Could Ron Paul leave the Republican Party?

[Oddball]

I know your negs overpower mine but fuck you anyway. Enjoy it.

I don't understand why people try so hard to be dick heads on the internet. But you sir have succeeded.

You're the dickhead who seems to think that people are too stupid to be free....Well "people", that is, except for you.

You really would be a much better fit in the Democrat Party....They think that they're smarter than everyone else, too.

I never said anyone was stupid, that was YOUR assertion. Nor did I insult anyone. Only the weak continually do that as a substitute for honest debate.

Your basic argument is that the only thing keeping most of the country from becoming heroin addicts is federal law....This presumes people are stupid on two levels:

1) That they'll just blindly follow the law because Big Daddy Big Gubmint tells them to.

and

2) Removal of those federal laws will mean that people will be rushing out the door to the nearest heroin dealer they can find, the moment the federal law is abolished.

Only the weak assume that everyone else but themselves are weak....Your baseline argument itself is an insult....It treats the average American as too stupid to decide for themself.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You're the dickhead who seems to think that people are too stupid to be free....Well "people", that is, except for you.

You really would be a much better fit in the Democrat Party....They think that they're smarter than everyone else, too.

I never said anyone was stupid, that was YOUR assertion. Nor did I insult anyone. Only the weak continually do that as a substitute for honest debate.

Your basic argument is that the only thing keeping most of the country from becoming heroin addicts is federal law....This presumes people are stupid on two levels:

1) That they'll just blindly follow the law because Big Daddy Big Gubmint tells them to.

and

2) Removal of those federal laws will mean that people will be rushing out the door to the nearest heroin dealer they can find, the moment the federal law is abolished.

Only the weak assume that everyone else but themselves are weak....Your baseline argument itself is an insult....It treats the average American as too stupid to decide for themself.

I wasn't talking about average Americans, I was talking about children.

 

[kwc57]

His ideas domestically outside of fiscal ones would lead to complete anarchy. States fighting states over recognition of local laws. Massive increases in juvenile drug use which would lead to more crime to feed the addiction.

Those are not the values I'm for. You don't control a society for a hundred years then suddenly and abruptly release them and expect positive outcomes.

Anyone who is pro drug use will NEVER get my vote. My drug use as a juvenile nearly destroyed my life and I had limited access. Open the market up and the decline of our families will be unreal.

No thanks.

Pro drug use? I don't recall Paul ever promoting drug use. I do recall Paul espousing the liberty that the Constitution guarantees to US citizens. Maybe you are confuns the two? I'm anit-drug. I've never touched a drug that wasn't perscribed and even then, I took it within the doctor's guidelines. If I caught my son using, there would be hell to pay. That being said, drug use whould be up to the individual to decide and he should use personal responsibility for such use. Legalizing drugs would not lead to massive drug use by juveniles and I'm surprised some people continue to use this falsehood. Illegal black market items are easy for kids to get their hands on. Legalize drugs and they can be regulated, controlled and taxed just like alcohol. Tell you what, wait outside a 7/11 and hand underage kids a $20 bill and tell them to go buy a six pack and a pack of cigarettes and see how many come walking out with the items. While kids do manage to get their hands on them, there isn't an alcohol and cigarette black market that makes the items easy to get. They have to find someone actually willing to buy the stuff for them. If anything, legalizing drugs makes it much harder for kids to get their hands on them.

I misworded it. I ment pro legalization

A lot of people make the same mistake calling Paul an isolationist instead of a non-interventionist........and yes, there is a huge difference between the two.

 

[Avorysuds]

We don't like most of Pauls looney ideas nor his looney supporters so its no loss. The election will be decided by the independents in the swing states as always. Not some small insignificant fraction of the gop.

Yes, Independents... whom Paul pulls from more than any other Republican out there... You would know this is you paid attention even if only on a surface level.

But as always your hate has blinded you, so please join the gangbang of Paul hate with you and the other 7 or so Paul haters on these boards and pretend you are in some kind of majority.

