• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Meet The Press Interview

Silverfox44

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
82
Location
Tukwila, Washington, USA
imported post

Today Sunday Dec 23 I tuned in to Meet The Press and was astonished by what I heard come out of Ron Paul's mouth. My point of view on this is I could not in good faith EVER CAST A VOTE FOR RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT. I hope some of you seen the interview Tim Russert crucified him on his past record. He had the gall to say Lincoln was wrong to go to war to and free the slaves. The guy is a gerk.:cuss:
 

compmanio365

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
2,013
Location
Pierce County, Washington, USA
imported post

Silverfox44 wrote:
Today Sunday Dec 23 I tuned in to Meet The Press and was astonished by what I heard come out of Ron Paul's mouth. My point of view on this is I could not in good faith EVER CAST A VOTE FOR RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT. I hope some of you seen the interview Tim Russert crucified him on his past record. He had the gall to say Lincoln was wrong to go to war to and free the slaves. The guy is a gerk.:cuss:

What's a gerk? :lol:

Well, thanks for sharing your opinion....I think many of us on this board disagree with you wholeheartedly.....:quirky
 

Silverfox44

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
82
Location
Tukwila, Washington, USA
imported post

Did you see the show? Just because he is in our corner as far as gun control laws goes you should have seen him try to explain his record. Thanks for your reply
 

fetch

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
271
Location
Spokane, Wa., ,
imported post

I was not going to post but this is interesting, and I didn't catch what a gerk is ether. That aside, I to saw the "interview". Tim Russerts style was not let Dr. Paul answer the question. He asked another question while Dr. Paul was trying to answer the first one. Yes, Dr. Paul stammered on the answers. BS tactic by Russert nothing more.
Once again people are not listening to what Dr. Paul is saying. The states have every right to secede from the union just as the southern states wanted to over slavery. Think about this, Lincoln used federal troops to attack U.S. citizens. How many presidents want to do that? As Dr. Paul stated, Lincoln did not need to use force to free the slaves. Economic and human rights were already at work to end slavery. The south would have ended slavery on their own. It was up to the states, not the federal government.
And gee, Dr. Paul can't remember things he said thirty years ago. How many of you remember what you said yesterday? The media taking things out of context? Not ever!
I don't think the people working at the IRS are going to vote for him. The only problem with Dr. Paul is that it is already to late.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

I didn't get to see the interview.

What were all the points on his record you found objectionable, Silverfox44?
 

imperialism2024

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
3,047
Location
Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

fetch wrote:
I was not going to post but this is interesting, and I didn't catch what a gerk is ether. That aside, I to saw the "interview". Tim Russerts style was not let Dr. Paul answer the question. He asked another question while Dr. Paul was trying to answer the first one. Yes, Dr. Paul stammered on the answers. BS tactic by Russert nothing more.
Once again people are not listening to what Dr. Paul is saying. The states have every right to secede from the union just as the southern states wanted to over slavery. Think about this, Lincoln used federal troops to attack U.S. citizens. How many presidents want to do that? As Dr. Paul stated, Lincoln did not need to use force to free the slaves. Economic and human rights were already at work to end slavery. The south would have ended slavery on their own. It was up to the states, not the federal government.
And gee, Dr. Paul can't remember things he said thirty years ago. How many of you remember what you said yesterday? The media taking things out of context? Not ever!
I don't think the people working at the IRS are going to vote for him. The only problem with Dr. Paul is that it is already to late.
+1
 

Silverfox44

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
82
Location
Tukwila, Washington, USA
imported post

I think fetch covered most of what I objected to. Dr Paul was asked why he is now a Republican whenhe ran as a libertarian I think in 88 and criticized the Republicans but decided to switch back to that party. Another problem I had was the negative things he had to say about the Regan Presidency. They always say do not argue over Religion and Politics, and since this is the first time I have put my feelings on a certain issue in print I can understand why.

I appreciate all of you who tooktime to read it and post your replys.:)
 

Comp-tech

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
934
Location
, Alabama, USA
imported post

Silverfox44 wrote:
Today Sunday Dec 23 I tuned in to Meet The Press and was astonished by what I heard come out of Ron Paul's mouth. My point of view on this is I could not in good faith EVER CAST A VOTE FOR RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT. I hope some of you seen the interview Tim Russert crucified him on his past record. He had the gall to say Lincoln was wrong to go to war to and free the slaves. The guy is a gerk.:cuss:
He DID NOT say that Lincoln was wrong to free the slaves....he said that he chose the wrong method of doing so.
Get your facts straight........
Contrary to popular belief, the Civil War wasn't just about slavery.
 

fetch

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
271
Location
Spokane, Wa., ,
imported post

Silverfox44
You just don't get it.
Dr. Paul's criticism of Regan is what he said he was going to vs. what he did in office. Regan said he was going to cut government, end the dept. of education, the atf, etc. He did not. Now both are dangerous to U.S citizens.
Also Dr. Paul is running as a republican not because he wanted to, but it is because he had to. A third party, a party that is pro Constitution, is a joke in this country. People on welfare are not going to vote for Dr. Paul.
I view that 1913 was the death of the Republic. It has taken more than 100 years to get to where we are it is not going to change back over night. At this point in time I don't think there will be an '08 election. I know that Dr. Paul will not be president in '08, but it will change a lot of peoples view of the government! God help us all.
 

ConditionThree

State Pioneer
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,231
Location
Shasta County, California, USA
imported post

fetch wrote:
The states have every right to secede from the union just as the southern states wanted to over slavery. Think about this, Lincoln used federal troops to attack U.S. citizens. How many presidents want to do that? As Dr. Paul stated, Lincoln did not need to use force to free the slaves. Economic and human rights were already at work to end slavery. The south would have ended slavery on their own. It was up to the states, not the federal government.


+ 1

What makes it difficult for some to accept,is that in school many are taught that the "Civil War" was fought over human rights and slavery. This revisionism has abolished in their minds the idea that the States have (had) rights and could act independent of a Federal entity and were well within their rights to resist an invasion and an attack on State sovereignty. Now the concept of cesession is considered 'absurd', when in reality, it's the cleanest break from Federal tyranny.
 

mindful musiings

New member
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
3
Location
, ,
imported post

At this point,I'm STILL voting for Ron Paul. He'll probablynever get the Rep. nod to run the ticket. However,I am amazed at all the comments nationwide by people who like him,but state they won't vote for him because his chances of winingare slim to none. We have become a Nation of people who will take no chances with ANYTHING. "If my guy,team,driver,whatever, can't win, I'll back someone else who will." Whatever happened to backing the long shot? The downtrodden? I know you all get it.... Anyway,Merry Christmas to you all. Remember to watch SCOTUS in March for the case of all cases. It will define us all for Generations to come,regardless of the outcome. Peace.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

mindful musings wrote:
It will define us all for Generations to come,regardless of the outcome.

That is a lot to expect from the question that SCOTUS agreed to consider

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_v._District_of_Columbia

On November 20, 2007 the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.[5] The court has rephrased the question be decided as follows:

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to the following question:
Whether the following provisions, D.C. Code §§ 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02, violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?
 
Top