Liberals, Ron Paul Mock Death of American Hero on Twitter

[P@triot]

I never stop being amazed at watching the butt-hurt of the Ron Paul zombie's. I've never (and I do mean NEVER) seen such sore losers in my life.

God damn can you people cry, and piss, and moan like a bunch of little bitches. You didn't get your way, so you took your ball and went home. Fine.

But then you come back every day and you cry about what happened.

Let it go​

Ron Paul is a fuck'n lunatic who belongs in a nursing home for dementia patients. He couldn't even get support from the right, how the fuck was he going to garner support from independents or liberals?!?!

This argument holds no water. Ron Paul's support always came mostly from independents, and other non-traditional Republican voters. There's no logical reason why a number of people on the right not liking Ron Paul would indicate that even more independents or disaffected Democrats would dislike him, and, in fact, we know that that's incorrect.

As we often find to be the case Paul is the strongest candidate with independents, tying Obama with them while the rest of the GOP field trails by 6-15 points.

Obama leads GOP field by small margins - Public Policy Polling

In other words, the Republican candidate most competitive with Obama among independents and disaffected Democrats was Ron Paul.

So now you're actually admitting he was a radical liberal kook! God almighty you people make no fucking sense.

You try to twist it like independents and liberals loved this guy (which is as fucking stupid as claiming the world is flat). But if that's the narrative you want to run with - fine, I'll play your stupid little game:

Conservatives hate this mother fucker. So if independents and liberals love him so much, declare yourself a dumbocrat and go cry to them. Conservatives are so tired of listening to you little bitches cry. It's over. He lost

Let it go​

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I never stop being amazed at watching the butt-hurt of the Ron Paul zombie's. I've never (and I do mean NEVER) seen such sore losers in my life.

God damn can you people cry, and piss, and moan like a bunch of little bitches. You didn't get your way, so you took your ball and went home. Fine.

But then you come back every day and you cry about what happened.

Let it go​

Ron Paul is a fuck'n lunatic who belongs in a nursing home for dementia patients. He couldn't even get support from the right, how the fuck was he going to garner support from independents or liberals?!?!

This argument holds no water. Ron Paul's support always came mostly from independents, and other non-traditional Republican voters. There's no logical reason why a number of people on the right not liking Ron Paul would indicate that even more independents or disaffected Democrats would dislike him, and, in fact, we know that that's incorrect.

As we often find to be the case Paul is the strongest candidate with independents, tying Obama with them while the rest of the GOP field trails by 6-15 points.

Obama leads GOP field by small margins - Public Policy Polling

In other words, the Republican candidate most competitive with Obama among independents and disaffected Democrats was Ron Paul.

So now you're actually admitting he was a radical liberal kook! God almighty you people make no fucking sense.

You try to twist it like independents and liberals loved this guy (which is as fucking stupid as claiming the world is flat). But if that's the narrative you want to run with - fine, I'll play your stupid little game:

Conservatives hate this mother fucker. So if independents and liberals love him so much, declare yourself a dumbocrat and go cry to them. Conservatives are so tired of listening to you little bitches cry. It's over. He lost

Let it go​

Better than I thought it would be.

 

[P@triot]

Chris Kyle’s family needs your help

Chris Kyle is an American hero. He saved countless American lives in his time on the battlefield. And when he came home, he gave everything he had to his foundation and other returning military vets. Like most of us, he probably thought he had plenty of time to worry about saving for college, retirement, etc, but as it turns out he was robbed of that chance. Chris Kyle stepped up for America, it’s time for America to step up for him. Here’s a really cool way you can help - donate directly through Mercury One:

Mercury One Honors Chris Kyle, Former U.S. Navy SEAL - Fundly.com

 

[MisterBeale]

Nobody finds swallow more appalling than me. But sorry, he's 100% right on this one.

The only one who conditioned anybody was that quack Ron Paul himself. Blaming America for 9/11 is the most despicable thing I've ever heard a politician say (and that's saying a ton - because Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama have said some of the most deplorable shit in world history).

He then strikes again mocking a true American hero...

Why is blaming America for 9/11 so despicable? Who created Al-Qaeda?

Osama Bin Laden created Al Qaeda (and that is a fact). Any other stupid questions?

It's not a stupid question. It is the Socratic method of getting down to the crux of an issue. You think it is "despicable" of Ron Paul to blame 9/11 on America, I am just using the Socratic method of education to try to get down to the reason why you think it is "despicable". Clearly you have the wrong impression. If you know the TRUTH, you would not be so quick to judge, perhaps you would agree with him. It was our meddling in Afghanistan in other nation's foreign policies that caused "blow-back." Do you know what blow-back is?

