Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Deicide on September 06, 2011, 07:12:41 AM
-
-
:D
-
Look, unless RP has been divorced 3 times or voted Dem for a decade....
Getbig GOP voters are NOT interested in him~
-
Look, unless RP has been divorced 3 times or voted Dem for a decade....
Getbig GOP voters are NOT interested in him~
Having just finished the Reagan Diaries - what Reagan qwrote in his own words over 9 years spanning 700 or so pages, you are beyond clueless about Reagan along with the other delusional morons.
-
Nice ad, haven't seen it, I hope it gets some airtime.
-
Having just finished the Reagan Diaries - what Reagan qwrote in his own words over 9 years spanning 700 or so pages, you are beyond clueless about Reagan along with the other delusional morons.
My post didn't say a word about reagan.
my post was about blind ass GOP voters who vote for morally bankrupt RINOs while shitting on dems and casting them off to hell. i remember "christians cannot be libs/dems" being written on getbig... LOL!
-
-
My post didn't say a word about reagan.
my post was about blind ass GOP voters who vote for morally bankrupt RINOs while shitting on dems and casting them off to hell. i remember "christians cannot be libs/dems" being written on getbig... LOL!
Yawn - you know exactly what you wrote. Stop the bullshit - we all see through you like a sive.
-
Ron Paul looking snazzy...
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=393975.0;attach=427119;image)
-
Ron Paul looking snazzy...
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=393975.0;attach=427119;image)
Uncle Eddy
-
Uncle Eddy
Cousin Eddy.... HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! ;D
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_yjlXWzFo4o8/TKPrWV9GHXI/AAAAAAAAAk8/c7BZd_bFJ7Q/s1600/cousin+eddie+leisure+suit.JPG)
-
Hasn't 240 been defending Obama for the last 3 years.
-
Hasn't 240 been defending Obama for the last 3 years.
More than anyone on the board.
-
Paul to attack Perry in new ad
By: Dan Hirschhorn
September 6, 2011 05:59 AM EDT
Ron Paul is taking on Rick Perry in a new television ad blasting the Texas governor for for supporting Al Gore’s 1988 presidential campaign, POLITICO has learned.
The 60-second spot, backed by a six-figure ad buy — the first negative ad attacking Perry to come directly out of a Republican campaign this primary season — contrasts Paul’s endorsement of Ronald Reagan in 1980 with Perry’s role as the Texas chairman for Gore’s first presidential campaign.
“The establishment called him extreme and unelectable, they said he was the wrong man for the job. It’s why a young Texan named Ron Paul was one of only four congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan’s campaign for president, believing in Reagan’s message of smaller government and lower taxes,” the ad says. “After Reagan, Senator Al Gore ran for president, pledging to raise taxes and increase spending, pushing his liberal values. And Al Gore found a cheerleader in Texas named Rick Perry. Rick Perry helped lead Al Gore’s campaign to undo the Reagan revolution, fighting to elect Al Gore President of the United States.”
The ad, which Paul’s campaign is also trying to place during Wednesday’s POLITICO/MSNBC presidential debate, comes as Paul has increasingly focused his fire on his fellow Texan. The two have never had much of a relationship, and Paul’s repeatedly tried to paint Perry as an establishment candidate no different from the rest, and dismissed him Friday as just a “candidate of the week.”
“There are a lot of candidates who climbed real fast and went down real fast,” Paul told The Associated Press.
Perry’s camp has so far resisted engaging with Paul, though that may prove trickier when the two share the stage for the first time during the campaign at Wednesday’s debate.
Unlike his previous volleys, in this ad Paul only goes after Perry, leaving Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama alone.
“Now America must decide who to trust,” the ad closes. Al Gore’s Texas cheerleader, or the one who stood with Reagan.”
© 2011 POLITICO LLC
-
More than anyone on the board.
LOL! but i've always hated clinton. I have remarkable consistency there. I can't understand how sensible republicans voted for his ass.
-
My post didn't say a word about reagan.
my post was about blind ass GOP voters who vote for morally bankrupt RINOs while shitting on dems and casting them off to hell. i remember "christians cannot be libs/dems" being written on getbig... LOL!
fucking priceless, I don't think he even read your post lol... I think he's in such a speed rush that he often does that. "how is this a reply to what I posted" is usually my first thoughts to many of his replies.
-
Paul to attack Perry in new ad
By: Dan Hirschhorn
September 6, 2011 05:59 AM EDT
Ron Paul is taking on Rick Perry in a new television ad blasting the Texas governor for for supporting Al Gore’s 1988 presidential campaign, POLITICO has learned.
The 60-second spot, backed by a six-figure ad buy — the first negative ad attacking Perry to come directly out of a Republican campaign this primary season — contrasts Paul’s endorsement of Ronald Reagan in 1980 with Perry’s role as the Texas chairman for Gore’s first presidential campaign.
“The establishment called him extreme and unelectable, they said he was the wrong man for the job. It’s why a young Texan named Ron Paul was one of only four congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan’s campaign for president, believing in Reagan’s message of smaller government and lower taxes,” the ad says. “After Reagan, Senator Al Gore ran for president, pledging to raise taxes and increase spending, pushing his liberal values. And Al Gore found a cheerleader in Texas named Rick Perry. Rick Perry helped lead Al Gore’s campaign to undo the Reagan revolution, fighting to elect Al Gore President of the United States.”
The ad, which Paul’s campaign is also trying to place during Wednesday’s POLITICO/MSNBC presidential debate, comes as Paul has increasingly focused his fire on his fellow Texan. The two have never had much of a relationship, and Paul’s repeatedly tried to paint Perry as an establishment candidate no different from the rest, and dismissed him Friday as just a “candidate of the week.”
“There are a lot of candidates who climbed real fast and went down real fast,” Paul told The Associated Press.
Perry’s camp has so far resisted engaging with Paul, though that may prove trickier when the two share the stage for the first time during the campaign at Wednesday’s debate.
