RNC Shuns Ron Paul, Supporters Root For Romney Defeat

[buckstopshere]

Didn't realize how many INGOer's are closet Dems....

Seriously? I find people to be pretty open about their beliefs on this forum which is why it's popular IMO. I don't see many posters being "in the closet" about anything.

I've always considered myself an independent and still do. I've always voted republican but have no problem switching like this year voting for Johnson. If I found a dem that loved civil liberties, fiscal and personal responsibilities, and wanted to shrink the fed, I'd vote for them without a second thought.

 

[Lex Concord]

IMO, time to let it go and move forward, and stop looking into the past.

Open your eyes.

Nowhere in this thread have I made a statement about where anybody's vote should or shouldn't go.

I am at peace with the fact that Paul lost, and have stated several times here in this thread and in past threads that I didn't think he had a real chance.

The issue here is possible fraud.

The issue here is raising awareness of that possible fraud.

The issue here is working to prevent future fraud.

This is about moving forward, about raising the awareness to try to move the party from being the fraudulent den of snakes it appears to be. It is more likely Paul will actually win the party's nomination this week, but I thought it worth the effort; apparently you are okay with the status quo enjoy.

You have made yourself clear. You want Obama beaten at all costs, the ends justify the means, nothing to see here move along.

 

[firehawk1]

You have made yourself clear. You want Obama beaten at all costs, the ends justify the means, nothing to see here move along.

Yes you are correct I want Obama gone and short of a Hitler type running I am able to justify the ends by the means. I wish he could be erased from public memory. I wish he could be impeached and driven from office. I would be comfortable with him drug out of the White House in chains. He is a disgrace to the office he holds, and it is disgraceful to see him wear an American flag on his lapel. I am tired of seeing an American President bowing to other leaders. No point in going into how much money he has spent in the 3.5 years he's been President. Are you beginning to understand how strongly I feel about him being removed from office?

No need for the condescending tone though as I am totally comfortable and at peace with myself with my decision.

You obviously are not so.... nothing to see here move along.

 

[Lex Concord]

Yes you are correct I want Obama gone and short of a Hitler type running I am able to justify the ends by the means. I wish he could be erased from public memory. I wish he could be impeached and driven from office. I would be comfortable with him drug out of the White House in chains. He is a disgrace to the office he holds, and it is disgraceful to see him wear an American flag on his lapel. I am tired of seeing an American President bowing to other leaders. No point in going into how much money he has spent in the 3.5 years he's been President. Are you beginning to understand how strongly I feel about him being removed from office?

No need for the condescending tone though as I am totally comfortable and at peace with myself with my decision.

You obviously are not so.... nothing to see here move along.

No, I'm not comfortable with your decision and attitude about the matter, but I'm glad you quit dancing and admitted it.

10-7

 

[firehawk1]

No, I'm not comfortable with your decision and attitude about the matter, but I'm glad you quit dancing and admitted it.

10-7

Admitted what? I stated nothing I haven't been saying all along, Obama has to go PERIOD. I've stated that for several months now, I've been totally consistent on that matter. You lost me.

 

[Lex Concord]

Admitted what? I stated nothing I haven't been saying all along, Obama has to go PERIOD. I've stated that for several months now, I've been totally consistent on that matter. You lost me.

Admitted that the ends justify the means for your preferred outcome.

You kept dancing around the alleged fraud, talking about Paul not getting enough delegates, when I clearly stated we didn't know that for certain (you know, that possible fraud thing), accusing me of living in the past, being hung up on Paul's loss.

Maybe I was unclear in my meaning; maybe you didn't want to come out and admit that you don't care what level of fraud may or may not have been perpetrated, so long as we could get Obama out of the White House. You know, your preferred outcome, the one I was an elitist for assuming (it was a deduction) and you have already confirmed twice in two posts, even stating just above that you've been stating it all along...I apologize for my elitist assumption

 

[Lex Concord]

I have to ask, firehawk, your avatar bears a striking resemblance to David Bamber as Mr. Collins in Pride and Prejudice...I'm guessing that's not the case...care to enlighten?

