Any good writers want to respond to this

[hopeforamerica]

It's just a stupid blog. However it is about the only thing this worthless paper has printed about Ron Paul.

http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/Mike1633/16870

Anyone want to write a zinger of a response? I wish I could articulate the facts well.

 

[mczerone]

It's just a stupid blog. However it is about the only thing this worthless paper has printed about Ron Paul.

http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/Mike1633/16870

Anyone want to write a zinger of a response? I wish I could articulate the facts well.

Neither can that bloggist. This isn't the first time I've decided not to sign up for azcentral just to refute something.

Keep saying that Paul has requested "plenty" of pork, has dropped out, polls near "Duncan Hunter" (and way to be cordial to a fellow, using him to show how low Paul polled), and that he was 'given his spot at the table".

Those things are lies - over-simplified truth at best, and we all know that.

Your Time is better spent going to voters.rp2008 and making some calls - make 5 in a row to start.

 

[yongrel]

We're past the point where our comments on internet blogs make any difference. More productive to handwrite a letter or two and send it to Texas.

 

[Jon4Ron]

I would but I have this strong urge to call him a F-in Moron, so I must pass.

 

[Revolution9]

He is a milquetoast pantywaist of the frst order. He would crap his pants if I went boo! His analysis is rife with dogmatic bloviation that stretches the limits of logic into the realm of masturbatory obsequious bootlicking in his fervent and idiotic notion that the race will be McCain and Hillary and close. No effing way this clown should be given any attention. Let him rot in his political miasma.

The Revolution is alive and well and growing and there ain't shit the blogclowns ond parakeets of pyroclastc rhetoric can do about it.

Randy

 

[Cleaner44]

Here is what I wrote:

Mike, your label of Ron Paul as the master of the oversimplification makes me curious if you have every read any of Ron Paul's books. Here is a partial list:

Paul, Ron (1981). Gold, Peace, and Prosperity: The Birth of a New Currency
Paul, Ron, and Lehrman, Lewis (1982). The Case for Gold: a Minority Report of the U.S. Gold Commission
Paul, Ron (1983). Ten Myths About Paper Money
Paul, Ron (1987). Freedom Under Siege: The U.S. Constitution After 200 Years
Paul, Ron (2000). A Republic, If You Can Keep It. House of Representatives
Paul, Ron (2007). A Foreign Policy of Freedom
Paul, Ron (2008). Pillars of Prosperity

You might want to do some reading before you label Ron Paul so you don't come off looking like an ignorant fool.

Ron Paul is certainly not an "internet invention". He has been working in Congress since 1976 to return our country to sound money and urging his fellow Congressman to adheer to the Constitution.

If you only understood that the Ron Paul Revolution is much bigger than electing Ron Paul as our next President, then maybe you would not write such an ignorant blog. Those of us in the Ron Paul Revolution are fighting to restore our Republic and that struggle does not begin and end with Ron Paul.

The United States has been drifting away from our Constitution and into a fascist state. We have a national debt of over $9 trillion, runaway inflation, a recession that may turn into a depression, a stock market that is collapsing and then we have people like you Mike that seem to think this is all about electing our next President and then going back to sleep.

 

[acptulsa]

Not bad. I decided to add to it by going a different direction:

Quite a spin, McClellan. Your allegations about pork are certainly novel. Have any proof? Your allegation that Dr. Paul said there's "no chance" of a brokered convention is not only refuted by the link you provide, it's ridiculous on the face of it. The voters decide whether to give your pet hothead McCain enough votes to sew up the nomination, not Dr. Paul and not you media types.

To say you oversimplify the Ron Paul Revolution is, in itself, an oversimplification. About the only supportable claims in your compact yet nearly fact-free little diatribe are that the media continues to ignore it and that Dr. Paul does better in caucus states than in primary states. You certainly did yourself no favors mentioning this last.

Why, do you suppose, he does do better in caucus states? Do you think his supporters strongarm caucus goers into changing their votes? The truth is, our freedoms are steadily being eroded away and it simply isn't necessary to keep us safe. The truth is that the federal government is obese and grossly inefficient and the argument to cut it away and let the states do the work is palatable to all who don't have a stake in it. The truth is that Dr. Paul's record, his integrity and his positions are unimpeachable and the only thing that has retarded the growth of his support is the fact that no G.O.P. presidential candidate in history has gotten less coverage.

Spin away, "my friend". When you wake up to realize that a major American political party has nominated a candidate who thinks ex-K.G.B. chief Vladimir Putin is "president" of Germany, you may have trouble looking in the mirror. On that morning, don't waste your wailing and gnashing of teeth on us.