New Ron Paul Ad Takes Aim at Romney, Perry & Bachmann
- Posted on August 16, 2011 at 11:53pm by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul doesn’t seem interested in playing nice. Rather than sitting back and allowing Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry to enjoy the lime light with little opposition, Paul has released a new ad that takes aim at the three current party frontrunners.
In the ad, Paul attempts to tie each of them to President Obama and Nancy Pelosi, dismissing his GOP opponents as “smooth-talking politicians.” This is, of course, a smart move from a political standpoint, as Americans appear weary and tired of the same rhetoric that many claim is coming from both sides of the political spectrum.
By associating his Republican opposition with both Obama and Pelosi, Paul may be able to solidify negative images in the minds of those individuals who find themselves tired of party antics.
The ad begins as though it’s a feature film preview. A dramatic voice over says, “It’s the story of a lost city…lost opportunity…lost hope.” Dreary economic images are shown, as a voiceover explain‘s Washington’s “failed leadership.”
In one frame, Bachmann‘s image is placed next to Nancy Pelosi’s. In another, Romney’s face is shown above the word “smooth.” The USA Today’s Catalina Carnia writes:
The Texas congressman, who finished second to Bachmann in last weekend’s Iowa straw poll, highlights his votes against “every tax increase, every unbalanced budget“ and proclaims he is the candidate who ”will stop the spending, save the dollar, create jobs“ and ”bring peace.”
Watch the creative ad, below:
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 710 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 561 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 382 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 373 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 364 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 373 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 382 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 311 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 149 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 373 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (284)
ThisYearsModel
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:00amRon Paul=Professor Irwin Corey. He has zero chance of winning the nomination.
Report Post »pHredster
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:16amDid you retrieve that crystal ball from your arse? You have a very crappy outlook…
Report Post »DarkFire
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:27amno Ron Paul = Ross Perot
come one get it right, thats what his crystal ball told him.
Report Post »louise
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:57amOkie…love your comments about RP.
Report Post »Just wanted to say that when (and IF) Glenn decides to do an in depth investigation on Perry , he is going to have his eyes opened….especially on the NAFTA superhighway that will run from Mexico (actually, from South America all the way up through Canada) through the middle of America up into Canada. Think about the “eminent domain” theft of land that will involve! I have known about this for a long time. Years. This is part of the NWO plan to establish the Americas and Canada as one, with one currency (Amero). which is just a step shy of one world government and currency.
Was it Eisenhower that said the purpose of the freeway system in the USA was for quick transport of military (here) if need be? With all the transportation infrastructure in place, unprotected borders, and unprotected ports it would be easy pickings for an enemy.
But the way things are going, the elitists may just forget that step and jump feet first into the one world government.
Perry is not the tea-party darling he imagines himself to be.
Proud Christian
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:57amLOVE the AD, i am supporting RON PAUL this election cycle. He is the same a decade ago, last year, last month, last week and yesterday! When are republicans going to stop eating each other??? RON believes in the REPUBLIC!!! Let us face the facts many of us will not vote for MIT!!!!! I will do a write in…. I do like Perry though…
Report Post »Gideon300
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 12:09pmYour name is proud Christian. I’m a Christian too, and as a Christian is our responsibility to bless and pray for Israel. Ron Paul doesn’t support or even like Israel. As I have already posted he slandered Israel on the House floor stating Israel is directly responsible for the creation of Hamas. Paul has heard that Iran wants to wipe Israel off the planet, yet, said they should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. We both know why Iran wants those nuclear weapons, and if you are familiar with Ezekiel 38 & 39 you know they will try to use them against Israel in the near future.
So, tell me, brother or sister in Christ, how do you justify the fact that you are not following God’s calling for us to bless Israel in Genesis 12:3?
Report Post »“I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.”
When vote for Ron Paul you are wanting him to lead our nation knowing already that he will not bless Israel, which makes you and anyone who votes for him complicite in this decision.
Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:20pm@Gideon 300
If you believe that move to Israel.
Report Post »GIDEON612
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 10:12pmI am not a christian. As Gandhi said, ” I like your Christ, but not your christians.”
I am a disciple of Jesus Christ. The term christian has been tainted just like the rainbow. There are too many that claim this tag and have made it worse. Just look at BHO and his claim of that.
Report Post »Now why you, gideon300, have chosen this name I do not know, but Jesus said, “you will know them by their fruits.”
Ranubis
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:20amRon Paul will not win the Republican nomination, he’s a libertarian and should run as one. As far as I‘m concerned he’s no better then the RINO‘s in the sense that he trying to fool people into believing he’s something that he’s not. Be a man Ron, and run as a libertarian!
