Ladies and gentlemen, may I present to you now: THE BRAVEST MAN ON THE INTERNET!!!



How silly...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":

Precisely my point. Paul is polling in single digits when one polls actual Republican likely primary voters.

Simple partisanship. Nothing surprising there.

The difference between the two is the US mass media and the Washington pundit class. They appear to have a strong Republican preference and play their propaganda/partisan games accordingly - attacking Kerry and giving a pass to Guiliani and Romney. That's just the way it is.

Up till now I've always considered that beneath my dignity.

Funny thing is your posts and arguments don't even rank high enough for me to be annoyed. Indeed, you fall into the 'amusing' classification. Equally unworthy of serious discussion, but mildly amusing now and again.

Anyone who "threatens" another, with anything, on an internet forum is a sad case, indeed.

But you are hereby dubbed "The Bravest Man On The Internet".

And I bet you see that as a compliment...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":

Nice, Canadians opinions on U.S Presidential candidates fuck up yet another thread.

Those fucking assholes up north (not aimed at anyone on this board) are the biggest waste of space around.

I voted Rudy but then again God knows how many fucking Canadians voted Paul to make it look like he's the front runner.

Originally Posted by White Rabbit
Funny thing is your posts and arguments don't even rank high enough for me to be annoyed. Indeed, you fall into the 'amusing' classification. Equally unworthy of serious discussion, but mildly amusing now and again.

Originally Posted by Steve
Anyone who "threatens" another, with anything, on an internet forum is a sad case, indeed.

But you are hereby dubbed "The Bravest Man On The Internet".

And I bet you see that as a compliment...

________

You guys need to get a bathroom stall. Yikes.

Why Rudy? I'm not attacking. I really want to know.

I think Paul gets a lot of independants and young people. Young people vote in low numbers and independants usually can't vote in the primaries.

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

And if you call yourself a Federalist Republican, than Ron Paul would clearly be your only choice in the field.

Well in my view he is the best candidate by miles, what he has done to fight terrorism over the years (when he was up at the DoJ all the way to his reaction to 9/11) has been outstanding. He cut taxes when mayor of New York and is enternally popular, he's a nice guy and that's pretty good for me.

Okay that last post was in response to your question about Rudy (can't be bothered to go back and edit it) and no Ron Paul is not the best choice for a federalist, the best choice for a federalist is Rudy.

He has defended states rights on everything from Roe to gays to the line item veto. He has beaten the federal government on all 3 issues, even though i don't agree with his views all the time he can beat the fed government in the SC any day.

Rudy Giuliani -
Made some sense to me in the debate - but i don't like his war cry.

Mike Huckabee -
was OK

John McCain -
I like John - Beers with John is good - but hes not Presidential.

Ron Paul -
Rocks ! the only one who truly represents the people!

Fred Thompson -
more of the same idiot bush here - I think the Party loves that and I don't know why.



If it looks like Ron Paul is gaining in the Race - I will rejoin the party.

__________________

Paul stands for traditional Republican positions. I just don't understand why it's only apparently young people or progressive independents who like him. And his answer regarding having airlines hire civilian looking security guys who can carry guns instead of the federal gov't meddling and how that would have prevented 9/11 was bang-on. Have Republicans veered so far off their course that they've forgotten what the party was really supposed to stand for?

Nothing Paul is saying is that radical. It's mostly a continuation of where Eisenhower left off in many ways, especially on foreign policy and no nation building.