I just watched Ron Paul get shredded by 'Orilley, is he the right guy?

reply to post by Lar Janus

i never called him a nut job. what i said was that i would wait to see his cnn interview. and the big bird interview and see if he crumbles with them.

LOL you must have been watching a different version

reply to post by CanadianVandal

you talkin to me?...are you talking to me?
because i saw that old man get shredded by O'Rielly, stammered, studdered and i felt sorry for the old guy.

This link should take you directly to the Ron Paul - O'Reilly interview.

Title: Ron Paul on Iraq.

Originally posted by joeyvelder
reply to post by Lar Janus

 

I'll hold judgement until after the CNN interview. if he crumbles ith CNN what is left for him? an interview with Big Bird from Sesame st.?

Hey buddy,I'd like to introduce you to our president Mr.Bush.He is a blundering idiot and he has served two full terms.HRMMM

If Bush can be president for two terms without knowing the english language then im sure Paul stands a fair chance..

BTW on the video all i see is Bill being a interuptive moron.He will not let Paul explain a single thing.
more rumors build up every day.

[edit on 11-9-2007 by Project_Silo]

[edit on 11-9-2007 by Project_Silo]

O'Reilly is an idiot and spins the @^#$ out of news for his own agenda.

O'Reilly is a raving lunatic in my opinion.

Iran has NEVER stated that they want a nuclear weapon. FOX has repeatedly bashed Ron Paul, they have no interest in keeping their "News" fair or balanced.

Bush has said Bin Laden isn't all that important.



This is why Ron Paul is saying we aren't doing the right thing in Afghanistan.

Iran is not developing nuclear weapons. If you have any doubts, read this: www.abovetopsecret.com...

As a side note: If you think Ron Paul is a stammering idiot, I hate to know what you think about our current president. Least when Ron's done talking he made a point and what he says makes sense.

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
-- Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945
(emphasis added, see video below)



It's only a debate if both sides present FACTS. This was not a debate.

[edit on 11-9-2007 by Angry Danish]

Originally posted by Angry Danish
O'Reilly is an idiot and spins the @^#$ out of news for his own agenda.

O'Reilly is a raving lunatic in my opinion.

Oh yeah, and a Democratic opponent wouldn't be?

You're missing the point, if he can't take a short interview with O'Reilly, how's he going to withstand the Democratic (likely Clinton) attack machine for 9 months if he were ever to become the Republican nominee?

[edit on 9/11/2007 by djohnsto77]

Originally posted by djohnsto77

You're missing the point, if he can't take a short interview with O'Reilly, how's he going to withstand the Democratic (likely Clinton) attack machine for 9 months if he were ever to become the Republican nominee?

[edit on 9/11/2007 by djohnsto77]

The way I see it is that whatever "attack machine" be it the R's or the D's cannot succeed when it's attacking the truth and the Constitution. In my experience the only people who have caved under "attack" pressure have done so because their foundations werent firm to begin with.

The truth is absolute and no amount of spin, attacking, or propaganda can kill it.
Politicians who stand on shakey half-truths and empty poll numbers are the ones who cave under attack machines. If you have the truth on your side and believe honestly what you say you do than there's no harm in being shouted at by the Oriellys of the world.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Show me the politicians in our nation that have truth and clean minds and that are not been pay by corporate America, give only one name and I will have my faith in the political system of our nation restored.

reply to post by marg6043


Ron Paul.

Though I'm sure he isnt 100% perfect. Otherwise there isnt one. I dont believe its possible to be a politician and not fall into corruption.

Thats doesnt mean anything I said is wrong. The truth cannot break down to attack pressure. The truth doesnt have a constant uphill battle to prove its right.
The truth doesnt need to belittle its opennents or dig up "dirt" on them.

Originally posted by joeyvelder
reply to post by CanadianVandal

 

i saw that old man get shredded by O'Rielly, stammered, studdered and i felt sorry for the old guy.

'Shredded'? C'mon, now! Getting "shredded" means [to me] being beaten in debate, not shouted down by an egotistical SOB like O'Reilly. Have YOU ever tried to have a debate with a loudmouthed POS, who just keeps shouting over you? Its IMPOSSIBLE! Par for the course, for Fox Lies; most of their 'news' programs I've seen always seem to degenerate into a shouting match, with plenty of insults thrown in, for good measure. Its an embarrassment to Americans, that they've made Fox such a highly rated 'news' cast.