Unlike his previous volleys, in this ad Paul only goes after Perry, leaving Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama alone.
“Now America must decide who to trust,” the ad closes. Al Gore’s Texas cheerleader, or the one who stood with Reagan.”
© 2011 POLITICO LLC
GOOD MOVE!!!
-
fucking priceless, I don't think he even read your post lol... I think he's in such a speed rush that he often does that. "how is this a reply to what I posted" is usually my first thoughts to many of his replies.
Reagan was divorced and a dem for many years before turning to be a repub. RP mentioned Reagan in his video.
And BTW - many of the clowns on this board who jump on the RP bandwagon trash Reagan endlessly.
RP has many good policy positions - but he is also sort of a cult like figure for others to clong to now that their failed obama messiah is going down like the titantic.
again - how anyone can be both for Obama and them Ron Paul is beyond strange.
-
Reagan was divorced and a dem for many years before turning to be a repub. RP mentioned Reagan in his video.
And BTW - many of the clowns on this board who jump on the RP bandwagon trash Reagan endlessly.
RP has many good policy positions - but he is also sort of a cult like figure for others to clong to now that their failed obama messiah is going down like the titantic.
again - how anyone can be both for Obama and them Ron Paul is beyond strange.
I don't think any of the Ron Paul people voted for Obama because they think Obama and Paul have anything in common. It's because they couldn't stomach continuing the Bush presidency by voting McCain. Obama was suppose to do things like pulling us out of Iraq.
-
Reagan was divorced and a dem for many years before turning to be a repub. RP mentioned Reagan in his video.
And BTW - many of the clowns on this board who jump on the RP bandwagon trash Reagan endlessly.
RP has many good policy positions - but he is also sort of a cult like figure for others to clong to now that their failed obama messiah is going down like the titantic.
again - how anyone can be both for Obama and them Ron Paul is beyond strange.
are you fucking serious lol? The fucking video was about Ron Paul believing in Reagan while Perry supported Al Gore. 240's response had absolutely nothing to do with Reagan. It was a joke about people not supporting Ron Paul... Slow down and pay attention once in a while lol...
-
I don't think any of the Ron Paul people voted for Obama because they think Obama and Paul have anything in common. It's because they couldn't stomach continuing the Bush presidency by voting McCain. Obama was suppose to do things like pulling us out of Iraq.
Obama was more Bush than Mccain was to anyone with two brain cells to rub together.
Obama voters were suckered by a sleazy, slick, and shallow marketing campaign tailor made for the same type of fools who call Ms. Cleo in the middle of the night, sign up for AMWAY and MLM marketing scams, and spend $100's of dollars a month at GNC thinking they will look like Ronnie Coleman
Obama voters who are now wailing in agony and desparation have only themselves to blame for being so gullible and naive.
As for RP, once the media convinces the soccer mom pofs and the single women as to his plans, he is done.
-
I don't think any of the Ron Paul people voted for Obama because they think Obama and Paul have anything in common. It's because they couldn't stomach continuing the Bush presidency by voting McCain. Obama was suppose to do things like pulling us out of Iraq.
He doesn't really care why. It's been explained many times but he doesn't care about understanding why, he thinks it's just a good way to insult. Nobody gives a shit but that's why he'll go on a bump rampage showing someone supported Obama. Fact is Obama said he would be many things that he lied about. Those were things that do match Ron Paul. Obama claimed he would be the first president in a long time to weigh every decision with the constitution. He claimed he was against torture and would close gitmo. He was going to end unwarranted wars going on. He was against Nafta and all that shit. There's a lot of stuff Obama said that Ron Paul also says. Obama is a fucking liar. But 3333 doesn't give a rats ass about reality. He's just a bitter angry person on a mission of vengeance.
-
Obama was more Bush than Mccain was to anyone with two brain cells to rub together.
Get it right moron... I know you wish like hell Obama voters could time travel but we didn't know the future when we voted for him asshole... So you don't say Obama was, you say Obama is more Bush than McCain.
-
Get it right moron... I know you wish like hell Obama voters could time travel but we didn't know the future when we voted for him asshole... So you don't say Obama was, you say Obama is more Bush than McCain.
Wrong - had you actually looked at who was funding his campaign, what his actual economic policies were, his support of TARP and the wall street mafia, you would have had more than ample time to realize just what you were going to get.
-
Wrong - had you actually looked at who was funding his campaign, what his actual economic policies were, his support of TARP and the wall street mafia, you would have had more than ample time to realize just what you were going to get.
Oh that's bullshit... There is no obligation to follow your funding and on the issues I raised, gitmo, wars, torture following the constitution it really doesn't make a difference. If you're really after understanding why a Ron Paul supporter would have picked Obama over McCain, there are clear reasons but you don't give a shit about any of that. You just want to paint a picture that isn't real because you think in some way it's a good insult. That's why you often end your posts by bringing it up.
-
Oh that's bullshit... There is no obligation to follow your funding and on the issues I raised, gitmo, wars, torture following the constitution it really doesn't make a difference. If you're really after understanding why a Ron Paul supporter would have picked Obama over McCain, there are clear reasons but you don't give a shit about any of that. You just want to paint a picture that isn't real because you think in some way it's a good insult. That's why you often end your posts by bringing it up.
And you believed Obama and his bullshit promises why?
When lie after lie after lie he was exposed on telling you about his past and record - it didnt dawn on you that he might be lying about his police ideas and statements as well? LMAO!
-
And you believed Obama and his bullshit promises why?
When lie after lie after lie he was exposed on telling you about his past and record - it didnt dawn on you that he might be lying about his police ideas and statements as well? LMAO!
Because McCain WAS a promise of the SAME. In case you didn't notice, there was only one real option if you didn't want SAME to win. At least there was a shot with Obama,.... And he didn't have that much of a record as you all kept pointing out. But again, you're not really in this for the truth of why, you're in this because you think it's a good insult even though it's not lol.