 

[Oddball]

I never said anyone was stupid, that was YOUR assertion. Nor did I insult anyone. Only the weak continually do that as a substitute for honest debate.

Your basic argument is that the only thing keeping most of the country from becoming heroin addicts is federal law....This presumes people are stupid on two levels:

1) That they'll just blindly follow the law because Big Daddy Big Gubmint tells them to.

and

2) Removal of those federal laws will mean that people will be rushing out the door to the nearest heroin dealer they can find, the moment the federal law is abolished.

Only the weak assume that everyone else but themselves are weak....Your baseline argument itself is an insult....It treats the average American as too stupid to decide for themself.

I wasn't talking about average Americans, I was talking about children.

Sure...It's always about the chiillllldrreeennnn, innit?

I don't suppose you know that kids know where they can get their hands on a sack of weed or a gram of coke a lot more quickly than a 6-pack of beer, do ya?...Is that supposed to be some kind of evidence of the laws keeping drugs out of the hands of kids being successful?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It will be nice when Paul retires.

 

[Paulie]

I never said anyone was stupid, that was YOUR assertion. Nor did I insult anyone. Only the weak continually do that as a substitute for honest debate.

Your basic argument is that the only thing keeping most of the country from becoming heroin addicts is federal law....This presumes people are stupid on two levels:

1) That they'll just blindly follow the law because Big Daddy Big Gubmint tells them to.

and

2) Removal of those federal laws will mean that people will be rushing out the door to the nearest heroin dealer they can find, the moment the federal law is abolished.

Only the weak assume that everyone else but themselves are weak....Your baseline argument itself is an insult....It treats the average American as too stupid to decide for themself.

I wasn't talking about average Americans, I was talking about children.

This post implies that you somehow think legalized drugs wouldn't still be regulated the way alcohol and tobacco are.

On that note though, go check out a high school party sometime and tell me what you see.

 

[Paulie]

It will be nice when Paul retires.

You're horrible at debating your side.

You continually step foot into these Paul threads, drop an opinion with nothing backing it up, and then when you're cornered you resort to posts like this instead of manning up.

You're not a conservative. You're an embarrassment to the cause.

 

[Avorysuds]

Those are not the values I'm for. You don't control a society for a hundred years then suddenly and abruptly release them and expect positive outcomes.

The same bullshit red herring that was used to describe the freed slaves back in 1866...Turns out they understood how freedom worked out after all.

His ideas domestically outside of fiscal ones would lead to complete anarchy. States fighting states over recognition of local laws. Massive increases in juvenile drug use which would lead to more crime to feed the addiction.....Anyone who is pro drug use will NEVER get my vote. My drug use as a juvenile nearly destroyed my life and I had limited access. Open the market up and the decline of our families will be unreal.

No thanks.

Ahhh...The old reducto-ad-anarchy scare tactic.

And he's not pro drug use, you old fool...He's for letting the states decide how to deal with the issue, just like they do for liquor....Just because you nearly wrecked your life by your stupid choices means that everyone else will.

BTW, I notice that the laws against drugs didn't keep you from getting your mitts on them.

Doesn't change my vote or opinion. I'm well aware he wants to grant the states the rights. And since most states need major revenue increases it would be just like gambling. A slow but steady increase.

And I'm no fool.

You might not be a fool but you were proven wrong and outright owned... No one cares how you will vote, like many Obama supporters it has nothing to do with policy but more to do with "feelings," that’s the camp for you.

What's it like to getting your shit handed to you over and over again when it comes to you lying about Ron Paul, only to have you run a default slogan of "I like fucking with the Paul supporters." It's hilarious to watch you outright claim "everything I said was bullshit because I just wanted to Troll Paul supporters" then see you claim you won't vote for Paul based off your failed Paul supporters trolling...