So now we know the reason. It is because you falsely believe that Osama Bin Laden created Al Qaeda. In the beltway, it is common knowledge that the CIA and the Mossad created Al Qaeda. Militant Muslim extremists have been useful tools for fighting communists since the seventies, after that, the "official" story is we just sort of ignored them. So now you know.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A__vw5Vuwp0]Clinton admits the U.S government created and funded the terrorists which they are fighting today - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYvO3qAlyTg&feature=youtu.be]Zbigniew Brzezinski Taliban Pakistan Afghanistan pep talk 1979 - YouTube[/ame]

Still, the campaign succeeded in creating the image of an invincible force, and "Islamic Jihad" became a symbol to follow – much as Al Qaeda is today.

The US must be careful about its use of the term "Al Qaeda." Meaning "the base" in Arabic, it originally referred to an Afghan operational base for the mujahideen during the Soviet occupation in the '80s.

In the current context of Osama bin Laden's terror network, this name was imposed externally by Western officials and media sources. Mr. bin Laden has, in fact, never mentioned "Al Qaeda" publicly.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0523/p11s02-coop.html

http://metaexistence.org/israelagenda.htm

http://www.whale.to/b/alqaeda.html

 

[MisterBeale]

Second, it's lunatics like you and the rest of the butt-hurt little Paul-bots who will be the death of this once great Republic because you're a bunch of sore loser little bitches. You're guy lost, so you did what you could to sabotage the election. You went out and voted for Gerry Johnson just to make a point to everyone that your tiny little hiney hurt. Now, thankfully you radical nut jobs are so few and far between, you made no difference in the elections outcome one way or another. But it is sad you couldn't respect our Constitutional process and just support the most conservative candidate between the TWO (and only two) candidates that had any chance of winning the election.[/B]

Hey, if you don't wish to respect me or my point of view, that is fine. I was trying to have a civil debate. I am not partisan. Once I saw the corruption in the system, I refused to participate, I didn't even bother turning out to vote in my State's primary, I knew it would be a lost cause. If the party bosses weren't even going to run the caucuses and the primaries fairly, why even bother? No sir, I kept track of them very closely. I saw them shipping in out of state supporters for other candidates, having the press falsely report bogus victories, even going so far as to have Paul victories deleted from the record. They did everything they could to steal the first couple of states from him. It was disgraceful.

But you know what? They party bosses are the party bosses, it is their damn party, and they can run it any damn way they want to, right? But don't sit there and try to tell me the majority of conservative voters felt Romney was the best choice are most represented by those money party elites. The media told them that he did. If you repeat a lie often enough, and give a guy a platform. . . . but what ever. A Goldman Sach's shill is still a shill.

But really, there is no reason to get hostile and personal about it. During the primary season, I was not a member of this board. I was at another forum. There was a thread there where we posted all sorts of evidence that corruption was rampant in the nominating process. It was covered in the press at the local level all over the country. Sorry you missed it. Perhaps only national corporate propaganda interests you.

Incidentally, the Republican nominating and convention processes were not the only processes that were extremely corrupt. If you had paid attention, you would have seen that the Democratic National convention was also extremely corrupt as well. From the way they chose their delegates, to the way they amended their platform. It was shameful. The whole process is severely out of whack. My father has been a staunch Republican his whole life, but it depressed him, how little they actually care about the voters input any more. If you are going to berate me with your foul mouth and defend this corruption rather than discuss what we can do about it, than we have nothing to talk about.

I'm about opened minds, not enslaved ones.


“We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.”

― Albert Einstein

 

[P@triot]

Why is blaming America for 9/11 so despicable? Who created Al-Qaeda?

Osama Bin Laden created Al Qaeda (and that is a fact). Any other stupid questions?

It's not a stupid question. It is the Socratic method of getting down to the crux of an issue. You think it is "despicable" of Ron Paul to blame 9/11 on America, I am just using the Socratic method of education to try to get down to the reason why you think it is "despicable". Clearly you have the wrong impression. If you know the TRUTH, you would not be so quick to judge, perhaps you would agree with him. It was our meddling in Afghanistan in other nation's foreign policies that caused "blow-back." Do you know what blow-back is?

It was our "meddling"? So the U.S.S.R. invades Afghanistan, we provide resistance forces with the tools that allow them to turn back one of the two super powers in the world (specifically the "stinger" missile), and you and Ron Paul deduce we were "meddling"....? Wow...