-
That's actually a pretty good ad for RP, IMO.
-
Because McCain WAS a promise of the SAME. In case you didn't notice, there was only one real option if you didn't want SAME to win. At least there was a shot with Obama,.... And he didn't have that much of a record as you all kept pointing out. But again, you're not really in this for the truth of why, you're in this because you think it's a good insult even though it's not lol.
All i needed to know was Rev. Wright, Saul Alinsky, Ayeres, Khlasid Rashidi, Fr. Flegar, Klahlid Al Mansour, Bernadine Dohrn, his statements trashing the US Const. on more than one occasion, his promises to radically transform the nation, his promise to skyrocket energy prices, etc, to make me know what an absolute disaster and catastrophe he would be.
Too bad in America in 2008 - the AMWAY voters could not see the writing on the wall.
-
All i needed to know was Rev. Wright, Saul Alinsky, Ayeres, Khlasid Rashidi, Fr. Flegar, Klahlid Al Mansour, Bernadine Dohrn, his statements trashing the US Const. on more than one occasion, his promises to radically transform the nation, his promise to skyrocket energy prices, etc, to make me know what an absolute disaster and catastrophe he would be.
Too bad in America in 2008 - the AMWAY voters could not see the writing on the wall.
lol, dude, all you needed to know was that he is black. :D
-
That's actually a pretty good ad for RP, IMO.
Agree. Good ad.
-
lol, dude, all you needed to know was that he is black. :D
His being half black is about the only thing that is good about him although that is a pile of shit too since he uses his bi-racial situation for political gain. So you know what - I take it back - his being black is not even one of the good things about him.
Funny too - had a guy like Cain, West, or Scott won the nomination - would blacks ever embrace them like they did Obama who is not even really black? Probably not
-
His being half black is about the only thing that is good about him although that is a pile of shit too since he uses his bi-racial situation for political gain. So you know what - I take it back - his being black is not even one of the good things about him.
Funny too - had a guy like Cain, West, or Scott won the nomination - would blacks ever embrace them like they did Obama who is not even really black? Probably not
I was joking.
Another thing to consider. People were really sick to death of the neoconservative agenda and how far they had taken the country in that direction. A vote for McCain would have been for sure a vote in the same general direction. Ron Paul is about as anti to neocon as you can get. Obama in many ways looked to be a person who would not keep the country going down the neocon path. Even if it appeared in areas that he would be leftist or whatever, that wasn't looked at as bad because the country had gone so far neoconservative any direction change off that path felt right. It's not uncommon for the people to vote the opposite when that happens. That's the way it goes and that's not always a bad thing. It is a bad thing when all the politicians running are in general controlled by the same interests and end up doing the same shit under a different name. Anyway, it's one more thing, why someone who likes Paul would end up voting Obama in 08. It was a shot at changing a course vs. no shot at changing it.
I know you want to simplify it but the dynamic of what happens and what people are thinking during an election is a lot more complex than just looking at who funds who. If we could just look at funding support as an ultimate litmus test, it should would make elections easy. That's not the reality of it.
-
wow, something about being a divorced dem makes for a great republican president... gotcha!
-
That's actually a pretty good ad for RP, IMO.
More attack style than his usual, I guess that is good. :-\
-
??? ??? ???
Paultards LOVE to rewrite History or they are just so in love with Old Man Paul that they write a false history for him so they can fulfill a lust.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/06/ron-paul-claims-legacy-of-reagan-in-web-video-despite-past-rejection/
Ron Paul claims legacy of Reagan in Web video, despite past rejection
By Christopher Bedford- The Daily Caller Published: 5:12 PM 09/06/2011 | Updated: 5:18 PM 09/06/2011
In a video released Tuesday, Rep. Ron Paul takes aim at Republican presidential frontrunner — and fellow Texan — Gov. Rick Perry.
The clip, paid for by the Ron Paul Presidential Committee, seeks to hammer home the oft-noted point that Perry was a 1989 convert to the Republican Party, endorsing Sen. Al Gore’s unsuccessful campaign for the Democratic nomination the year before.
“After Reagan,” the video declares, “Sen. Al Gore ran for president… pushing his liberal values. And Al Gore found a cheerleader in Texas named Rick Perry.” The video contrasts this record with “a young Texan named Ron Paul [who] was one of only four congressman to endorse Ronald Reagan’s” 1976 primary challenge against Republican incumbent Gerald Ford. The congressman also endorsed Reagan in his successful run four years later.
“Now,” the narrator continues, “America must decide who to trust: Al Gore’s Texas cheerleader or the one who stood with Reagan?” (RELATED: Ron Paul calls Perry ‘Al Gore’s Texas cheerleader’ in latest video)
The script does not differ from the narrative of the Paul campaign, whose activists lay claim to the legacy of the American Founders and American conservatism.
In Internet posts and Ron Paul advertisements, a Ronald Reagan endorsement of Paul is frequently cited. However, the authenticity of the endorsement was questioned when Paul’s 1996 congressional campaign refused to share documentation with The New York Times and compounded by Reagan’s former attorney general, Edwin Meese II, who, the Times reports, “came [to Texas]…to insist that Mr. Reagan had offered no recent endorsements.”
Despite these doubts, the idea that Paul “is the one who stood with Reagan” is called into question most candidly by the congressman’s own words.
In 1987, the year leading up to the 1988 election, a story in the Dallas Morning News quotes Paul calling Reagan “a dramatic failure.”
But, Paul says, his disenchantment with the Ronald Reagan began well before 1987. In an interview that year with The Christian Science Monitor, he said, “It didn’t take more than a month after [Reagan's inauguration in] 1981, to realize there would be no changes.”
In a 1987 open letter authored by Paul and published in the Libertarian Party News, Paul reaffirmed that since 1981 he had “gradually and steadily grown weary” of Reagan and the Republican Party.