Vote for who you like best Gramps. Vote for who you feel best reflects your beliefs Gramps. Paul believes in upholding the constitution, balancing the deficit and is extremely honest, I whole heartedly believe Paul is not the candidate for you.

 

[Avorysuds]

Doesn't change my vote or opinion. I'm well aware he wants to grant the states the rights. And since most states need major revenue increases it would be just like gambling. A slow but steady increase.

And I'm no fool.

Yeah, you're a fool to think that the law is the only thing separating people who want to drugs from doing them.

As was already pointed out, it didn't stop you....Funny how everyone else can be deemed stupid and weak, but the wisdom of your experience is beyond reproach.

I know your negs overpower mine but fuck you anyway. Enjoy it.

I don't understand why people try so hard to be dick heads on the internet. But you sir have succeeded.

Says the guy who starts multiple Paul hate threads every week and then claims he just wanted to Troll the Paul supporters when he can't back any of his shit talking up...

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It will be nice when Paul retires.

You're horrible at debating your side.

You continually step foot into these Paul threads, drop an opinion with nothing backing it up, and then when you're cornered you resort to posts like this instead of manning up.

You're not a conservative. You're an embarrassment to the cause.

There's nothing to debate as Paul can't and won't win.

 

[Paulie]

The same bullshit red herring that was used to describe the freed slaves back in 1866...Turns out they understood how freedom worked out after all.


Ahhh...The old reducto-ad-anarchy scare tactic.

And he's not pro drug use, you old fool...He's for letting the states decide how to deal with the issue, just like they do for liquor....Just because you nearly wrecked your life by your stupid choices means that everyone else will.

BTW, I notice that the laws against drugs didn't keep you from getting your mitts on them.

Doesn't change my vote or opinion. I'm well aware he wants to grant the states the rights. And since most states need major revenue increases it would be just like gambling. A slow but steady increase.

And I'm no fool.

You might not be a fool but you were proven wrong and outright owned... No one cares how you will vote, like many Obama supporters it has nothing to do with policy but more to do with "feelings," that’s the camp for you.

What's it like to getting your shit handed to you over and over again when it comes to you lying about Ron Paul, only to have you run a default slogan of "I like fucking with the Paul supporters." It's hilarious to watch you outright claim "everything I said was bullshit because I just wanted to Troll Paul supporters" then see you claim you won't vote for Paul based off your failed Paul supporters trolling...

Vote for who you like best Gramps. Vote for who you feel best reflects your beliefs Gramps. Paul believes in upholding the constitution, balancing the deficit and is extremely honest, I whole heartedly believe Paul is not the candidate for you.

The only one in congress who stands up for the constitution even when it's politically unpopular nationally, he can't wait to see retire.

I bet he "owns guns" too, because that's what a republican is supposed to do. I can't wait til the government comes to take them from him legally and he's left wondering what the fuck just happened

 

[Avorysuds]

I never said anyone was stupid, that was YOUR assertion. Nor did I insult anyone. Only the weak continually do that as a substitute for honest debate.

Your basic argument is that the only thing keeping most of the country from becoming heroin addicts is federal law....This presumes people are stupid on two levels:

1) That they'll just blindly follow the law because Big Daddy Big Gubmint tells them to.

and

2) Removal of those federal laws will mean that people will be rushing out the door to the nearest heroin dealer they can find, the moment the federal law is abolished.

Only the weak assume that everyone else but themselves are weak....Your baseline argument itself is an insult....It treats the average American as too stupid to decide for themself.

I wasn't talking about average Americans, I was talking about children.

And the Goal post shifts again...

Gramps, you do realize you are a massive Government liberal yes?

 

[Paulie]

It will be nice when Paul retires.

You're horrible at debating your side.

You continually step foot into these Paul threads, drop an opinion with nothing backing it up, and then when you're cornered you resort to posts like this instead of manning up.

You're not a conservative. You're an embarrassment to the cause.

There's nothing to debate as Paul can't and won't win.

