Back to The Blaze »

Comments (10)

• JaxLawyerHelp

  Posted on August 22, 2012 at 4:16pm

  All the others are the same… Ron Paul for change… http://www.usalawyer.org/the-federal-reserve-communist-america-under-bush-clinton-obama-romney/

  Report this comment

   

• KidCharlemagne

  Posted on August 22, 2012 at 12:47pm

  Oh…..I believe I get it now……it sounds like a quid pro quo arrangement to me:

  ————————————-
  Gingrich’s private ventures are going bankrupt
  By Marcus Stern
  Tue May 22, 2012 6:00am EDT
  http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/22/usa-campaign-gingrich-idUSL1E8GID2320120522

  Sounds like Newt is deep down in the well and Romney’s campaign coffers are the only one with enough rope to spare.

  Of course, I don’t know why Romney would want to ‘acquire’ Newt’s delegates anyway….after all, the corporate media has been telling us for a couple of months now that Romney already had it locked up.

  Report this comment

   

  • windwardtack

    Posted on August 22, 2012 at 1:10pm

    So far as I know, most of Gingrich’s were already filled with Romney people, or party people which is the same thing.

    Ron Paul won a majority of delegates in LA because he won the caucus there in a landslide. His supporters bones were broken and another had to be taken away by ambulance from the state convention due to the cheating of Villiers and that group. I disagree with that deal, the video is so telling we could fight that battle in the media and win, hands down.

    Ron Paul won the delegates from well over 5 states and should be nominated to the floor to be voted on, earning him a 15 minute unedited speech. He would also be able to make conservative motions in ordinary course of business at that point. Strike suits against his delegates based on the establishment breaking the rules they themselves made are disgusting.

    Report this comment

     

• KickinBack

  Posted on August 22, 2012 at 11:56am

  RP supporters are nothing more than closet Obama supporters. Too afraid to admit it. ‘Nuff said.

  Report this comment

   

  • KidCharlemagne

    Posted on August 22, 2012 at 12:38pm

    What does that make Romney supporters then?:

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/romneys-2002-flashback-my-views-are-progressive/

    Report this comment

     

  • windwardtack

    Posted on August 22, 2012 at 1:11pm

    Nonesense. Obama signed NDAA putting in indefinite detention of US citizens without trial. He extended the Patriot act and is compounding the destruction of our economy hand over fist.

    It is just that Romney wants pretty much the same thing.

    Report this comment

     

  • bpitas

    Posted on August 23, 2012 at 10:55am

    I think you had a typo there – it’s Romney whose policies are exactly the same as Obama’s. Ron Paul was the most conservative in the race, the exact opposite of Massachusetts Liberal Romney.

    Report this comment

     

  • BigRedDog

    Posted on August 23, 2012 at 4:25pm

    @Windwardtack: Ron Paul didn’t bother to show up to vote against NDAA. He was too busy campaigning.

    @Bpitas: See, I thought it was Ron Paul who aligned himself with Obama when he came out in support of the Occupy Movement. I didn’t see Romney supporting them.

    Report this comment

     

• watersRpeople

  Posted on August 22, 2012 at 11:32am

  I would suspect you shouldn’t be thinking that Ron Paul will ever give up his delegates.

  Report this comment

   

• goodinohio

  Posted on August 22, 2012 at 10:10am

  Poverty, WWIII or peace and prosperity, It’s up to the delegates.

  Report this comment

   

Comments are closed.

« Back to The Blaze