1. ± says:

    Expressed with magniloquent grace.

  2. tcc3 says:

    If you can’t handle the heat, get off the campaign trail. Walking out of an interview in a huff shows poor judgement, lack of diplomacy, and lack of strategic thinking.

    • LibertyLover says:

      Not really. It shows a sense of purpose and a willingness to put the media back in its place. The man has got to much to do then to keep answering the same question over and over.

      It’s almost turning into a birther scenario: we didn’t get the answer we wanted so we’re going to keep asking the question.

      • tcc3 says:

        Then the proper response would have been to say that he had addressed this issue many times and to please ask some thing relevant regarding the issues.

        Walking out like a petulant child only looks like hes running from the question.

        If he has so little poise and skill that he cant handle an unwelcome question, what happens when he’s negotiating with congress? Or meeting with a foreign dignitary? Or leading our military?

        A “stupid” question from a CNN reporter is the least of what he might face.

        • LibertyLover says:

          He did say that. Did you even watch the video?

          • tcc3 says:

            I did. I watched the aired version and the uncut one. The uncut one doesn’t make him look any less like a grumpy old man who cannot be bothered to deal with a reporter he sees as tiresome.

          • LibertyLover says:

            Hmm. I have to say “tiresome” is exactly the way to explain it.

      • tcc3 says:

        How did he put her in her place? She got a juicy piece of tape.

        He could have used it as an opportunity to show some strength and cunning. But he missed that opportunity when he turned tail.

        He lost on both counts, both in the resulting bad press and the lost opportunity.

        • LibertyLover says:

          She didnt get what she wanted. She got treated like a bully. Ignore a bully.

          Watch near the end. She isn’t smiling with glee. She’s frowning because she failed to get what she wanted.

          If these people aren’t careful they are going to develop the same reputation as the birthers.

          • tcc3 says:

            He can ignore the media, but he does so at his own peril. They aren’t always going to throw him softball questions.

            You want to liken this to the birthers: except that its a thing that actually happened. Those newsletters aren’t a fiction, made up by a lunatic fringe.

            Ignorance may be his only possible defense, but people tire of “I dont know.” about things you damn well should know about.

          • LibertyLover says:


            It very similar. One side said something happened and refused the explanation.

            Eventually it’s going to come down to who is more trustworthy: the biased media or Ron Paul.

    • orchidcup says:

      So Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, etc. are the epitome of good judgement, diplomacy, and strategic thinking?

    • msbpodcast says:

      No opening up her mind with a .45 would be showing poor judgement.

      As it is, I’m with the brother.

      I refuse to vote for any party, cause in the end … its no party.

  3. McCullough says:

    Testify brother!

  4. #7--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Well–being the ultimate judge of all that if fair and wise==I gotta go look at that referenced video again. Does seem to me like he answered the question and the woman wouldn’t drop the issue. She should have moved on to a new question?

    Or if you are being obviously lied to, why not just ask the same question again? Kinda like waterboarding?

    Relevantly, just caught Paul’s answer during the Florida Debate about what a poor person should do who needs healthcare and Paul’s answer was: “I’ve got mine, screw you.” There are many good reasons Ron Paul is a Republican Liebertard rather than a Democratic Libertarian.

    Ha, ha. No Healthcare, No Soc Sec, No Anti-Discrimination Laws, No National Security (aka let Iran get the Nukes)==yes, very FREEEEEEEDOM based dogma.

    Ron Paul: worst candidate fielded this year.

    • tcc3 says:

      Indeed. As much as the newsletter issue shows him to be a poor choice, much more recent issues show it even more so.

      His stance on healthcare, selling national treasures, gold, and regulatory agencies are problems even without the newsletter.

  5. McCullough says:

    A simple truth…we are bankrupt, 16 Trillion in debt.

    All these programs would be great..hell, I’d LOVE to have all the freebies too.

    Grow up, the moneys gone man…..they done spent it, and gave the rest to their banker buds. Now watcha gonna do?

    Oh yeah, tax me some more!


  6. Roasted Peanuts says:

    This man should run for VP with Paul. My god would that be a magnificent ticket.

  7. #8--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Here it is: http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/ron-paul-gets-testy-gloria-borger-over-que with some interesting flack from Wolf and Borger.

    Paul did answer the question, answered the followup, and only walked off when Borger wanted to rehash the “incindiary” nature of the material that Ron Paul said he hadn’t read until 10 years after the fact.