 

[ssblair]

Well, as much as I like the Libertarian message that Ron Paul and apparently Gary Johnson promote, I still suggest that we support Romney--or whoever ultimately wins the GOP nomination (should there be a successful insurrection)--to provide a united vote against Obama... I hate to say it and suggest that people set aside their political inclinations in favor of promoting the team player, but it appears that Obamna is a clear and present danger to our most fundamental Rights and identity as Americans, so we need to recognize that this is a 2 party system and vote out the guy we -know- is bad news.

As much as I would like to change the GOP platform in favor of Libertarian principles, the time for changing or 'insurrecting' the party platform is in the primaries. The 2012 ballot is set, and the platform was built before this GOP convention, so we can't change it now anyway. Then we change the GOP party and platform at the 2014 election.

 

[Classic Liberal]

Well, as much as I like the Libertarian message that Ron Paul and apparently Gary Johnson promote, I still suggest that we support Romney to provide a united vote against Obama... I hate to say it and suggest that people set aside their political inclinations in favor of promoting the team player, but it appears that Obamna is a clear and present danger to our most fundamental Rights and identity as Americans, so we need to recognize that this is a 2 party system and vote out the guy we -know- is bad news.

As much as I would like to change the GOP platform in favor of Libertarian principles, the time for changing or 'insurrecting' the party platform is in the primaries. The 2012 ballot is set, and the platform was built before this GOP convention, so we can't change it now anyway. Then we change the GOP party and platform at the 2014 election.

Not going to vote for the lesser of two evils just so my rights can get stepped on by the other foot...nope, not going to do it.
Toss your principles aside as you wish, but I'd rather face tyranny with the greatest opposition we can muster than to accept it from the side that says they've got your back.

 

[Lex Concord]

Not going to vote for the lesser of two evils just so my rights can get stepped on by the other foot...nope, not going to do it.
Toss your principles aside as you wish, but I'd rather face tyranny with the greatest opposition we can muster than to accept it from the side that says they've got your back.

Well, you saw how fairly Ron Paul was treated through this election...surely WE can trust them.

 

[hornadylnl]

Well, you saw how fairly Ron Paul was treated through this election...surely WE can trust them.

2014 is the year we get libertarians in the repub party.

 

[firehawk1]

Admitted that the ends justify the means for your preferred outcome.

You kept dancing around the alleged fraud, talking about Paul not getting enough delegates, when I clearly stated we didn't know that for certain (you know, that possible fraud thing), accusing me of living in the past, being hung up on Paul's loss.

Maybe I was unclear in my meaning; maybe you didn't want to come out and admit that you don't care what level of fraud may or may not have been perpetrated, so long as we could get Obama out of the White House. You know, your preferred outcome, the one I was an elitist for assuming (it was a deduction) and you have already confirmed twice in two posts, even stating just above that you've been stating it all along...I apologize for my elitist assumption

Insisting that the choice of either Romney or Obama is between a Hitler and Stalin, and Paul or Johnson are a Sir Galahad in shining armor is laughable. Romney is no Hitler OR Stalin by any sane person's stretch of imagination, but can't really say the same about Obama now can we. Your apparent disgust at my assertion of the ends do in fact justify the means in this case is a false one. Romney isn't the perfect candidate, but he's a damn sight better than the current occupier of the White House. Plus to think that if Paul had won the most delegates HE wouldn't make sure everyone was lined up behind him is being nieve at best. It's called politics.

But you obviously don't agree, and continue your attempt to insult or degrade me or anyone else who doesn't agree with you (talk about intolerance) for making my/our own informed, thought out decisions. THAT is where the elitist label comes from. If you are unable to accept others decisions/opinions without the condescending holier than thou attitude, then I suppose the label truly fits, wear it with pride.

