Oh Frank, you sure do love talking about Ron Paul and trash his supporters and positions. When the general election comes around, good luck to Rudy to try and win it without that 1/3 of Republicans and 80% of independents who oppose the war.

So Ron Paul's kind of like the Keymaster...does that mean John Edwards is the Gatekeeper? How long do we have before dogs and cats are living together? :o)

Rudy's only a point behind Hillary Clinton in the polls. Even Fred Thompson has one poll putting him as tied. Link Do you have any polls showing Ron Paul anywhere close to that?

I, for one, welcome our insect overlords and remind them that, as a trust news personality, I can be instrumental in helping them round up slaves to toil in their underground sugar caves!

We're six months from the Iowa Caucus and people are just now getting to know Ron Paul -- but when they hear who he is, they like him a lot.

Before you put too much trust in those scientific polls, remember that McCain was the solid frontrunner as recently as March, and now his campaign is in shambles.

Ron Paul's supporters are enthused by his message -- limited government, return to the constitution, elimination of the Federal Reserve and IRS, ending the war in Iraq and no war in Iran, and cutting taxes and government spending.

But IMAO doesn't want to talk about any of this. Why not?

[IMAO makes no secret that it was paid off by the government agency responsible for 9/11 and will do anything to stop Ron Paul, so stop acting like there is some sort of conspiracy. -Ed.]

I knew it!!

It's hard to tell the difference between the Ron Paul supporters and the rabbid moonbats. Both will lie and deceive without the slightest hesitation.

Oh.....and their both nuts.

Why do you always name your alien overlords after prescription drugs? First Xanax and now Zelnorm? lol

[Because almost every prescription drug sounds like a great name for an alien warlord. -Ed.]

I have no problem with a candidate that isn't part of the establishment but I would prefer that he/she not be terribly daffy and that I not have to join a bunch of whack jobs to support him or her. If one has to denigrate the competition rather than promoting one's own product then you are operating from a position of weakness. Hardly practitioners of "The Art of War"...

Buck, with the good stuff comes a ton of baggage - that's what we make fun of him for. A lot of Dems will like his criticisms of Bush just like a lot of Dems have liked McCain for his criticisms of Bush over the years - but when it came to actually supporting the man himself, they have had to come to grips with the fact he's no lefty and their support dwindled accordingly.

When it comes to pissing off potential supporters, Ron Paul is McCain on crack, a Dem who would support him for opposing the war would be absolutely horrified when they learned of proposals to cut entire departments, nevermind his opinion of the UN and the more extreme conspiracy theories.

Besides that there's the question of plain old experience - we make fun of Barack Obama for being inexperienced, how the hell are we going to justify electing a member of the House of Representatives as President?

[IMAO makes no secret that it was paid off by the government agency responsible for 9/11 and will do anything to stop Ron Paul, so stop acting like there is some sort of conspiracy. -Ed.]

is there any way I can get in on this?

[Because almost every prescription drug sounds like a great name for an alien warlord. -Ed.]

Very true; also very funny.

Some required daily reading for every IMAO user -> It's the Daily Paul. Enjoy!

Funny how Ron Paul makes the ardent Republicans, who always bash lefties on big taxes, wasteful government schemes, violating our rights (2nd Amendment) or internationalism (UN, France...etc), do a 180 on all of that.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm
A republican candidate lags by almost 30 points begind a democrat.
With Bloomberg in the race, candidates who don't make fear mongering the centerpiece of their platform get 58%.

The only thing that is holding Guiliani up in the polls are his liberal social views. His statism only appeals to a shrinking number of cowards who need a big daddy to protect him from the big bad muslims.

"Funny how Ron Paul makes the ardent Republicans, who always bash lefties on big taxes, wasteful government schemes, violating our rights (2nd Amendment) or internationalism (UN, France...etc), do a 180 on all of that."

Where do we bash him for that?

"The only thing that is holding Guiliani up in the polls are his liberal social views."

And the reason Rassmussen has Fred Thompson tied with Hillary is . . . ?

"His statism only appeals to a shrinking number of cowards who need a big daddy to protect him from the big bad muslims."

NO - it's because he's paying us off. Get with the program.

Maybe Frank J. should change his last name to Kennedy, since he loves the government so much.

And the reason Rassmussen has Fred Thompson tied with Hillary is . . . ?