    BAD REPORTING. as so much of reporting is. Was it Jon Stewart or Rachel Madow that shows 20 year old video of Ron Paul saying he was actively involved with those news letters? Ha, ha. Can’t just lie anymore and get away with it in the age of YouTube.

    Paul was still “wrong” to walk away though. He’s running for Presnedent: stand your ground and say “Why are you going back and asking the same questions again? YES—-the material was offensive, incindiary, and wrong==I disavow it. What is it about me agreeing with you do you not understand?”

    Ha, ha. While Ron Paul does a better job than most of directly answering a question, he’s getting worn down.

  8. #11--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    #8–McCullough==if by “tax me” you mean to reveal you are a multi-millionaire and object to an additional 3% tax on your income over one million dollars==then Yes, I think you should be taxed.

    Happy Tax Fact No 36: 6 Walton Family Members have as much wealth as the bottom 90 Million Americans==all inherited of course. Yes, we can’t tax them–they are job creators===as in creating the largest force of near minimum wage jobs without health benefits there is why destroying the income and community life of many thousands more of Mom and Pop stores selling competing items.

    Its all very much why American is failing/has failed.

    • orchidcup says:

      I cannot believe you would stoop so low as to criticize the Waltons.

      The Walton family are the most beloved folks around Walton’s Mountain.

      Grandpa Zeb, Grandma Esther, John-boy, Mary Ellen, Ben, and Erin were the nicest and most decent people you would ever know, and they regularly attended the Baptist Church. Well, John-boy didn’t always attend church, but we always thought he was gay.

      The Waltons were fine folks.

  9. #13--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Even humor/sarcasm has its limits. “Nothing” can justify the wealth disparity that is argued for by the Teabaggers today. And it wouldn’t happen were it got for goof bags thinking Ron Paul is a viable candidate for any political office. Court Jester?==Yes, of course. Political Office===Hell no.

    Dogmatists of EVERY stripe should be rejected as placing dogma above the Constitution! Any sane reading of the Constitution IMMEDIATELY requires the recognition that rights must be balanced against one another.

    Just that simple==if you got no balance, then you are unbalanced.

    Ipso Dipsit.

    • orchidcup says:

      “Just that simple==if you got no balance, then you are unbalanced.”

      I’ll go along with that bobbo. I hope you get yourself on an even keel soon. Good Luck with that.

  10. McCullough says:

    Tax more spend more..right bobbo? It’s the Murican way dammit.

    Wheres my god-damned sno-kone machine?

  11. #15--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    #14–McCullough==copy and paste the words I used that motivates you to think even in passing I’m a tax more, spend more liberdrool?

    NO–all reasonable people are for balanced budgets and whatever taxing/spending philosophy is required to get there.

    McCullough==wealth disparity as we have now destroys democracy. Certainly you can’t be in favor of further tax cuts for the rich? Give a poor person a buck, and they spend it locally. Give a rich person another million dollars and they will open another business overseas.

    The only thing that trickles down in our society is job shortages, misery, and lies.

    Its easy: universal healthcare, education, portable secure retirement, all the cheese and popcorn you can eat on welfare, free birth control, 8by9 cardboard box if needed for houseing, gambling on Wallstreet prohibited, and no flouride in the water. Tax as necessary to support those programs.

    Who could possibly object?===except Ron Paul which is why he is a very bad man. Some of what he is “for” is good. But too much of what he is for is downright evil. Take the blinders off.

    As to countries that have attacked us–yes the 911 terrorists were all Saudi’s. That doesn’t mean Saudi Arabia attacked us. If so, then why not say any and all Arabs attacked us, or any and all Muslims did? Oop’s—didn’t mean to give you that ammunition.

    Ha, ha. Yeap–the rich aren’t rich another. May I have another tax break please?

    Silly Hoomans.

    • McCullough says:

      bobbo==copy and paste the words I used that motivates you to think even in passing I’m a give the rich more tax breaks kinda guy.

      You can have your social programs, prolly all you most ever wanted, once you get the biggest baddest black hole of spending under control.

      Hmmm, wonder what that could be.

      Are you really that afraid of scary brown men with beards? Does that boogey man keep you up at night worrying? Or did the government just put that fear into you so they can steal your liberty and money. Personally I’m more afraid of that fluoride you mentioned above, oh and Gestapo checkpoints in New Mexico that search my car for no fucking reason. Quite bothersome. Bearded brown guys don’t bother me one damn bit.

      Ron Paul is a very very bad man…let’s wish him into the cornfield.

      Sno-kones anyone?

