Richard Viguerie: Ron Paul 'Shocking and Disappointing;'

[acptulsa]

Translation for Snapple: Power Ranger goofiness.

 

[phree]

I agree that it's worth finding out. I mean, no one is perfect. Not even Ron Paul. But, I also find it curious that some people are also jumping to the conclusion that Ron Paul must be evil, or he wouldn't have done this. Everyone has to find out for themselves, but for me, I know whenever I've had one of these dilemmas and called his office and spoken to an aide, that what Ron did always made sense to me.

So go through whatever it is that you feel you need to do. But, I'm suggesting to you that you're flying blind until you talk to his office and get more information.

So you don't feel any curiosity about this? You could have called his office yourself in the same amount of time it took you to suggest I do it.

 

[Rhys]

I just called the congress office's chief off staff. He's gonna call back with an answer. I'll tell you all what he says on why... why... why. Honestly, I don't know either but I trust Dr. Paul with my life and my families future.

 

[acptulsa]

So you don't feel any curiosity about this? You could have called his office yourself in the same amount of time it took you to suggest I do it.

Do you? You actually seem more interested in our reactions than in the issue itself.

 

[tomaO2]

His constituents are in Texas.

Right, so I would tend to believe that you are mistaken when you make a claim that he is earmarking his money for Washinton DC. One of the posters has kindly given a link to all his recent earmark requests and they are all for his district. http://i.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/all...tx.14.paul.pdf

Every one of them has the location of Gavelsteen or Texas in it. None have a different state. Why are you so eager to believe that Ron Paul is funding other areas? What makes you think he CAN fund other areas? Nothing I have read on the subject has stated that you can set aside earmarks for something completely outside of your district. Where did you hear it?

He gets requests for funding from his constituents and tries to honor their request while still voting against the bill. That's how this works. Even if the funding DID go to Washington DC, it would, almost certainly, still help his district in some odd way. Considering the paragon of integrity Ron Paul is, you owe him the benifit of the doubt. Stop attacking with information that is little more then hearsay.

You wanted a reasonable answer to your posts, I have given you one. Now, are you going to reasonably take into consideration what I have said or will you mindlessly attack again because deep in your heart you really don't think Ron Paul is as great a congressman as he seems to be?

 

[LibertyEagle]

So you don't feel any curiosity about this? You could have called his office yourself in the same amount of time it took you to suggest I do it.

Because I have done it enough, that I am choosing to trust him on this. It's you that are upset over it; not me. So, you need to call yourself and get your questions answered to your own satisfaction. You don't need a go-between.

Ron has the most approachable congressional office of any that I have ever called. He's not even my Congressman, but I have called his office through the years to get an answer to a question that my own congressman would not answer. They were always approachable, professional and thorough.

 

[phree]

Do you? You actually seem more interested in our reactions than in the issue itself.

I already plainly stated that I'm very concerned about your reactions or lack thereof. It's head in the sand behavior like yours that gives us a bad name.

I called RP's office and was put into voicemail. I'll let you all know what I find out.

It's sad that you all trivialize my commitment to RP. Until I heard about this endorsement I was confident about voting for RP's endorsements. Now I'm not. I'm sure this isn't effecting only me, and if it represents a greater loss of support for RP I would think you would be more concerned instead of posting troll crap like aravoth.

 

[Sandra]

Is there any way to see it kylejack and phree are the same person? I believe phree just confused replies directed to kylejack.

 

[acptulsa]

It's sad that you all trivialize my commitment to RP. Until I heard about this endorsement I was confident about voting for RP's endorsements. Now I'm not. I'm sure this isn't effecting only me, and if it represents a greater loss of support for RP I would think you would be more concerned instead of posting troll crap like aravoth.

It really hadn't occured to me that there were people supporting Ron Paul that arent' capable of researching candidates themselves. Didn't know that was really likely. I do know the only Congressional incumbant who is as good as he is he himself.

 

[BarryDonegan]

Don Young voted against the reauthorization of the Patriot Act.

there is a distinct possibility that ron paul is using soft endorsements to keep the numbers of congressmen fighting against the patriot act solid.

we don't know all the specifics of that district. this is not a third party claim of wrongdoing, this is a lesser known political candidate trying to get some hype for a political career.

if you have a question about ron paul's choice for a soft endorsement of a colleague, ask him sometime.

 

[Sandra]

It really hadn't occured to me that there were people supporting Ron Paul that arent' capable of researching candidates themselves. Didn't know that was really likely. I do know the only Congressional incumbant who is as good as he is he himself.

+1 for kylejack and phree. They can cut and paste, but won't read anything they submit as proof.

 

[phree]

Don Young voted against the reauthorization of the Patriot Act.

there is a distinct possibility that ron paul is using soft endorsements to keep the numbers of congressmen fighting against the patriot act solid.

we don't know all the specifics of that district. this is not a third party claim of wrongdoing, this is a lesser known political candidate trying to get some hype for a political career.

if you have a question about ron paul's choice for a soft endorsement of a colleague, ask him sometime.

Thank you for one of the few logical replies I've read in this thread. As noted above I've called RP's office and I'm waiting for a call back.

I do trust Ron Paul to a huge degree, but I don't trust any human totally. I don't take anything for granted in politics, a position I think RP would agree with.

