Complaints Flood CNN After Beck Smears Ron Paul Supporters As Terrorists

[KenH]

how about deluded brats?

Sounds reasonable to me. :thumbs:

Maybe, also, arrogant brats?

 

[TomVols]

I don't understand why Paul should leave the GOP. Okay, so he's no friend to the Pro-life movement and he's not been consistently conservative on many other issues. He still is an important voice and he needs to be heard.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

I don't understand why Paul should leave the GOP. Okay, so he's no friend to the Pro-life movement and he's not been consistently conservative on many other issues. He still is an important voice and he needs to be heard.

because he is a libertarian and not a Republican. Of course the same sentiment gose out to a few others as well.

 

[KenH]

The trend has been for the Democratic and Republican Parties to lose those identifying themselves as Democrats or Republicans and for the number of self-identified independents to increase. I think this will pretty much solidify going forward as basically 1/3 identifying themselves as Democrats, 1/3 as Republicans, and 1/3 as independents.

 

[KenH]

because he is a libertarian and not a Republican. Of course the same sentiment gose out to a few others as well.

Without libertarian Republicans the GOP cannot win national elections, just as without the moveon.org types the Democrats cannot win national elections.

I know, 2 Timothy2:1-4, that you probably won't agree, at least with the first part. However, that is okay, brother.

 

[carpro]

Without libertarian Republicans the GOP cannot win national elections, just as without the moveon.org types the Democrats cannot win national elections.

I believe your second statement would be provable.

I doubt your first would be, unless you are willing to ascribe the description of libertarian to many people that would not describe themselves as such.

I may be wrong, but I believe true libertatians are relatively small in number, while the radical nutball moveon base of the democrat party is relatively large.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Without libertarian Republicans the GOP cannot win national elections, just as without the moveon.org types the Democrats cannot win national elections.

I know, 2 Timothy2:1-4, that you probably won't agree, at least with the first part. However, that is okay, brother.

Your comparison between Liberatarians and movon.org falls short of equality. The average conservative on the street doesn't think about liberarianism. In fact most probably do not know much about that philosophy. Liberatarians are so small in number they do not add up to much influence. And the social philosophy among Libertarians is contradictory to conservative values. Their influence is of no value and consequence to the GOP. The radical outcry of libertarians has only recently come to existance largely under Ron Paul. Not that he instigates the radicalism of Liberarians but they certainly place themselves under his banner. And he does little to seperate himself from them so he is culpable in their radical and visceral behavior.

On the Democrat side of things their radical and visceral behavior has been in existence for some time. And their influence is of a great consequence to the dems. Tehy are widely known among the average Democrat and even carries some amount of influence in that party even though not all their ideas are bought into.

So the comparison is not a valid one. But in recent times the behavior of the radicals from moveon.org and media matters has certainly influenced libertarians. It is hard to tell the two apart these days with their irresponsible rhetoric, and calls for ungodly social behavior.

 

[saturneptune]

On the Democrat side of things their radical and visceral behavior has been in existence for some time.

If this was the 1948 election, no doubt in my mind you would have voted for Dewey over Truman.

 

[church mouse guy]

Without libertarian Republicans the GOP cannot win national elections, just as without the moveon.org types the Democrats cannot win national elections.

I know, 2 Timothy2:1-4, that you probably won't agree, at least with the first part. However, that is okay, brother.

The GOP in Indianapolis just scored a major victory in winning the Mayor's office in a big city. The Republican Greg Ballard had 51% of the votes. The Libertarian Party had less than 4,000 votes and seems to have hurt the Democrats more than anyone else. The conclusion is that the GOP does just fine without the Libertarians. (By the way, the Libertarians fielded almost a million votes agains Reagan in 1980 but he still won just fine without them.)

 

[church mouse guy]

I don't understand why Paul should leave the GOP. Okay, so he's no friend to the Pro-life movement and he's not been consistently conservative on many other issues. He still is an important voice and he needs to be heard.

On both foreign policy and domestic social issues (live and let live), Ron Paul sounds like a liberal Democrat, as was pointed out on the Beck program.

 

[poncho]

If I may speak on the O/P...

The actions of Ron Paul supporters, those who go out of their way to get on TV & rant, those who get themselves tazed at organized events, those who would violate the personal space of an elected official, or anyone's personal space for that matter, and those who say that behavior is OK because it exposes the "Flaws" in our system....those folks I mentioned above have been the biggest issue I have with being in Paul's camp. I wouldn't call them terrorists, but how about deluded brats ?

How about calling them what they really are...a tiny fraction of a percentage within Ron Paul's support base. How about not focusing so much on the tiny number of folks who make fools of themselves and focus more on what Ron Paul himself is saying? I think that's the whole point of the OP. Beck and the other conglomerated media talking heads...who's job and livelyhoods depend on spreading their master's word and covering for them would keep us all focused on a few nitwits so's we won't pay attention to the bigger issue. Which is, "our government" is no longer our government.

