If Republicans had any guts... Ron Paul!

ZappasGuitar said:
To you it's an anecdote...to me it's fact.

I actually like Paul, not enough to vote for him, but at least he's not a good little Rightie automaton like most of the candidates with an R after their name.

Right now, there's not much evidence to back up my claim. If Paul comes out strong in Iowa and begins to develop some momentum, it's possible some sound bytes of his conversation with Michael Medved may surface...
Click to expand...

A guy with an "R" after his name feed the slaves. This President keeps comparing himself to past Presidents, but his actions look more like Chairman Mao.
 
Last edited:
Darla said:
Okay so you are a truther maybe, but Zap isn't. That's all I was saying, and that I can vouch for that, because surprisingly, I actually have "known" him that long. So he's not a "hypocrite" for getting on Paul about this.
Click to expand...
reread what I posted, the words of MOST lefties and righties. having read quite a bit of zappas posts since i've been here, i find him to be a fairly level headed individual about most things. There are a few where he's gone off the lefty deepend, but then nobody can be right all the time like I am.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
The fact remains I heard Paul on the radio refuse to state unequivocally that our Government was not complicit in the 9/11 attacks.
Click to expand...

I'll point it out AGAIN.

You previously stated that he would not say that the government had "nothing to do with" not "complicit"...

You are adding words that didn't exist before, and still don't.

We've linked to his positions, read them to you by telling you what they said, pointed out how you are wrong, gave you examples of why it is wrong, and showed you that words have actual meanings.

You are absolutely being deliberately obtuse in this thread because you so desperately want to believe something about Ron Paul.

Please, give us one link that proves your assertion. Not a personal anecdote that changes with each telling, and actual link written by anybody with credibility, maybe a tape of that show you insist you heard where you obviously cannot remember the question asked...
 
Darla said:
Okay so you are a truther maybe, but Zap isn't. That's all I was saying, and that I can vouch for that, because surprisingly, I actually have "known" him that long. So he's not a "hypocrite" for getting on Paul about this.
Click to expand...

IF Ron Paul was actually a Truther I'd be supporting him on this. However, all he has is some radio show he heard where Paul wouldn't say that the government "had nothing to do with" 9/11. That's stupid. He believes that our government policy gave some motive to the attackers. He wouldn't say that they "had nothing to do with" 9/11.

Now Zappa is adding "complicit" to that assertion. His anecdote is changing and he hopes we won't notice because he wants the anecdote to fit the assertion.

If he can show one link with Ron Paul suggesting the US Government hired people to crash planes into the WTC, I'll apologize.
 
Darla said:
Okay so you are a truther maybe, but Zap isn't.
Click to expand...

and maybe he should be. maybe YOU should be. anyone that swallowed that pile of shit known as the 9/11 commission deserves to be locked up in gitmo. I've seen traffic accident investigations handled with better attention to detail and thoroughness than the attacks of 9/11 were.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
and maybe he should be. maybe YOU should be. anyone that swallowed that pile of shit known as the 9/11 commission deserves to be locked up in gitmo. I've seen traffic accident investigations handled with better attention to detail and thoroughness than the attacks of 9/11 were.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that if I don't believe the US Government was complicit or involved somehow in the 9/11 attacks, I should be locked up in Gitmo?

Is this the official Libertarian position? Because Billy was just going on about small government vets on this board and how you're all Libertarians.

So all of the Libertarians on this board would lock me up in Gitmo for disagreeing with them about 9/11? Or just you? Would it be indefinite?
 
Damocles said:
IF Ron Paul was actually a Truther I'd be supporting him on this. However, all he has is some radio show he heard where Paul wouldn't say that the government "had nothing to do with" 9/11. That's stupid. He believes that our government policy gave some motive to the attackers. He wouldn't say that they "had nothing to do with" 9/11.

Now Zappa is adding "complicit" to that assertion. His anecdote is changing and he hopes we won't notice because he wants the anecdote to fit the assertion.

If he can show one link with Ron Paul suggesting the US Government hired people to crash planes into the WTC, I'll apologize.
Click to expand...

I really don't give a shit Damo, if Zappa says he heard it, I believe it. Not everyone gets that from me here, that's for sure. But he's no liar.
 
