KenH's New Original Ron Paul for President Thread

[poncho]

carpro, Paul's explaining why the terrorists hate us doesn't mean he wants them to hate us or approves of the fact that they hate us. How is this confusing?

What Carpro and the rest of the establishment shills like Hannity and O'Rielly would have us believe is that Ron Paul is blaming U.S. citizens and/or the government for the attacks of 9/11. This whole ploy has already fallen flat on it's face because it's so simply ridiculous that even the co opted republicans can see that it's just a reaction to Paul's opponents inability to drag him down by using the "skeletons" in his closet.

John McCain tried the same ploy when he tried to blame American citizens (public opinion) for "losing" the intervention in Viet Nam. This is pure bunkum. That intervention was lost because as anyone who has studied the American revolution even a little can tell you is that organized armies using attrition will be bested by those resorting to guerrilla warfare almost every time. We whupped the British empire using it, the Afghans whupped the Soviets using it...da da da da da.

The strange part is that "we" taught the Afghans how to wage a guerilla war against a major superpower and win. Yet, we turn around and try to use attrition against the very same people "we" trained to beat the Soviets! Dumb dumb dumb!

Ron Paul is giving the establishment and the people a much needed history lesson. Unless you happen to be Hannity or O'Rielly then in that case like Bill O said during his interview with Ron Paul,"we don't need a history lesson".

Apparently you and Carpro do need a history lesson Bill.

It's not those who dissent or even our "freedom" that causes others to hate us, it's our attitude that the world is ours and our policy of aggresive warmongering, isolationism (sactions), military intimidation and killing of those who dare to think their nation should be run by the government it's own people chooses.

Ron Paul is saying it's the policy period! Trying to spin it into anything else is an act of desperation and dishonesty as far as I'm concerned.

 

[poncho]

Nationwide March for Ron Paul New Year's Eve

Imagine thousands of Ron Paul supporters marching at the same time in every major city in the world! There are almost 100,000 meetup.com group members now. If we can get even 10% of the meetup group members to pledge that would be huge!

The R[3VOL]UTION is just getting started. We have shown the media that we can raise more money in one day than any candidate in history. Now it is time to show them, in person, just how many people this movement unites! What better way to show your support for Ron Paul than to march through the streets with fellow Ron Paul supporters? Join us this New Year's Eve and pledge to march in a major city near you!

We need your help spreading the word and getting other people to pledge as well. The more pledges there are, the more inspired people will be to show up. There will be tons of people flocking to these cities for New Year's Eve, so this is a great time to reach a huge audience

SOURCE

I'll be marching with my daughter and friends in Nashville Tennessee on New Years eve. Anybody else planning to march?

 

[KenH]

State Softball

State Softball

Posted by Lew Rockwell at December 28, 2007 07:01 PM

Chris Matthews was smirking on Hardball tonight, discussing all the establishment-acceptable candidates (and ignoring the one who isn't). Then NBC's Chuck Todd broke the rules, right at the end, and said there's a new question being asked in Iowa: "Who will place after Ron Paul? Will it be Giuliani and Thompson?" The other panelists giggled nervously. A shocked Matthews said, "That's a sobering thought." Sobering? Wait until the caucuses.

-www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/018071.html

 

[PastorSBC1303]

Ken, just thought I would share this with you. I just drove through the one four way stop in our little down town area of South Missouri and found about 8 folks holding signs up for Ron Paul and waving at all of the cars going by.

 

[KenH]

Interesting bit of news. It will be interesting between now and Super Duper Tuesday to see how the passion of the Paul supporters translates into caucus goers and primary voters.

Sometimes I feel rather optimistic about how well Paul will do and then at other times, having been deeply disappointed in how things turned out for Jack Kemp in 1988 and Steve Forbes in 1996, I wonder if Republican voters will truly return to voting en masse for limited government again.

 

[KenH]

Paul campaign wants to raise another 23 million dollars to win nomination

www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=212674

 

[KenH]

New Hampshire could surprise a lot of people.

Ron Beats Rudy?
New Hampshire could surprise a lot of people.