And in 1988, the same year Paul’s campaign accuses Perry of not standing by what it terms the Reagan Revolution, Paul told The Los Angeles Times, “The American people have never reached this point of disgust in politicians before. I want to totally disassociate myself from the Reagan administration.” This, Los Angeles Times reporter J. Michael Kennedy writes, is because Paul believed Reagan was “leading the country into debt and conflicts around the world” — an accusation the presidential hopeful and his supporters often levy against fellow Republican contenders today.
Paul’s opposition to what his current video calls “the Reagan Revolution” was so intense that in 1987 the former Reagan supporter joined Perry in the ranks of those current presidential candidates who did not spend 1988 as a Republican, resigning from the party and running unsuccessfully as the Libertarian Party candidate for president.
In his letter of resignation to Republican National Committee Chairman Frank Fahrenkopf, Paul wrote that because of Reagan, “big government has been legitimized in a way the Democrats never could have accomplished,” adding, “The chickens have yet to come home to roost, but they will, and America will suffer from Reaganomics.”
“The message of the Reagan years,” Paul concluded, is that “there is no credibility left for the Republican Party as a force to reduce the size of government.”
He did not run again as a Republican until 1996 — five years after Perry’s conversion — when he returned to the United States House of Representatives, embracing the legacy of Ronald Reagan.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/06/ron-paul-claims-legacy-of-reagan-in-web-video-despite-past-rejection/#ixzz1XDuRZvO5
-
Agree. Good ad.
It is if you are into rewriting history and believing lies. See Above.
-
It is if you are into rewriting history and believing lies. See Above.
If you actually pay attention it says he supported his message with emphasis on message.
-
If you actually pay attention it says he supported his message with emphasis on message.
Wriggling yourself into another Ron Paul pretzel will still not explain away the epic Bullshit lies of that ad.
Are you and the other really this far gone? Its pathetic really.
-
If you actually pay attention it says he supported his message with emphasis on message.
How can he support something or someone that he was diametrically opposed to and rather vocal about during the 80s?
Fucking hell, how much History do you plan on re-writing or alternating in order to Sanctify Ron Poop?
-
How can he support something or someone that he was diametrically opposed to and rather vocal about during the 80s?
Fucking hell, how much History do you plan on re-writing or alternating in order to Sanctify Ron Poop?
I am not rewriting anything. I am a bit shocked at this ad because Paul has said he was disappointed in him after he got into office at least.
-
LMFAO at TA. dude jizzed his pants when Obama bought ocra and coco butter at the local store, completely betrayed every campaign promise, and he still plans on voting for him.
-
I am not rewriting anything. I am a bit shocked at this ad because Paul has said he was disappointed in him after he got into office at least.
Why did you choose to disseminate and propagate this ad? What is the point of it?
-
Jesus you're a dumb fucker TA... Of fucking course Ron Paul opposed Reagan on stuff, that's no secret. The issues mentioned in the video he stood with Reagan on and are the issues Rick Perry stood against! In that repect the ad is spot on! Ron Paul also stands with people like your hero Bernie Sanders on issues and several others on the left, but we also know he disagrees with them too. It's not a secret that Ron Paul disagreed with Reagan on shit and it's even been talked about here. And for fuck sake, you're pointing out his potition against Reagan from the year he was running for president against the VP of Reagan's admin. FUCKING NO SHIT HE WOULD HIGHLIGHT WHERE HE THINKS REAGAN WAS WRONG IN THAT ELECTION. duh...
-
Why did you choose to disseminate and propagate this ad? What is the point of it?
Well, it was a new ad from RP, that's why. I have to admit it is confusing but there you have it.
-
Well, it was a new ad from RP, that's why. I have to admit it is confusing but there you have it.
I don't think it's confusing, read my post above.
-
Well, it was a new ad from RP, that's why. I have to admit it is confusing but there you have it.
n the core issues Ron Paul and Reagan thought exactly the same. Go look at reagans old speeches during the 60's and 70's , He sounded exactly like Ron Paul.
-
Well, it was a new ad from RP, that's why. I have to admit it is confusing but there you have it.
He needs to stop hiring Paultards that are trying to rewrite an alternate History in his ads which are created for the sole hope of somehow linking Reagan to Paul as to fish away votes from Perry and gain more Conservative support.
The thing is, most Republicans are too dumb to realize any of this anyway and will believe anything no matter what they are told.
You and the others here should know better when you see garbage like that.
-
n the core issues Ron Paul and Reagan thought exactly the same. Go look at reagans old speeches during the 60's and 70's , He sounded exactly like Ron Paul.
ROFLMAO, is that how you are going to try and Pretzel out of it? The ad is dealing with Reagan in the 80s.
Furthermore that is a fallacy as well. "Sounds like". hahahhaha
-
There is only one good thing here: Ron Paul`s TRUE feeling about Ronald Reagan being a horrible leader that has "given us unprecedented deficits, massive monetary inflation, indiscriminate military spending, an irrational and unconstitutional foreign policy, zooming foreign aid, the exaltation of international banking, and the attack on our personal liberties and privacy.”
Paul even went so far as to call Reaganomics, “warmed-over Keynesianism.”
;D
-
;D
Rep. Paul’s letter is a broadside attack on every element of President Reagan’s record and philosophy. Paul thought President Reagan was so bad, he left the GOP.
-
The ad is about 1980 no?
-
The ad is about 1980 no?
Hopefully Perry will own Paul in the debate about this disaster of an ad. It would be amusing to see.
-
The ad is about 1980 no?
Yes, it was about Reagan's first run.
-
I think we need another guideline.
If you know nobody will read your idiotic dribble, pathetically try using various fonts and colors
-
I think we need another guideline.
If you know nobody will read your idiotic dribble, pathetically try using various fonts and colors
Truth hurts Skippy.
Tell me, have the Paultards zapped your brain as well?