Watching Law and Order...

So shouldn't that guy? Everybody already likes him from Law and Order and a bunch of movies vs. another one who gets 1% in the polls and has yet to demonstrate he can get higher? Worked for Reagan, right?

[P.S., Frank, If I'm wearing out my welcome by taking these guys seriously, let me know]

If celebrity appeal is what turns people like you on then I'm sure you'd support Tom Cruise for President of the Galaxy. He'd take on the REAL leader of al-Qaeda--Lord Xenu.

But seriously, you people who get hard-ons for Fred Thompson are pretty ridiculous. This guy is the "Max Cleland" of conservatism--he doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Campaign finance restriction, affirmative action, expansion of the welfare state, initial support for the McCain amnesty (before he decided he wanted to run), etc. You guys are major tools if you think he's anything to be excited about.

Tsk, tsk. Who wants to bet, hmmm? ...Tsk.

"If celebrity appeal is what turns people like you on then I'm sure you'd support Tom Cruise for President of the Galaxy."

Getting tied in the polls with Hillary turns me on.

Getting 0.5% doesn't.

While I don't like campaign finance restrictions, it's hardly a deal-breaker (neither is a single vote in the '90s favoring one part of affirmative action or welfare) - a candidate implying 9/11 was a gigantic government conspiracy and who seems to be the hero of every conspiracy lunatic is a dealbreaker, sorry.

I don't like what you have to say, but I support your freedom to say it. Ron Paul is likely the only candidate who would defend your freedom of speech.

Tom Wolf
Seattle, WA

testo

Getting tied in the polls with Hillary turns me on.
Getting 0.5% doesn't.

....YES. Why not have someone else make the decision for you! Are fucking serious? You'd just jump on the bandwagon because some grandma who answered a phone survey thinks Fred Thompson looks presidential?

Also, can you point out when Ron Paul claimed that the 9/11 attacks are a government conspiracy.
(What you maybe referring to is the claim that our intrusive foreign policy in the Middle East has angered people to attack us. That is a by-product of government policy, yes, but over a period of many decades.)

Maybe Ru Paul is just a straw man put up by the RNC just to turn people away from libertarian ideas. He takes some decent stands, but is so loony and foreign to reason, that he makes the whole group of libertarian leaning righties look like paranoid nutcases.

If CNN has a debate between a liberal and a conservative, almost without fail, they will have some three-tooth, flannel-wearing, illiterate, imbred ignoramous representing "conservatives" as he gets verbally flogged by some lefty professor who knows English. They use this method to try to discredit conservative views.

Maybe Ru Paul is the means to discredit libertarian-conservatives.

So there is a conspiracy . . .

It's hard to tell the difference between the Ron Paul supporters and the rabbid moonbats.

The Paul-bots seem to swear a lot less and refrain from implying that we are homosexuals. However, they could just be DUmmies or KOSmonuts who run their comments through a filter first.

While I don't like campaign finance restrictions, it's hardly a deal-breaker (neither is a single vote in the '90s favoring one part of affirmative action or welfare) - a candidate implying 9/11 was a gigantic government conspiracy and who seems to be the hero of every conspiracy lunatic is a dealbreaker, sorry.

Spin spin spin! Thompson is no conservative. Sure you'll try to minimize his support for Liberal policy because you're an idiot and you're infatuated with celebrity.

Also, I can't believe you actually admitted to supporting him because he polls high. You just "owned" yourself.

"....YES. Why not have someone else make the decision for you! Are fucking serious? You'd just jump on the bandwagon because some grandma who answered a phone survey thinks Fred Thompson looks presidential?"

The whole point, dumbass, of the thread you were responding to was electability. The above poster said the Republican front-runners don't have it. I pointed Rasmussen has Fred Thompson tied with Hillary Clinton, whereas your guy gets less than 1% - Electability, which is what your side brought up in this thread, is not a reason to vote for Ron Paul.

"Also, can you point out when Ron Paul claimed that the 9/11 attacks are a government conspiracy.
(What you maybe referring to is the claim that our intrusive foreign policy in the Middle East has angered people to attack us. That is a by-product of government policy, yes, but over a period of many decades.)"