You can go to bed each night and sleep soundly with the decisions you make, and I can do the same.

 

[firehawk1]

I have to ask, firehawk, your avatar bears a striking resemblance to David Bamber as Mr. Collins in Pride and Prejudice...I'm guessing that's not the case...care to enlighten?

My avatar is a picture of Jonathan Frid as Barnabas Collins from Dark Shadows, may he rest in peace. I remembered watching it after school in the early '70's. I recently began watching the few that were on Netflix and have been buying the DVD's since. No special meaning to my avatar other than I admire Frid's work as Barnabas Collins.

 

[ssblair]

Not going to vote for the lesser of two evils just so my rights can get stepped on by the other foot...nope, not going to do it.
Toss your principles aside as you wish, but I'd rather face tyranny with the greatest opposition we can muster than to accept it from the side that says they've got your back.

Then I sincerely wish you and your compatriots success in making a showing that causes the GOP party leadership pause to consider adopting the principles that you are standing for.

I just hope that your votes dont cost us another 4 years of Obamanation rule...


Not to say that I'm totally thrilled with Romney on all counts, but I think he would certainly be capable on a domestic level. The question is, how much of his Massachusetts background (ie. gun bans and "Romneycare") is indicative of his preferences versus the preferences of the far left state legislature that he had to work with. I am anticipating that we'll find that he is more conservative than his Massachusetts record would suggest. I thought that he said the right things in his recent interview with the NRA--but then he's been studying for this exam for 6? years now. And I'm not sure if he ever responded to the GOA's survey on 2A issues that they circulated at the beginning of the primary season.

 

[ssblair]

Ultimately I think that the Tea Party has the right approach--It is a 2 party system here in the US and it is difficult for 3rd party candidates to make it work--they just don't have the political infrastructure, support, and access to make things happen. And I don't think that making the country a "3-party" or "multi-party" system is an effective option either--I think those would be worse options than the 2 party system we have now. The Tea Party recognizes that the best way to get change is to change the ideology of the GOP from the inside.

And don't discount the fact that even if you like a politician's professed ideology, he still needs to be effective in executing that ideology--he's got to be able to manage the power brokering, the back room deals, and all the string pulling to get things done in a room of adversarial political parties. I see this as being even more difficult for a 3rd party chief executive. If the chief executive cannot be a strong figure, then the whole administration is going to be mired in disagreement and infighting in craptacular fashion (a la President U.S. Grant). This is where--despite Ron Paul's ideological appeal--I do not believe (and others may differ) that he would make an effective president. But I would like to see some of his ideologies adopted by the GOP and executed by a more capable administration.

 

[Lex Concord]

Insisting that the choice of either Romney or Obama is between a Hitler and Stalin, and Paul or Johnson are a Sir Galahad in shining armor is laughable.

Did I make either statement? If so, please show me, I have forgotten. If not, please direct this to someone else or stop erecting straw men.

Romney is no Hitler OR Stalin by any sane person's stretch of imagination, but can't really say the same about Obama now can we.

YMMV but I'll accept your premise for the sake of argument.

Your apparent disgust at my assertion of the ends do in fact justify the means in this case is a false one. Romney isn't the perfect candidate, but he's a damn sight better than the current occupier of the White House.

My disgust is a false one? Stating that you asserted that the ends justify the means is false? (refresher below)

Yes you are correct I want Obama gone and short of a Hitler type running I am able to justify the ends by the means.

I guess you're the one who brought Hitler into this?

I'm not sure what you're saying was false there, but I am still quite disgusted by the whole blind eye to fraud thing. I'm not afraid to share my morals either.

Plus to think that if Paul had won the most delegates HE wouldn't make sure everyone was lined up behind him is being nieve at best. It's called politics.