Both you and Ron Paul blame America for 9/11 because both of you are completely and totally uninformed about the rest of the world. Neither one of you have even the faintest clue as to what turned Bin Laden against us - which is equal parts sad and comical (now quick, bring up Google so you can pretend like you actually knew).

 

[P@triot]

Second, it's lunatics like you and the rest of the butt-hurt little Paul-bots who will be the death of this once great Republic because you're a bunch of sore loser little bitches. You're guy lost, so you did what you could to sabotage the election. You went out and voted for Gerry Johnson just to make a point to everyone that your tiny little hiney hurt. Now, thankfully you radical nut jobs are so few and far between, you made no difference in the elections outcome one way or another. But it is sad you couldn't respect our Constitutional process and just support the most conservative candidate between the TWO (and only two) candidates that had any chance of winning the election.[/B]

Hey, if you don't wish to respect me or my point of view, that is fine. I was trying to have a civil debate. I am not partisan. Once I saw the corruption in the system, I refused to participate, I didn't even bother turning out to vote in my State's primary, I knew it would be a lost cause. If the party bosses weren't even going to run the caucuses and the primaries fairly, why even bother? No sir, I kept track of them very closely. I saw them shipping in out of state supporters for other candidates, having the press falsely report bogus victories, even going so far as to have Paul victories deleted from the record. They did everything they could to steal the first couple of states from him. It was disgraceful.

But you know what? They party bosses are the party bosses, it is their damn party, and they can run it any damn way they want to, right? But don't sit there and try to tell me the majority of conservative voters felt Romney was the best choice are most represented by those money party elites. The media told them that he did. If you repeat a lie often enough, and give a guy a platform. . . . but what ever. A Goldman Sach's shill is still a shill.

But really, there is no reason to get hostile and personal about it. During the primary season, I was not a member of this board. I was at another forum. There was a thread there where we posted all sorts of evidence that corruption was rampant in the nominating process. It was covered in the press at the local level all over the country. Sorry you missed it. Perhaps only national corporate propaganda interests you.

Incidentally, the Republican nominating and convention processes were not the only processes that were extremely corrupt. If you had paid attention, you would have seen that the Democratic National convention was also extremely corrupt as well. From the way they chose their delegates, to the way they amended their platform. It was shameful. The whole process is severely out of whack. My father has been a staunch Republican his whole life, but it depressed him, how little they actually care about the voters input any more. If you are going to berate me with your foul mouth and defend this corruption rather than discuss what we can do about it, than we have nothing to talk about.

I'm about opened minds, not enslaved ones.


“We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.”

― Albert Einstein

First you say I will cause the death of the republic, then you turn around claim you're trying to have a nice, civil discussion?

As far as corruption, it's rampant at all levels of government (which is tragic). Ad if you want to discuss what can be done about it, I'm all ears. But so far all I've seen is a person pissing and moaning incessantly that Ron Paul didn't win.

Mitt Romney won fair and square. Any corruption that swayed anything in Romney's favor was just as prevalent on Ron Paul's side of the fence. It's comical how you worshippers believe Ron Paul is the all pure, all holy, flawless modern day Jesus Christ. You guys are actually worse than the Barack Obama worshippers. It's enough to make a grown man completely nausea's.

When Ron Paul saw a bill was going to pass, he would stuff it full of wasteful pork for his district, then vote against it so he could say he never voted for a bill with pork. Tells you all you need to know about the integrity of this quack....

 

[GuyPinestra]

First you say I will cause the death of the republic, then you turn around claim you're trying to have a nice, civil discussion?

As far as corruption, it's rampant at all levels of government (which is tragic). Ad if you want to discuss what can be done about it, I'm all ears. But so far all I've seen is a person pissing and moaning incessantly that Ron Paul didn't win.

Mitt Romney won fair and square. Any corruption that swayed anything in Romney's favor was just as prevalent on Ron Paul's side of the fence. It's comical how you worshippers believe Ron Paul is the all pure, all holy, flawless modern day Jesus Christ. You guys are actually worse than the Barack Obama worshippers. It's enough to make a grown man completely nausea's.

When Ron Paul saw a bill was going to pass, he would stuff it full of wasteful pork for his district, then vote against it so he could say he never voted for a bill with pork. Tells you all you need to know about the integrity of this quack....

Just wanted to point out the obvious absurdity of these 2 sentences being in the same statement...