Report Post »Ranubis
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:23amBy the way…CAIN 2012
Report Post »bluegoldnationdotcom
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:48amRon Paul running as a libertarian would be republicans worst nightmare in 2012 and would give the election to 0bama. The best thing for republicans would be for Paul to run as a democrat and primary 0bama but that ship has sailed and Paul is FAR from being a democrat anyway. So be glad Paul is running as a republican and not as a third party candidate. I would be like Ross Perot part 3.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:13amYou New Conservatives keep saying Ron Paul can’t win or he is unelectable. It only drives more to Ron Paul’s platform. It only gives us more drive and determination. It only distinguishes you from the True Republicans.
New Conservatives can start their own party or they can join their progressive buddies and have a progressive party. Be truthful New Conservatives and join your Progressive Democrats!
TEA!
Report Post »Mr.Truth
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:14amBe a man and he’s a Rino?? Go check his voting record. Cain supported the wall street bail outs and also said nationalizing the banks wasnt a bad idea… Yea you can vote for him all you want to but not me or my family.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 8:13amThe Libertarian party was a split from the Republican party in the early 1970‘s so it’s not an “either/or” situation. He can run as whichever party he chooses, the GOP still holds a sizeable contingent of libertarian minded folks. It is from this contingent that Ronald Reagan sprang, and at the time he was scoffed at by GOP insiders and belittled by them, just like Paul.
Report Post »TheBMT
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 10:20amThen the “conservatives” and “neo-conservatives”, as well as the “tea party” should all run as their respective tags right? God forbid that you have a Republican who believes in LIBERTY!
Report Post »circleDwagons
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:37pmi would like to see someone who is supported by both the Libertarian party and the Republican party. having said that, i think Dr Paul would defeat obomo paulbots vs obomobots
Report Post »allometry
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:29pmYou‘ve been watching wolves in sheep’s clothing so long, you can’t tell them apart. Paul‘s the only guy in Congress who’s been consistently conservative for 30 years.
You are either going to make a stand, to join with strong constitutional candidates, or you‘re going to stand for the status quo that says they’re constitutional candidates, then blur the lines on what is allowed and what isn’t.
The road gets rocky from here. Time to choose if you want the path that’s smooth for a bit, but drops off at a cliff, or one that will be bumpy for a bit, but gets you back on the right path.
Report Post »grumpyt
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:12amThe only one that plans on undoing the illegal EO’s past Presidents have used to enslave us. We must see that Ron is elected.
$20.12 to Ron Paul from everyone will show them who we want.
Report Post »pHredster
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:23amBrilliant! Just logged off of Ron Paul’s website with a $20.12 donation.
Report Post »Re-Founding Sons
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 9:34amI’m doing the same.
Report Post »If Ron wins it will be like our country winning the lottery after going bankrupt….I will pray and do all I can to support him
Woo
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:41amWow…. Ron Paul is effin Neo!
Seriously, the only thing missing from that was the shot of the audience drinking Kool Aid and bobbing their heads up and down in unison while chanting “Yes Master!”
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:55amSame thing the left said about the TEA Party.
Ron Paul 2012!!!
Report Post »101
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 5:06amRon Paul Campaign Raises Most Donations from Military
2012 Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has raised more than any other current presidential candidate in donations from members of the military. Of those donors who indicated their occupation and employer, Paul topped the other contenders, a distinction he also achieved during his 2008 presidential run.
“Our fighting men and women take an oath to protect America, defend our Constitution and defend our borders,” said Ron Paul 2012 Campaign Chairman, Jesse Benton. “They look at Ron Paul and see a leader who takes their oath seriously, and who will fight to ensure that we don’t misrepresent that oath by sending them off to police the world, instead of defending our country.”
Donations
Paul… 71%
Cain…13%
Romney…8%
Bachmann…5%
Other…3%
Thats alot of military support for one candidate!
Report Post »dukielouie
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 5:58amThank God for Ron Paul. I have followed him for years and he is the truth teller. Who else will stand against this Global take over of America.He has stood strong all these years against Nafta, Un Agenda 21, Ilegal immigration,Federal reserve, and always stands for for Liberty. Why does Rush,Sean,and the rest of the republican hacks want to distroy him because of the TRUTH!!!!
Report Post »Ranubis
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:14amRon Paul is not going to win republican nomination! He’s not even a republican, he’s a libertarian!
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:26am@Ranubis
Yes he will and yes he is. He’s a true Republican.
New conservatives (NeoCons) can make a party of their own or just join with their Progressive left buddies and have the progressive party.
NO MORE NEOCONS!
Donate $20.12 August 20th
http://www.RonPaul2012.com/
Report Post »whatconstitution
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:44amYes master? You mean the same “master” that will work harder than any president in the recent past to ensure that the Federal Govt is held in check and does not infringe on our rights as individuals?
