ex-Ron Paul Campaign Co-ordinator

It wasn't an attitude. It was an observation. I would wager that over 90% of republicans will not give the man a second thought. Just my observation from what he has said.

God Bless!

 

Then listen to this:

www.wmur.com/video/13328294/detail.html

I have to wonder, Pastor Larry, why you are not calling for Giuliani to step up and clarify why he doesn't know what the 9/11 Commission report states and why he is not familiar with the term "blowback". I think you are being unfair to Ron Paul by not doing so.

 

"We the People"......stop pointing fingers and diverting responsibility away from the common folk, who either are too lazy to participate and vote or are too lazy or afraid to vote for the best candidate rather than the one the media says has a chance of winning.

God bless!

 

Good ole Gatewood!

I'm surprised Abrahmson hasn't run for governor. He's the reason Louisville and Jefferson Co merged, so he could run for something else :laugh:

 

So what? I don't decide who to support based on what the herd thinks. And I think that it is unwise for anyone to do so.

I would say it is more like 99% who won't give Ron Paul a second thought. It has always been that way.

"If you waste your time a-talking to the people who don't listen
To the things that you are saying who do you think's gonna hear?
And if you should die explaining how the things that they complain about
Are things they could be changing, who do you think's gonna care?

There were other lonely singers in a world turned deaf and blind who
Were crucified for what they tried to show,
And their voices have been scattered by the swirling winds of time,
for the truth remains that no one wants to know!"

- from the lyrics to "To Beat the Devil", written by Kris Kristofferson. I heard it on a Johnny Cash album when I was teenager and it has stuck with me. There is also a more positive chorus at the end but the older I get the more I become convinced that this first chorus is the more accurate one.

 

The 9/11 report on why America is hated

People keep saying the 9/11 report justifies Paul's debate comments. That may or may not be true. Here is a quote from the report:

Source: "Bin Laden's 'Letter to America,'" Observer Worldview, Nov. 24, 2002 (trans., online at http://observer.guardian.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,845725,00.html). Quoted in the 9/11 Commission report http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch2.htm

The report goes on to say that war was declared on the U.S. before the airstrikes on Iraq as a result of UN sanctions.

If there is material from the report to further substantiate Rep. Paul's (et.al.) claims, please show a quote/link from the 9/11 report. Thanks!

 

I have an honest question here (not like I'm being dishonest the rest of the time)

The 9/11 report is often cited by Paul and definitely by Paul's supporters. What about the fact that the 9/11 report was the impetus for new bureaucracy in the wake of the terrorist attacks (Cf. chs 12-13)? What about the recommendation that the US take a more interventionist role (cf. ch 12), both in nation building and military involvement? This includes nations that are deemed to be potential breeding grounds for terrorists, not just present threats.

Thanks!

 

Niether do I.

Could be. But I was checking him out and hoping he had something to offer. Unfortunately he has spoken and it sounds to me like he doesn't understand that the lost hate those who call themselves Christian no matter what. They teach their children from knee high to hate the Jews and Christians and to do as the Koran says and kill them whenever they can.

It matters not what we do as a nation to them. Just being Israels friend causes then to target us. No policy changes, NONE, will ever stop them from targeting what they call infidels. They kill for a reason, and that is to bring on the great Jihad. They will always being plotting to kill us no matter what our foriegn policies are.

It is naive to believe that if we stay out of their affairs they will leave us alone. So we better stay strong throughout the world wherever we have opportunity. We can only do our best to defend ourselves until Christ returns to deliver us. If that means taking out threats before they develope into massive situations then so be it. Saddam is no longer a threat. Iraqu is no longer a biological threat to it's neighbors nor a nuclear threat. These are GOOD things!

God Bless!:thumbs:

 

VERY good questions. The 9/11 report is refered to here many times as if it is a great finding and a wonderful report! What say you guys?

God Bless!

 

1) Based on what evidence? Did Muslims do massive suicide attacks in the United States before we adopted an interventionist policy after World War II? I opposed the 1990 Gulf War and I have been vindicated in doing so. The attacks on 9/11/01 would have never happened if we hadn't gotten involved in a situation that was none of our business.