 

[JoeB131]

Ron Paul ✔ @RonPaul
Chris Kyle's death seems to confirm that "he who lives by the sword dies by the sword." Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn't make sense


SOunds like common sense to me, not mockery. But people need something to talk about, and what better "political punching bag" to roll out than Ron Paul to make a point?

I can think of none. He's the right and lefts punching bag. mainly because he's right and they hate that.

Naw, we like punching Ron Paul because he's crazy and making fun of crazy people is always a laugh.

 

[Zuer]

I see why they mention karma. Kyle killed 160, most of them, I presume, Iraqis. They could be bad Iraqis, pro-Saddam Iraqis, Islamist Iraqis, unwashed Iraqis or stupid Iraqis, but they were Iraqis - they were born and raised there, it was their country. And some guy from Texas came to their country and killed them on the streets of their native city. He didn't ask why they were resisting foreign invasion (or would that be a silly question? indeed, why would anyone resist a foreign invasion of their native country? Especially if the invader clear said he had the best intentions. Would you resist the invasion of the US by the USSR - if the Soviets articulately explained they were liberating America from economic inequality?). Still, Kyle only did his job. The fighters he killed were danger to his fellow soldiers. However, when u invade a foreign country, it's pretty difficult to delegitimize the resistance of the natives.

 

[Warrior1972]

"I guess they would rather those insurgents he killed to be unmolested in their attempts to kill Americans????"

Amazing.

That's exactly what I've been saying to all the people who are whining about Predator drones taking out terrorists, whether they are so-called "Americans" aiding and abetting Al Queda and it's affiliates or not.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

"I guess they would rather those insurgents he killed to be unmolested in their attempts to kill Americans????"

Amazing.

That's exactly what I've been saying to all the people who are whining about Predator drones taking out terrorists, whether they are so-called "Americans" aiding and abetting Al Queda and it's affiliates or not.

You mean people accused of being terrorists. Not necessarily terrorists.

 

[MisterBeale]

Osama Bin Laden created Al Qaeda (and that is a fact). Any other stupid questions?

It's not a stupid question. It is the Socratic method of getting down to the crux of an issue. You think it is "despicable" of Ron Paul to blame 9/11 on America, I am just using the Socratic method of education to try to get down to the reason why you think it is "despicable". Clearly you have the wrong impression. If you know the TRUTH, you would not be so quick to judge, perhaps you would agree with him. It was our meddling in Afghanistan in other nation's foreign policies that caused "blow-back." Do you know what blow-back is?

It was our "meddling"? So the U.S.S.R. invades Afghanistan, we provide resistance forces with the tools that allow them to turn back one of the two super powers in the world (specifically the "stinger" missile), and you and Ron Paul deduce we were "meddling"....? Wow...

Both you and Ron Paul blame America for 9/11 because both of you are completely and totally uninformed about the rest of the world. Neither one of you have even the faintest clue as to what turned Bin Laden against us - which is equal parts sad and comical (now quick, bring up Google so you can pretend like you actually knew).

Yes, it was our meddling. It was none of our concern. Our father told us so, you listen to your father. It was not for us to decide who was in the right in that conflict. Now we are paying for it.

"Harmony, liberal intercourse with all Nations, are recommended by policy, humanity and interest. But even our Commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand: neither seeking nor granting exclusive favours or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of Commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with Powers so disposed; in order to give trade a stable course."
~George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

"Observe good faith and justice towards all Nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all."
~George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

 

[P@triot]

It's not a stupid question. It is the Socratic method of getting down to the crux of an issue. You think it is "despicable" of Ron Paul to blame 9/11 on America, I am just using the Socratic method of education to try to get down to the reason why you think it is "despicable". Clearly you have the wrong impression. If you know the TRUTH, you would not be so quick to judge, perhaps you would agree with him. It was our meddling in Afghanistan in other nation's foreign policies that caused "blow-back." Do you know what blow-back is?

It was our "meddling"? So the U.S.S.R. invades Afghanistan, we provide resistance forces with the tools that allow them to turn back one of the two super powers in the world (specifically the "stinger" missile), and you and Ron Paul deduce we were "meddling"....? Wow...

Both you and Ron Paul blame America for 9/11 because both of you are completely and totally uninformed about the rest of the world. Neither one of you have even the faintest clue as to what turned Bin Laden against us - which is equal parts sad and comical (now quick, bring up Google so you can pretend like you actually knew).

Yes, it was our meddling. It was none of our concern. Our father told us so, you listen to your father. It was not for us to decide who was in the right in that conflict. Now we are paying for it.