Report Post »ILUVAMERICA
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 8:15amMOST blaze bloggers are just sheeple who need to be told who to vote for
Report Post »they can not research and SEE that Ron Paul is the only hope We the People HAVE to survive
LibertariansUnite
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:40amRon Paul 2012
Report Post »Steve
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 5:30amYou are correct.
Report Post »nepanhandle
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 8:17amCan’t wait to vote for him.
Report Post »allometry
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:33pmBoth parties are heading down the path of progressivism and leaving a capitalist state for a socialist one. On the political line where one calls themselves democrat, but sacrifices the rights of the worker to choose and a republican, but helps institute social justice programs by redistributing tax payer dollars to those who don’t pay taxes, Ron Paul is a guy who stands apart.
The reason everyone thought this guy was nuts 6 years ago, is because they assumed he was moving further right. In reality, he stood still and everyone moved further down the road and further left.
Now we’re looking back, with our feet in the fire to this guy, ready to give him a shot at pulling us back.
I’m a Gary Johnson fan, but he doesn’t have a chance in hell. My support is now with Paul.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:38amRon Paul has more a chance then you believe. Don’t be so naive.
West is a sell out. He couldn’t even be consistent his first year. I would never in my life vote for a liar as him. SELL OUT.
Just as the left labelled the TEA party “crazy”, “fringe”, and “racist” the same is being done by establishment Republicans aka New Conservatives to discredit Paul and his supporters.
Now why would New Conservatives use tactics of the lefty Progressives?????? Because they themselves are Progressive. the very Progressives that ate the Democrats. Wake up!
TEA
Report Post »OperationNorthwoods
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:36amRon Paul didn’t vote for the patriot act, Tarp, the Iraq war, more taxes or anything else that the federal government is doing without expressed authorization in the constitution. Everybody says they want someone who is real, not mearly an elistist lackey. Well you have a choice this time, you had the same choice last time. God has delivered a way out for Us through the tea party and Ron Paul. Let’s not waste another opportunity.
Report Post »Steve
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:40amThe Iraq War wasn’t followed according to the constitution?
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 5:36am@Steve
It is debatable but no, Operation Iraqi Freedom was not Constitutional.
Our founders made it very clear that power to authorize war lay directly on Congress and in the Federalist Papers stated our President would not be like the Monarch King declaring war when he chooses.
Congress did not declare war which would result in and force the President to be commander and chief and actually wage war to win. Instead, Congress passed a Joint Resolution enabling the President to use force against Iraq as HE sees fit and against threats HE perceives against Americas security.
The Resolution took responsibility from Congress and put it with the President. The Resolution made Congress irrelevant. The Resolution was unConstitutional.
Report Post »rightwinger76
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 8:50am@Okie
Report Post »Many of our military conflicts throughout the past have been engaged without a congressional declaration of war.
GhostOfJefferson
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 8:54amThat is correct Steve, it wasn’t followed according to the Constitution. Only Congress has the power to *declare war*. Them shrugging it off and not declaring war and saying “yeah, whatever” to funding is not how it’s supposed to work.
Fact is we haven’t had a Constitutionally authorized conflict since the end of WW2. Prior to that, we didn‘t really engage in much of the ol’ international adventurism (some exceptions, but they were small compared to what’s going on today). We’re not even supposed to have a standing army, for Pete’s sake. And the “but but but….danger today!” thing most folks bring up is a direct result of us NOT following our Constitutional requirements and the advice of our Founding Fathers.
This election is already looking to me to be another case of “vote for this progressive, or the other progressive will win!”, just like every other election after Reagan, and most before he came on the scene. Lock step folks, lock step.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 9:35am@Rightwinger
Doesn’t make it right. Do we keep doing wrong with our head in the sand or do we stand up and demand our Government be ran correct?
@GhostOfJefferson
I appreciate your wisdom. We haven’t “declared” war since they tied all economies together right? Same time period I was thinking as a result of UN, Global government right after WWII. Again, your greatly appreciated. Keep up the good fight.
Report Post »desertspeaks
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:18amOK, for all the warmongers who disagree with Ron Paul’s position on Iran arming themselves. Who has Iran gone to war with over the past 100 years?
Report Post »Now, Who has AMERICA gone to war with or attacked over the past 100 years?? If you bother to look who the U.S. has had engaged in hostilities over the past 100 years. It’s quite an extensive list!!
We “AMERICA” are the agressor!
If the U.S. stops mucking about in every other countries business, we’d save TRILLIONS of dollars and MILLIONS of lives!!!!
VOTE RON PAUL AND RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION!
flyingrobots
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:39amThe only problem with your assertion is that in the last 100 years, Iran hasn’t been attacked.