 

[betterthanideserve]

Dear Better,

Yeah, I know about David Horowitz because I am a senior citizen and he has been around for many years. He was an anti-war leftist during the Viet Nam era. All that I said in my post was what he said on the Beck show--that he was raised in a communist home. He is a Jew who left the left and became a conservative--the classic definition of what a neo-con is. To say, as you did, Better, that communism and conservatism are the same is way over the top and really not worthy of a reply except to say that conservatism is anti-communist.

As for your complaint, Better, that the constitution is treated like a rag--we heard that in 2004 from Peroutka. Remember, the constitution is all sail and no anchor, as demonstrated by two supreme court cases that the constitution offered no remedy for. The first case required constitutional amendment and that was the Dred Scott case that ruled that Dred Scott was not a human being but property of his slave owner. The second case which has not had a constitutional remedy for 35 years is Roe v. Wade in which the court has ruled that the unborn child is not a human being and may be put to death by the mother at any time before birth. So much for the sail with no anchor.

Ron Paul should go back to his old political party, the Libertarian Party, because his essential beliefs are Libertarian Party planks. He does not fit well in the GOP and that is the reason that he will not even carry Texas, his home state.

OK?

By the way, you remark that it is nice that the American military will not have to be dispatched against the leftists who are protesting the war in Iraq. This is curious that a person such as yourself shows sympathy for the left in this matter and really confirms what Horowitz said in that he said that the left and the right were just alike in their opposition to the war and from their statements no one could tell them apart. Better, you prove that point.

I too am getting older I was around during the 60's and remember Horowitz,all I said was that he is no conservative. He is a neoconunist,a patsy ,a good soldier of the left even when they call themselves conservatives.I am a true conservative
believe it or not.Sometimes I even sould liberal to myself,he is doing the bidding of the socialist's in washington from both sides of the isle.Let us not forget where they want us to go,controlled,politically correct think like we want you to think,not for yourself mind numbed,dumbed down servants,only serve them not GOD.
The church is sleeping and it is time to wake the church up. Do you agree?disagree?

 

[church mouse guy]

I too am getting older I was around during the 60's and remember Horowitz,all I said was that he is no conservative. He is a neoconunist,a patsy ,a good soldier of the left even when they call themselves conservatives.I am a true conservative
believe it or not.Sometimes I even sould liberal to myself,he is doing the bidding of the socialist's in washington from both sides of the isle.Let us not forget where they want us to go,controlled,politically correct think like we want you to think,not for yourself mind numbed,dumbed down servants,only serve them not GOD.
The church is sleeping and it is time to wake the church up. Do you agree?disagree?

If you are a true conservative, as you say that you are, Mr. Better, why are you supporting a live and let live candidate for President of the USA and one who agrees with the flag burners on foreign policy?

 

[poncho]

If you are a true conservative, as you say that you are, Mr. Better, why are you supporting a live and let live candidate for President of the USA and one who agrees with the flag burners on foreign policy?

Conservatives are all supposed to support an aggresive imperialistic foreign policy??? Why? It's crazy! Good for special interests and big government, bad for the people. Who's side did you say you were on again CMG?

I believe the founders wanted us to have a foreign policy that encouraged trade and friendship not one that tried to control other nations affairs and make enemies. If that's the foreign policy true conservatives think they are to support then methinks true conservatives have been totally hoodwinked.

Neo-CONNED! as Ron Paul would put it.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

How about calling them what they really are...a tiny fraction of a percentage within Ron Paul's support base. How about not focusing so much on the tiny number of folks who make fools of themselves and focus more on what Ron Paul himself is saying? I think that's the whole point of the OP. Beck and the other conglomerated media talking heads...who's job and livelyhoods depend on spreading their master's word and covering for them would keep us all focused on a few nitwits so's we won't pay attention to the bigger issue. Which is, "our government" is no longer our government.

I think you should admt that I have a point, instead of blaming the media.

 

[church mouse guy]

Conservatives are all supposed to support an aggresive imperialistic foreign policy??? Why? It's crazy! Good for special interests and big government, bad for the people. Who's side did you say you were on again CMG?

I believe the founders wanted us to have a foreign policy that encouraged trade and friendship not one that tried to control other nations affairs and make enemies. If that's the foreign policy true conservatives think they are to support then methinks true conservatives have been totally hoodwinked.

Neo-CONNED! as Ron Paul would put it.

Poncho, you are with the flag-burners on foreign policy as far as I can tell from what you write. Evidently, you agree with the Democrats that we should just accept that the Arabs don't like us and are going to blow us up from time to time for buying so much oil from them and that we only make things worse by trying to stop them from doing that.

Ron Paul is not even going to win his home state of Texas in the primary. He is a non-starter. The problem with him is that his ideas are unpopular. He is live and let live on social issues and he is with the leftists on the war against terror.

Believe me if we retreat from Iraq or if we somehow manage to lose this war, the Arabs will bring the war to our nation and they will attack us all over the Middle East. Iran will produce the atomic bomb if we are defeated in Iraq or if we retreat there. This is a serious dirty war with no end in sight at the moment.

As for the charge that Bush spent a lot of money, it is more correct constitutionally to say that Congress spent a lot of money since they have the power of the purse.

Also, Bush faced a divided GOP. The most glaring example of this division of GOP is that Ron Paul has voted against Bush and the military many, many times.