Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Ps104_33, Jul 10, 2007.
Oh noooo! Poor ronnie.
It's only because they are removing all the polls where he is getting votes.
"Barking Moonbat" :laugh: LGF is getting more creative in their ad hominem's.
Timmy, Timmy...this barking moonbat reminds you that the gentleman from Texas name is Ron Paul. When you cast your vote be sure to vote for Ron and not his son Ronnie.
How is it ad hominem to report that Ron Paul got no support on the latest poll?
I'd be curious who these Gallup polls are polling, if they are still only polling those voters ages 30 and up, then they are missing the entire younger voting block, which is where Ron Paul gets much of his support. Here is a link to some statistics that speak much louder than Gallup polls and are not "hacked" but based on actuall data from 10 million users in Hitwise's system: http://www.clickz.com/showPage.html?page=3626275
I think the Internet will play a role in the 2008 election like never before and it has the traditional media scared!
As far as I am concerned my support has nothing to do with Ron Paul winning the GOP presidential nomination, but it is simply the enjoyment I receive from watching the liberal GOP Establishment - including its disciples who post in this forum, such as Timmy - having such a fit over his candidacy. Fortunately, I hope to enjoy this spectacle for another seven months.
Their report of Ron Paul getting no support on a Gallup poll of less than 400 people with a +- of 5%, polling people who have land lines and actually answer them, is not ad hominem. However, introducing the article with ...
"The barking moonbats’ favorite candidate Ron Paul..."
...is. It's consistent of LGF tactics as they also like to use expressions such as "Truther Morons" and other such like statements. Further, it is quite ignorant as the epithet, "barking moonbat" typically applies to leftist liberals which Ron Paul nor the bulk of his supporters are (though he does have cross ideological appeal as he is a rare anti-war candidate and there's even some liberals out there that like the constitution). The "barking moonbat" epithet would be better served for supporters of Rudy Julie-Annie (a cross-dressing, sodomite supporting, pro-abortion, actual liberal) and web sites that support him like...LGF.
Fair enough. I just wasn't seeing the ad hominem. I know nothing about the site since I don't support Rudy. By the way, calling him a cross dresser over the one prank thing..isn't that a bit over-the-top? Some people call Paul a pro-abortion, pro-pot candidate, so let's be careful with the real ad hominem
I was polled when I was in my late 20s.
Rudy wore the clothes that pertain to a woman, danced in a cabaret and had Donald Trump rub his face in Rudy's chest. He's cross-dressed publicly on more than one occasion so it begs the question how many times does one have to do this before he's considered to be a cross-dresser and this is not considered to be an ad hominem? At the least he was a cross-dresser twice. These are not the behaviors of a Christian, nor the behaviors of a conservative but they are consistent with a reprobate who rooms with sodomites and supports the killing of babies.
Some people calling Ron Paul pro-abortion is just about as lame as calling his supporters "barking moonbats". Ron Paul's record shows him to be pro-life, Rudy's does not. Ron Paul does not have a record indicating that he wears women's clothes, Rudy does. Also, as an added bonus, Ron Paul has never married one of his cousins.
Oh come now. Women just have nicer clothes.
Those people must be either ignorant of the facts, or simply trying to spread lies about Dr. Paul. This is from Ron Paul's Web site:
The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.
In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman.
In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094.
I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn.
I have also authored HR 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.”
Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken direct action to restore protection for the unborn.
As an OB/GYN doctor, I’ve delivered over 4,000 babies. That experience has made me an unshakable foe of abortion. Many of you may have read my book, Challenge To Liberty, which champions the idea that there cannot be liberty in a society unless the rights of all innocents are protected. Much can be understood about the civility of a society in observing its regard for the dignity of human life.
As for Paul, he is a mixed bag on abortion. His voting record does not equal his statments. See the thread on that issue in this forum.
Rudy is not a serious candidate. I don't know why you Paulites are so worried about him, and even more, I don't know why you're reaching at straws to tank him. His record is tanking him enough as it is.
Giuliani is the current frontrunner for the Republican Party and he isn't a serious candidate?
But, that may be true, as the GOP's chances in 2008 are pretty remote for retaining the presidency.
You can say that about every candidate who has voted on bills.
I've seen polling that has him trailing, particularly those that have Fred in the race.
You're reaching, my friend.
So are you saying Paul is just another "I'll say one thing and vote another"? I thought he was supposedly different?
So you consider being in 2nd place in some polls to indicate that Giuliani is not a serious candidate?
Not at all. Only one Man has ever lived his life consistently and He isn't running for president in 2008.
No, Ron Paul is not perfectly consistent but he is head and shoulders above any other candidate in either major party when it comes to being about as consistently pro-limited, constitutional government as any non-divine human being can be.