he sheep are fed up with politicians like Ron Paultard, KILLary, Commie Sanders, ALL the Bush's

You really are a simpleton if you think Ron Paul has anything in common with the leftists you mentioned in your poorly thought out screed.

Your obsession with Dr. Paul borders on psychosis

My best friend, a bright guy, thinks Trump will win.

Seems like every 4 years there are a bunch of people who keep confusing the word "think" with the word "hope".

You really are a simpleton if you think Ron Paul has anything in common with the leftists

Amen to that. If Ron Paul had any authority in the legislative process we would not be in the shape that we are in now, at least financially. I can't understand how so many people are so ignorant concerning the problems we have in this country. I guess they believe the MSM.

You really are a simpleton if you think Ron Paul has anything in common with the leftists you mentioned in your poorly thought out screed.

He has something very much in common... he's a FAILED politician that's been elected and reelected like all the others... you F'n asshole.

Amen to that. If Ron Paul had any authority in the legislative process we would not be in the shape that we are in now, at least financially.

It's easier for the dimwits here to blame Ron Paul for their sorry lot in life than it is to actually read up on what he stands for.

Freedom and liberty are concepts that the authoritarians who infest this site despise.

I can't understand how so many people are so ignorant concerning the problems we have in this country.

Don't worry - according to the Trump-bots here, St. Donald will ride in on a white horse and save the republic.

Your obsession with Dr. Paul borders on psychosis

If you say untruthful, ignorant claims about Paultard, AND I CORRECT YOU in these claims, that doesn't mean I have an "obsession" talking about him anymore than I have an obsession telling this forum what a C*NT KILLary is 1,000 times.

You F'n A-hole

... AND I CORRECT YOU ...

proof that you have a psychosis. You live in a state of delusion.

If you say untruthful, ignorant claims about Paultard, AND I CORRECT YOU in these claims, that doesn't mean I have an "obsession" talking about him

I have posted nothing about Dr. Paul that is untrue.

On the other hand, that you are so blinded by your hatred and fear of a well respected one-time politician speaks volumes about your lack of reason and maniacal obsession on the subject.

We all get it - you hate the things he stands for - freedom, liberty, you know important concepts like those that the republic was founded on.

Oh - BTW, you haven't corrected anyone. You have further displayed your neurotic phobia of all things Ron Paul.

In case you didn't get the memo, he hasn't been in office for a number of years, yet you still fear his ideas.

Just one more thing - the epithet "Paultard" is a term that normally is used to criticize his supporters, not the man.

Good grief - even your attempted insults reek of in-bred ignorance.

I have posted nothing about Dr. Paul that is untrue.

You said Paultard "had nothing in common" with Clinton, Bush and Sanders... and that isn't true. They all are politicians that have won elections in our failed system. TRUMP HASN'T. You lied, F' off.

If you say untruthful, ignorant claims about Paultard, AND I CORRECT YOU in these claims, that doesn't mean I have an "obsession" talking about him

I have posted nothing about Dr. Paul that is untrue.

There is nothing about Ron Paul accomplishments you can post either ... because he has done nothing, right?

All you ever post about him is bullshit.

i think it's kinda cute how you fight for the weaker Paultards.

more delusions. further proof of psychosis: what is it? rhetorically: paranoid schizophrenia + multiple personalities?

You have how many primers? Only 50,000+ waiting to be used at your own discreation and ... don't you imagine yourself as the cop in the village people?

There is nothing about Ron Paul accomplishments you can post either

The only criteria you use for evaluating a politician's accomplishments is by the number of laws they pass.

You must be a big fan of this guy.

Which Senator Has Passed the Most Laws?

A not-so-shocking fact of lawmaking is that you are expected to make laws. So, which lawmaker can boast that he or she has been behind the passage of more laws in Congress than any colleagues?

Out of the current class of senators, the honor of Most Laws Passed goes to Sen. Orrin Hatch, according to data from the Library of Congress. Hatch has sponsored or cosponsored 742 bills that eventually became law. For comparison's sake, the median senator, David Vitter, has seen 78 of the bills he sponsored or cosponsored enacted.

Hatch has served in the Senate for 37 years. He's supported bills as diverse as a resolution to posthumously restore citizenship rights to Jefferson Davis (enacted by Jimmy Carter in 1978), to the Songwriter Equity Act, which would allow songwriters to be paid the "fair market value" of their work (Hatch himself has dabbled in songwriting).

You have how many primers? Only 50,000+

I've used some... but bought more than I've used, Sucky. So I have more than 50,000.

I did a little shooting over the last few weekends. I even broke out the gen 1 dessert eagle chambered in .44 mag. It turned a few heads in the indoor range.

All you ever post about him is bullshit.

What is it about Ron Paul's ideas about freedom and liberty that scares you so much?

You were one of the assholes over at LP who was using obscure, leftist blogs to go after the man in 2012.

Is it his non-interventionist policy?

Yeah, I can see why you'd hate someone who isn't a warmonger.

more delusions. further proof of psychosis: what is it? rhetorically: paranoid schizophrenia + multiple personalities?

It's hilarious how FireIsland and Gatlime have derailed a thread about Hillary and posted their clinically obsessive rants about Ron Paul, a guy who isn't even in office any longer.

So I have more than 50,000.

Paranoid delusions of Rambo?

Paranoid delusions of Rambo?

Gotta say, GI sure has an active fantasy life.

It's hilarious how FireIsland and Gatlime have derailed a thread about Hillary and posted their clinically obsessive rants about Ron Paul, a guy who isn't even in office any longer.

