PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul Is Praised By Hillary Clinton



Galileo
04-23-2009, 01:20 PM
Ron Paul Is Praised By Hillary Clinton
Posted by Lew Rockwell at April 22, 2009 07:10 PM



(not a joke)



WATCH THE VIDEO!



http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/026449.html

JoeChalupa
04-23-2009, 01:25 PM
She was praising his supporters. :tu

FaithInOne
04-23-2009, 02:18 PM
sweet sweet validation

antimvp
04-23-2009, 10:00 PM
nice.

Marcus Bryant
04-23-2009, 10:34 PM
Hmmm....5 posts in the thread and no 'see, I told yew he wuz a liberal' comments yet.

Wild Cobra
04-24-2009, 04:57 PM
Ron Paul Is Praised By Hillary Clinton
Posted by Lew Rockwell at April 22, 2009 07:10 PM
jJky1akj-Vo
I think she wants him to run again to take votes away from the republican candidate again.

ChumpDumper
04-24-2009, 05:08 PM
Feh, Alan Keyes got more votes than Ron Paul.

If Democrats really want to take votes away from Republicans, they should encourage Palin to run in 2012.

Yonivore
04-24-2009, 05:19 PM
Hmmm....5 posts in the thread and no 'see, I told yew he wuz a liberal' comments yet.
I think that was covered back when he was declared a crazy nutjob.

braeden0613
04-24-2009, 05:49 PM
I think that was covered back when he was declared a crazy nutjob.
glass houses...

ChumpDumper
04-24-2009, 05:52 PM
Whose blog said he was a crazy nutjob?

Marcus Bryant
04-24-2009, 06:27 PM
I think that was covered back when he was declared a crazy nutjob.

Yeah, he actually believes the Constitution is valid.

Marcus Bryant
04-24-2009, 06:31 PM
Feh, Alan Keyes got more votes than Ron Paul.



Perhaps in a couple states.

ChumpDumper
04-24-2009, 06:40 PM
Perhaps in a couple states.Nationwide popular vote results:

Alan Keyes- 47,768

Ron Paul- 41,905

http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2008/2008presgeresults.pdf

Galileo
04-24-2009, 06:44 PM
Nationwide popular vote results:

Alan Keyes- 47,768

Ron Paul- 41,905

http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2008/2008presgeresults.pdf

You didn't count the votes in the primaries. RP didn't run for president in the general election.

ChumpDumper
04-24-2009, 06:46 PM
You didn't count the votes in the primaries. RP didn't run for president in the general election.I wasn't talking about the primaries, so I naturally left them out.

He lost those pretty soundly as well.

Marcus Bryant
04-24-2009, 06:50 PM
Though not to Keyes.

Galileo
04-24-2009, 06:52 PM
I wasn't talking about the primaries, so I naturally left them out.

He lost those pretty soundly as well.

you're right, keyes got beat pretty bad by Paul in the primaries.

ChumpDumper
04-24-2009, 06:53 PM
Though not to Keyes.Again, if you want to talk about the primaries, enjoy yourself.

You know I wasn't.

braeden0613
04-24-2009, 06:56 PM
Again, if you want to talk about the primaries, enjoy yourself.

You know I wasn't.
Actually it's pretty hard to tell you were talking about the presidential race. You just said that RP got less votes than Alan Keyes.

ChumpDumper
04-24-2009, 07:02 PM
Actually it's pretty hard to tell you were talking about the presidential race. You just said that RP got less votes than Alan Keyes.Sorry about that.

Let it be known throughout the land that I was indeed talking about the popular vote in the 2008 presidential election as clearly illustrated by the numbers and link to the results of the popular vote in the 2008 presidential election I posted.

I apologize for any confusion.

braeden0613
04-24-2009, 07:06 PM
Sorry about that.

Let it be known throughout the land that I was indeed talking about the popular vote in the 2008 presidential election as clearly illustrated by the numbers and link to the results of the popular vote in the 2008 presidential election I posted.

I apologize for any confusion.
Good Lord, you posted that AFTER you said Alan Keyes got more votes.

ChumpDumper
04-24-2009, 07:09 PM
I posted the actual popular vote results four minutes before anyone said anything about the primaries.