I agree that we are over stretched militarily, we do need to pull back. But I think the thoughtful question that needs to be asked is, don’t we afford ourselves a level of protection by having a presence throughout the world?
In the days when you had to send ships and an army over to a country to attack them, perhaps leaving all our firepower at home made sense. But how do we protect ourselves when folks can hurt us remotely (i.e. nuclear tipped missiles, etc).
I’m not sure we can ignore Iran.
Report Post »Bluzie
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:55amThere is a little war (10 years) that Iran had with Iraq that happened in the 70‘s to 80’s.
Also The U.S. is pressured by the world to step up under human rights and suffering to militarily intervene in many cases. Being the world’s leader of freedom we have accepted that role by default.
Iran obtaining nuclear weapon technology has far reaching implications other than their lack of a delivery system to the U.S. (via an non existent Air Force). They can and would give/sell those weapons and technologies to mobile terrorism factions. Instead of waking up one morning to see some planes flying into a building, you’d wake up to see a major city leveled.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 5:06am@FlyingRobots
We can completely level and nuke any city in the world in a hour.
If we are going to keep troops in other countries, the countries could pay us for our service instead of us paying them as is currently.
Keeping troops in other countries, amassing in neighboring countries, is threatening and perceived as a threat. Just as if Iran aligned with Mexico and built bases and stationed troops along our southern border.
The people of the country we station troops in believe our military influences and dictates their Government, which we generally do thru “aid” (bribes) and support (propaganda). The people then resent us.
Stationing our troops around the world makes us the World Government’s police. No country likes being told what to do.
Iran doesn’t want war with us. Iran wants us out of the middle east.
Report Post »Steve
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 5:06amWell Iraq comes to mind off the bat but lets put that little tidbit aside for a second. .
So let me try to understand this.
You mean Iran who is the largest sponsor of Islamic terror attacks across the world.Iran who has sent advisers to countries training how to kill Americans.and may I add have succeeded doing so. Iran who has supplied weapons to terrorists in the Middle East. Iran who has vowed to wipe Israel off the planet and to destroy the United States. Your referring to that Iran right.
OK. So by this definition they have not been at war with anyone for the past 100 years?
well besides Iraq but lets skip historical facts for a second and return to what your definition of War is. I could only assume that if country A attacks Country B then there is a state of war. So if Country C helps Country B with weapons, field trainers, logistical supplies and intelligence then Country C is not at war with Country A because Country C hasn’t really fielded an Army to attack Country A.
It’s only when country C masses an army on a battlefield are they at war or lets say ports a small ship in…what NYC Harbor and that ship just happens to have a nuclear bomb that accidentally explodes and kills 2 million people are we at war then? Even if they told us months and years ago that they were going to do it. So only when dead Americans wash along the NJ coast and not along an Iraq road can we attack then? Is it OK? I mean whats the bar set at. 20 Americans? 2,000,000 ?
Report Post »Steve
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 5:19amOkie from Muskogee
Iran doesn’t want war with us?
Really and who told you this? : ) You got an in at the consulate? Do you know someone over at CAIR? Has Hezbollah or Hamas been slipping in their communications. Come on who told you? You can let us know we wont tell anyone. I mean it’s got to be the best kept secret in this century. Come on, wasn’t our crazy uncle Billy was it? has he been eavesdropping on the Republican Guard again. That uncle Billy what a card.
You mean all that talk for the past 1400 years about a world wide caliphate was all just a big misunderstanding. Or that the destruction of America by an Iranian nuclear weapon was just a big joke? ha ha . Or the 12th Imam who will bring fire and death to all non believers was just a prank. …Really? WOW. That makes me feel a whole lot better.
Tell me when the bunny goes down the hole do we all have to take turns or can we go in pairs. I really would love to have tea with the mad hatter do you think he has time for tea I really want some tea…do you want some tea too?
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 5:51am@Steve
Listen to Iran’s own words on WHY they want to wipe us from the map of the middle east. It would be a lot easier to nuke our troops in the middle east since they are like sitting ducks “Nation Building”. Thus Iran says will wipe USA from the middle east map.
No Iran does not want war directly with the USA, we would destroy them in a blink of an eye. Iran has a military from the stone ages. Their drones resemble paper air planes.
Yes Iran fights the USA in the middle east thru proxies because they do not want direct war with us. They want us to leave.
Your completely ignorant if you think Saudi Arabia will allow Iran to be head Caliph over any Caliphate. Before any “Caliphate” comes to pass Iran and Saudi would go to war.
Jerusalem holds the Dome of the Rock. Any Nuke of Israel would destroy or hamper the Muslim ran holy site. Thus Iran says they will drive them into the see.