Their singular goal is to derail a thread. Kanaries always perform that sort of function as it is in their blood. They learned the art from yukon.

Seems like every 4 years there are a bunch of people who keep confusing the word "think" with the word "hope".

Actually, my friend thinks Trump is an idiot.

His wife thinks Trump is the Great White Hope.

A guy who isn't even in office any longer.

Because he was as popular as Randy Weaver at a neighborhood get together.

There is nothing about Ron Paul accomplishments you can post either

The only criteria you use for evaluating a politician's accomplishments is by the number of laws they pass.

Nope, the first consideration I give to evaluating a politician is to observe if he makes a big an ass of himself.

Ron Paul long ago exceed all standards set for normality and registered zero on my approval scale … an abject failure.

What is it about Ron Paul's ideas about freedom and liberty that scares you so much?

There is nothing about Ron Paul’s ideas on freedom and liberty that scares me.

In fact, Ron Paul is just a total nothing.

He has never espoused, adopted or supported a cause, belief, or a way of life that held my interest.

... the first consideration I give to evaluating a politician is to observe if he makes a big an ass of himself.

Being a longtyme "horse's ass" yourself, how would you differentiate between yourself and your own reflection in a mirror?

I did not mean to derail your thread … but when I see the name Hillary, I automatically then think of Ron and the ease of comparison.

You may now carry on and take control of the thread … (he said as he saluted smartly, did an about face and got the Hell outta here)

... how would you differentiate between yourself and your own reflection in a mirror?

Well, Bucky, everyone I meet in life is my mirror. The people I look at simply reflect portions of my own consciousness back to me. This gives me an opportunity to really see myself and ultimately to grow. The qualities I can most admire in those I meet are my own and that also goes the same for those qualities I dislike. If I want to change anything in relationships, then I must change what I want to see.

Now do I expect you to understand this … no. Do I believe that you even read this … no. But, you may fool me and read it through. If you did, then post “I love you, Gatlin” in a reply to this post to proved me wrong.

if you think Ron Paul has anything in common with the leftists

He be lovin those Washington earmarks

Thursday, Hillary Clinton attended a $100,000-a-head fundraiser hosted by none other than Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a prominent New York businesswoman, and supporter of Mrs. Clinton.

Knew it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKRFlNryaWw

Yes, it is extremely amusing for me to consider Hillary and Ron are both comfortable with same-sex marriage and both agree that same-sex partners should receive benefits

Once again as usual, you mischracterize (in other words: "lie about")Dr. Paul's position on gay marriage and LBGT rights.

You have been posting the same lies for years and it seems to me that if you are really the truth-seeking advocate you claim yourself to be, at the very least you would research the topic before opening your festering pie-hole.

Same-sex marriage

Asked his opinion on same-sex marriage in October 2011, Paul expressed his support for marriage privatization by replying, "Biblically and historically, the government was very uninvolved in marriage. I like that. I don't know why we should register our marriage to the federal government. I think it's a sacrament." In the same interview, when asked whether he would vote for or against a state constitutional amendment like California's Proposition 8, he said, 'Well, I believe marriage is between one man and one woman.

LGBT rights

On the specific issue of LGBT rights, Paul stated that, “You have to remember, rights don't come in groups we shouldn't have 'gay rights'; rights come as individuals, and we wouldn't have this major debate going on. It would be behavior that would count, not what person belongs to what group.”

They both support and call for the expansion of free trade in that it should be left to its natural course without tariffs, quotas, or other restrictions.

Free Trade

... true free trade by definition benefits both parties. Free trade is the process of free people engaging in market activity without government interference such as tariffs or managed-trade agreements. In a true free market, individuals and companies do business voluntarily, which means they believe they will be better off as a result of a transaction. Tariffs, taxes, and duties upset the balance, because governments add costs to the calculation which make doing business less attractive.

Ron Paul is a proponent of free trade and rejects protectionism, advocating “conducting open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations.” He opposes many free trade agreements (FTAs), like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), stating that “free-trade agreements are really managed trade” and serve special interests and big business, not citizens.

He voted against the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), holding that it increased the size of government, eroded U.S. sovereignty, and was unconstitutional.

He has also voted against the Australia–U.S. FTA, the U.S.–Singapore FTA, and the U.S.–Chile FTA, and voted to withdraw from the WTO. He believes that “fast track” powers, given by Congress to the President to devise and negotiate FTAs on the country’s behalf, are unconstitutional, and that Congress, rather than the executive branch, should construct FTAs.

#35. To: Deckard, Operation 40, nolu chan (#26)

Your link leads to an article by The Free Thought Project.

The Free Thought Project is a highly biased source toward liberal causes. They utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) , publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes.

Your source is completely untrustworthy and therefore there is no benefit for me to take my time to read the article.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-10-07

Liberal article here queerbait?

You seized the opportunity to ignore the original topic and go on another of your anti-Ron Paul tirades.

What a frigging joke.

Your source is completely untrustworthy and therefore there is no benefit for me to take my time to read the article.'

'nuff said!!!

Your source is completely untrustworthy and therefore there is no benefit for me to take my time to read the article.'

Yet you took it upon yourself to derail the thread with your off-topic pathological obsession with Ron Paul.

Wikileaks, The Wall Street Journal, Princeton University and various other sources are linked in the article.

It's a shame you are too much of a sniveling coward to check the documented facts that are prevalent in this article.

Or is it just your infantile world view that does not allow you to recognize the corruption and sale to the highest bidder by the Clinton criminal enterprise?

Yeah - it must be a "conspiracy theory", right queerbait?