Why should there be any confusion after that?

braeden0613
04-24-2009, 07:22 PM
I would really love to leave this thread alone but whatever
At 5:08 you say, "Feh, Alan Keyes got more votes than Ron Paul."---Could mean primaries, foxnews.com popularity contest, presidential election, who knows

You post the numbers then Galileo says those are the presidential numbers, which are irrelevant since RP pulled out long before the election.

At 6:53 you say, "Again, if you want to talk about the primaries, enjoy yourself. You know I wasn't."

So how is anyone supposed to know you were talking about the presidential numbers at the beginning when you said Keyes got more votes than RP? It's really not a valid point anyway---most of those votes were likely write-ins.

Galileo
04-24-2009, 07:31 PM
I would really love to leave this thread alone but whatever
At 5:08 you say, "Feh, Alan Keyes got more votes than Ron Paul."---Could mean primaries, foxnews.com popularity contest, presidential election, who knows

You post the numbers then Galileo says those are the presidential numbers, which are irrelevant since RP pulled out long before the election.

At 6:53 you say, "Again, if you want to talk about the primaries, enjoy yourself. You know I wasn't."

So how is anyone supposed to know you were talking about the presidential numbers at the beginning when you said Keyes got more votes than RP? It's really not a valid point anyway---most of those votes were likely write-ins.

Good points.

Was RP even on any ballots in November? Maybe as a third party in Montana or something. Were Ron Paul write-in votes ever counted in all 50 states?

ChumpDumper
04-24-2009, 08:24 PM
I apologized for any misunderstanding.

Feel free to make excuses for Paul -- he was a fringe candidate no matter how you slice it.

ChumpDumper
04-24-2009, 08:25 PM
Was RP even on any ballots in November? You can't answer this question for yourself?

braeden0613
04-24-2009, 08:42 PM
I apologized for any misunderstanding.

Feel free to make excuses for Paul -- he was a fringe candidate no matter how you slice it.
Probably...but he was branded crazy and a fringe candidate by the mainstream Republican party. It's ironic that he was essentially preaching the same things they were years ago.

Marcus Bryant
04-25-2009, 12:29 AM
Years ago? Perhaps about 8.

Bush did everything but head over to the National Archives and shit on the Constitution.




Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a goddamned piece of paper!


Paul was revered by conservatives once upon a time as the ideal congressman. He was one of the earliest supporters of Ronald Reagan back in 1976. Of course, in the secessionist hotbed that is Texas, Paul took something like 3% of the GOP primary vote (yes, by then the race had been decided, but still).

It will take some time for the GOP to recover from the Bush move to Roosevelt/Wilson style progressivism and militarism. It's amusing that McCain was so disdained by 'conservatives' when he differed little substantively from Bush in terms of their view of government.

The weird thing is that on social policy, all of primary candidates, save for Paul, were nothing more than big government advocates, content to continue the status quo.

Marcus Bryant
04-25-2009, 12:42 AM
The GOP needs an insurrection in the worst way. The old guard has led it down the wrong path. Frauds like Dobson, Hannity, and the editorial staffs of The Weekly Standard and National Review need to be shown the door. The government isn't a church and the people don't exist to serve the state as it seeks global domination. Paul has his faults, but I don't see anyone else willing to articulate an alternative view of where we should be headed as a nation in the GOP.

We can have all of the bellyaching about how Obama is leading us to 'socialism', but honestly he's basically continuing where his predecessor left off.

I think the nation will be ready for a non-bailout path soon, but staging the comeback will require the party to become more libertine in matters social. True individualism will still play well, but you need someone credible to deliver that message. Other than Paul I don't see anyone else who can.

FaithInOne
04-25-2009, 08:12 PM
Chump got chumped lulz

ChumpDumper
04-25-2009, 08:15 PM
I cleared up any ambiguity rather quickly lulz

FaithInOne
04-26-2009, 03:11 PM
I cleared up any ambiguity rather quickly lulz

haha still too much pride lollerz

ChumpDumper
04-26-2009, 03:18 PM
Was that word too big for you?

LnGrrrR
04-27-2009, 09:30 AM
Ron Paul SHOULDN'T have been a fringe candidate, if you take the Republicans for their word at what they value.

Marcus Bryant
04-27-2009, 12:37 PM
Ron Paul SHOULDN'T have been a fringe candidate, if you take the Republicans for their word at what they value.

Essentially.

FaithInOne
04-27-2009, 03:47 PM
Was that word too big for you?

nah dude, snl taught me the meaning of that word a long time ago.