Thread: Ron Paul On Meet The Press

Originally Posted by Darlene

I think a lot of you recent posters from the last few months that have been so vocal for Romney, have been sent here from Free Republic to stir the pot. Why would anyone want someone who is for everything we have been fighting against the last few years and defeated, to win?

I think Tancredo endorsed him in the heat of the moment after reading that opinion piece that got everyone here riled up from the blogger at Lou Rockwell. He wanted Ron Paul to defend himself against an article that didn't even come from his mouth. In the meantime Romney declared on Tim Russert's show just this week that he would do everything that we defeated with the comprehensive immigration bill. Now people want to vote for him???

This after talking to him for 1 hour. Sure he got promises from Romney just like we got the fence even after the bill was passed, financed and signed by the President.
Just to be taken back at the last minute, and we are to believe the lies of this chosen one. The face time he gets alone from the MSM is enough to know not to trust one of their chosen few.

Tancredo campaign workers and advisers were even shocked by the endorsement.

As was I.

Most of what Russert was bringing up about immigration was from 20 years ago, 1987 and as RP said, circumstances can change with time.

He usually has thought out reasons for not supporting some bills that you may think sound wonderful, probably because he is the only one that reads them.

Come on Bren, 789 posts in 4 months, mostly against Ron Paul!

usanevada 379 in less than a month, mostly touting Romney.

So, if we do not blindly and naively follow Paul like you do, we are part of some conspiracy??? I don't think so.

If we do not agree with what you say about Paul, then we are automatically wrong and trouble makers----no matter what evidence is posted???

FYI---both of us have been involved with this issue for OVER 2 years. I belong to NUMEROUS anti-illegal forums. Just because I have not been posting here, does not mean that I am new to this issue---and just woke up yesterday.

Also, Tancredo did NOT support Romney for the reasons that you posted. He stated that Paul's opinions regarding Muslim terrorists and terrorist countries is why he could never support Paul.

Maybe listen to Tancredo's interview after selecting Romney----before you speculate or put words in his mouth.

Also, it was 2005 when Paul voted against Hunter's border fence/security bill.

"Blindly and naively"???

Wanna borrow a spoon for that pot you're stirring?

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

"Blindly and naively"???

Wanna borrow a spoon for that pot you're stirring?

You do not want to see/consider any information that should make you question Paul and his motives.

Any time there is a question--- you use Paul's answers as to why he did/didn't do something as an explanation only----you do not look at any other information.

Originally Posted by Bren4824

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

"Blindly and naively"???

Wanna borrow a spoon for that pot you're stirring?

You do not want to see/consider any information that should make you question Paul and his motives.

Any time there is a question--- you use Paul's answers as to why he did/didn't do something as an explanation only----you do not look at any other information.

You haven't provided any other information to look at, Bren.

But conversely, you run away from the answers that Romney gave last week.

We could argue this issue for the next month and not get it resolved

How about just dropping the whole Romney/Paul thing for now , Its going to work itself out sooner or later anyway

There are more important issues going on and we arn't going to convince each other of who is right and who is wrong

Originally Posted by usanevada

We could argue this issue for the next month and not get it resolved

How about just dropping the whole Romney/Paul thing for now , Its going to work itself out sooner or later anyway

There are more important issues going on and we arn't going to convince each other of who is right and who is wrong

I do not know why we are even discussing Romney with Paul because Romney is not an option.

Sturmrugar wrote:

I do not know why we are even discussing Romney with Paul because Romney is not an option.

Heck, I haven't figured out why we're discussing either of them, especially with Hunter still in the race.

Originally Posted by usanevada

You had to love his answer to Glenn Beck when ask about Sutton


Johnny who?

Get over it!!!!!!

I liked when Ron Paul said: he wants get rid of the IRS and Federal Reserve.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Sweet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There's nothing here to argue: I'm voting for Ron Paul.

Originally Posted by sturmruger

Originally Posted by usanevada

We could argue this issue for the next month and not get it resolved

How about just dropping the whole Romney/Paul thing for now , Its going to work itself out sooner or later anyway

There are more important issues going on and we arn't going to convince each other of who is right and who is wrong

I do not know why we are even discussing Romney with Paul because Romney is not an option.

And, that is your opinion---as well as others' opinion.

However, that is not everybody's opinion.

Originally Posted by Bren4824

Originally Posted by sturmruger

Originally Posted by usanevada

We could argue this issue for the next month and not get it resolved

How about just dropping the whole Romney/Paul thing for now , Its going to work itself out sooner or later anyway

There are more important issues going on and we arn't going to convince each other of who is right and who is wrong

I do not know why we are even discussing Romney with Paul because Romney is not an option.

And, that is your opinion---as well as others' opinion.

However, that is not everybody's opinion.

This thread is about Ron Paul and who are the "two" discussing Romney?