No, actually, that wasn't what I was referring to, though I'd be happy to argue that also. Ron Paul has gone on the Alex Jones Show and implied he thinks that 9/11 may have been a government conspiracy - that it's something he needs to investigate. He's also implied there's a conspiracy of the "North American Union" to take over the United States.

"Spin spin spin! Thompson is no conservative."

"Finally, compared to Mr. Thompson's lifetime ACU rating of 86.1 and Mr. Frist's 87.8, worth noting is Arizona Sen. John McCain's 82.3. Also worth noting are the lifetime ACU ratings of so-called "second-tier" Republican presidential candidates: Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, 94.0; California Rep. Duncan Hunter, 92.0; Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, 97.8; and Texas Rep. Ron Paul, 82.3."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070623/EDITORIAL/106230006/1013

"....YES. Why not have someone else make the decision for you! Are fucking serious?

Again, electability is what **you** brought up - Your whole reason for being in this thread was to argue we don't have it. So if you have a problem with that argument you shouldn't have focused on it to begin with.

----

Let's start from scrath:

----

"A republican candidate lags by almost 30 points begind a democrat.
With Bloomberg in the race, candidates who don't make fear mongering the centerpiece of their platform get 58%."

"YES. Why not have someone else make the decision for you! Are fucking serious? You'd just jump on the bandwagon because some grandma who answered a phone survey thinks Ron Paul looks presidential?

Before 9/11 I would have been rooting for Ron Paul in the primary, then voted for the Republican who actually won the nomination. Much like I voted for Alan Keyes for the sole reason he was the ONLY major party candidate who would answer questions with chapter and verse from the Constituition as to why he would or would not support a policy. I think it good to have such candidates bringing the subject up, longerm it is the only way to bring about a change. But 9/11 did change everything. No candidate will get my vote until they pass muster on the question of whether they believe we are at war with Islamic fanatics.

Ron Paul is an Idiotarian Libertarian. Sad reality is MOST libertarians are, although there are some notable exceptions.

Almost everything else Paul stands for I can endorse, but either he doesn't believe we are in a war or doesn't believe it is worth winning, so I can't support him. Period, full stop.

But even if we were back in a Pre 9/11 world I ain't stupid enough to believe Paul could, or SHOULD, win. Because he is running to govern a nation that doesn't exist anymore. He would govern the Republic of our Forefathers, which Lincoln destroyed in favor of an Empire and FDR later transformed into a Welfare Socialist People's Republic.

I'll tell you when a Libertatian WILL be elected. When We The People decide we want the Republic back. The Libertarian president will be the final step, not the first. First we take back the local governments, then the State houses and along the way as the public mood changes we will get Congress. Then, and only then, will it be possible to elect a Libertarian as POTUS, but it won't matter by then because the office won't be all that important anymore.

It all makes sense now. Rachel Carson was part of this conspiracy long ago. That's why they banned DDT!

I guess I'll have to stock up on Raid and Black Flag instead. -and maybe something to protect me from Zelnorm too while I'm at it.

Is Paul Westerberg aware of Ron Paul having stolen his nose?

I made all my points on Ron Paul in the Dancing Monkey poll thread.

I don't know about all these conspiracies, but I do sometimes wonder about people who are obsessed
with conspiracy theories (as some claim Ron Paul himself is).

As for Fred Thompson, he and Ron Paul are actually every similar except on the Iraq War. The media has even noted that Fred is trying to copy and emulate Ron on many issues.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=31794

Let's not forget the word on the Hill that Fred is lazy and not up to the full-time job of Prez, and realize the ONLY substantive legislation his name is on is the unconstituional and liberal McCain-Feingold bill.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1863648/posts

If it was insectoid, wouldn't it have 6 legs? Just wondering. And all this political screaming is making me loopy. Whoever wins, this country will still be better than Iraq. Except maybe if Hillary wins.

And here I was taking you seriously, prepping an alien invasion crack, and, of course, you beat me to it.

Well I hate to mention it, but Facebook says Obama has it in the bag.

My boy Fred has a little over 6,000 "supporters" on Facebook. L. Ron Paul, a bit over 12K. The Shriller ups it to 25K.

But "O" man rings up over 102K.

Fortunately for us the primary facebook demographic (the young) are notorious for their poor turnout, and it's easier for L. Ron Paul's fans to register multiple e-mail addresses than it is for them to register to vote multiple times.

