Complaints Flood CNN After Beck Smears Ron Paul Supporters As Terrorists

I'm 55 years old. How old are you?

 

More useless and inflammtory banter with no real reason or legitmate consideration.

 

Why don't you go and read your bible or something you consider worthwhile if my postings are "imflammtory banter" (should be inflammatory) or the like.

Or, you could work on your spelling skills, you know you being a pastor and all. Seems like communication skills which a preacher needs are sorely laking in your instance. What college did you graduate from that didn't teach you basic English skills?

 

If it were a just war, then I would agree. Since war has never been officially declared, and we are not truly AT war, then there is no compelling reason to silence the opposition.

 

revisionist bologna.

 

Do you ever try thinking before posting?

 

wow! What a revealing post.Anyway the only time someone seems to care about my typo's is when they have nothing left to say.

 

No, it's the truth. I am so sorry that you find the truth to be disagreeable.

 

Whoa, the liberals had nothing to do with the founding of the USA. They were probably all Tories at the timeand hoping for more big British government in this country. :laugh: :laugh:

 

Whoa nothing. The Tories were the conservatives of their day, cmg. Liberalism is not the evil that conservatives paint it to be. If it were not for liberal values we would be living in a dictatorship today. The very concept of representative government is a liberal idea.

 

1) Ron Paul is an isolationist because he want to draw back the military from all over the world. We have been using the military overseas since Thomas Jefferson at least, and perhaps before. To call Bush an isolationists is total semantic rubbish, and you know it, Ken. As for the so-called diplomatic estrangement, that is the straight leftist line that Beck and Horowitz were talking about--it goes to the point that we have bad relations with the French; however the French recently improved their relations with us because they too fear Iran.

2) Someday you can tell me the difference between the man who takes the money and the people who get others to give him the money. Since it is an official campaign, I think that Paul is responsible, but if you say that he isn't then I will agree with you.

3) This is Ron Paul's last hurrah because the Libertarian Party is dwindling down from what it was in 1980 when they made their greatest inroads against the Republican Party. He will probably try to keep his Texas congressional seat the rest of his life, so you are right that he will have some hurrahs in Texas, but not from Texans for Bush.

 

:laugh: :laugh: You are playing with definitions. Today's liberals are not like classic liberals and you know it. You want to use today's word with yesterday's meaning and then redeem your case. The idea that the Founding Fathers were tax and spend big government leftists like today's liberals is totally wrong. Ron Paul, as David Horowitz points out, sounds just like a communist or socialist. Cover up the names on their written statements, and no one could tell who was who. As the old saying goes, the far right and the far left join hands.

 

However, nowhere near to this extent.

 

Did Horowitz say that? If he did, then he has no idea what he is talking about and should stay off of political and news shows.

How can wanting the government to stay off of your property and out of your wallet be communistic or socialistic?

Horowitz's statement, if you have quoted him accurately, is totally nonsensical.

 

Unless you know who the author of a statement is, you cannot tell the difference between Ron Paul and some ultraleftist Democrats, communists, and socialists. We are talking about US foreign policy.

 

Communism is more about domestic policy than foreign policy. Any type of government can attempt to rule the world(example: neo-cons in our own government).

 

I know. Classical liberal is a synonym for libertarian.

 

It would also be nice if Julie on nee,McCain,romney,and thompson,along with others did as well.

 

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.

 

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 ?