Securing Middle East borders does nothing for stopping a Nuke coming across our unsecured southern border.
I know, it actually takes thought, and listening to the words of the person threatening and why their threatening to understand how to solve the problem. Keep listening to Propaganda, See where that gets you.
Report Post »redbone007
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:15amVote for Ron Paul and America will be placed in the arms of the terrorist..he has not plan to keep us safe. His only plan is for America to close her eyes and hope they do not mess with us.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:54am@RedBone
Your full of crap. Quit being a useful idiot with talking points and add some facts to your post.
You obviously have no clue what your talking about so unless your a paid liar, stop talking and think after looking at the facts.
Report Post »AmericablessGod
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 8:09amActually, Iran was at war with Iraq for about 10 years back in the 80′s and hundreds of thousands died. They are covertly at war with the U.S. and Israel right now, funding and supplying terrorists in Palestine and Iraq.
They are not a peaceful nation who should be left alone to develop their nukes to use them on Israel as they have directly promised! Don’t be as naive as Ron Paul on this one.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 8:50am@AmericaBlessGod
Are you referring to the 1980-1988 Iraq-Iran war in which Iraq with out formal announcement attacked and invaded Iran? The Iraq-Iran war in which WE backed SADDAM and sent him billions in funds and made sure weapons and chemicals made their way to Iraq. The same War in which we shot a commercial Iranian airline down.
What happened in ‘79? Oh yea, Iran overthrew the puppet US implemented Shaw. Iraq with our support attacked Iran. We supported SADDAM! Then a couple years later, decided to wage war with Iraq in the first Gulf War! How insane is that!
No one believes Iran is innocent. Every one just believes it’s dumb to keep our troops whee they can attack them and to prop up evil middle east dictators.
If we are minding our business and Iran decides they truly want some We will bring it to them. Until then, we have no business in the Middle East. And until we leave our troops will continue to be targeted by Iran and all those who do not want us there.
Ever wonder why the middle east hates the US, look at history and you’ll see why!
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 9:12amYes yes, we’ve always been at war with Eurasia.
Funny how “the greatest sponsor of terrorism” is such an elastic title that gets applied to whomever is conveniently in the sights of the progressives in government. The real “greatest sponsor of terrorism” of course is never ever mentioned because, hey, we buy most of our oil from them. Why finger the Saudis, bad business decision right?
Terrorism schmerrorism. I’m so tired of being told to conduct my life in a 100% terrorist alert mode. Bad people will do bad things, we can’t live the rest of our lives in fear. Maybe if our politicians, the same ones most of us claim to despise, would stop tromping around the world making enemies, we wouldn’t have to worry quite so much. Nobody “hates us for our freedom”, folks, the world is a much more complex place than the silly rhetoric most of you buy into, informs you about.
Report Post »LibertariansUnite
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 10:17amIraq invaded Iran, Iran was defending itself.
You can look that up if you want.
Report Post »autoconnect65
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:10amI CUT MY TIES WITH FREEDOM WORKS OVER THE ATTACKS ON RON PAUL if you look at the comments made you see a patten , unelectable ! fringe ! sounds like SAUL ALINSKY ! BELITTLE DEGRADE marginalized ! SEEMS THE REPUBLICANS USE THE SAME BOOK , well sorry folks in not voting for the lesser of two evils ! say what you mean mean what you say ? say the true it has no agenda ? RON PAUL IS REAL AND IS RIGHT ! NO WAY I WILL PICK A PROGRESSIVE OR A COMMUNIST TO LEAD AMERICA TO HELL , ONLY SOME ONE THAT SPEAKS THE TRUTH , AND SHOWS IT IN PASSED DEEDS ! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,NOT ONE CAN SAY WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IS IN LINE WITH THE BILL OF RIGHTS WITH THE CONSTITUTION , ALSO DO YOU THINK ISREAL IS GOING TO WAIT TO SEE ID IRAN CAN GET A NUKE OR WILL THEY BOMB THEM ?!
Report Post »I say they will bomb them ! I SAY NO MORE TO THE REBUBLICANS , I SAY NO MORE TO THE DEMOCRATS ! YOU ARE DONE ! GET OUT !
Re-Founding Sons
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 9:40amSPEAK! The truth will set us free, free, FREEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!
Report Post »DarkFire
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:54amPual has not a snowballs chance in hell. Simply put…….. were Americans and were vain, and he looks like the guy down the road your mother warned you about to stay off his lawn cause he is a crotchity old man. Now put his ideas in ……… lets say, a young 40 yr old man, and he wins in a land slide.
so hold out for Rubio and West, or Palin and Trump, like i am doing.
Report Post »skiziks20453
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:13amI would vote for Rand, but Ron? I think not. He ia a little unstable.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:46amWhere do you suppose Rand learned it?