  12. orchidcup says:

    “Its easy: universal healthcare, education, portable secure retirement, all the cheese and popcorn you can eat on welfare, free birth control, 8by9 cardboard box if needed for houseing, gambling on Wallstreet prohibited, and no flouride in the water. Tax as necessary to support those programs.”

    Bobbo For President! Tax Me Bro’!

  13. #18--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Yeap–its the Bobbo for 2012 Unbalanced Fiscally Responsible Socially Christian Party. No liebertards and otherwise socially ackward allowed. You all will be rounded up and put on ships past the National Boundaries. Let your natural hard working talent build the society you say you can do all on your own. Go Ahead===let’s see. Even let you televise it on Reality TV. Should be a laugh. All those Alpha types looking around for someone to take advantage of.

    Speaking of which–anyone notice how dirt cheap hdtv’s are getting. Biggest price drop I’ve ever seen this year. I wish my 25 year old Panasonic 50 inch would stop working so I could justify the upgrade.

  14. Evan says:

    The political view of Bobbo. If you don’t want bigger government, you’re against America. Quite politically sophisticated indeed.

    Ron Paul is not a racist, now move on to reality. It seems to me the supporters of Obama really want Paul to be a racist. He just isn’t, let it go.

  15. #23--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    #22–Evan==poor old Republicans can never argue on point. When did I ever say or imply that Ron Paul was (sic!==present tense) a racist? Maybe you imply that because he currently thinks that enforcing the Civil Rights Act is unnecessary government intrusion? Well–OK==I’ll give you the inference, but it sure looks like to me that he is WORSE than a racist. He hates everyone in the 99%. You know–everyone not rich enough to isolate themselves from the nurturing hand of Government===as long as their own wealth remains disproportionate due to government policies.

    More facts other than the Waltons being discussed on the CageMatch here: http://cagematch.dvorak.org/index.php/topic,10339.15.html

    Yes–try to imagine how much wealth has been captured by the top 1% and so many here actively trying to cut their own throats in support.

    Truly “amazing”–my vocabulary fails me.

    • orchidcup says:

      “Truly “amazing”–my vocabulary fails me.”

      We are here to help you.

      What word were you searching for?

    • McCullough says:

      You aint gonna get doodly-squat until youse can pony up. BTW, what is the going rate for doodly-squat?

      Reality…it’s what’s for dinner.

  16. #25--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    #24–Orchi==what word? Ha, ha. Well done. Well–I always start with the concept of “projectile fecal vomiting” and work back from there. Something you never forget seeing/smelling/wiping up. Same with our tax policy/wealth disparity, but how to connect real honest shiate with tax policy? Short, concise. It is “amazing” to behold but that is downright misleading.

    “The Only Sidedish Alfie Uses at His TeaParties” is closer, but too long.

    I’m stumped.

  17. Badda bing says:

    Please oh please let Ron Paul become the front runner. His self destruction will be the biggest explosion of hot gas since the hindenberg.

    Note to any future politician wannabees, if your going to have a newsletter or any other publication that will have your name attached in any way. You probably want to read it before it goes to print. Bye bye ron, next contestant please.

    • LPapagno says:

      Please oh please Badda Bing…Please be standing next to him when it explodes so the likes of you well be no more.Douche-bag
      Go Ron Paul…..

      • So what says:

        “well be no more” ? His own words doom him. He’s either a competent racist by his own words or he’s an incompetent politician. Neither of which is worth voting for.

        How can people be so simple minded as to believe Paul is any better then any of the other idiots running on the republican ticket? In alfies case I can understand it, but in supposedly intelligent thinking people it leaves be wondering.

  18. #40--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Has there been a server crash?==or the censorship of posts from hwo, pedro and moi? Nothing vulgar, just what I would call the very best of the web==direct confrontation. Maybe its just me? If a crash–sadly, I just deleted my cache history or I could have put them back up. I don’t know what might have been more sensitive:

    1. Pedro kinda agreeing with me.
    2. International Bickering
    3. Class Warfare.

    You never know when a shotgun blast fatally hits the mark nonetheless.

    I have traveled all over Mexico on multiple occasions. Like anywhere else on earth, it has a combo of good and bad going on. To the degree it looks more like GOUSA rather than a closer to nature off the grid self sustaining economy, I do have a concern for its path, just as I do for GOUSA.

    I don’t mind being censored. I do very dislike being censored and not told why=======so that I can conform in the future. You know, I just want to be a good citizen.

    /////Gee, I can’t even find my post wherein my MAIN idea is addressed: I feel for poor people everywhere. We are all more the same than different. It was Pedro that drew me off course. If you “feel” for the poor, what CAN you think of the rich? Not directly as in my case, but by logical seduction?