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by Angry Danish
O'Reilly is an idiot and spins the @^#$ out of news for his own agenda.

O'Reilly is a raving lunatic in my opinion.

Oh yeah, and a Democratic opponent wouldn't be?

You're missing the point, if he can't take a short interview with O'Reilly, how's he going to withstand the Democratic (likely Clinton) attack machine for 9 months if he were ever to become the Republican nominee?

[edit on 9/11/2007 by djohnsto77]

What do you mean he "can't take it"? Ron Paul has ALWAYS, during his political career, been on the "other side", and I'm sure he's used to being an underdog. What are the Democrats gonna do? His stance on the war and civil liberties kicks their platform out from underneath of them, and in fact, HE'S been more anti-war/pro-liberty than ANY of the probable Dem nominees. He is EXTREMEMLY consistent in his positions, unlike just about every other candidate (R or D), and has UNIQUE views/workable solutions on the important issues of our times. He is a Constitutionalist, and ANY politician who abides by that document will have a consistent voting record. I've been telling people that--speaking PRACTICALLY--he is the BEST of the Rep candidates, and would destroy any Dem who would be put up, against him; like I've also said, the Rep Party would rather LOSE in 2008, than nominate RP.

It's very hard, for me, to comprhend how ANYONE can find fault with RP; he is the ONLY candidate (among Rs and Ds) who seriously contemplates the Constitution when voting.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by marg6043

 

Though I'm sure he isnt 100% perfect. Otherwise there isnt one. I dont believe its possible to be a politician and not fall into corruption.

Exactly. I'm sure someone, somewhere, can dig up an association or campaign contributor that may reflect poorly on Dr. Paul. His voting record speaks for itself, and you know what you're getting, when you vote for RP. Corruption is using one's office, inappropriately, for personal gain, or to hand out favors to your associates. When you look at the Clintons, Gores, Bushes, Cheneys, and Kennedys of the political world, you see multi-millionaires who've used their offices to attain wealth/power for themselves and others; you see no such thing in Ron Paul. While I wouldn't want to bet he's completely untouched by any kind of impropriety, I would be suprised to see any evidence of serious wrongdoing. When you're for TRULY limited Govt, you're not gonna get many Big Money characters knocking on your door.

Originally posted by Lar Janus

It's very hard, for me, to comprhend how ANYONE can find fault with RP; he is the ONLY candidate (among Rs and Ds) who seriously contemplates the Constitution when voting.

I actually had someone tell me that because David Duke supports him he must be evil.

I tried to explain that regardless of the reasons behinds Dukes support that every hate-spewing sociopath should support Ron Paul because Paul will defend that sociopaths right to spew whatever madness he wishes.

Paul doesnt support hate groups or any groups. He supports the Constitution and everyone should support that.

reply to post by joeyvelder


joey, you've been awfully quiet thru the last few posts. Is it possible that maybe some of your doubts about Ron Paul have been answered here? I certainly hope so. Many of us believe that Mr. Paul could be a turning point for America. Or should I say a 're-turning' point?

Also, for the record; I hardly think that anyone who holds a medical degree and has been a successful MD and much loved by his patients, could hardly be called a "nutjob!'

[edit on 9/11/2007 by janasstar]

Originally posted by joeyvelder
Giuliani dressed in drag too and that hasn't hurt him why? because he doesn't have non-mainstream beliefs. he stays on the "safe" side of politics.

Rudy has been married three times, once to his own cousin. His kids don't talk to him. He dresses in drag. He is pro choice. This may be considered safe territory to you, but the GOP may have other ideas. They would love to see Huckabee get the nom, because moral issues are more important to the GOP than anything, at least during a campaign.

Originally posted by joeyvelder
When Ron is standing on the ponts he is standing on, he needs all the credibility he can get.

Are you kidding me? The points Ron stands on are based on the constitution, man. How much more credible do you want? He lives and dies by that document. It's not his fault the constitution is out-dated for today's America. If Americans were smart they'd elect a libertarian for a term or two. It would do this country some good to get back to its roots.

All those people out there who think Ron Paul is nuts? Facists. Sorry, but it's true. You have this idea about what America is like. As though we're free as long as we keep telling ourselves that. The only thing free in this country is air, and that product is getting worse by the day.

Don't let Fox News decide your vote for you.

