Protester's Removed From Fred Thompson Event

[JeffWartman]

Ron Paul isn't a true Conservative he is more of a Libertarian.

You have no concept of the true Conservative.

There is a big difference between Neo-Conservatives, which is 95% of the Republican Party right now, and true Conservatives.

Neo-Conservativism and true Conservativism are not even close to being similar in ideology

From your posts on here, you are a Neo-Con, not a true Conservative. That's nothing wrong with that per se, I just hope you know.

 

[Paulie]

Ron Paul isn't a true Conservative he is more of a Libertarian.

This goes to show how utterly clueless you are. You don't belong talking about politics, or anything associated with it.

Libertarian is a political party...Conservatism is merely an ideology.

One can't, and doesn't, depend on, or cancel out, the other.

That said, give me one good reason how you could possibly say Ron isn't a true conservative.

Or would you rather just load me up with another 10 negative reputations for your past reasons such as "idiot", "moron", "dumbass", and what was the other one? "imbred"? Like I even give a fuck about reputation points.

 

[Annie]

This goes to show how utterly clueless you are. You don't belong talking about politics, or anything associated with it.

Libertarian is a political party...Conservatism is merely an ideology.

One can't, and doesn't, depend on, or cancel out, the other.

That said, give me one good reason how you could possibly say Ron isn't a true conservative.

Or would you rather just load me up with another 10 negative reputations for your past reasons such as "idiot", "moron", "dumbass", and what was the other one? "imbred"? Like I even give a fuck about reputation points.

So say you, A representative if ever there were one for Ron Paul, claims he is NOT a libertarian. He disavows all claims to portray him as such.

 

[Paulie]

So say you, A representative if ever there were one for Ron Paul, claims he is NOT a libertarian. He disavows all claims to portray him as such.

I'm sorry kathianne, but it must just be you. I may not agree with everyone here, but i can at least understand what everyone says when they post except you. You never make any sense. Could you please stop typing fragmented, run-on sentences? Oh, and while you're at it, stop following me around as well...?

All I could muster of an understanding of what you just made an attempt to say, was that Ron Paul has said he is not a Libertarian. Before i comment on that, am I correct?

 

[JeffWartman]

So say you, A representative if ever there were one for Ron Paul, claims he is NOT a libertarian. He disavows all claims to portray him as such.

Throughout this campaign Ron has declined at every stage to even reference Libertarianism. When asked, he calls himself a true conservative (apart from neo-conservativism) and a Constitutionalist (not the wackjob third party -- someone who actually believes in the Constitution)

Perhaps if current Republicans understood the Constitution we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[JeffWartman]

In fact, you should probably read Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative. THAT is closer (though not exact) to Ron's ideology than anything in Washington currently.

 

[Nevadamedic]

I'm sorry kathianne, but it must just be you. I may not agree with everyone here, but i can at least understand what everyone says when they post except you. You never make any sense. Could you please stop typing fragmented, run-on sentences? Oh, and while you're at it, stop following me around as well...?

All I could muster of an understanding of what you just made an attempt to say, was that Ron Paul has said he is not a Libertarian. Before i comment on that, am I correct?

In Congress, Paul has adhered to limited government conservative, religious,[3] and libertarian principles, often basing his positions on constitutionalism and states' rights. He has never voted to raise taxes or congressional pay and refuses to participate in the congressional pension system or take government-paid junkets.[4][5]

Paul supports free trade, tighter border security, gun ownership, school prayer,[6] and a return to free market health care. He opposes abortion, capital punishment, NAFTA and the WTO, the income tax, Medicare and Medicaid, universal health care,[7] the War on Drugs, federal regulation of marriage, and foreign interventionism, advocating withdrawal from NATO and the United Nations.[8] He voted against same-sex adoption.[9] He is pro-life and believes Roe v. Wade should be overturned, arguing that "the federal government has no authority whatsoever to involve itself in the abortion issue".[10] He voted to ban partial-birth abortions.

