Do you think the Kucinich remark.....

[dawnbt]

I think it helped. We all Kucinich isn't going to make it and Ron could likely get their votes. I know two people whose first choice is Kucinich and second is Ron Paul.

 

[Wolverine]

he is out there, lol

did u see stephen colbert making fun of how many things he has in his pocket?


BWAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAAAAAAAaa

 

[Hudder]

I find his lack of lies not disturbing.

 

[Pii]

dr paul basically suggested that all of them hate him because he is a mormon!

I didn't come away from it with that impression. Maybe it's my rose-colored glasses. I do think that he successfully articulated that the other candidates have seized on Romney's religion as a potential wedge in order to separate him from the party base, which unfortunately, contains a lot of evangelicals. Not just in the Leno interview, but in other interviews as well.

He has consistently stated that people should take exception to Romney based solely on his positions and his record, NOT based on his spiritual beliefs. He has always argued against the so-called "Religious Test."

 

[Johncjackson]

Did people even hear the question? He was asked if there were any Democrats he liked or agreed with on anything. He said he considers Kucinich a friend and that the 2 are often the only votes against bills expanding war spending and trampling civil liberties. But he clearly said they dont agree on economic policy.

I doubt he turned off anyone, maybe some closet necons.

Kucinich is a socialist but so are all the other candidates. At least he is right on some pretty MAJOR issues. And thats more than can be said for those other guys in both parties.

If people care enough about any issue, they are willing to work with others on an ad-hoc basis. If you would rather support the war than be friendly to a socialist who happens to agree with you on that particular issue, you are a warmonger.

 

[vegetarianrpfan]

well, i agree with you and that is what leno's question was. and though dr paul began with that answer he inexplicably drifted into a much more sinister and less substantiated explanation. leno politely questioned that explanation but dr paul kept saying how he was afraid that was the reason.



huckabee is disgusting and he might be using the mormon thing to some extent, though i think that his voters pay attention to stuff like that on their own and he doesn't even need to use it much. but the question was not about him but about "why is everybody ganging on romney". dr paul basically suggested that all of them hate him because he is a mormon!

He also mentioned that it was because he was seen as the frontrunner and because of the flip-flopping.

I have never said this to anyone on this forum, but please take your extremely negative attitude away from this board. You are not helping either Ron Paul or other Ron Paul supporters. You sound like you would belong more at a meeting of the National Association of Neocons who Hate Ron Paul or something. I have never ignored someone on this board, congratulations, you're the first!

It is clear that Huckabee has used the Mormon thing for his personal gain against Romney. It is clear that the Mormon thing will be used against Romney and has been. It is also clear that the majority of Americans would prefer that the money being used in Iraq right now be spent in America on ANYTHING rather than a quagmire in the desert across the world. The government currently pays for 40% of all healthcare through Medicaid and Medicare, and guess what, even a Ron Paul presidency will not be able to do anything about that at first. The Iraq money would be better suited to pay for our debts under Medicare and pay for suitable medical care for our returning veterans. No Republican, as far as I know, is proposing that the government get rid of Medicare and Medicaid.

Your extreme negativity makes no sense in light of these facts.

-------------------------------
Libertarian Girl
http://www.libertariangirl.com

 

[partypooper]

t is also clear that the majority of Americans would prefer that the money being used in Iraq right now be spent in America on ANYTHING rather than a quagmire in the desert across the world. Your extreme negativity makes no sense in light of these facts.

those "facts" are completely irrelevant for my "negativity". claims on how "we" should be spending more money "to take care of people at home" is inconsistent with libertarian message. it is pandering, pure and simple. and pandering to the far left is no better than pandering to neocons, in addition to being counter-productive if one is seeking republican nomination.

 

[CountryboyRonPaul]

He said they agreed on the War and on Civil Liberties, but he obviously has several disagreements on economic issues and such.

We are dealing with a Libertarian state for the moment.

 

[partypooper]

I didn't come away from it with that impression. Maybe it's my rose-colored glasses.

maybe you are right. my husband (a republican leaning independent) said i was over-analyzing it and it wasn't so bad.

 

[OrbitalGun]

Shame on you people. Respect Dr. Paul for always telling the truth...if that is his opinion, then so be it....That is why I respect him so much - he simply tells the truth - remember how that used to be?