-
TA, do you think Paul's platform in 88 should have been: "Reagan was awesome, I have no complaints, elect his VP"
::)
-
Truth hurts Skippy.
Tell me, have the Paultards zapped your brain as well?
Not a big RP fan myself. I do like his stances on the economy, United Nations, NATO, transparency to The Fed. Lot I don't like that I've mentioned before.
-
TA, do you think Paul's platform in 88 should have been: "Reagan was awesome, I have no complaints, elect his VP"
::)
If he was in love with Reagan the way you are in Love with Ron Paul, then sure, why not.
So what did we learn? We learned that Ronald Reagan can be directly blamed for Ron Paul`s disenchantment from the Republican Party (Paul`s own words and reasoning) and subsequent party switch.
This is coming from Ron Paul mind you.
-
TA, the video states that Ron Paul supported Reagan for his belief in smaller government and lower taxes. TA, is it true or false that Ron Paul supported Reagan on this KEY aspect of who Reagan was? YES!!!! The video states that Perry supported the opposite when he backed Gore, is that true? YES!!!!!
What the fuck is your problem beyond the obvious of trying to spin the reality of what happened out of your hatred for Paul?
-
So what did we learn?
From you, not fucking much as usual...
-
Lot I don't like that I've mentioned before.
mention them again please.
-
??? ??? ???
Paultards LOVE to rewrite History or they are just so in love with Old Man Paul that they write a false history for him so they can fulfill a lust.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/06/ron-paul-claims-legacy-of-reagan-in-web-video-despite-past-rejection/
Ron Paul claims legacy of Reagan in Web video, despite past rejection
By Christopher Bedford- The Daily Caller Published: 5:12 PM 09/06/2011 | Updated: 5:18 PM 09/06/2011
In a video released Tuesday, Rep. Ron Paul takes aim at Republican presidential frontrunner — and fellow Texan — Gov. Rick Perry.
The clip, paid for by the Ron Paul Presidential Committee, seeks to hammer home the oft-noted point that Perry was a 1989 convert to the Republican Party, endorsing Sen. Al Gore’s unsuccessful campaign for the Democratic nomination the year before.
“After Reagan,” the video declares, “Sen. Al Gore ran for president… pushing his liberal values. And Al Gore found a cheerleader in Texas named Rick Perry.” The video contrasts this record with “a young Texan named Ron Paul [who] was one of only four congressman to endorse Ronald Reagan’s” 1976 primary challenge against Republican incumbent Gerald Ford. The congressman also endorsed Reagan in his successful run four years later.
“Now,” the narrator continues, “America must decide who to trust: Al Gore’s Texas cheerleader or the one who stood with Reagan?” (RELATED: Ron Paul calls Perry ‘Al Gore’s Texas cheerleader’ in latest video)
The script does not differ from the narrative of the Paul campaign, whose activists lay claim to the legacy of the American Founders and American conservatism.
In Internet posts and Ron Paul advertisements, a Ronald Reagan endorsement of Paul is frequently cited. However, the authenticity of the endorsement was questioned when Paul’s 1996 congressional campaign refused to share documentation with The New York Times and compounded by Reagan’s former attorney general, Edwin Meese II, who, the Times reports, “came [to Texas]…to insist that Mr. Reagan had offered no recent endorsements.”
Despite these doubts, the idea that Paul “is the one who stood with Reagan” is called into question most candidly by the congressman’s own words.
In 1987, the year leading up to the 1988 election, a story in the Dallas Morning News quotes Paul calling Reagan “a dramatic failure.”
But, Paul says, his disenchantment with the Ronald Reagan began well before 1987. In an interview that year with The Christian Science Monitor, he said, “It didn’t take more than a month after [Reagan's inauguration in] 1981, to realize there would be no changes.”
In a 1987 open letter authored by Paul and published in the Libertarian Party News, Paul reaffirmed that since 1981 he had “gradually and steadily grown weary” of Reagan and the Republican Party.
And in 1988, the same year Paul’s campaign accuses Perry of not standing by what it terms the Reagan Revolution, Paul told The Los Angeles Times, “The American people have never reached this point of disgust in politicians before. I want to totally disassociate myself from the Reagan administration.” This, Los Angeles Times reporter J. Michael Kennedy writes, is because Paul believed Reagan was “leading the country into debt and conflicts around the world” — an accusation the presidential hopeful and his supporters often levy against fellow Republican contenders today.
Paul’s opposition to what his current video calls “the Reagan Revolution” was so intense that in 1987 the former Reagan supporter joined Perry in the ranks of those current presidential candidates who did not spend 1988 as a Republican, resigning from the party and running unsuccessfully as the Libertarian Party candidate for president.
In his letter of resignation to Republican National Committee Chairman Frank Fahrenkopf, Paul wrote that because of Reagan, “big government has been legitimized in a way the Democrats never could have accomplished,” adding, “The chickens have yet to come home to roost, but they will, and America will suffer from Reaganomics.”
“The message of the Reagan years,” Paul concluded, is that “there is no credibility left for the Republican Party as a force to reduce the size of government.”
He did not run again as a Republican until 1996 — five years after Perry’s conversion — when he returned to the United States House of Representatives, embracing the legacy of Ronald Reagan.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/06/ron-paul-claims-legacy-of-reagan-in-web-video-despite-past-rejection/#ixzz1XDuRZvO5
Wellll I'd say he has some problems with that ad. It's misleading to try and align himself with Reagan if he actually tried to distance himself from Reagan.
And you don't make your point any better with the large font, color, etc. Can't speak for anyone else, but it often has the opposite effect on me (more likely to ignore it).
-
From you, not fucking much as usual...
lmao
-
dissing reagan in 87, when Bush was running things anyway...
vs. supporting reagan in 79... then as he made solid moves in the next 5 years...
Different times. Does anyone here truly believe reagan was making the calls in late 1988? LMAO
-
Wellll I'd say he has some problems with that ad. It's misleading to try and align himself with Reagan if he actually tried to distance himself from Reagan.