2) Iraq was a biological threat in the 1980's thanks to the United States government.

 

No problem. You are most welcome.

"How did Bin Ladin—with his call for the indiscriminate killing of Americans—win thousands of followers and some degree of approval from millions more? . . . He also stresses grievances against the United States widely shared in the Muslim world. . . . He spoke of the suffering of the Iraqi people as a result of sanctions imposed after the Gulf War, and he protested U.S. support of Israel. *****America’s policy choices have consequences. Right or wrong, it is simply a fact that American policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and American actions in Iraq are dominant staples of popular commentary across the Arab and Muslim world."

- www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/fullreport.pdf
​

 

No. Did they do masive suicide attacks in the US before we had airplanes?

It has less to do with policy, it has much to do with opportunity.

God Bless!

 

Well, he currently has my vote and I am a Democrat!

Jamie

 

I doubt you see him on the final ticket and are given the chance. But God knows and I do not. Whoever wins is the man or woman the Lord wants to be President of the USA.

God Bless!

 

Whether he is on the "ticket" or not, unless things change he will get my vote even if I have to write it in.

Jamie

 

He rejects the use of force for political ends. When you think about it, that rules out all war all the time. All wars are about politics. That sounds to me like more of Paul not thinking seriously about what he is saying. That actually adds to the weakness of what he said. It just makes me wonder ... Does this guy really not think about what he says?

The Revolution was about politics. WWI and WWII were about politics. And they weren't really even about defending America. We took it to foreign soil to liberate other countries rather than simply stay at home and defend ourselves. So it seems like Paul has not given serious thought to what he is saying.

I am unfair to Ron Paul because I have not publicly stated that I think Giuliani is an idiot? How does that work, Ken? My comments were about Ron Paul, no one else. Why would I call on Giuliani to do anything? I haven't really called on Paul to do anything. These guys aren't listening to me. I pointed out what should have been obvious ... That Paul misspoke. As I have said before, this kind of poor thinking does not give me confidence in his ability to be a president. I think Giuliani is a waste of time. So what?

I watched more of this debate than the last one to learn somethign about Paul. I was hoping to be impressed. I wasn't. I was disappointed.

 

Not sure that is the reason for the merger, but Jerry Abramson, and prior to him, Rebecca Jackson and Todd Hollenbeck of the Falls City, and Mayor Scotty Beasler of Lexingtron were pretty fair, or at least, were no slouches as administrators of their respective areas. And were, no doubt, better administrators than some we've elected as Governor. But I'll still go with Gatewood, if he wins the primary, simply because he is far more honest than most of the candidates. I cannot vote for him in the primary.

Ed

 

That is such a false, abominable statement! How dare you besmirch the sacrifice of our troops without which you would either be speaking German today or worshiping the Japanese Emperor.

 

I didn't besmirch our troops, Ken. You are worse than Giuliani with that response.

I have walked on some of the battle fields of the Pacific Islands were Japanese tanks, guns, pillboxes still stand; where American armor is still found just as it was left some sixty years ago. I have literally stood in awe ... in tears at the thought of what went on there. I have waded in the water where our soldiers went ashore in full battle gear, and dug my toes in the sand that was red with their blood. I have stood at the top of cliffs where mother threw their babies over and then jumped to avoid capture by American troops because they have been brainwashed. I have looked down the face of cliffs where Japanese soldiers jump more than 400 feet to kill themselves rather than be captures. Don't talk to me about belittling the greatest generation. I did no such thing and you know it.

Most of WWII was fought thousands of miles away from our shores. My point is that what we were doing was freeing other people, such as the French, the Philipinos, the English, etc. Had we set out only to defend ourselves, we would never have strayed that far away. We would have stayed close to home. We did the right thing. But the German economy and war machine was in shambles. The Japanese economy was failing by most evaluations. They would not have lasted long. We could have hung back around here and just defended our land, but we didn't. We went across the oceans to fight, and more than 400,000 men gave their lives on some other countries soil, freeing other people from tyranny of the sort that Saddam Hussein was carrying out on the Iraqi people.

So don't act like Rudy. Deal with the facts. Much of WWII was an intervention in European politics.

 

That is bunk. Pure, unadulterated bunk.