You're goddamn right RON PAUL! I've been telling you people for years about RON PAUL and you all laughed, but when it's PRESIDENT RON PAUL I'll be the one laughing!

RON PAUL!

Paultards>LaRouchies>Birchers>Birfers?

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Paultards>LaRouchies>Birchers>Birfers?>Tebow

And we all know that Paul winning polls translates to huge voting numbers!

Ron Paul willingly appeared on television to debate an Obama impersonator.

GaryPDX: I'd love a Paul/Huntsman 2012 ticket. That would be the shizznit. And our only hope to stop the train wreck we're headed for.

Ron Paul shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the Executive branch.

/would vote for a Romney/Huntsman ticket

The Mavrick: Ron Paul willingly appeared on television to debate an Obama impersonator.


But he didn't let Brüno get in his pants. So he's got that goin' for him.

It should be fun to watch the talking heads at Fox spin this into more evidence that Romney is the real winner here.

Democrats opposition to Dr. Paul shows how hypocritical the liberals are when it comes to ending the war(s).

Mugato: I do respect Ron Paul for being someone who finally said that terrorists don't just hate us "for our freedom". He practically got booed off stage at the Republican debate but he said it.

Yeah I definitely respect the way he has brought a dose of reality into the conservative alternative universe.

But he's still way round the bend on too many issues and i'd never vote for the man or any libertarian.

DarwiOdrade: The Mavrick: Ron Paul willingly appeared on television to debate an Obama impersonator.

So? Look how many times he's appeared on TV to debate Republican impersonators.

bravian: GaryPDX: I'd love a Paul/Huntsman 2012 ticket. That would be the shizznit. And our only hope to stop the train wreck we're headed for.

Ron Paul shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the Executive branch.

/would vote for a Romney/Huntsman ticket

Might as well be a Thomas S. Monson, Henry B. Eyring, and Dieter F. Uchtdorf ticket. Don't get m wrong, I don't mind Mormons. I just don't want a German as vice-vice-president.

lordaction: Democrats opposition to Dr. Paul shows how hypocritical the liberals are when it comes to ending the war(s).

Unless you could be both against the war and for, say, civil rights and a functional economy. Then opposing Ron Paul would be perfectly justified.

eddyatwork:

RON PAUL!

/his stance on abortion is moot, he will never overturn roe v wade
//it's a non issue and he is just supporting his conservative catholic base
/reagan never bothered with it once he got elected even though it was in his platform

lordaction: Democrats opposition to Dr. Paul shows how hypocritical the liberals are when it comes to ending the war(s).

Huh? Won't we be out of Iraq by the end of this year? Won't we be out of Afghanistan by the end of next year? Is this the whole "It's Obama's war now" thing? Considering that if he had unilaterally removed our troops when he was first elected you would have called him a coward and a traitor, this is more along the lines of "there's nothing that you can do that we won't take issue with." If the republicans are going to just reflexively boo no matter what Obama does, and won't cooperate in carrying out any program that Obama proposes, I suggest you stand quietly over there and let the grown-ups take care of business; because the days of waiting to see how a policy turns out then claiming that it was your idea in the first place, and the Democrats letting you take partial credit in the name of bipartisanship, are over.

As for Ron Paul getting the nomination, I doubt it and it would be an easy win for Obama in November. As for him running as an independent, I think Bachmann and Santorum are much more likely to do that in the face of defeat, which would mean an easy win for Obama in November as well as a clearcut majorities for the Democrats in both Houses of Congress. Nope, republicans, your best bet is Romney and I really have no problem with Romney; after all he is a classic liberal republican. I have no problem with a liberal republican in the White House. The country could actually benefit from having a liberal republican in the White House. Yup, we could do far, far worse than having a LIBERAL republican in the White House.

Mugato: FARTNOISE FARTNOISE JUNIOR: Might as well be a Thomas S. Monson, Henry B. Eyring, and Dieter F. Uchtdorf ticket. Don't get m wrong, I don't mind Mormons. I just don't want a German as vice-vice-president.

What have the Germans ever done to us?

Uh, hello. Pearl Harbor.

The Mavrick: Ron Paul willingly appeared on television to debate an Obama impersonator.

In fairness, is there any proof that Ron Paul knew it was an impersonator?

He may just a have time telling them apart.

urban.derelict: he will never overturn roe v wade

No one will overturn Roe V. Wade. It's how conservatives keeps getting elected. Most states have asinine anti-choice laws that essentially make abortion illegal. Roe V Wade will never be overturned, despite abortion being essentially illegal in most states because it's the conservatives' boogieman.

I would absolutely love to see Ron Paul get the GOP nomination. He's one of the few sane candidates on the Right.

I can't vote for or otherwise support him, due to his stance against Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and other similar programs, but I would love to see his ideas on foreign policy and against war become more prevalent in the GOP.

I respect his consistency, even if I don't always agree with what he says.

clambam: lordaction: Democrats opposition to Dr. Paul shows how hypocritical the liberals are when it comes to ending the war(s).

Huh? Won't we be out of Iraq by the end of this year? Won't we be out of Afghanistan by the end of next year? Is this the whole "It's Obama's war now" thing? Considering that if he had unilaterally removed our troops when he was first elected you would have called him a coward and a traitor, this is more along the lines of "there's nothing that you can do that we won't take issue with."

Not only are we withdrawing in the next few weeks under Obama, the deadline for withdrawal was signed by George Bush, meaning that it was already set back when Ron Paul was running for President in 2008.