And you don't make your point any better with the large font, color, etc. Can't speak for anyone else, but it often has the opposite effect on me (more likely to ignore it).
Question for you beach, did Ron Paul ever endorse Ronald Reagan? Did Rick Perry ever endorse Ronald Reagan? Did Ron Paul continue to support the issues he mentioned in the political ad that he was inspired by Reagan on?
What is the problem with that ad again?
-
Question for you beach, did Ron Paul ever endorse Ronald Reagan? Did Rick Perry ever endorse Ronald Reagan? Did Ron Paul continue to support the issues he mentioned in the political ad that he was inspired by Reagan on?
What is the problem with that ad again?
The fact he portrayed himself as a Reagan disciple when he actually, apparently, distanced himself from Reagan. It gives a false impression that he supported Reagan, when that was only partly true (assuming what TA posted is accurate).
I actually thought it was a good ad, before reading what TA posted, and I never agree with anything TA posts (to the extent I read it).
-
Wellll I'd say he has some problems with that ad. It's misleading to try and align himself with Reagan if he actually tried to distance himself from Reagan.
And you don't make your point any better with the large font, color, etc. Can't speak for anyone else, but it often has the opposite effect on me (more likely to ignore it).
The ad says Ron supported Reagan at the beginning of his presidentail run because of some of the things Reagan advocated. That's what happened.
Wheres the problem?
-
The fact he portrayed himself as a Reagan disciple when he actually, apparently, distanced himself from Reagan. It gives a false impression that he supported Reagan, when that was only partly true (assuming what TA posted is accurate).
I actually thought it was a good ad, before reading what TA posted, and I never agree with anything TA posts (to the extent I read it).
TA posted stuff from when Paul was running for office and every candidate had to make cases for what they felt was wrong over recent years. And indeed there were things Paul felt went wrong under Reagan, but on the principle of what Reagan originally ran on Paul did support vocally back then. It was those principles, smaller government, government is not here to help you, less taxes, all that kind of stuff that Paul did always stand with Reagan on. It's these issues that were raised in the ad. On that aspect the ad is spot on.
Ron Paul still today stands on stuff Reagan said. And look, in some instances Reagan brought this on himself, look at his speaches, he was totally for non intervention but during his admin, he blized the shit out of south america in intervention. There's all kinds of shit where Paul at the end of Reagan's time had to run against. But he still supported the ideology of smaller government, the government gets in the way type of stuff. Paul DID support Reagan on that and Reagan DID support Paul for these same ideals. These are the things that at the time Rick Perry DID NOT SUPPORT. In that aspect the ad is right.
-
The ad says Ron supported Reagan at the beginning of his presidentail run because of some of the things Reagan advocated. That's what happened.
Wheres the problem?
The problem is what I just posted:
It gives a false impression that he supported Reagan, when that was only partly true (assuming what TA posted is accurate).
The message is Ron Paul was one of a handful of people who supported Reagan years ago and has remained consistent throughout his career. He shouldn't have said that if he actually distanced himself from Reagan. It's not a very complete picture.
-
i thought reagan was pretty out of it toward the end of his presidency?
-
TA posted stuff from when Paul was running for office and every candidate had to make cases for what they felt was wrong over recent years. And indeed there were things Paul felt went wrong under Reagan, but on the principle of what Reagan originally ran on Paul did support vocally back then during the 80's. It was those principles, smaller government, government is not here to help you, less taxes, all that kind of stuff that Paul did always stand with Reagan on. It's these issues that were raised in the ad. On that aspect the ad is spot on. Ron Paul still today stands on stuff Reagan said. And look, in some instances Reagan brought this on himself, look at his speaches, he was totally for non intervention but during his admin, he blized the shit out of south america in intervention. There's all kinds of shit where Paul at the end of Reagan's time had to run against. But he still supported the ideology of smaller government, the government gets in the way type of stuff. Paul DID support Reagan on that and Reagan DID support Paul for these same ideals. These are the things that at the time Rick Perry DID NOT SUPPORT. In that aspect the ad is right.
Perfect explaination.
-
TA posted stuff from when Paul was running for office and every candidate had to make cases for what they felt was wrong over recent years. And indeed there were things Paul felt went wrong under Reagan, but on the principle of what Reagan originally ran on Paul did support vocally back then. It was those principles, smaller government, government is not here to help you, less taxes, all that kind of stuff that Paul did always stand with Reagan on. It's these issues that were raised in the ad. On that aspect the ad is spot on.
Ron Paul still today stands on stuff Reagan said. And look, in some instances Reagan brought this on himself, look at his speaches, he was totally for non intervention but during his admin, he blized the shit out of south america in intervention. There's all kinds of shit where Paul at the end of Reagan's time had to run against. But he still supported the ideology of smaller government, the government gets in the way type of stuff. Paul DID support Reagan on that and Reagan DID support Paul for these same ideals. These are the things that at the time Rick Perry DID NOT SUPPORT. In that aspect the ad is right.
That's not entirely what the ad conveys. It tries to say he was supporter of Reagan the man, not just what Reagan stood for.
And Ron Paul is supposed to be different, so the fact he did what other candidates did to get elected doesn't help his cause. It actually supports my belief that, at the end of the day, he's just a politician. Maybe more honest than most, but still a politician. (See my earlier comments about asking for stimulus money and earmarks.)
-
That's not entirely what the ad conveys. It tries to say he was supporter of Reagan the man, not just what Reagan stood for.
And Ron Paul is supposed to be different, so the fact he did what other candidates did to get elected doesn't help his cause. It actually supports my belief that, at the end of the day, he's just a politician. Maybe more honest than most, but still a politician. (See my earlier comments about asking for stimulus money and earmarks.)
You have one fucking thick skull man.
-
So I watched it again. America has to decide who to trust: the Al Gore cheerleader, or "the one who stood with Reagan."