+1 Ron Paul's honesty is what brought me to him too. If we get one thing from the Revolution, other than the Presidency, it should be that honesty is what the people want not talking points and pandering.

 

[jmdrake]

He should have said "of the top 3" and then go on to say Obama.

Why? Obama supports military action against Iran and he said he wouldn't promise to have the troops out of Iraq by 2013! Plus Obama supports universal healthcare, gun control and everything else that some people here don't like about Kucinich. Obama also supported the expanded unPatriot Act and the "homegrown terrorism" bill and other assaults on our civil liberties. Hey, I personally don't dislike Obama (I can't. My wife supports him.) But Kucinich is far closer to Ron Paul on the important issues I care about than anyone else currently running with the possible exception of Mike Gravel.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[Goldwater Conservative]

it was a disaster of a response and a disaster of an appearance.

he felt compelled to pick kucinich as the closest democrat but had no problem saying that no republican candidate was close enough to him. but that answer was only a part of the problem - dr paul also said that other republican candidates are attacking romney because of his religion - an unfair, paranoid and in any case unsubstantiated accusation.

dr paul also repeated a disastrous healthcare "argument" that we should be spending our military money on healthcare, coming across as a hard-core pacifist and a proponent of socialized health care. the comments about fox being scared of him were not very good either.

the only good part was his response to foreign policy question (analogy with murder and motive). but apart from that it was a disaster.

Thanks to whoever on these forums first linked that.

 

[acptulsa]

I tried to record it (I have to get up early), but the storms (that killed two in nearby Missouri) gave the local NBC affiliate all the excuse they could need to preempt the entire show. So, I appreciate the in-depth reporting here.

Seems to me the talk of diverting resources from the war to health care could as easily be construed as saying that if we weren't overtaxed in support of the war, we could do far greater things. But then, I didn't see it.

All I can say is thank God he's getting some serious exposure at last! Why it takes an entertainment venue to bring us news on the political front I don't know, but hooray. I just hope his crossing of a picket line is no particular detriment.

I expect we owe the writers a debt of gratitude for striking. Otherwise, would Leno have been able to get him on?

 

[Lars]

I seems to me that Ron needs a strong running mate soon. Maybe a business person or a celebrity. Who would we like?

 

[Duckman]

dr paul also said that other republican candidates are attacking romney because of his religion - an unfair, paranoid and in any case unsubstantiated accusation.

Slightly offtopic, but I don't think Ron Paul was implying that the other candidates were attacking Romney because he is a Mormon, he was implying that some people won't vote for him because he's a Mormon, which is different (because it doesn't imply an actual attack by someone).

I don't know of any candidate who attacked Romney because he is a Mormon. But Sean Hannity did. He devoted an entire episode of H&C a few months back to informing the public that Romney is a Mormon and basically trying to convince evangelicals to stop supporting him.

 

[vegetarianrpfan]

those "facts" are completely irrelevant for my "negativity". claims on how "we" should be spending more money "to take care of people at home" is inconsistent with libertarian message. it is pandering, pure and simple. and pandering to the far left is no better than pandering to neocons, in addition to being counter-productive if one is seeking republican nomination.

As I previously stated, the government currently provides FORTY PERCENT of healthcare in the US. Ron Paul has not said he would immediately abolish this. Therefore, those debts must be paid somehow. He has also said that our healthcare expenditures on veterans should be the one thing in our federal budget that increases. That's plenty of healthcare costs that could be paid for with the $1 trillion going to Iraq, and yes, anything else is complete negativity. Current debts must be paid until a more libertarian system can be gradually put in place.

Sorry, but the rhetoric used by Democrats can also be used by Republicans for a more libertarian message. Libertarianism IS "taking care of our people at home," more than socialized medicine ever would be. "Our people" could go to Social Security (a current debt that Ron Paul has said could not be gotten rid of without a gradual transition) or to veterans.

Most Americans would not object to that statement, whether Republican or Democrat. Keep in mind that most Republicans are in FAVOR of Medicare, even though it is basically socialized medicine (without even an income test!)

-------------------------
Libertarian Girl
http://www.libertariangirl.com