The problem is that despite his efforts to paint himself as a huge anti-war Champion, Ron Paul played absolutely no role in the withdrawal. He stuck to the sidelines and the shadows when being anti-war was controversial. He didn't show up at any anti-war rallies until 2007. He was completely absent when the Murtha resolution went on the house floor in 2005. He choose to stay out of the 2004 debates on the war between Bush and Kerry. He didn't start actively campaigning on it until the 2008 election when the anti-war movement was widely accepted and it gave Ron Paul a chance to set himself apart from the other candidates. But again, GW Bush was already setting the timeline for withdrawal at this point.

If you look at the Wikipedia entry on the movement to withdraw from Iraq, you won't find Ron Paul's name anywhere on it. So Paul supporters will like to pretend it never happened.

Remember, most Paul supporters are yet college students who weren't even alive in the 1980s. Yet they still insist that Affirmative Action quotas are the reason they couldn't get into a better college, despite the fact that quotas were ruled unconstitutional in the 1970s.

Mugato: but wouldn't overturning Roe v Wade just leave it up to the states? Meaning that girls could still get abortions, they would just have to flee to a blue state?

It would seem that way, which boggles my mind as to how states can make these asinine restrictions on abortion.
Like:
Parental notification
Parental approval
"Zoning restrictions"
Asinine building codes that are written to only target abortion clinics
Laws that justify the murder of health care providers
"Personhood" amendments (which by the way cannot be enforced because states can't determine citizenship/personhood)
Banning abortion coverage in health insurance.


Row v Wade made these laws illegal.


or do nothing like

Not trying people like Scott Roeder and others who make threats and vandalize clinics as a terrorist. Yes, they are using violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes....i.e. the definition of terrorism.

Allowing advertising billboards that say stupid shiat like "I had finger prints at 2 weeks." That's false advertising and no one does anything about it.

There's an asshole who protests right at the door to a womens shelter near where I live, who harasses women that walk by, even if they're not going into the shelter. The god damned shelter doesn't refer people nor pay for abortion services! Why hasn't the shelter gotten a stay away order for him? How come nothing is done when these women complain about harassment??

Mugato: FARTNOISE FARTNOISE JUNIOR: Mugato: FARTNOISE FARTNOISE JUNIOR: Might as well be a Thomas S. Monson, Henry B. Eyring, and Dieter F. Uchtdorf ticket. Don't get m wrong, I don't mind Mormons. I just don't want a German as vice-vice-president.

What have the Germans ever done to us?

Uh, hello. Pearl Harbor.

That was the Battle of Wounded Knee and that was like 2,000 years ago when Samuel Adams brewed the Articles of the Old Republic. Damn, you can hold a grudge.

That brew must have been delicious since it started the civil war

Mugato:
But the girls can always go to Crazy Larry's Fun Time Back Alley Abortion Clinic...."We'll bring out the kid in ya!TM"

I don't want to get into too much detail. But I know a (Blue) state that has to fly physicians in from different locations via helicopter during random days of the week to provide abortions. And the clinic sites rotate.

I believe the physician has a CCW permit.
And you have to go through an extensive DOJ background check to just sit in on a procedure at the clinic.

Event: Ron Paul wins the Iowa caucuses
Headline: "Gingrich finishes 2nd in Iowa caucuses, Romney finishes 3rd"

the catch is that if the decision becomes to Mitt Romney or Ron Paul, Mitt Romney is in a stronger position to win the nomination than he would be against Newt.

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Paultards>LaRouchies>Birchers>Birfers?

LaRouche is in his own category. He preys exclusively on college students, and sends them to weekend brainwashing camps*.

(*Had a friend of mine not investigated this in person, I might not believe it either.)

Guidette Frankentits: I don't want to get into too much detail. But I know a (Blue) state that has to fly physicians in from different locations via helicopter during random days of the week to provide abortions. And the clinic sites rotate.

I believe the physician has a CCW permit.
And you have to go through an extensive DOJ background check to just sit in on a procedure at the clinic.

Care to at least tell us which state this occurs in?

Mugato: I purposely don't pay attention to the abortion issue because it's none of my business therefore I'm pro-choice by default but wouldn't overturning Roe v Wade just leave it up to the states? Meaning that girls could still get abortions, they would just have to flee to a blue state?

Until a red/purple state makes it a crime to cross state lines for the purpose of procuring an abortion.

Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Care to at least tell us which state this occurs in?

It's one of the states that Reagan didn't carry in 1980

BSABSVR: Until a red/purple state makes it a crime to cross state lines for the purpose of procuring an abortion.

Shut up, they don't need anymore ideas.

MrEricSir: LaRouche is in his own category.

mainly because his guys run constantly and rarely win primaries. So it's like the Socialist Workers Party philosophy on candidacies, only in the Democratic Party.

The Paul fanatics have already won actual offices, so that puts them at a higher level.

RobbieFal: mainly because his guys run constantly and rarely win primaries. So it's like the Socialist Workers Party philosophy on candidacies, only in the Democratic Party.

The Paul fanatics have already won actual offices, so that puts them at a higher level.

I think you're missing the point here. Paul's version of winning means compromising your values at some point, because that's just how politics works if you want to have an impact. Whereas LaRouche never has to compromise because he will never win -- so he can go on preaching about how we need to build nuclear power maglev trains all over the country and how we should change our textbooks to say that Leibniz invented calculus instead of Newton.

And no, I didn't pull either of those ideas out of my ass. Those are both straight from LaRouche materials.

Guidette Frankentits: It's one of the states that Reagan didn't carry in 1980

Why the cryptic details? Is this some kind of underground abortion thing happening in Minnesota...because I'm fairly sure Planned Parenthood operates there without helicopters or DOJ background checks. I follow the choice issue rather closely and haven't heard anything close to that but...I'm game to see some evidence.