The debate expanded beyond just Paul and into drug laws, and you have nothing to say for your desire for the government to decide what's best for the individual.

Probably because you recognize how much that flies in the face of freedom and conservatism and you're embarrassed.

 

[Avorysuds]

It will be nice when Paul retires.

You're horrible at debating your side.

You continually step foot into these Paul threads, drop an opinion with nothing backing it up, and then when you're cornered you resort to posts like this instead of manning up.

You're not a conservative. You're an embarrassment to the cause.

There's nothing to debate as Paul can't and won't win.

There is nothing to debate because you couldn't list Paul's positions if your life depended on it.

Paul is winning in Iowa, second in NH... So if you base the fact that Paul is not winning off the fact that he is then you have a point, if you're a blind Paul hater.

Really Gramps, you're just pissed because you’re a Newtie-bot and he had his 8 seconds in the sun and was rejected.

However, I'm still able to sya Newt can win the nomination. Why? Because I'm not some Newt hater.

 

[Paulie]

You're horrible at debating your side.

You continually step foot into these Paul threads, drop an opinion with nothing backing it up, and then when you're cornered you resort to posts like this instead of manning up.

You're not a conservative. You're an embarrassment to the cause.

There's nothing to debate as Paul can't and won't win.

There is nothing to debate because you couldn't list Paul's positions if your life depended on it.

Paul is winning in Iowa, second in NH... So if you base the fact that Paul is not winning off the fact that he is then you have a point, if you're a blind Paul hater.

Really Gramps, you're just pissed because you’re a Newtie-bot and he had his 8 seconds in the sun and was rejected.

However, I'm still able to sya Newt can win the nomination. Why? Because I'm not some Newt hater.

He jumped on the bandwagon with every candidate that shot up in the polls.

He has no idea who he likes because he knows at the the end of the day there's nothing different about any of them.

 

[Katzndogz]

You're horrible at debating your side.

You continually step foot into these Paul threads, drop an opinion with nothing backing it up, and then when you're cornered you resort to posts like this instead of manning up.

You're not a conservative. You're an embarrassment to the cause.

There's nothing to debate as Paul can't and won't win.

The debate expanded beyond just Paul and into drug laws, and you have nothing to say for your desire for the government to decide what's best for the individual.

Probably because you recognize how much that flies in the face of freedom and conservatism and you're embarrassed.

The foundation of Paul's support are drug addicts.

 

[Paulie]

There's nothing to debate as Paul can't and won't win.

The debate expanded beyond just Paul and into drug laws, and you have nothing to say for your desire for the government to decide what's best for the individual.

Probably because you recognize how much that flies in the face of freedom and conservatism and you're embarrassed.

The foundation of Paul's support are drug addicts.

you suck at the internetz.

You're not even good at trolling.

 

[kwc57]

There's nothing to debate as Paul can't and won't win.

The debate expanded beyond just Paul and into drug laws, and you have nothing to say for your desire for the government to decide what's best for the individual.

Probably because you recognize how much that flies in the face of freedom and conservatism and you're embarrassed.

The foundation of Paul's support are drug addicts.

Never touched the stuff, so that blows your theory. Man, that was easy.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

There's nothing to debate as Paul can't and won't win.

There is nothing to debate because you couldn't list Paul's positions if your life depended on it.

Paul is winning in Iowa, second in NH... So if you base the fact that Paul is not winning off the fact that he is then you have a point, if you're a blind Paul hater.

Really Gramps, you're just pissed because you’re a Newtie-bot and he had his 8 seconds in the sun and was rejected.

However, I'm still able to sya Newt can win the nomination. Why? Because I'm not some Newt hater.

He jumped on the bandwagon with every candidate that shot up in the polls.

He has no idea who he likes because he knows at the the end of the day there's nothing different about any of them.

I stopped supporting Cain on Oct 3rd (before he peaked in the polls). My support for Newt is tepid but still there. I have given no other support. Your full of it.