New Ron Paul Campaign Ad Takes On Santorum — "Betrayal"

[Bindare_Dundat]

=player_embedded

[Shockwave]

Win!

[Soul Crusher]

Ouch.   Brutal ad

[howardroark]

Santorum is just another Big Government Bush Republican... the GOP needs to move away from that and find a true small-r republican standard bearer.

[Bindare_Dundat]

The Romney Con
[ Invalid YouTube link ]![/youtube]

[Dos Equis]

Calling his opponents a "serial hypocrite," saying they have a "record of betrayal," they are "corrupt," etc. 

"I'm Ron Paul and I approved this message."   

[outby43]

The Romney Con
[ Invalid YouTube link ]![/youtube]

awesome vid

[Bindare_Dundat]

Calling his opponents a "serial hypocrite," saying they have a "record of betrayal," they are "corrupt," etc. 

"I'm Ron Paul and I approved this message."   

What's false?

[Dos Equis]

What's false?

What difference does it make?  That's not the point.  You shouldn't say whatever you want, just because you think it's true.  Calling the man corrupt?  That's just completely unnecessary. 

[Shockwave]

What difference does it make?  That's not the point.  You shouldn't say whatever you want, just because you think it's true.  Calling the man corrupt?  That's just completely unnecessary. 

Werent you just in another thread defending people who were attacking Ron Paul the same way?
Your shameless bias is epic. whatever is done to him is OK, and anything he does isnt. Lol.

[Dos Equis]

Werent you just in another thread defending people who were attacking Ron Paul the same way?
Your shameless bias is epic. whatever is done to him is OK, and anything he does isnt. Lol.

No, I wasn't just in another thread defending anyone who was calling Ron Paul corrupt.  What thread are you talking about? 

Epic shameless bias?  I kinda like that.   

[howardroark]

What difference does it make?  That's not the point.  You shouldn't say whatever you want, just because you think it's true.  Calling the man corrupt?  That's just completely unnecessary. 

It is true. These guys - Santorum (lol), Gingrich, Romney - they're all Big Government Republicans with terrible records and corrupt records to boot. How else do you explain a historian with no economic training and no assets aside form DC insider knowledge all of a sudden making thousands of dollars from a GSE?

[240 is Back]

beach bum,

do you mostly hate ron paul because he promises to end that strong us military presence in the world that you know our nation worked so hard to achieve?

cause it seems like you are with him on all the moral parts of issues.  I believe you are stronger toward letting the federal govt handle issues tho, and he prefers to let the states do it?

[Dos Equis]

It is true. These guys - Santorum (lol), Gingrich, Romney - they're all Big Government Republicans with terrible records and corrupt records to boot. How else do you explain a historian with no economic training and no assets aside form DC insider knowledge all of a sudden making thousands of dollars from a GSE?

It's true because some liberal rag said he took campaign contributions from PACs?  And that makes it ok to call him corrupt?  I don't think so.   

[Dos Equis]

beach bum,

do you mostly hate ron paul because he promises to end that strong us military presence in the world that you know our nation worked so hard to achieve?

cause it seems like you are with him on all the moral parts of issues.  I believe you are stronger toward letting the federal govt handle issues tho, and he prefers to let the states do it?

240,

Do you ever tell the truth? 

Cause it seems like the handful of your posts that I actually read all contain some falsehood, distortion, and/or embellishment. 

[Shockwave]

240,

Do you ever tell the truth? 

Cause it seems like the handful of your posts that I actually read all contain some falsehood, distortion, and/or embellishment. 

He askes you a question that you did not answer.

[Dos Equis]

He askes you a question that you did not answer.

He asked a question with false premise (again), which is why I asked him if he ever tells the truth.  It's sort of like asking a guy when he stopped beating his wife.   

[Shockwave]

He asked a question with false premise (again), which is why I asked him if he ever tells the truth.  It's sort of like asking a guy when he stopped beating his wife.   

Ok - let me rephrase his question.
Where do you agree with Paul, and where do you disagree?
And - If Pauls foreign policy DIDNT involve wanting to drastically cut back our military presence, would you still hate on him like you do?
Right now it seems pretty irrational, considering Paul, besides his foreign policy, pretty much embodies everything the US was founded on, and everything conservatives were supposed to be about.

[Bindare_Dundat]

It's true because some liberal rag said he took campaign contributions from PACs?  And that makes it ok to call him corrupt?  I don't think so.   

That liberal rag holds democrats to the same standard in this case. they werent just attacking Republicans, they also had dems on the list.

[Bindare_Dundat]

Ok - let me rephrase his question.
Where do you agree with Paul, and where do you disagree?
And - If Pauls foreign policy DIDNT involve wanting to drastically cut back our military presence, would you still hate on him like you do?
Right now it seems pretty irrational, considering Paul, besides his foreign policy, pretty much embodies everything the US was founded on, and everything conservatives were supposed to be about.

Dont bother. You hit the nail on the head. BB answers the question the way a shitty politician does.

[Dos Equis]

Ok - let me rephrase his question.
Where do you agree with Paul, and where do you disagree?
And - If Pauls foreign policy DIDNT involve wanting to drastically cut back our military presence, would you still hate on him like you do?
Right now it seems pretty irrational, considering Paul, besides his foreign policy, pretty much embodies everything the US was founded on, and everything conservatives were supposed to be about.

That's a little better.  

I agree with him on some issues, most importantly our need to control and reduce government spending.  He's absolutely right about that.  

I don't "hate on" Ron Paul.  That would a question with a false premise.  

His foreign policy views are naive and dangerous.  I don't think he should be the CIC.  

[Dos Equis]

Dont bother. You hit the nail on the head. BB answers the question the way a shitty politician does.

Paulbot 
 
Someone suffering from an obnoxious personality disorder which causes them to endlessly scan online discussions for mentions of Ron Paul and then descend on those discussions with hostile invective and over the top praise for Dr. Paul, accompanied with various rude behavior including shouting down disagreement and accusing anyone who disagrees with them of being a fascist. Often characterized by not actually understanding the principles of libertarianism, the political positions of Ron Paul, or how to make any kind of effective argument for their positions. Despite being real people they have been called 'bots' because their comments often have the non sequitur like quality of computer generated spam.
 
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Paulbot

[240 is Back]

His foeign policy views are naive and dangerous. 

what do you believe would happen if Ron Paul had 4 years as president, in terms of foreign policy?