Darla said:
So you are saying that if I don't believe the US Government was complicit or involved somehow in the 9/11 attacks, I should be locked up in Gitmo?

Is this the official Libertarian position? Because Billy was just going on about small government vets on this board and how you're all Libertarians.

So all of the Libertarians on this board would lock me up in Gitmo for disagreeing with them about 9/11? Or just you? Would it be indefinite?
Click to expand...

Darla cannot into hyperbole.
 
Ron Paul can split atoms by just looking at them. If I thought he actually had a chance; I'd skip the white Russian n doobie breakfast and actually go vote.
 
Darla said:
So you are saying that if I don't believe the US Government was complicit or involved somehow in the 9/11 attacks, I should be locked up in Gitmo?
Click to expand...
some of you people don't read very well at all, do you? I said if you believe, in it's entirety, the 9/11 commission report, you deserve to be locked up in Gitmo. Nowhere does what I said stipulate that the government was complicit in the attacks. The reason that is, and the reason Ron Paul refuses to say it wasn't, was the the 9/11 commission completely glossed over or ignored any potential part of the investigation that could lead to government complicity. In doing so, they threw you a bone about 19 terrorists and a genius mastermind named Bin Laden (who happened to be caught unawares in some home in pakistan???? some genius) and you went with it.

Darla said:
Is this the official Libertarian position? Because Billy was just going on about small government vets on this board and how you're all Libertarians.

So all of the Libertarians on this board would lock me up in Gitmo for disagreeing with them about 9/11? Or just you? Would it be indefinite?
Click to expand...
i'll just go ahead and include you on the deep end of the lefty group now.
 
The Dude said:
Ron Paul can split atoms by just looking at them. If I thought he actually had a chance; I'd skip the white Russian n doobie breakfast and actually go vote.
Click to expand...
hey non genius, how many people that think like you could actually change the course of our nation by getting off your lazy fat ass and actually go vote?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
some of you people don't read very well at all, do you? I said if you believe, in it's entirety, the 9/11 commission report, you deserve to be locked up in Gitmo. Nowhere does what I said stipulate that the government was complicit in the attacks. The reason that is, and the reason Ron Paul refuses to say it wasn't, was the the 9/11 commission completely glossed over or ignored any potential part of the investigation that could lead to government complicity. In doing so, they threw you a bone about 19 terrorists and a genius mastermind named Bin Laden (who happened to be caught unawares in some home in pakistan???? some genius) and you went with it.

i'll just go ahead and include you on the deep end of the lefty group now.
Click to expand...

You sound a lot like a truther, but one who doesn't have the guts to just state his position outright.
 
Darla said:
You sound a lot like a truther, but one who doesn't have the guts to just state his position outright.
Click to expand...
and you sound alot like an idiot, but that's beside the point. i've stated my position quite a few times, outright even, and a couple of times in this thread alone. Maybe you don't have the comprehension skills to determine plain english meanings.
 
Darla said:
I really don't give a shit Damo, if Zappa says he heard it, I believe it. Not everyone gets that from me here, that's for sure. But he's no liar.
Click to expand...

It must be Damo's new thing, running around calling people liars, the not apologizing.
 
Darla said:
I really don't give a shit Damo, if Zappa says he heard it, I believe it. Not everyone gets that from me here, that's for sure. But he's no liar.
Click to expand...

I believe the first anecdote. I haven't said I didn't. I point out his first anecdote said "nothing to do with" not "complicit". He's changing the anecdote to fit the assertion.

Reality:
There is no evidence other than in Zappa's imagination that Ron Paul believes in the conspiracy.

More Reality:
His first anecdote (the true story) didn't show what he asserts Ron Paul to believe.

Still More Reality:
There is zero evidence to support his assertion because Ron Paul doesn't believe what Zappa wants him to believe.

It's not like I think he's going to win the nomination or something, this isn't to "apologize" for "my party" or something. I don't give a rip if he is a "Truther" I just want more evidence than an ever-changing anecdote.
 
Damocles said:
Interesting, I point out what he actually says and this is your response. You get defensive when you are losing an argument.

I know it is embarrassing to know you are losing on the merits of your argument. I'm sorry it happens to you so often.
Click to expand...

Funny, I noticed that about you. You lose you cool, real fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top