No Ron Paul is not unstable nor does he appear as such. The only unstable ones are those claiming the want to restore the Constitution and love the founders then try to smear the one man Glenn Beck himself said was most like the founders and the one running on restoring the Constitution.
Insanity = doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Voting for the same politicians who created the mess over and over expecting a different result is insane voting!
Ron Paul The Constitutionalist 2012!
TEA
Report Post »autoconnect65
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:54amyou would vote in obama , and you say that ron paul in the problem ,,,you need to look in the mirror for the problem
Report Post »one Angry American
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:55amDo you have a right to your misinformed ignorant opinion? NO educate yourself about the subject before you open your dam fool mouth!
Report Post »Grannie4news
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:04amHe will lose to Obama if he wins the nomination. He is NOT presidential looking at all. He definitely is not the one to protect our country from terrorism either. He sounded like a fool when he said that Iran should have a nuclear bomb just like everyone else. He brought up Russia as an example during the cold war. Russia wasn’t radical Islam jihadists. They didn’t want to die any more than we did. A vote for Paul is a wasted vote. He won‘t do any better in this next election than he did in the last which didn’t amoun t to a hill of beans.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:27amVoting for a president based on looks is what ignorant pathetic sheeple people do. Like kids voting for American Idol.
Second, polls have shown Paul is tied with Obama when put head to head.
A vote not for Paul is a wasted vote and by definition insane vote as you’ll be voting for the same ones who got is in this mess expecting a different result.
If you think we can tell Iran what to do you believe we can tell Israel what to do as BO did to go back to ‘67 borders.
Report Post »one Angry American
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:57amWhat?U.S.S.R.was not as big a threat as a bunch of dirt poor idiots in dirty rags hiding in caves. You are soooooo stupid have some more cool aid.
Report Post »JJ Coolay
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:09amThe only way a vote for Paul would be a wasted vote would be if he is a 3rd party in the general election. Otherwise, during the primary, vote for conscience.
Report Post »However, Muskogee, your quote: “A vote not for Paul is a wasted vote and by definition insane vote as you’ll be voting for the same ones who got is in this mess expecting a different result.” is a little off. Michele Bachman, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and the rest of them DID NOT get us in this mess.
Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:31am@LL Cool J
Think you missed one point, Romney, Perry, and Bachmann are all for the same policies we have had.
Bachmann says she is TEA party and less government yet votes for the Patriot Act (big Government), marriage amendment (more Government), and wrote 16 times to the Federal Government asking for Stimulus dollars for Government jobs. The stimulus and jobs she voted against and talked bad about. Same mess as before.
Romney, really? He is Barack Obama junior. Today is for abortion tomorrow he isn’t. Today he believes Government can force commerce, tomorrow he isn’t. Same mess.
Perry who mandated vaccines for HPV. Perry who sured up the NAFTA superhighway. Perry who gave illegals in state tuition. Same mess.
Voting for any of these 3 will be voting for more of the same. More of the same policies of Bush and Obama as they are the same..Voting for any of these three will be voting insane.
And I disagree, voting Ron Paul in a 3rd party will not be wasted. The Republicans voting for a progressive right Rino would be the ones wasting their vote. The Progressives of the Republican Party can go find their own party. We true conservatives are standing in truth and will vote as such.
Ron Paul 2012
Report Post »FaithUsa
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 8:14amRon Paul will beat Obama with a whole lot of Obama’s own supporters if he gets the nomination. The problem is in Paul winning the Republican nomination. Independents don‘t vote in the primaries because they don’t want to declare party affiliation. We’re going to have to change our ways this time.
Report Post »cookcountypatriot
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:03ami thought obama was the one…remember oprah,,,is he the one? is he the one? i do believe he is the one……reminds me of obamas campaighn,,
Report Post »101
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:02amRight on, Ron Paul rocks the house
Please pledge to donate to the Ron Paul Birthday Money Bomb at http://www.RonPaul2012.com on August 20th.
Ron Paul 2012
Report Post »This_Individual
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:46amWay to go Ron!
Report Post »Crakaveli
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:35amLove it.
Report Post »J3nn.net
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:34amIndeed, he is the one. I just hope voters who disagree with one or two of his policies, like gay marriage and Iran having a nuke, will see past those issues and look at the big picture. Which candidates will restore our country back to the greatness it was intended to be? Without question, Ron Paul.
Keep social issues at a minimum, America, so that we may actually have an America.
Report Post »Steve
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:09amI wish I could look past the Islamic issue. But I cant. One must listen to the enemy and the enemy Has said.
“Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism? But you should know that this slogan and this goal are achievable, and certainly can be achieved,” Ahmadinejad proclaimed before the huge crowd in Tehran.