Ron Paul is a fool. Doesn't he realize we are in a WAR.

Doesn't he realize that there is a huge conspiracy in the Middle East of people who want the green flag of the crescent and the star to wave over the Capitol of the United States and over the White House.

Listen to
Virgil Goode, he's the one who knows about the jihadist threat. The Muslim armies are assembled at our doorstep. I'm proud to stand by The Honorable Rep. Goode, against the L(oon) Ron Paul.

Virgil Goode will tell you that the terrorists are planning with illegal immigrants to fund abortions for unwed teenage mothers.

My point about the polls was that people don't appreciate fear mongering candidates. So far the major Republican theme has been 9/11, attack Iran, and more prison camps for terrorists, safety over liberty. The Democrats on the other hand only tacitly support the war with Iran, with the others being minor.

Fred Thompson has not jumped into the campaign yet, so he's had no chance to play that card. So far, all we know is the idea of Fred Thompson, who like all the top tier candidates tries to cover up some potentially unpopular aspects (Romney, is a classic example).

If you are really looking for a conservative and hawkish, big government type why not support Huckabee? He has been honest and consistent...

Perhaps Huckabee's religiosity is too legitimate and sincere, Thompson on the other hand would be perfect for paying meaningless lip service.

Why I'm no sophisticated big city lawyer, but I sure am mystified by how well Virgil Goode does a Senator Claghorn impersonation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmisTWxbZpE

What are Ron Paul's initials? RP, what is RP backwards, PR, PUBLIC RELATIONS! Get it? Get it? You neocons don't stand a chance! Ron Paul once had a dog named "Fred" and he controlled him like Ron Paul controls Thompson. And what is dog spelled backwards GOD! Get it? Get it? He will win and do some sort of good thing. and what is Ron Paul spelled backwards, luapnar! Get it? Get it?

I am a highly educated professor at a top acredited big name school. When i see all the things that Ron Paul stands for I wonder what happened to men like this. This is the kind of man our forfathers would be proud of. He wants small government, low taxes, fishnet stockings, whitewall tires, global warming, gun control and whatever else we can say on a blog that supports a certain issue.

L. Ron Paul is goofy looking and probably smells like BenGay.

Is this who you want to lead the nation, seriously, I ask you...

Ron is kind of goofy looking, but Fred is downright scary these days - especially when he is standing next to his wife.

I know primaries are the issue now, but the ultimate question is can any Republican win the White House? If so, it has to be someone like Ron or Fred with a different message.

Scary thing is, odds on are Billary will be once again ruining this country far more than Bush ever did.

Rawen Pawwel is G-D!!!
He IS the 2nd coming of... uh.... whoever
R.P.ers are loonie tunes escaped from their rubber rooms!

Nutzoid, the fact that the Paul-bots take a drawing of a giant, four-legged insect as an invitation to a "serious" political discussion (or as serious as one can be while wearing a tin-foil hat and constantly worrying about fluoridated water and one's precious bodily fluids) appears to verify your diagnosis.

You just wait. People have said the Libertarian "party" couldn't organize a 2 car funeral procession. Well, we've got you now. For the past 30 years, while the Libertarian "party" consistently polled at 1%, we've been loading the poll judges with LIBERTARIANS! HA HA HA! So when the primarys come around ALL the votes will be for Ru Paul, er, Ron Paul.

Then it will be FUEHRER RU PAUL, er President Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is reicht. The arabs do hate us for what we have done. Ever since Jefferson sent the Marines to rout the barbary pirates, the arabs have had it in for us. They have long memories, unlike their penises.

And Ron Paul will take us back to the founding fathers. End overseas entanglements, bring the troops home and let our endless oceans protect us. Then he'll disband the army, air force, coast guard and border patrol. We'll be one happy hemisphere. Where all the countries come together and vote. And since we have more mexicans than Mexico, we'll win. No more TAXES! No more GOVERNMENT! No more FIAT currency, bring back the gold standard! No more flags with fringes! (or is it all flags with fringes? I can never remember that one).

Alex Jones for VP!

Damn... You really get the RP supporters out when you start bashing him.
You think they have some sort of web bot that goes out and finds blogs bashing Paul, so they can concentrate their attacks/defenses (depending on your point of view).