BY ANDREW CLINE
Sunday, December 30, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

MANCHESTER, N.H.--For several hours last Sunday, more than a dozen Ron Paul volunteers stood in snowdrifts in the rain outside the Mall of New Hampshire in Manchester waving at last-minute Christmas shoppers and handing out hundreds of yards signs.

The campaign doesn't know how many people participated because, as with so many Paul rallies, this one was organized entirely by fans not officially associated with the campaign.

"We told them to take Christmas Eve and Christmas off, and next thing we know they're doing a sign wave at the mall," said Jim Forsythe, a self-employed engineer and former Air Force pilot from Strafford, N.H., who independently organizes volunteer efforts for Ron Paul.
That spontaneous grassroots support is why Mr. Paul, an obstetrician from Lake Jackson, Texas, could pull off a stunner on Jan. 8 and place third in New Hampshire's Republican primary. If he does, he would embarrass Rudy Giuliani and steal media limelight from John McCain and Mitt Romney, who are battling for first place. ...

The buzz surrounding the Paul campaign is reminiscent of the grassroots campaign Democrat Carol Shea-Porter waged against Republican Rep. Jeb Bradley last year. Polls showed Mrs. Shea-Porter trailing by 19 points in October. With almost no money and no support from the Democratic establishment, she came from behind and beat the congressman 51% to 49%.

- rest at www.opinionjournal.com/cc/?id=110011060

 

[TomVols]

I do miss Jack Kemp. And I need to renew my Forbes subscription. Sorry...back to the topic at hand. :thumbs:

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

Wall Street Journal: Paul could do better than expected.

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

Human Events asks: Would Reagan Vote for Ron Paul?

To begin with, there is little doubt that for at least foreign policy, Reagan was basically a non-interventionist.

 

[KenH]

Christine Smith Supporting Ron Paul

http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/12/30/christine-smith-supporting-ron-paul/

 

[carpro]

carpro, Paul's explaining why the terrorists hate us doesn't mean he wants them to hate us or approves of the fact that they hate us. How is this confusing?

It's not.

It's just a different issue.

 

[carpro]

Quote:
Originally Posted by carpro
I believe murdering 3000 innocent people is in excusable.

So does Ron Paul. So do I. So does everyone else who posts in this forum.

Of course he does. Of course you do. Of course all of us do.

But, then I'm not the one that's blaming the US for 911. Paul is.

"For the critics of our policy of foreign interventionism in the affairs of others the attack on New York and Washington was not a surprise..."

Ron Paul

 

[Petra-O IX]

Quote:
Originally Posted by carpro
I believe murdering 3000 innocent people is in excusable.



Of course he does. Of course you do. Of course all of us do.

But, then I'm not the one that's blaming the US for 911. Paul is.

"For the critics of our policy of foreign interventionism in the affairs of others the attack on New York and Washington was not a surprise..."

Ron Paul

No he's not, you have interpreted Ron Pauls message completely wrong.

 

[carpro]

When asked if we invited the attacks of 911:

"I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, 'I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.'..."

Translation:

Yes, we invited the attacks.

 

[Petra-O IX]

When asked if we invited the attacks of 911:

"I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, 'I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.'..."

Translation:

Yes, we invited the attacks.

And your translation is wrong. Ron Paul did not say is was America's fault for 911
Ron Paul does have an understanding of our enemy but he never did legitimize their reasoning for their attack on us.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Isn't Paul saying that the reason they came here to attack us is because we were over there?

 

[Dagwood]

Isn't Paul saying that the reason they came here to attack us is because we were over there?

You don't believe that our presence in Saudi Arabia had anything to do with our being attaked on 9/11?

 

[Pastor Larry]

You don't believe that our presence in Saudi Arabia had anything to do with our being attaked on 9/11?

My question was not about what I believe, but about what Paul says.

 

[Petra-O IX]

Isn't Paul saying that the reason they came here to attack us is because we were over there?

Maybe , but he didn't legitimize their reasoning nor did he say it was America's fault for 911 .... Whooops, there I go again repeating myself.