Ron Paul takes stances that he terms Constitutionalist and libertarian. He is an advocate of free trade, fewer taxes, smaller government, strong national sovereignty and non-interventionism.[58]

Paul supports reduced government spending and reduced taxes. As congressman, he has never voted to raise taxes or to approve an unbalanced budget and has also called for the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the federal income tax.[59] Paul has been named "The Taxpayer's Best Friend" by the National Taxpayers Union every year he has been in Congress.[60]

Paul supports a non-interventionist foreign policy and opposes foreign aid. He is the only 2008 Republican presidential candidate to have voted against the Iraq War Resolution in 2002.[63][64] Paul voted for the Authorization for Use of Military Force which resulted in the War in Afghanistan in 2001,[50] but suggested alternatives including giving the president authority to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal to target specific terrorists.

In the 1988 presidential election, Paul defeated American Indian activist Russell Means to win the Libertarian Party's nomination for the U.S. Presidency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

I guess true Conservatives are Pro-Life now and want Roe Vs. Wade overturned? You guy's can't be that stupid.

 

[JeffWartman]

I guess true Conservatives are Pro-Life now and want Roe Vs. Wade overturned? You guy's can't be that stupid.

You have outdone yourself. With this statement, you officially never need to talk about politics again. You have finally made one of the most unintelligent points I have ever seen.

Let me lay it out for you. Yes, kid, true Conservatives want Roe v Wade overrturned. Why, you ask? It has NOTHING to do with the validity of abortion.

It has to do with state's rights, son. Abortion, if you follow the original meaning of the Constitution, is truly a state issue. That is his basis. And that's true Conservativism. State's rights.

Get it?

 

[Paulie]

Get it?

No, he obviously doesn't.

Wanting Roe vs. Wade overturned has EVERYTHING to do with undoing a precedent that was set due to the Federal Government sticking their undesired presence into a matter that involves States, and the individual people who collectively represent those states ONLY. Nevadamedic watches too much TV news to be able to wrap his uneducated brain around this issue.

Cable news stations are not the be-all-end-all of political education, no matter how much they may seem to be these days.

TRUE conservatives didn't want Roe vs Wade, at a FEDERAL level, to even exist in the first place.

 

[Angel Heart]

<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="370" wmode="transparent" data="http://www.liveleak.com/player.swf?autostart=false&token=bb8_1185451469"><param name="movie" value="http://www.liveleak.com/player.swf?autostart=false&token=bb8_1185451469"><param name="wmode" value="transparent"><param name="quality" value="high"></object>

CNN Omits 9/11 Conspiracy Comments From Video Marked as: Featured
CNN is running a story about a protester at a Fred Thompson event who was forced out after telling Thompson he wasn't 'a real conservative.' What CNN neglects to mention, in fact omits from it's story and edits from the corresponding video, is that the woman ejected from the Thompson event wasn't a 'conservative.' In fact, the female who was asking the questions was a memeber of 'Houston 9/11 Truth' and was removed only after screaming 'what about building 7?' and '9/11 was an inside job.' Watch the raw video of the event and see what CNN edited out.

Why would CNN cut out the 9/11 conspiracy comments? Clearly, they had access to the same footage I did so why did I have to discover this on my own? This looks like a blatant attempt by CNN to make Fred Thompson look bad.

CNN Link: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/25/protester-removed-from-fred-thompson-event/

 

[Bullypulpit]

What's with you and this topless story?

Thompson is a bloody Liberal masquerading as a Conservative.

I find myself in agreement with you.

He dumps his wife and kids when they become inconvenient for him...he dates a string of Hollywood hotties and then marries one younger than his oldest daughter and who makes a "Playboy" centerfold look flat-chested. Yeah...he's a conservative alright.

 

[Paulie]

Angel Heart, the only time the media ever covers anything that has to do with the 9/11 conspiracy theory, is when they have the full opportunity to smeer the messenger and avoid debate.