I just watched the 5 minute clip from You Tube as I couldn't bring the Fox Video which shows probably the whole video, but I am sure this 5 minute clip shows what the majority of the interview shows: BILL OREILLY IS A COMPLETE AHOLE!!!!

How can you start a thread stating that Ron Paul got thrashed in the SO CALLED INTERVIEW WHEN THERE WASN'T EVEN AN INERVIEW!!!!

I would love to debate with ANYONE in this thread or on this board if you think Bill Oreilly gave a good interview and also those who think there is someone else to vote for besides Ron Paul.

reply to post by hoochymama


You tell 'em Hoochie Mama! As we say in Texas; Sunday dinner's on the table, bring it on, wheeeee doggies!! [she says with drum roll on desk]
(or is that what we said in NC? darn transplants! never can get it right!)

[edit on 9/12/2007 by janasstar]

Originally posted by joeyvelder
The more I listen to Ron Paul the more doubts I have.

I'm sorry to hear that.

Originally posted by joeyvelder
The only reasonable thing I have heard him say is that he would get rid of the IRS.

I agree in that the IRS should be abolished. If the government is going to continue to throw away the money they take from us, they should find a new source of cash. I also agree with Dr. Paul that the Dept of Education should be abolished. if education became the responsibility of the private sector and charitable groups, you'll see our schools improve immediately. I disagree with Dr. Pauls stance on abortion (i'm pro choice), but at the same time he doesn't believe the federal government has any right to make a law for or against it. Ron Paul believes in state's rights, which would restore the representative system that seems so bloated and misguided today. I agree with that.

Originally posted by joeyvelder
When he gets asked the tough questions he stammers, stumbles and crumbles.
First Hannity rips him a new one and Ron doesn't defend himself and now O'Rielly shreds him to threads and AGAIN Ron just stammers.!

Ron Paul defended himself against both Hannity and OReilly very soundly. Yelling over someone does not make you correct. Even as Ron disagree's with them, he has the respect to let them finish their sentence. I'm sorry you view this as a weakness. By the way, the only time Paul spoke over OReilly was when Bill INCORRECTLY stated that Paul never wanted to be in Afghanistan, when Paul DID vote to go in to get Bin Laden. But, because the mission was to get Bin Laden and he has since escaped, there is no longer a reason to be in Afhanistan.

Originally posted by joeyvelder
Am I missing something here with Ron? what am I not seeing in him that everyone else seems to see?

I think you are missing something very critical, Joey. Whether you support Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee or anyone else, you have to make your own conclusions instead of relying on the media (or anyone else) to do it for you.

I don't believe you're failing to see something in Ron Paul that everyone else see's. I don't think everyone else see's it to be honest. Ron Pau supporters, though strong on the internet, are not the majority at this point. It is up to his supporters to garner that support in the people we talk with day in and out. If people want to see the government change in fundamental ways that bring us back to the ideals that made this country great, then they should vote for real change in Ron Paul.

But that's a long shot. It's better that we elect new officials from the ground up. Representatives and Senators vote on legislation, not the president. We need people who support our ideals in congress and the senate, or Ron Paul's goals will never pass.

It is up to his supporters to garner that support in the people we talk with day in and out. If people want to see the government change in fundamental ways that bring us back to the ideals that made this country great, then they should vote for real change in Ron Paul.

But that's a long shot. It's better that we elect new officials from the ground up. Representatives and Senators vote on legislation, not the president. We need people who support our ideals in congress and the senate, or Ron Paul's goals will never pass.

I'm AMAZED by the number of people who haven't even HEARD of him (or, any other candidate outside the MSM coverage). Many, when they do, like what they hear. Unfortunately, though, far too many rely on party labels to make their decisions for them. I had one guy tell me he was voting HRC, because (in his own words), "Its time to give a woman a chance, the guys have been messing things up". That, along with Ron Paul being (in his view) a "rich white man" (though he'd never even HEARD of RP, before that moment) and HRC being a Dem, were his SOLE reasons for his decision. It horrifies me that people like this actually get to vote--this is the problem with unrestrained "democracy", "one man, one vote" thinking; people who have very little interest in current events/politics and an even weaker grasp on civics/liberty and economics get to decide policy for the rest of us.

The Govt-run schooling monopoly has done its job superbly--dumbing down Americans to the point that the Govt can do anything it wants and making people think socialism is a good thing.