 

[BarryDonegan]

Because I have done it enough, that I am choosing to trust him on this. It's you that are upset over it; not me. So, you need to call yourself and get your questions answered to your own satisfaction. You don't need a go-between.

Ron has the most approachable congressional office of any that I have ever called. He's not even my Congressman, but I have called his office through the years to get an answer to a question that my own congressman would not answer. They were always approachable, professional and thorough.

yes, ask him.

if you are going to get this bent out of shape over an endorsement claim made by a third party whiner... don young supports abolishing the income tax, overturning the patriot act.

whatever calculation might have gone on in his head, we can only theorize, but how much of an issue do you want to make of this.

do you think this political endorsement undoes all of ron paul's other credentials?

do you think that because of this we should drop our support of him and support a different candidate for congress? someone who will be criminally in bed with corporations and foreign governments?

if you have a problem with this, go ask ron paul about it, then comment. don't go charging through his support trying to undermine and insult everyone. some people just aren't that bent out of shape about this endorsement. I have looked into don young and see things that are good and things that are bad. the things that are good, ending the patriot act and the income tax, are very good.

sorry about the strong emotional content in this reply, i just feel like sometimes people get tunnel vision about stuff and can't keep the big picture in mind. if ron paul voted tomorrow to go to war with china for no reason, he would still be the most trustworthy guy we have in D.C. that would of course be bad and require us to explain to him that it is wrong, but he has made the right choice so many times that it is a risk to replace him with anyone else.

 

[phree]

+1 for kylejack and phree. They can cut and paste, but won't read anything they submit as proof.

This from the idiot who uses Young's interventionist position as a defense of the man.

 

[phree]

yes, ask him.

if you are going to get this bent out of shape over an endorsement claim made by a third party whiner... don young supports abolishing the income tax, overturning the patriot act.

whatever calculation might have gone on in his head, we can only theorize, but how much of an issue do you want to make of this.

do you think this political endorsement undoes all of ron paul's other credentials?

do you think that because of this we should drop our support of him and support a different candidate for congress? someone who will be criminally in bed with corporations and foreign governments?

if you have a problem with this, go ask ron paul about it, then comment. don't go charging through his support trying to undermine and insult everyone. some people just aren't that bent out of shape about this endorsement. I have looked into don young and see things that are good and things that are bad. the things that are good, ending the patriot act and the income tax, are very good.

You make good points Barry. Of course this is all mute if RP didn't make the endorsement. If he did make it I don't think it's unfair or unwise to question why he endorsed an interventionist.

 

[BarryDonegan]

You make good points Barry. Of course this is all mute if RP didn't make the endorsement. If he did make it I don't think it's unfair or unwise to question why he endorsed an interventionist.

fanbois will always defend everything, i just think every minute we spend potentially discouraging people from the freedom movement is another minute we didn't tell another person about our way of thinking. personally, i feel like ron paul not running for president was a decision that i disagree with, even if its for a 3rd party. i also feel like one or two more republican dropouts to the libertarian party will push the party to critical mass, and wished ron paul had done that. but its not my choice, and he has his reasons.

this is a war, and there is going to be smoke everywhere, and a lot of confusion, explosions jarring your sense of hearing... but we don't have time to turn the gun on our own people over things that are not clear. its acceptable to send a letter or a call to dr. paul and let him know that you don't like the endorsement, but its a pretty minor deal all the way around.

we need to be focused more on what we are doing ourselves.

personally, i will be commenting today on barack obama's acceptance speech in my cities paper , as their "libertarian reaction". something we probably would not have gotten last cycle.

 

[qh4dotcom]

Don Young voted against the reauthorization of the Patriot Act.

there is a distinct possibility that ron paul is using soft endorsements to keep the numbers of congressmen fighting against the patriot act solid.

we don't know all the specifics of that district. this is not a third party claim of wrongdoing, this is a lesser known political candidate trying to get some hype for a political career.

if you have a question about ron paul's choice for a soft endorsement of a colleague, ask him sometime.

Do you know the position of the opponent on the Patriot Act? Maybe Parnell opposes the Patriot Act as well.

Young needs to publicly recognize that he has screwed up like Bob Barr did...otherwise he represents the status quo, should be thrown out of office and replaced with someone who has never abused power.

 

[phree]

I remember now why I stopped coming to this forum. It sucks.

I'll get my answer about this endorsement and I believe it will be good enough that I continue to support RP. I hope this forum isn't representative of the majority of Ron Paul supporters.

 

[CapitalistRadical]

Unwavering rigidity is the undoing of many Libertarian movements. We've had enough of that. I'll support any candidate that Paul endorses.

 

[acptulsa]

Unwavering rigidity is the undoing of many Libertarian movements.

Steel is strong not because it is rigid, but because it is flexible. Plywood is stronger, pound for pound, because it is more flexible. Those who would divide us would naturally cast aspersions on the most visible member of our movement in hopes we are rallying round that person. Anyone who would try to deliberately shake our faith in such a person is "trolling", wittingly or not.

That said, this is not a cult of personality. I believe that if (God forbid) Ron Paul died tomorrow it would not stop us. As you say, the main thing we have to fear is our own lack of flexibility. Nimbleness is a big plus in politics.

But, that said, we are all sick to death of moral flexibility and it is time to stop rewarding it. That is basic to this movement.