I don't see how a reasonable person watching that clip would not conclude that Ron Paul was a Reagan supporter. And not a supporter who later distanced himself from Reagan.
-
You have one fucking thick skull man.
::) You have one man crush on a politician.
-
Perfect explaination.
The whole thing is so absurd it's funny. It was common knowledge that Ron Paul had issues with Reagan. We even posted about it here in the 08 election. It's been talked about extensively on the net and even on the Ron Paul forums. But we all knew that he supported Reagan's stated ideology especially the aspects of it that are most known today. So it's like a WTF hahah are you serious when I see TA pop up with an AH-HA! that Ron Paul distanced himself when he was running for president at the end of Reagan's time in office.
The real question should be, Did Ron Paul ever distance himself from the ideals Reagan started out with? Nope....
Did Ron Paul support and continue to support the ideals Reagan started with? YUP
Did Rick Perry support the ideals of Reagan back then? NOPE...
-
So I watched it again. America has to decide who to trust: the Al Gore cheerleader, or "the one who stood with Reagan."
I don't see how a reasonable person watching that clip would not conclude that Ron Paul was a Reagan supporter. And not a supporter who later distanced himself from Reagan.
Yes he was a Reagan supporter, he stood with him AT THE BEGINNING when others did not. It says that right at the start of the video. WHY do you insist with changing the meaning of something so obvious? He distanced himself cause Reagan changed, thats why they said AT THE BEGINNING and not during the presidency. ok? got it now?
-
So I watched it again. America has to decide who to trust: the Al Gore cheerleader, or "the one who stood with Reagan."
I don't see how a reasonable person watching that clip would not conclude that Ron Paul was a Reagan supporter. And not a supporter who later distanced himself from Reagan.
Ron Paul was a Reagan supporter, that's actually a fact. Perry never was then, that's also a fact. You're failing to put things into context of what happened, when and why. In the aspect of the issues raised in the ad he is still a supporter of Reagan. I know, you're use to these politicians who have to side with one side over the other and never cross that. But even today Ron Paul is not that, he still crosses over to team up on issues he thinks are right. With Ron Paul you can have him yelling about what a politician wants one day and the next day he'll be teaming up with on another issue. That's Ron Paul and personally I fucking love the honest integrity of it. But you and TA are taking that same postive and turning it into his negative but that won't fly because we know well from his history that's not the full story and is more, spin to make him look bad.
-
why are we even arguing with two people that already hate Ron Paul and have had nothing but contempt for him with almost every post they've made about him? It's so fucking obvious these two would latch onto anything they feel in the least has potential to make him look bad.
-
dissing reagan in 87, when Bush was running things anyway...
vs. supporting reagan in 79... then as he made solid moves in the next 5 years...
Different times. Does anyone here truly believe reagan was making the calls in late 1988? LMAO
But then there is this.
Paul says, his disenchantment with the Ronald Reagan began well before 1987. In an interview that year with The Christian Science Monitor, he said, “It didn’t take more than a month after [Reagan's inauguration in] 1981, to realize there would be no changes.”
-
So I watched it again. America has to decide who to trust: the Al Gore cheerleader, or "the one who stood with Reagan."
I don't see how a reasonable person watching that clip would not conclude that Ron Paul was a Reagan supporter. And not a supporter who later distanced himself from Reagan.
Exactly.
Paultards are sick Pretzels who will twist themselves into whatever Bullshit illogical position because they can`t simply admit that their candidate sucks major on many issues.
I like the one where he thinks FEMA should be eradicated. Poop, Poop Paul. Or the one where he says he wouldn`t have gone after Bin Laden even if he knew his location. POOP POOP Paul.. hahahh
-
why are we even arguing with two people that already hate Ron Paul and have had nothing but contempt for him with almost every post they've made about him? It's so fucking obvious these two would latch onto anything they feel in the least has potential to make him look bad.
Thats why I try keeping my posts short. I couldnt type everything you do because even though its as clear as a bell, some people are just going to continue to refuse to see facts as they are. So whats the friggin point?
-
Yes he was a Reagan supporter, he stood with him AT THE BEGINNING when others did not. It says that right at the start of the video. WHY do you insist with changing the meaning of something so obvious? He distanced himself cause Reagan changed, thats why they said AT THE BEGINNING and not during the presidency. ok? got it now?
::)
Yes because One Month after the inauguration of Reagan is a long enough time line for Ron Poop to drop support from Reagan.
-
Exactly.
Paultards are sick Pretzels who will twist themselves into whatever Bullshit illogical position because they can`t simply admit that their candidate sucks major on many issues.
I like the one where he thinks FEMA should be eradicated. Poop, Poop Paul. Or the one where he says he wouldn`t have gone after Bin Laden even if he knew his location. POOP POOP Paul.. hahahh
There you go BB, TA agrees with you and if that doesnt make you question your position then I don't know what will.
-
Then why even ask the question? lol
The obsession some folks have with Ron Paul is actually pretty funny. It's very similar to the Obama-bots who viewed Obama as The Messiah before the 08 election.
Suffice to say I have a different take on the ad. It's not something I would have recommended he run. In any event, at the end of the day it's not going to matter. Perry will likely beat him by a large margin in Texas. And if 2008 is any guide, Romney will beat him in Texas too.
-
There you go BB, TA agrees with you and if that doesnt make you question your position then I don't know what will.
Oh I'm good. Just need to go take a shower. lol
-
Oh I'm good. Just need to go take a shower. lol
I'll call the police, don't shower, it'll wash away the evidence...
-
(http://www.ronpaulwasright.net/0_0_0_0_149_159_csupload_36212190_large.png?u=992823664)
JUNIOR YELL SQUAD.
HAHA, what a homo. Over compensating with the guns now to hide his more effeminate side.
-
(http://www.ronpaulwasright.net/0_0_0_0_149_159_csupload_36212190_large.png?u=992823664)
JUNIOR YELL SQUAD.