  19. McCullough says:

    I can attest to the fact that you have not been censored…why so paranoid?

    Different post possibly…dude, I know it’s Christmas..but do you HAVE to drink yourself into a stupor?

    I mean, like me?

  20. #42--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    McCullough—for real? Well then, I’m totally tripping. Seems to me earlier in the evening, the thread was posted by JCD himself?

    Its like the thread has been cut in half with the second half not appearing, and then the first half replaced by the first half?

    Please don’t conflate MY seasoning of goodwill, egg nog and beer, with your own poison of choice: bourbon?==if I recall correctly? No doubt for hwo its either Tequila Silver Commandante or the blood of new borns?

    Why does, EXACTLY WHY does tequila wreck a person so much more so than other hard liquors? Beer and egg nog is just like me==friendly.

    I swear “something” is going on with this thread, but as the very worst of what is posted is being maintained ((for now?)) it must be some other organizational goal? Going to change the type to pink on red or what other modernizations are in the pipeline?

  21. #43--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Aiy-yi–yi—yie!!! The entire thread is back. Jumping from 26 to 40 posts = back and forth! I can’t keep up. And now back to JCD, not Eideard???

    Really makes no sense at all. More like that single pad of LSD was a quad?

    Or I have a dealy case of Montezuma’s Revenge and my computer is about to crash? Truly unique. If you aren’t seeing this on your end……. well then there truly are multiple parallel universes and mine is vibrating enough to wake Einstein up.

    I see a fork in the road ahead: drink more—–post more.

    It’s a choice! A life affirming choice.

  22. #44--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Wow!! I swear I could drive my car, or a jet fighter, or a stand up debate with Fox News, and not crash and burn “but” I have just confused the thread on the disbanding of the VeraCruz police force with this one.

    I apologize. I’ve got to get that Personal webcam that records everything I do. I’m becoming as spastic in space and time as was Billy Pilgrim in Slaughterhouse Five? Amusing. Disheartening, but still amusing.

    The confusion ((and insights worth having)) are all mine. I wonder if there is actually a nexus between these threads other than my confusion?

    Other thread reads ok, this one, I butchered. Again–I apologize.

  23. ± says:

    Cutting through the crap. The dude admitted he used to be smart and avoided voting for the lesser of evils; but now disavows this method of voting. So he his back to voting for the lesser of evils. So he votes for evil. People don’t need to be part of the problem, but he chose to do so just like most of the sheeple on this blog who will vote just like him and for exactly the same reason.

    Until people understand that voting for the lesser of evils is still voting for evil, we are totally and awesomely fucked.

    Vote any third party and you are NOT part of the problem.

  24. #46--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    #45–P/M==totally false presentation there. It assumes without stating that the third candidate is also “not evil” which is rarely if ever the case. There is a reason evil worst choices will offer up a confusing third party to diminish the vote for the second worst candidate: its chicanery. When YOU do for innocent reasons what EVIL people do for political gamesmanship, you are in fact only being a dupe. Most recently there is NO DENYING that a vote for Ralph Nader was pragmatically a vote for George Bush. If you preferred GB over Algore, then nothing lost. If however your second choice for Presnedent was Algore, then you totally screwed yourself under the color of some kind of misplace virtue.

    Silly Hooman==wake up and make Reality your friend.

    Silly otherwise.

  25. #48--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    #47–TeaDud==the only reason Paul is for less government is he assumes his taxes will go down while the “fix” he has in for his share of crony/fixed capitalism will remain in force. He relies on the Coked Brothers for this and has no reason, given the past 30 years, not to think this is true.

    Politics today: all about the already too rich trying to get even more while fooling the Republican throat cutters to keep on voting against their own self interests: fools indeed. “Don’t raise my taxes” as if YOU are of any importance in the play of things. And so the downward spiral only tightens.

  26. TThor says:

    Good man!!!

  27. LibertyLover says:

    What cracks me up about this whole thing is the Democrats are even bad mouthing Paul.

    Ron Paul is a threat to the status quo. The repubs are going to lose their military industrial complex and the dems are going to lose their social programs. Both of these have bled the country dry. It’s time to seal that wound.

  28. Buzz Mega says:

    Now really. Does Ron Paul strike you as the sort of person to publish racist bullshit?

    Writing leaves a fingerprint within its chosen words, phrasing, punctuation use, errors, sentence structure, use of modifiers et cetera.

