I got your great big letters last time. Nothing has changed in the past 30 minutes. I still don't have a candidate.

Why do the DoPs demand to know who those of us who aren't DoPs support?

 

[Olive Drab]

Really? Totally contingent on closing foreign military installations?

You're right, "totally" was a bad choice of words, but Ron Paul usually starts with cutting military interventionism around the world and concentrating on defense when he talks about getting back to a sound economy.

 

[Olive Drab]

I got your great big letters last time. Nothing has changed in the past 30 minutes. I still don't have a candidate.

Why do the DoPs demand to know who those of us who aren't DoPs support?

I think you do have someone you support. I think you are Proponent of Santorum (PoS for short). Your posts reflect it. Your just too embarrassed to admit it. All you PoS's should start a thread telling us how great he is! That is going to be fun!

 

[tr1gg3r]

I didn't realize there were multiple grades of hypocrite. I thought it was a binary thing - yes or no.

Sure it is. You either are or you aren't. However, I think there are much bigger issues out there than appropriating district level funds. You know, like the issues of spending even more money that we don't have by getting involved in more wars and colonizing the moon.

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

I got your great big letters last time. Nothing has changed in the past 30 minutes. I still don't have a candidate.

Why do the DoPs demand to know who those of us who aren't DoPs support?

What are you waiting for?

 

[squirrelhntr]

beep boop bop, paulbot reporting

I have a Motorola R-2 D-2 smart phone and thats what it sounds like when I get a message or call. beep boop bop, but with a few whistles added to it.... LMAO

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Sure it is. You either are or you aren't. However, I think there are much bigger issues out there than appropriating district level funds. You know, like the issues of spending even more money that we don't have by getting involved in more wars and colonizing the moon.

There are bigger issues. Just to be clear, I don't want to colonize the moon.

We don't hire a President to be an accountant, especially being that the President has no role whatsoever in how much money is collected, budgeted or spent. None. That is what Congress does. The President writes checks that he's told to.

The President's roles are threefold - administer the government according to the will of Congress as set down in legislation, conduct foreign policy with Congress' consent, and be Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. No where in his constitutional job description does it say a word about levying taxes, paying bills, closing military bases, or anything else your candidate claims he will do, Disciples of Paul notwithstanding. A majority of Americans got hoodwinked last election. Why do you want to do it again?

Check out the Constitution sometime to see what the roles of the branches of government are if you are confused. It will change to .

What are you waiting for?

Two hours ago I hadn't made a choice. In that two hours I went to church (watched it on the Interwebz), took a nap, and a whole bunch of stuff except pick a Presidential candidate I was going to support.

 

[tr1gg3r]

Check out the Constitution sometime to see what the roles of the branches of government are if you are confused. It will change to :

No confusion here. I get it. Our country is in terrible shape. Sadly, until our congress is full of people who also get it, we the people will continue to bend over and take it. All I want is to see some sort of shift in a more positive direction. Hopping aboard the Newt/Willard/Rick express will continue to send us down the tracks to destruction.

I'm no Paulbot. I want Gary Johnson to win in the worst way. We need a third (see: second) party. We are doomed with the BOYN party. It needs to end.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

No confusion here. I get it. Our country is in terrible shape. Sadly, until our congress is full of people who also get it, we the people will continue to bend over and take it. All I want is to see some sort of shift in a more positive direction. Hopping aboard the Newt/Willard/Rick express will continue to send us down the tracks to destruction.

I'm no Paulbot. I want Gary Johnson to win in the worst way. We need a third (see: second) party. We are doomed with the BOYN party. It needs to end.

Gary Johnson supports abortion up until some loosely defined time where the child become "viable". To Mr. Johnson life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness has an arbitrary minimum age limit.

But if it were to between him and BHO, I could support him because at least he doesn't support late term, partial birth, or the infanticide BHO has.

 

[tr1gg3r]

Gary Johnson supports abortion up until some loosely defined time where the child become "viable". To Mr. Johnson life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness has an arbitrary minimum age limit.

But if it were to between him and BHO, I could support him because at least he doesn't support late term, partial birth, or the infanticide BHO has.

Again, there are bigger issues than abortion. I don't care what Gary Johnson's personal stance is on abortion. His political view is, paraphrasing here, that the federal government has no place defining the terms of human life. Leave that up to the states.