HAHA, what a homo. Over compensating with the guns now to hide his more effeminate side.
have you seen the pics of him out with the cheerleaders just like GW lol...
-
have you seen the pics of him out with the cheerleaders just like GW lol...
lol
Man, its fucking scary how much they resemble each other in every shitty way possible.
-
Ron Paul was a Reagan supporter, that's actually a fact. Perry never was then, that's also a fact. You're failing to put things into context of what happened, when and why. In the aspect of the issues raised in the ad he is still a supporter of Reagan. I know, you're use to these politicians who have to side with one side over the other and never cross that. But even today Ron Paul is not that, he still crosses over to team up on issues he thinks are right. With Ron Paul you can have him yelling about what a politician wants one day and the next day he'll be teaming up with on another issue. That's Ron Paul and personally I fucking love the honest integrity of it. But you and TA are taking that same postive and turning it into his negative but that won't fly because we know well from his history that's not the full story and is more, spin to make him look bad.
Are you aware that being a Reagan supporter is not actually a good thing?
-
Are you aware that being a Reagan supporter is not actually a good thing?
Here he goes again.....
-
Thats why I try keeping my posts short. I couldnt type everything you do because even though its as clear as a bell, some people are just going to continue to refuse to see facts as they are. So whats the friggin point?
Facts? ROFLMAO you can`t be serious.
-
Are you aware that being a Reagan supporter is not actually a good thing?
Starting to change my mind on that. In the past I would have said that but if you listen to what Reagan said, I love it. On the same hand, there was shit going on behind the public's back that went entirely against what he said to the world. That part, not so good... But his words, I like, the reality, not so much.... This is absolutely true of his admin and as such you ought to consider more in this area than you do being critical of Paul and how and why he supported Reagan and why he didn't. There's more to the story that you're not telling.
-
TA, I voted in the 88 election, were you even born then? Maybe 5 years old at tops? It's easy to copy some quotes but that doesn't give you insight into what was happening at the time and why. You can get that but you need to actually research it, not just copy a few quotes and spin them like you have.
-
TA, I voted in the 88 election, were you even born then? Maybe 5 years old at tops? It's easy to copy some quotes but that doesn't give you insight into what was happening at the time and why. You can get that but you need to actually research it, not just copy a few quotes and spin them like you have.
Man, I admire you for trying.
From another site.
Many conservatives would now agree that as great as Reagan was, he wasn't as conservative as today's conservatives are (and claim to be). It's a much better position to be in to be too conservative for the Republican party than too liberal (ala Gore) for the Republican party.
The Perry camp posted the letter Paul wrote criticising Reagan. All it will do is enforce the above. The fact that they even bothered to respond to this ad shows RP has pull in this election.
In response, Paul's campaign pointed to Paul's policy proposals during that time and repeated the points in the ad that focused on Perry's past support for Al Gore's 1988 presidential campaign.
Yahoo article.
"Dr. Paul was going after Perry for being liberal in 1988. What's Rick Perry's attack for, being too conservative?" Paul spokesman Gary Howard told The Ticket. "The contrast here is plain: Dr. Paul wanted a stronger conservative revolution, Gov. Perry worked to end it."
-
::)
Yes because One Month after the inauguration of Reagan is a long enough time line for Ron Poop to drop support from Reagan.
Who knows what he knew during this time to make him begin to be dissappointed.
Paul was one of only a handful of elected lawmakers to support Reagan's failed bid for president in 1976, but he became disenchanted after Reagan won the election in 1980.
-
Who knows what he knew during this time to make him begin to be dissappointed.
Paul was one of only a handful of elected lawmakers to support Reagan's failed bid for president in 1976, but he became disenchanted after Reagan won the election in 1980.
He was a dumbass for supporting Reagan in the first place. I wonder if you and Decide are now Reaganites. looolol
-
LOL, I should probably have ron change my name. It can't look good: Hugo Chavez supports Ron Paul lol...
-
LOL, I should probably have ron change my name. It can't look good: Hugo Chavez supports Ron Paul lol...
Don`t worry, the longer you support Ron Poop, the more your identity erodes. It happens to all Paultards. Things they used to be against, they now support and so on.
-
Don`t worry, the longer you support Ron Poop, the more your identity erodes. It happens to all Paultards. Things they used to be against, they now support and so on.
easy to stick to these easy reply insults while you have consistently ignored points made you can't answer for in this thread.
-
easy to stick to these easy reply insults while you have consistently ignored points made you can't answer for in this thread.
I haven`t ignored a single post. Seriously, this Group-Think has got to stop. Its getting out of hand.
-
I haven`t ignored a single post. Seriously, this Group-Think has got to stop. Its getting out of hand.
are you fucking shitting me, you have not ignored a single post huh? ::) You wanna re-check that before getting owned?
-
are you fucking shitting me, you have not ignored a single post huh? ::) You wanna re-check that before getting owned?
No. Please own me.
-
No. Please own me.
ok, go back and show me where you answered the points I made in past posts within this thread. From what I see you didn't even address them.
-
anyone who is cheerleading Perry...
you freakin' deserve another 4 years of obama. suck one. you're putting up a male Palin and you're going to act all offended that swing voters reject his hillbilly ass.
-
anyone who is cheerleading Perry...
you freakin' deserve another 4 years of obama. suck one. you're putting up a male Palin and you're going to act all offended that swing voters reject his hillbilly ass.
Perry may not be my cup of tea, but fuckimg please.
-
Perry may not be my cup of tea, but fuckimg please.
let me clarify...
any repub who works to promote/elect perry over bachmann, paul, mitt, etc...
they deserve obama.
-
let me clarify...
any repub who works to promote/elect perry over bachmann, paul, mitt, etc...
they deserve obama.
Like I said, he is last on my list, but if he wins the nomination, I will vote for him wo hesitation.