Hey Master Shake, ever occur to you that people pass on their TRUE beliefs and feelings through satire and sarcasm? I personally have found sarcastic people to be the most angry and insecure - along with childish name callers.

Well, Rudy is the better choice.. But I'm all for picking on Ron Paul's stupidity ;)

[IMAO makes no secret that it was paid off by the government agency responsible for 9/11 and will do anything to stop Ron Paul, so stop acting like there is some sort of conspiracy. -Ed.]

Come on Frank, this is arguing in bad faith. My point was not that you're paid off by anyone, which I think was clear -- it was that anti-Paulistas have a pretty unflattering invective-to-argumentation ratio in their attacks, and prefer to talk about anything but the policy issues re Paul.

Your response to my post was a good example of this behavior.

Ron Paul was an OB/GYN. Maybe as he was birthing those babies he "added" a little something given to him by the alien insect overlords. Starting YEARS ago, he would put in the mind switches that makes people turn into moonbats and want to support him.

Yah! That could be it!

"Buck, with the good stuff comes a ton of baggage - that's what we make fun of him for."

Well, what is this baggage? You're not specific, which was part of my point, anti-Paulers call him "crazy" and then won't give me one or two things that make him so supposedly nuts.

Is it that he wants to get rid of the Federal Reserve? The IRS? The income tax? What makes RP crazy, I'd like to hear it.

If you're lookin' for crazy, how about nuclear first-strikes on Iran, which all other 9 repub candidates + obama and hillary, won't take off the table. How would we then react if Russia nukes chechnya, etc.?

"If you are really looking for a conservative and hawkish, big government type why not support Huckabee? He has been honest and consistent..."

I like Huckabee. There's the problem of him raising taxes, but other than that he's pretty conservative. The guy's probably 10 times more religious than me, but I honestly don't think that's a problem for him. He doesn't give off much of a Puritan vibe and is able to come across as pretty easy going and funny off the cuff--that ought to keep him from scaring off people who'd normally be worried a guy from the religious right.

I'd like to see him as a VP pick. If he could show he could get wider support, I'd consider him for something more than that - but whether I like him or not, I want to nominate someone who can show they can beat Hillary. No matter how much I like a candidate, if I'm casting a vote for somebody who does not demonstrate that, there's a good chance that's only going to help Lady MacBeth get elected.

"Well, what is this baggage?"

Keep reading further on -

"How would we then react if Russia nukes chechnya, etc.?"

If Chechnya stated that they wanted to nuke Russia and wipe it off the face of the Earth (which the Iranian government has said about us) and were pursuing nukes, then no - I wouldn't hold it against Russia for threatening to do that. Re: if they actually did it? - whether I'd hold against them would depend on how legitimate a threat Chechnya posed at the time.

Fiftycal,
You made a minor error. The Arabs hated us before Jefferson. He sent the troops into Tripoli in RETALIATION for their piracy.
Ghost,
If Frank J. changed his last name to Kennedy, no one on the Right would again look at IMAO.

No I cannot support Conspiracy Theorists or those who pander to them.
I will support the candidate who says the only true globalism is U.S. statehood.

Could we get some linkage from people bashing Fred! in the thread above? I hear people saying that he's not really conservative, or that he supports this or that obviously-crap policy (amnesty, gun control, etc.), but I never see the tiniest shred of supporting evidence.

Here's what I do know about the guy: I read his column archive on Townhall, and I looked up his voting record here. I agree with pretty much every vote he made (except one), and the content of pretty much every article I've read. The one vote was the one for McCain-Feingold, but I think that one may have been made in good faith, and I think he's expressed regret for the way it's been used since then. He has since written several articles and made speeches denouncing the Fairness Doctrine, which puts his position on First Amendment issues in a favorable light.

So if other candidates align well with your personal views, by all means please support them. But don't try to convince us that Fred! is something other than a "real" conservative -- at least not without supporting evidence.

The best thing about Ronulans is their total lack of a sense of humor. Rather then laugh about the foibles of their anointed leader, they eagerly try to deceive and denigrate all those who dare deviate from the flock. They are much like the moonbats in that regard, except moonbats support Xenu rather then Zelnorm.

Xenu vs. Zelnorm, a battle of Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla proportions.

One Ron Paul to rule them all, One Ron Paul to find them, One Ron Paul to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them.