We need to find real solutions to the real problems in this country. I don't need lip service about contraception, abortion, moon bases, wind power, etc. It's all smoke and mirrors. We need to turn the ship around, and fast.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that killing the unborn isn't a problem. All I am saying is that you have to be able to separate your personal feelings from your political feelings. You have to be able to know that Roe v. Wade isn't going to be touched in the next x amount of years. The well-being of the country is far bigger than one person's personal beliefs.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Again, there are bigger issues than abortion. I don't care what Gary Johnson's personal stance is on abortion. His political view is, paraphrasing here, that the federal government has no place defining the terms of human life. Leave that up to the states.

We need to find real solutions to the real problems in this country. I don't need lip service about contraception, abortion, moon bases, wind power, etc. It's all smoke and mirrors. We need to turn the ship around, and fast.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that killing the unborn isn't a problem. All I am saying is that you have to be able to separate your personal feelings from your political feelings. You have to be able to know that Roe v. Wade isn't going to be touched in the next x amount of years. The well-being of the country is far bigger than one person's personal beliefs.

You missed my main point.

I am pro-life. Normally I will not consider a candidate that supports abortion of any sort. However, in a hypothetical scenerio, I am willing to support Johnson if it means getting rid of Obama. I don't understand how a person can decide when the moment of viability is. But at least that's better than obama's positions. Therefore, he would get my support in that scenerio.

You're right, there are issues of national survival at stake this year. And (in the general election) to waste a vote on somebody that does not have a snow ball's chance to win is the same as supporting Obama.

Will any of the four republicans running for the nomination be the perfect candidate on all the issues? Heck no! But any one of them will be a damn site better than obama. And just maybe their election can be a stepping stone in the right direction. Especially if they nominate a solid constitutional conservative VP that could build support for the cause in the later years.

 

[firehawk1]

But any one of them will be a damn site better than obama. And just maybe their election can be a stepping stone in the right direction. Especially if they nominate a solid constitutional conservative VP that could build support for the cause in the later years.

It's obvious you haven't been paying attention. It's been made quite clear that any one other than Ron Paul is if fact a worse choice than Obama. Ron Paul Koolaid needed STAT!!!

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

It's obvious you haven't been paying attention. It's been made quite clear that any one other than Ron Paul is if fact a worse choice than Obama. Ron Paul Koolaid needed STAT!!!

Not sure who said "worse choice," but i believe it would be the "same choice." None other than the Dr. will do anything really different than Obama is doing imo. Ask Mitty if he woulda signed the NDAA, oh wait, you dont have to, he already said he would have signed it also. Nobody except Paul would have a problem with taking away any single right we have left. Oh my bad, they might "do it with resignation." Like thats supposed to make us feel better

 

[HICKMAN]

So you trust a guy who says one thing while voting a different way, who has spent 23 years in Congress with nothing of nothing of distinction to show for it, who calls for actions he would be powerless to implement without acknowledging such

'nothing of distinction"... straight from the lips of Rush, Hannity and O'Reily.

Where does it say in Article One of the Constitution that he has to do something of "distinction".

I've heard this weak argument before... as if a member of the House has to do nothing but CREATE MORE LAWS THAT LIMIT AMERICANS... Someone has to fight against that.

I guess defending the Constitution... LITERALLY, is beneath you.

 

[bullet293]

i dont care who you are that's some funny stuff

I think you do have someone you support. I think you are Proponent of Santorum (PoS for short). Your posts reflect it. Your just too embarrassed to admit it. All you PoS's should start a thread telling us how great he is! That is going to be fun!

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

'nothing of distinction"... straight from the lips of Rush, Hannity and O'Reily.

Where does it say in Article One of the Constitution that he has to do something of "distinction".

I've heard this weak argument before... as if a member of the House has to do nothing but CREATE MORE LAWS THAT LIMIT AMERICANS... Someone has to fight against that.

I guess defending the Constitution... LITERALLY, is beneath you.

It doens't say anywhere that he has to do anything of distinction. But he's not running for 2 more years of doing nothing. We're in the middle of an administration with a guy who has spent his entire political career voting present. Why do we want to do the same thing all over again? What's that definition of insanity?

I'm all for defending the Constitution - although I think maybe sending pirates after terrorists might be beneath me.