« Morning Funnies | Main | US Supreme Court Upholds Strip Search Of Passenger Wrongfully Arrested »

April 03, 2012


Ron Paul is not speaking of the Republican grass roots but of the establishment in many areas. He speaks in short hand and those who support him know what he is talking about. He doesn't 'focus group' what he says, and tries to answer, directly, EVERY question he is asked. If you WANT to find something to hold against him you always can, if you don't want to look into what he meant.

Across the country local GOP organizations are breaking rules to stop his delegates. Some, as in Washington, are saying he is 'dangerous to the party' and people should be willing to vote for anyone else -- trying to get all non-Paul slates in a state where he took second. In Georgia, in Missouri, the list goes on (in MO one of his supporters trying to continue an improperly adjurned caucus was actually taken away in handcuffs at the behest of the local party group -- even though he himself was a member of the GOP central committee for that county -- simply because people were listening to him as he explained requirements for drafting a roster and continuing the caucus).

So he sees this and responds to this. Obviously he isn't speaking about the body of the GOP -- just some of the entrenched interests who seem to think the rules they make only have to be followed by others.

I am trying to figure something out.

Ron Paul has been an elected Republican official for almost 40 years.

You say he is trying to take over the party.

What exactly are you trying to say?

Has he been laying low for 30 years as a covert spy from the Libertarian Party? Laying low as an elected Republican congressman?

These people are void of understanding, they lack the skills to comprehend reality. Sorry but politics is a team sport when someone is out for blood in their own party there is something desperately wrong with the last brain cell they might have left. Paul is such a hypocrite, he says he is for term limits, yet he has been in congress since 1997 , says he is not for earmarks, yet votes no one bills where he knows it will make no difference and still brings home the bacon to his district .. let's look here at
Federal spending in anti-government Rep. Ron Paul’s (R-TX) district has quadrupled since 1999 to more than $4 billion, making Texas’ 14th congressional district one of the highest per-capita federal spenders in the country. With $14,707 spent per resident annually, it is clear that Paul’s constant bellyaching about overly-indulgent government spending is nothing but empty rhetoric used to rouse political support for his presidential bid. Maybe his supporters can't read ??? or Maybe they just don't care what their Messiah does even when it's hypocritical .I guess they don't care about integrity and ethics . There seems to be a pattern here.
More recently in an investigation this was found while Paul was ranting about the evils of FEMA, his office was behind closed doors planning what they could do with the new federal funds, which eventually included rebuilding 180 homes, reconstructing the county’s seawall, and embarking on an extensive beach nourishment project. OF course Ron Paul has an explanation for his seemingly hypocritical behavior of railing against government programs, but then quietly grabbing his share of federal funds: Paul, "blame it on the government itself. “If they are going to allot the money, I have a responsibility to represent my people. He is a hypocrite with a silver tongue and only ill informed , naive folks would ever follow him.

Why were you a member of the Ron Paul Forums?

Why do you disagree with Jim DeMint?

Marc, can you give us a rundown on Kentucky's Republican delegation in Congress and how they voted on NDAA and the Patriot Act? Was Ron Paul speaking of rank and file (unelected) Republican voters or was he speaking of those "Republicans" that were nominated and elected to congress?

[Marc's reply: Senate: McConnell 'yea', Paul 'nay'

House: Whitfield 'yea', Guthrie 'yea', Yarmuth 'nay', Davis 'yea', Rogers 'yea' Chandler 'yea'.

I don't know who Paul was talking about. Lack of specificity is pretty inclusive in my book.]

Again, policy makers do not respond to voters who say, "Hey, you shouldn't co-sponsor and vote for NDAA and stand by for assasination of American citizens, but since you're my party's nominee, I'll vote for you anyway...just less enthusiastically."

They respond to people who cost them elections for supporting such things.

Politics isn't a team sport, it's a bloodsport. Sorry this upsets you so much, but frankly, this kind of outrage shows us that our tatics work, and give us all the reason we need to double down on them.

And again, I'll be happy to have you on our side in 2016.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Photo For Facebook

  • Kentucky's #1 Conservative Blog
     photo blogfacebooklogo_zpsd77979be.jpg



Tip Jar

My Twitter Updates

  • What's New?

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Blog powered by Typepad