The crowd responded with the popular Islamic chant, “Death to America!”
The official, state-controlled Iranian news media explained the next day that if a nuclear bomb were detonated by “shahidim” (Islamic suicide bombers) in a major American city, the result would be “utter chaos” that would cause “the complete disintegration of the American economy and American society
I listen and watch as thousands die every year in the name of Mohammad. I listen and watch as Sharia law slowly covers it’s ideology upon non Islamic states. I listen and watch children being taught that Americans are Satan and martyrdom ensures a place in paradise. I listen and watch hundreds dancing in the street when Americans are murdered. I listen and watch this administration embrace the organization that helped Hitler in the final solution. I listen and watch as young men and women sacrifice their lives for people who at the end of the day still hate them because they aren’t Muslim. I listen and watch as ALL our political leaders and media ignore the threat while Sharia creeps into America. What are you listing to? What are you watching?
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:17am@Steve
Why does Iran issue that threat?
Ron Paul will not ignore any threats against us. He will hear the threat, the why, and proceed further. We do not need to be in other Muslim countries propping them up and aiding them to be safe. In reality it makes us unsafe.
Ron Paul isn’t an isolationist. He is a non interventionist. If war with Iran was waged under Ron Paul, he would ask Congress for permission and would wage war to win and conquer, not pacify and prop up.
Ron Paul will make us safer. Ron Paul will make us free. Ron Paul is what we need.
TEA!
Report Post »Steve
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:01amOkie from Muskogee
So allowing Iran Nukes and it‘s public statements on our destruction using nukes doesn’t spark an issue?
I love most of what Dr. Paul says . What I know of Islam.I just can’t get past this.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:48am@Steve
Again and most important, why does Iran threaten to wipe the USA off the map?
Instead of trying to make Nukes from their own reactors they know Israel will bomb as seen with Saddam Hussein as we supported Saddam, why haven’t they bought one from friendly North Korea or Pakistan and ran it across our open border?
Why did Israel create nuclear weapons?
We have no ability to control Iran other then taking the country over thru war. We do have the ability to react to Iran accordingly to their actions.
Chess, not checkers…..
Report Post »Steve
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 5:45amOkie from Muskogee
Again I refer to history of Islam and it’s following of the Koran which instructs Convert, enslave or kill.. Then I will refer to the current conflicts across the globe and it’s relation to Islam to meet those objectives. I don’t know what the future may bring but to imagine Islam is all talk and no action is being a little naive dot cha think.
Cheers to you too.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:06amIf Islam came here and tried to implement Sharia Law thru a Muslim President would you support an uprise and holy war until the occupying Islamists left? Yes I do believe you would.
No why are we to tell Iran any different. We did try to impose our style of life upon them resulting in the PEOPLE supporting the radicals we see today out of resentment for the oppression from the US backed Shaw.
Osama bin Laden attacked us because Saudi King was seen as selling out to the Americans and the people resented us for it leading to support of crazy radicals Al-Qaeda.
This is what happens from trying to force and spread “democracy” thru financial and military aid. Propping up oppressive dictators in the Middle East has led to the events of today.
There is nothing in the middle east we need. There is no reason to force “democracy” on those not willing to die for it. There is no reason to be there. So why are we?
Report Post »Drives Like Jehu
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:28amFor being “so smart”, ron paul certainly ignores the lessons of history. His “non-interventionist” slant on foreign policy mimics neville chamberlain, and we all know how well that worked out (“Peace in our times”). A central bank is necessary and was instituted originally because of the intolerable restraints on the economy brought on by tight money in boom areas, so paul’s wanting to eliminate the FED ignores that little lesson in history (although making public audits of the FED is a good idea). Plus, the social stances of libertarianism are immoral; we are a nation of laws partly to protect the weak from the strong – allowing recreational drug usage, business without safety regulations, marriages of any stripe, etc (in other words, anarchy) has historically ruined nations too (e.g. Roman Empire).
Report Post »Taldren
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:53am1. Neville Chamberlain was known for appeasement, not for non-interventionism. Ron Paul has repeatedly said that he has not problem going to war as long as it is a just war with a clear congressional declaration in which victory, and thus an end, would be defined. Your blurring of the lines between the two very different policies suggests you have no understanding of either.
2. The FED has been a disaster ever since it was implemented. There is no argument that can honestly be brought forth to counter that. FA Hayek has won the long battle over JM Keynes and all that is left to prove the point is stand back and watch the system collapse just as was predicted back in 1930s.
3. The law is there to protect the liberty and rights of the individual and only when these has been infringed upon, or at imminent risk, is the hand of justice supposed to intervene.
You education on these matters is suspect.
