Ron Paul discussed by Buchanan on MSNBC

Bradley in DC said:
We need to tell our friends and neighbors.
Click to expand...

agree. the media knows, by now. he's being talked about, even talked up. the work in front of us are the people around us. and down the street. and at the flea market. and downstairs at work.
 
You still have to blackmail(accountable) the MSM with the 100% TRUTH and hold them accountable.When they write bad articles or misleading ones.We have to hold them ACCOUNTABLE to the TRUTH. ex the Nevada Straw Poll where Romney attended,but Ron Paul Won.
 
Hope said:
That's an interesting point. Wouldn't the Republican Party get up in arms though about running a Dem as VP, even if they were conservative? Seems like it might drive some conservatives to a third party like the Christian right is talking about doing already. I don't know much about Joe Manchin, though. I'll have to look him up.

Ron Paul's been a representative in Texas for years and years, but it's interesting that he's not seen like a good ole boy like Fred. I guess you can take the boy out of Pennsylvania but you can't take the Pennsylvania out of the boy. :p
Click to expand...

well, that's a good point, but. while i haven't researched manchin's record or positions, the overall feeling i get in WV is that the republicans in general don't mind him. there's not much yelling about him going on, and i live in an area that's exactly 50/50 rep/dem, with the r's being a lot more active. i know my constitution-loving father has a joe manchin for governor sign on his shed, proudly, after ditching the democratic party ages ago because of socialists like the clintons.

plus, i've heard manchin floated as veep for the democrat nominee, because he's 'conservative' and would appeal to independents and some republicans
 
Last edited:
Buchanan and Paul are the only two people that come to mind that have beliefs similiar to mine. If I had to pick between the two it would be a tough choice since in some areas I agree with Buchanan more and vice-a-versa.

It was sad to see the media, particularly MSNBC slander and misrepresent his book as being anti-semetic. I remember years ago you bring up Buchanan's name and they immediately bring up Hitler. It just shows how powerful and dangerous the media is in influencing elections. What was suprising was after all MSNBC and NBC did to smear Buchanan he ended up there as a commentator. You even see him on Chris Mathews show who was his biggest detractor during his campaigns.

So on one hand it would be great to see these guys on the same ticket on the other false accusations of racism might reappear. But perhaps because of his working relationship at MSNBC all these years they will not actively smear him this time around and people easily forget considering that was 7 years ago.
 
Last edited:
partypooper said:
sounds like great stuff.

btw, did anyone watch buchanan yesterday on hardball?

they discussed imus controversy and how much imus hurt those basketball players (who apparently ended up on oprah show) and buchanan said something like "insult me and get me to oprah to promote my book" :D

btw, imus will be back on air. i never watched imus before but i think paul might be getting a sympathetic ear there.
Click to expand...

I saw that Imus debate w/ Buchanan and Dyson too! It was a knock-down drag-out wasn't it? Darn good television!
 
Everyone did notice that Buchanan lumped McCain and Paul in as "conservatives" right? So, that disqualifies Buchanan as a running mate because he has obviously had a stroke. Anti-gun, anti-free speech McCain a conservative? Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
 
I love Buchanan, most of the time anyway.

YouTube?
 
Last edited:
Omg

Hope said:
No, it's absolutely not. Ron Paul still only has approximately 10% name recognition among the general populous.
Click to expand...

I WAS TALKING ABOUT I GOT THAT BASE COVERED WHERE I LIVE AND YES I DO,IM PASSING OUT FLYERS HERE aka based covered ,i was talking to that members post,then you jumped in and started going off somewhere i wasnt even going. geez

HOPE did you drink coffee this morning or something?

hope you just totally took my post out of context?? please go read again ,i was commenting to tell your friends and neighbors and i said thats a given as the post and then said i got that base covered..
 
Last edited:
I really like Pat Buchanan and have read all of his books. In fact, the issue of free trade/protectionism is really the only issue where I disagree with Dr. Paul much, so I might agree a bit more with Pat on the issues. People take Pat out of context all the time and use that to call him racist and sexist, when he simply isn't. He just speaks his mind, like Dr. Paul, and doesn't worry all the time about not stepping on anybody's toes. But for that reason I wouldn't be too sure about bringing him on as a VP, although there couldn't be a better President/VP combo than this.
 
militant said:
for mass consumption, yes. but i'm about to read buchanan's a republic, not an empire and i increasingly get the feeling i'd rather have buchanan than most anyone else, except the oft-touted walter williams or the like.

buchanan is fiery like paul, but in a more subdued way, a more 'masculine' way, if you will, and would serve as an excellent body of gravity, so it's a shame he's rather unpopular with some of our base. pat could bring in the football watchers, the rednecks, the farm boys, and the businessmen, on pure personality alone.
Click to expand...

Im reading Pats book, How the Right Went Wrong. Good stuff. He predicted alot of whats going on right now.
 
I like Pat, because like Paul, he speaks his mind and doesn't give a hoot what the current trends are.
 
I recently sent an e-mail to Pat Buchanan after a particularly good piece over on Town Hall, I alluded to his "mount up" speech and that however the current election cycle turns out should he ever think about political office again I'd be one of his supporters. His response was friendly--I was actually a bit surprised he ever replied, but at the end he threw in "my riding days are over."
 
Satisfying protectionists

I disagree with Buchanan's protectionism as well, but a compromise might be a low, flat tariff rate (say 4%) across the board. It's constitutional, and even Harry Browne advocated it as a way to get rid of the income tax. One good thing about it, unlike a general sales tax (this "fair tax" nonsense), is that it's inherently self-limiting. If the rate is set too high, tax revenues fall because consumers shift to domestic goods. It would also help fix the trade deficit, assuming that USDX 0.52 doesn't do so first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Brian4Liberty
Texas is Turning Blue… Thanks to Republicans
Replies
4
Views
170
unknown
unknown
dannno
Libertarian (R) Phil Lyman Semi-endorses Democrat for Utah Governor
Replies
11
Views
2K
dannno
dannno
PAF
Federal Spending in 2025 Is on Track to be the Highest Ever
Replies
6
Views
79
Anti Globalist
Anti Globalist
Anti Federalist
39th President Jimmy Carter dead at 100
Replies
12
Views
4K
sparebulb
S
Anti Federalist
Pat Buchanan retires at age 84
Replies
11
Views
1K
vita3
V
Back
Top