Has anyone here ever seen the mainstream media debate 9/11 theories? Usually it's Hannity & Colmes or Bill O, and they let someone speak for a minute or 2, and then call them a nutjob. No debate. No talking points. Just a smeer campaign.

I'm not saying that i'm a typical 9/11 truther, but I don't believe the official story 100%. Does that mean i think "Bush did it!"? No. Does he know more than he admits? Yes. You can see it written all over his face:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KNyV5s7aoIc"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KNyV5s7aoIc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I want my president and Vice president testifying under oath about what they know. For ANYTHING. Anything less is unacceptable, but ESPECIALLY about 9/11. 300 million people had their hearts ripped out of their chest because of 9/11, and the government has basically said "oh well, fuck you."

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/e7miLffG_Dg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/e7miLffG_Dg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

That looks like a question he wasn't expecting to be asked. He squirmed around and stuttered like the rest of his life depended on how he responded.

Typical characteristics of a person caught up in a lie.

Do i think 9/11 was an "inside job" perpetrated by the US government? Sometimes i do. I feel like I've been deceived and lied to. I want to know what was in the August 6th, 2001 memo. I want to know why that damn thing is so secret, and how after almost 7 years it could still somehow be so SECRET that the only reason to not disclose it is because of "national security". National Security is such a convenient excuse to keep something confidential.

My official stance is that there are people in the government that have something to hide.

So go ahead, call me a "kook" because I have the sheer audacity to actually question my government.

 

[Stephanie]

Angel Heart, the only time the media ever covers anything that has to do with the 9/11 conspiracy theory, is when they have the full opportunity to smeer the messenger and avoid debate.

Has anyone here ever seen the mainstream media debate 9/11 theories? Usually it's Hannity & Colmes or Bill O, and they let someone speak for a minute or 2, and then call them a nutjob. No debate. No talking points. Just a smear campaign.

I'm not saying that I'm a typical 9/11 truth, but I don't believe the official story 100%. Does that mean i think "Bush did it!"? No. Does he know more than he admits? Yes. You can see it written all over his face:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KNyV5s7aoIc"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KNyV5s7aoIc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

I want my president and Vice president testifying under oath about what they know. For ANYTHING. Anything less is unacceptable, but ESPECIALLY about 9/11. 300 million people had their hearts ripped out of their chest because of 9/11, and the government has basically said "oh well, fuck you."

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/e7miLffG_Dg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/e7miLffG_Dg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

That looks like a question he wasn't expecting to be asked. He squirmed around and stuttered like the rest of his life depended on how he responded.

Typical characteristics of a person caught up in a lie.

Do i think 9/11 was an "inside job" perpetrated by the US government? Sometimes i do. I feel like I've been deceived and lied to. I want to know what was in the August 6th, 2001 memo. I want to know why that damn thing is so secret, and how after almost 7 years it could still somehow be so SECRET that the only reason to not disclose it is because of "national security". National Security is such a convenient excuse to keep something confidential.

My official stance is that there are people in the government that have something to hide.

So go ahead, call me a "kook" because I have the sheer audacity to actually question my government.

You people are so disconnected with the real world....How many terrorist attacks did we have under Bill Clinton....Did you all even remotely suggest that he knew of them ahead of time, of maybe even had a hand in staging them????

You all are friggin nuts...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You people are so disconnected with the real world....How many terrorist attacks did we have under Bill Clinton....Did you all even remotely suggest that he knew of them ahead of time, of maybe even had a hand in staging them????

You all are friggin nuts...

Well of course they didn't, have you forgotten republicans are nazi's in disguise. Democrats are just looking out for us idiots to stupid to take care of ourselves.

 

[Paulie]

Way to get to the bottom of an issue...turn it around politically.

Why does it always get reverted back to Bill Clinton? First of all, I don't like Clinton and never did. I don't like most presidents that we've had, dem or repub. I don't take sides politically. Frankly, i partly blame Clinton for 9/11, because he had more than one opportunity to take Bin Laden, and he let him go, knowing full well what his capabilities were.