Report Post »Dawngreene
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:27amMichael Sheurer does not believe that Iran is the threat the media insists it is. He is former CIA senior counter terrorist analyst. He is highly educated and experienced on the subject. Could those who control the media yes even Fox News have other motives for pushing the wars? How many decades do we bomb countries in order to prevent wars? How much blood is justified in the never ending wars? If I question the wars, I am told I am not a patriot. I say if I question the wars that makes me human. How many thousands of lives have been lost? For what? The Mid East is STILL on fire, if anything it has gotten worse. We have made even more enemies. Most are not radicals and they do not hate us because we are rich! Come on! Use your brain! They hate us because we are bombing their children, their homes. Ron Paul has my vote.
Report Post »Steve
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:34amBut one cannot get around what Jefferson heard when he went with John Adams to wait upon Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March 1785. When they inquired by what right the Barbary states preyed upon American shipping, enslaving both crews and passengers, America’s two foremost envoys were informed that
“it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
Ambassador Abd Al-Rahman did not fail to mention the size of his own commission, if America chose to pay the protection money demanded as an alternative to piracy
The level of tribute demanded began to reach 10 percent of the American national budget, with no guarantee that greed would not increase that percentage, while from the dungeons of Algiers and Tripoli came appalling reports of the mistreatment of captured men and women.
There were many Americans—John Adams among them—who made the case that it was better policy to pay the tribute. It was cheaper than the loss of trade, for one thing, and a battle against the pirates would be “too rugged for our people to bear.” Putting the matter starkly,
Adams said: “We ought not to fight them at all unless we determine to fight them forever
They Hated us then as they hate us n
Report Post »unbound1
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:22amOur country needs Ron Paul! People need to understand he’s not going to give Iran nukes. He is still going to do everything to defend the USA and other countries can take care of themselves. This candidate can bring people from all sides of the aisle together – dems, reps, independents, and libertarians. A true American patriot who loves USA and has 30 year exp. to prove it!
Report Post »Capt. Ron
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:19amAfter watching his ad he looks old and tired.
Report Post »one Angry American
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:59amI am sure he is he has been fighting for liberty ALONE. Wake up bro!
Report Post »louise
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 6:35amyou would look old and tired too, Capt. if you had been fighting the cause of liberty for the last 35 years.
Report Post »thepatriotdave
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:13am“If Ron Paul were to actually win, he would indeed fail to smash the state entirely. That is neither his intention nor his promise. However, he would clearly move American society far closer toward the anarchist ideal.” ~ By Anthony Gregory
Ron Paul has no business being in the White House!
Report Post »unbound1
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:23amthat is not true. Running the govt like the constitution says is anarchy? not hardly!
Report Post »unbound1
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:26amThat is not true. A govt run by the constitution is not anarchy!
Report Post »unbound1
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:31amsorry about the redundancy…I didn’t think it posted :-)
Report Post »This_Individual
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:50amRon Paul is what our country needs. The rest just seem to be fake and unimpressive.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 3:10am@PatriotDave
A Libertarian like the founders Ron Paul would put our Government were it belongs, just to the left of Anarchy.
You sir and your Progressive NeoCon buddies have and would place Government passed center left to complete left.
You have been proven a liar. You have no credit with anyone here. Find some principles and integrity.
Report Post »louise
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 7:11amAnthony Gregory sounds like a scared little girl.
Report Post »People have forgotten what Liberty is. People have forgotten the vision of our founding fathers that was rooted in faith. And most ly they have forgotten that our country has a ‘law of the land’ that refrains government over-reach, and protects individual liberty. THIS is what Ron Paul has been saying for 35 years.
Does liberty draw fringe fanatics such as anarchists? Of course it does. That does not mean that Ron Paul is an anarchist!!
Get your facts straight .
FaithUsa
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 8:21amThere is nothing more moderate than our Constitutional Republic. Ron Paul is the least extreme of them all because of his focus on rule by law.
Report Post »Steve
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 2:10amIran is the killer to this candidate!
Report Post »one Angry American
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:03amAre you afraid of Iran do you think that iran is the main problem we face in our time? bro seriously educate yourself you are dangerous to me and my children’s freedom.
Report Post »101
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 4:35am@Steve …get your facts straight before spewing false statements
Ron Paul On Iran
Report Post »http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujl_sTPZPLY
TheWholeTruth
Posted on August 17, 2011 at 11:34amSteve.. I bet you live in a neighborhood with a Home Owners Association and just LOVE it … don’t you? That’s what you seem to want to impose on all Americans… same diff. ..Always nice, and clean and just so-so. Every blade of grass just the right height, no junkie broken down cars in the driveway, no basketball goals over the garage. …… NO FREEDOM!
Report Post »