I like to believe that Paul wouldn't have perpetrated fraud to do so, though. I might be wrong...he's human and, therefore fallible. We'll never know, however, just like we'll never know whether he had the most or second most delegates due to the widespread willingness to ignore any and all allegations of fraud, and possibly furtherance of the same at the national convention.

But you obviously don't agree, and continue your attempt to insult or degrade me or anyone else who doesn't agree with you (talk about intolerance) for making my/our own informed, thought out decisions. THAT is where the elitist label comes from.

You mean that's where you want it to claim it comes from after having been called out on the original quote

If you are unable to accept others decisions/opinions without the condescending holier than thou attitude, then I suppose the label truly fits, wear it with pride.

I haven't attempted to insult or degrade you any further than to point out 1) your desire, until recently to prop up straw men and argue around the points presented and 2) your admission of being okay with fraud as part of the process of "getting everyone behind Romney", even though, as I have pointed out, it started with the process of "getting Romney in position to actually get someone behind him".

You're free to believe what you will...there are plenty of others on here who believe as you do regarding Romney being better than Obama, and Obama being the most dangerous man to occupy the White House (you might do well to note that I haven't disagreed on this yet, nor do I intend to) but if you're going to point a big red arrow at being at peace with fraud (most flavors are crimes), don't whine and cry elitist when someone points it out. If that's what you believe, wear it with pride.

If pointing out such an attitude (hey, I'm cool with fraud, so long as Obama goes) and being disgusted by it is elitist or condescending, then I guess I am guilty on both counts.

You can go to bed each night and sleep soundly with the decisions you make, and I can do the same.

[strike]Sleep well....you are still dodging one question.

Is that Mr. Collins in your Avatar, or isn't it?[/strike]

Sorry, missed your response.

 

[Citizen711]

Not to say that I'm totally thrilled with Romney on all counts, but I think he would certainly be capable on a domestic level. The question is, how much of his Massachusetts background (ie. gun bans and "Romneycare") is indicative of his preferences versus the preferences of the far left state legislature that he had to work with. I am anticipating that we'll find that he is more conservative than his Massachusetts record would suggest. I thought that he said the right things in his recent interview with the NRA--but then he's been studying for this exam for 6? years now. And I'm not sure if he ever responded to the GOA's survey on 2A issues that they circulated at the beginning of the primary season.

This is exactly what I've been saying. As governor, he governed according to what his constituents wanted. Romneycare, gun control legislation - that's what Massachusetts wanted, and he delivered. I don't understand why people choose to ignore it when a politician listens to those he governs.

He has been right up front on what his personal views on these issues are, since his presidential campaign began. Whether it's genuinely consistent with his personal views or it's simply trying to deliver what the people want, it's a win-win for us. Short of Bush Sr.'s "Read My Lips" debacle, I don't recall any presidents doing such a blatant 180 upon reaching the White House as people seem to think Romney must be planning.

 

[hacksawfg]

I'm going to take a vacation from reading/posting in this thread, go eat some bacon, and dream about having enough surplus cash to buy a Barrett 50 cal. and pay Salma Hayek whatever it takes to watch her shoot it naked from the standing position all day. I think if nothing else that's something else that probably 95% of us male INGO'ers can get behind .

I'm tired of arguing politics.

 

[.45 Dave]

Has anyone explained why, if the Libertarian viewpoint is so superior to the Republicans, it is that Paul ran on the Republican ticket? How can you support a guy who turned coat like that? Could it be that he realized that the Libertarian Party is a dead end after 40 years of trying and having essentially no impact? (except on INGO, of course.)

 

[.45 Dave]

I'm going to take a vacation from reading/posting in this thread, go eat some bacon, and dream about having enough surplus cash to buy a Barrett 50 cal. and pay Salma Hayek whatever it takes to watch her shoot it naked from the standing position all day. I think if nothing else that's something else that probably 95% of us male INGO'ers can get behind .

I'm tired of arguing politics.

But it's so much fun! Especially when the Libertarians run screaming "Mitt and Ryan and Palin, OH MY"