I'm not going to debate 9/11 in this thread. All i'm going to say is that I look at what countries we bully, and what ones we actually invade or at least stick our noses in militarily. Every single one has something to offer us economically.

Why do we go into some countries to "help stop ethnic genocide", but not others? Millions of americans want to know why we haven't offered any help to Darfur...isn't it obvious?

Anyway, back to topic.

 

[Nevadamedic]

You people are so disconnected with the real world....How many terrorist attacks did we have under Bill Clinton....Did you all even remotely suggest that he knew of them ahead of time, of maybe even had a hand in staging them????

You all are friggin nuts...

If you remember Bill Clinton tried to cover everything up. He did not want to go after Bin Laden, he would not give the order to kill him, he was to scared of retribution. Bill Clinton is a coward in every sense of the word.

 

[Stephanie]

Way to get to the bottom of an issue...turn it around politically.

Why does it always get reverted back to Bill Clinton? First of all, I don't like Clinton and never did. I don't like most presidents that we've had, Dem or repub. I don't take sides politically. Frankly, i partly blame Clinton for 9/11, because he had more than one opportunity to take Bin Laden, and he let him go, knowing full well what his capabilities were.

I'm not going to debate 9/11 in this thread. All I'm going to say is that I look at what countries we bully, and what ones we actually invade or at least stick our noses in militarily. Every single one has something to offer us economically.

Why do we go into some countries to "help stop ethnic genocide", but not others? Millions of Americans want to know why we haven't offered any help to Darfur...isn't it obvious?

Anyway, back to topic.

You know what sweetie...
I wish we could live in the Utopia world also...
But, a lot of chickenshit countries relay on us to protect their lame ass, and who always goes and helps......Us...the United States of America....And then who always takes the blame as being the bully...

You can pretend that wars is an outdated way of the 21st century...
But...we were slapped in the face on 9/11....So...that's just where we are...
The one thing I don't like about Ron Paul...Him blaming us for all the stupid that is going on in the world....
You are another one....What is the difference with liberating the Iraqi people and putting our soldiers lives in Darfur????? You all have some backward priorities.....Who else can help out in Darfur....Where the hell is the almighty UN..???

 

[Nevadamedic]

I find myself in agreement with you.

He dumps his wife and kids when they become inconvenient for him...he dates a string of Hollywood hotties and then marries one younger than his oldest daughter and who makes a "Playboy" centerfold look flat-chested. Yeah...he's a conservative alright.

He's about as Conservative as The Kennedy Family.

 

[Nevadamedic]

You know what sweetie...
I wish we could live in the Utopia world also...
But, a lot of chickenshit countries relay on us to protect their lame ass, and who always goes and helps......Us...the United States of America....And then who always takes the blame as being the bully...

You can pretend that wars is an outdated way of the 21st century...
But...we were slapped in the face on 9/11....So...that's just where we are...
The one thing I don't like about Ron Paul...Him blaming us for all the stupid that is going on in the world....
You are another one....What is the difference with liberating the Iraqi people and putting our soldiers lives in Darfur????? You all have some backward priorities.....Who else can help out in Darfur....Where the hell is the almighty UN..???

The UN is useless and should be disbanded.

 

[Larkinn]

\.
You are another one....What is the difference with liberating the Iraqi people and putting our soldiers lives in Darfur????? You all have some backward priorities.....Who else can help out in Darfur....Where the hell is the almighty UN..???

The difference is that Darfur would save far more lives, cost far less US lives, and far less money.

If you wanted to nation-build, Iraq was not exactly the most optimum place to do it.

As to where the UN is, give it some power and it will do something. Oh wait...you don't want to do that because you think its useless. Bit of a catch-22, hey? But your views, and people like you, are what makes it powerless so I find it a bit hypocritical of you to then bitch when it doesn't do much.