"Harmony, liberal intercourse with all Nations, are recommended by policy, humanity and interest. But even our Commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand: neither seeking nor granting exclusive favours or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of Commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with Powers so disposed; in order to give trade a stable course."
~George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

"Observe good faith and justice towards all Nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all."
~George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

That is a remarkable statement of stupidity and naivety. You're like a small child and because of that, the truth isn't going to matter for you, but for anyone else who doesn't look at the world as a small child:

It wasn't even a matter of "who was RIGHT" (though that is painfully obvious). It's about our interests. We had an enemy that wanted to dominate the world. We saw an opportunity to take that enemy down without firing a shot. That's EXACTLY what happened. We collapsed the U.S.S.R. and sent them home with their tails between their legs broken and bankrupt by providing Afghan forces with the tools and money they needed to fight. We essentially let the Afghan's defeat the might U.S.S.R. empire for us.

Now, because you are completely uninformed on why Bin Laden turned on us after we assisted him in defeating the Soviets, I'm going to explain it to you and your Sovereign Citizen pals:

During the 1st Gulf War (under George H.W. Bush), Bin Laden's home nation of Saudi Arabia invited the U.S.A. to set up a base and launch operations from their country. Bin Laden was outraged and felt it was an insult that non-muslim boots would hit the ground in his country (again, even though his nation INVITED us to do so). It's a completely irrational and absurd reason to start a "jihad" against someone when they come invited by the host nation and are only there to free another nation (Kuwait) which had been invaded by yet another nation (Iraq) lead by a maniacal dictator. But he was an unhinged radical, and that's why he turned on us. So, our involvement in the Afghan - Soviet conflict had NO bearing or influence on what happened, and - in fact - probably bought us the slightest measure of good will early on since we had assisted him.

If only Ron Paul and his followers actually knew what they were talking about before commenting, uh?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It was our "meddling"? So the U.S.S.R. invades Afghanistan, we provide resistance forces with the tools that allow them to turn back one of the two super powers in the world (specifically the "stinger" missile), and you and Ron Paul deduce we were "meddling"....? Wow...

Both you and Ron Paul blame America for 9/11 because both of you are completely and totally uninformed about the rest of the world. Neither one of you have even the faintest clue as to what turned Bin Laden against us - which is equal parts sad and comical (now quick, bring up Google so you can pretend like you actually knew).

Yes, it was our meddling. It was none of our concern. Our father told us so, you listen to your father. It was not for us to decide who was in the right in that conflict. Now we are paying for it.

"Harmony, liberal intercourse with all Nations, are recommended by policy, humanity and interest. But even our Commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand: neither seeking nor granting exclusive favours or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of Commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with Powers so disposed; in order to give trade a stable course."
~George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

"Observe good faith and justice towards all Nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all."
~George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

That is a remarkable statement of stupidity and naivety. You're like a small child and because of that, the truth isn't going to matter for you, but for anyone else who doesn't look at the world as a small child:

It wasn't even a matter of "who was RIGHT" (though that is painfully obvious). It's about our interests. We had an enemy that wanted to dominate the world. We saw an opportunity to take that enemy down without firing a shot. That's EXACTLY what happened. We collapsed the U.S.S.R. and sent them home with their tails between their legs broken and bankrupt by providing Afghan forces with the tools and money they needed to fight. We essentially let the Afghan's defeat the might U.S.S.R. empire for us.

Now, because you are completely uninformed on why Bin Laden turned on us after we assisted him in defeating the Soviets, I'm going to explain it to you and your Sovereign Citizen pals:

During the 1st Gulf War (under George H.W. Bush), Bin Laden's home nation of Saudi Arabia invited the U.S.A. to set up a base and launch operations from their country. Bin Laden was outraged and felt it was an insult that non-muslim boots would hit the ground in his country (again, even though his nation INVITED us to do so). It's a completely irrational and absurd reason to start a "jihad" against someone when they come invited by the host nation and are only there to free another nation (Kuwait) which had been invaded by yet another nation (Iraq) lead by a maniacal dictator. But he was an unhinged radical, and that's why he turned on us. So, our involvement in the Afghan - Soviet conflict had NO bearing or influence on what happened, and - in fact - probably bought us the slightest measure of good will early on since we had assisted him.

If only Ron Paul and his followers actually knew what they were talking about before commenting, uh?

Sounds like you agree that al-Qaeda attacking the U.S. is blowback for U.S. foreign policy.