    What if the writings from the past were to be analyzed in light of more recent prose guaranteed to have come from the hand of Mr. Paul? Let’s forensic this issue before it begets Big Stupid.

    BTW, I’m not a Paul supporter. But I am interested in fair attempts to determine truth.

    • tcc3 says:

      If hes not, it still means hes the sort of person to let a racist use his name and public soapbox to spread hate.


      Also, in all the time these newsletters were being published, not only did Paul not notice their contents, but no one else did either? “Hey Mr Paul I’m concerned about this racist newsletter.” “Hey Ron, we’re old friends, so I know this isnt you – might want a new newsletter staff.”

      • Alfonse says:

        We get it you don’t like the guy. But you haven’t proven shit. Give it up already. Anyone who would pardon black people from minor drug offenses is obviously not a racist.

        Speak to that or shut the fuck up.

        Better yet, just shut the fuck up.

        • #65--bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

          Here are several videos on the points made.


          The “proof” that he knew what was in the newsletters is not conclusive at all. He talks about monetary policies not social or racial issues at 2:00 into the video. Other video is quite persuasive that he is against drug laws that overly penalize the blacks.

          Still Alfonse, the point tcc3 made was that Paul is responsible for what his newsletter said. I think that is true and it doesn’t matter that he may not have known. He profited from it monetarily and by keeping his name known.

          I would also say that regardless of what he knew, or let go 20 years ago, WITH the other video, in my mind resolves the racist charges in Paul favor.

          Hardly matters. No one should vote for a dogmatist which Paul is to a very high order. A vote for Ron Paul will effectively be a vote for Obama. Ain’t that a bitch?

        • tcc3 says:

          What do you need me to prove? I haven’t disputed anything Paul has said.

          My position this entire thread: Even if hes not a racist, hes still a careless fool.

          What part of “dont let racists use your good name” do I need to prove?

        • So what says:

          I think most folks like Paul. He reminds them of their crazy uncle. He has no clue about the rest of the world around him, he makes no sense if you actually think about it, he’s just a touch racist, homophobic, and misogynistic, but he’s so darn cute in his craziness.

          That said however, any one that believes the words coming out of a politicians mouth has been partaking of too many illicit drugs.

          • tcc3 says:

            Thing is, I think Paul really believes this stuff. He’s too consistent not to, even when its detrimental for him. So I think he’s genuine about his policies.

            I just think most of his policies are awful.

          • So what says:

            “Thing is, I think Paul really believes this stuff.” So does my crazy uncle.

  29. Glenn E. says:

    I think the choice to elect Ron Paul is just another illusion. They’ll tangle his candidacy as a carrot in the public’s eyes, as “proof” that it’s not all rigged ahead of time. Like the televise debates are. By giving us such obviously controversial choices, they’re counting on increased voter registration. Which just continues to justify this farce they set up. And they need not consider campaign reform, as long as the voter registration percentage is high enough.

    In the end, whoever gets elected, will likely obey corporate desires and mandates. Not the wishes and concerns of the common citizen. And should this prove not to be true, often enough. Then Congress can be counted on to refuse supporting anything that strays from corporate desires, that the President proposes. The Presidency is just a figure head position, for approving what the corporate world wants done.

    That said, I still wouldn’t mind seeing Ron Paul make it. If for nothing else. To show everyone just how far they’re willing to let him go, before shutting him down. They’ve already pulled these 20 year old tabloids out of the woodwork, they probably knew about all along. Just as they knew about Herman Cain’s checkered past. But kept it quiet, until they needed to thin the running, and get him down in the polls. It’s called character assassination, like what they did to Bill Clinton, early on. And like they tried to do with Obama, with all that Birther and religion nonsense. When he was running, his Christian church was “too radical”. And after he won, his supposed Islamic “ties” were too radical. Whoever runs, that THEY don’t like, will be character assassinated (SOP of the GOP). And whoever wins, THEY don’t like will get the same, only worse. And if all else fails, there’s always the more deadly alternative.

  30. Glenn E. says:

    One thing that such a video made in a moving car proves. The guy is not making it up, it’s not rehearsed, of selectively edited. IOW, not a lie-a-gram, like the politicians cook up in their comfy offices. Or the FOX Tv staff, cut together from snippets of O’Reilly talking, during those rare moments he’s not cursing the script writers for making the works to hard for him to read. 🙂

    No wordsmith politician could handle driving and creatively lying, so convincingly. And when one finally can. We better believe that one is some future Hitler or the Devil himself.


Bad Behavior has blocked 5520 access attempts in the last 7 days.