Don't want to sound like uhlanstan but Ron Paul’s past association with white supremacists and his isolationist views make me uncomfortable. He reminds me of Charles Lindbergh who is still a hero to white supremacists and isolationists:

Way too many unproven allegations for me to have an opinon yet. I don't trust the liberal press, if they can find a little water and anything resembling dirt, they're gonna try and make mud. I don't trust the liberal left, they been caught lying too many times before and have proven that getting their guy elected is worth breaking any rules whether written or just understood.

I haven't made my mind up on who to support yet but, I can assure anyone interested, the liberal press will not make it up for me. As for the forth accuser, just having Gloria whatshername on the podium with her put a lot of doubt in my mind. I'm actually surprised she isn't on The View.

I'll just wait and see what is actually proven.

------------------
Ron
"While you cannot control the length of your life, you can control the width and depth." Live life to it's fullest, you may not see tomorrow.

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 11-08-2011).]

Never thought about that. Not only could we close the borders, we would be spending all that money in our own country. Then we could gradually downsize without shocking the economy. I like your thoughts OKflyboy.

[This message has been edited by dratts (edited 11-08-2011).]

..RON PAUL latest ,,Cozy up to Iran, they are misunderstood,,if only we befriend them...It is Iran & USA a big fairy tale ,love & kisses
RON PAUL is the biggest Liar in congress he is the kind of congressman people hate,,but he is a weassel,a slithering slime.His actions differ from his mouthing...HAVE YOU SEEN THE PHOTO OF PAUL IN THE CONFEDERATE CAP?? a classic super neat!!
Ron Paul hates the jews..Paul has a lot of good ideas,,but the guy represents the nazi facist that many democrats say all republicans are,, No one decieves the tax payer like Paul.
THINK PAUL,, THINK LIAR
PAUL LIAR PAUL
I WOULD VOTE FOR OBAMA BEFORE RON PAUL,,Paul the bigger Liar
WE HAVE BEEN KILLING OUR MILITARY AND INTELLIGENGE NET WORK FOR MANY YEARS,,CLINTON REALLY CUT MILITARY SPENDING ,,thank him for 9/11.
Cain is unelectable ,he put his lib foot in his mouth a month ago & no one remembers
A democrat will vote for a rapist(Clinton) KKK(byrd) murderer(kennedy) child moslester(barney frank)
but Republicans have higher standards,Cain,this is actually good for him ,but he should fade in popularity
of the 2 leftist I like Perry better than Romney,,but it looks like Romney
Once again the democrats on this forum will vote for a fraudulent criminal liar, what is wrong with you people ??
we have the chicago Mob in the white house ,do you really want America brought down to Obumbles level ??
we can not secure our borders because of democrats..
You better hope military spending goes up,,never forget there are many ron paul buffoons in congress who have a zillion pet projects,, the job of the govement is to protect the nation ,they do a poor job ,,if possible republican voters were comming accross the border ,,it would be secure in a month.
Thank Ron Paul for the Schrimp tread mill exerzise study classic behind the scene Paul..

[This message has been edited by uhlanstan (edited 11-08-2011).]

quote Originally posted by spark1: Don't want to sound like uhlanstan but Ron Paul’s past association with white supremacists and his isolationist views make me uncomfortable. He reminds me of Charles Lindbergh who is still a hero to white supremacists and isolationists:

I keep hearing that... and I Google it.. and it's all opinion pieces about how he gets campaign funds through white supremacy groups. What affiliation does he have with white supremacy?

quote Originally posted by uhlanstan: ..RON PAUL latest ,,Cozy up to Iran, they are misunderstood,,if only we befriend them...It is Iran & USA a big fairy tale ,love & kisses

What? I don't think so...

Did anybody notice that when she was asked to recall details about the alleged incident she looks towards the right. Normally, people don't look towards the right when recalling specifics. That info is stored on the left side of the brain. Either way I found the drama quite funny specially when Gloria introduced the story about, "Cain showing her his stimulus package."

quote Originally posted by theBDub: I keep hearing that... and I Google it.. and it's all opinion pieces about how he gets campaign funds through white supremacy groups. What affiliation does he have with white supremacy?

Here's one blog that seems well sourced. Summary:

quote While it may seem that Ron Paul is a good decent man with strong political ideals, that isn’t racist, who is being supported by Neo-Nazis and Patriot movement militia people who wrongly believe that he is one of them, the opposite is true. Ron Paul is a man with Neo-Nazi, Patriot movement militia views who is being supported by good decent people with strong political ideals who wrongly believe he is one of them.

I don't know if all the links and quotes in the blog are accurate but the David Duke - Ron Paul mutual admiration society turned me off many years ago. I also have a low opinion of the John Birch Society which Ron Paul praises highly or used to. I could be wrong but I have an uneasy feeling about the guy. I think many others do too.

Another opportunist?

AP Exclusive: Accuser filed complaint in next job

Exposed? One of Cain’s Accusers Works for the Obama Administration
http://conservativebyte.com...bama-administration/

More information about Cain's latest accuser...

'She's a complete gold digger': Murky past of Herman Cain accuser starts to emerge

I think you could take anyone, ask them to run for office and dig to find enough crap to throw in a newspaper article degrading that person.

Not many people's lives are "that" level of clean.

And if you do happen to run up against Jim Bob Duggar in your campaign, you just paint him out to be so hardcore right wing that he'll make illegal to dance in the US and fight it that way.

This isn't a democrat v republican issue. This is the state of current politics. One ounce of policy and a whole bottle of drama.

Karen Kraushaar, Herman Cain Accuser, Filed Complaint At Next Job
http://www.huffingtonpost.c...7Csec1_lnk3%7C111049

quote Originally posted by spark1: Don't want to sound like uhlanstan but Ron Paul’s past association with white supremacists and his isolationist views make me uncomfortable. He reminds me of Charles Lindbergh who is still a hero to white supremacists and isolationists:

When did this fear of supremacists begin? I can't recall you ever expresssing outrage at our CURRENT President's associations with Radical Hate Monger Reverend Wright, The Black Panthers, or Convicted Terrorists; not to mention his clear anti Israel semtiments. I must have missed those comments.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: For one, this website resides in Holland, a country that permits prostitution and pot smoking in the red light district. I would hardly call it Conservative. What you've forgotten is that the Democrats are right now in power, so most Democrats are not making the majority of the posts. In the past, under Bush, the majority of the posts were from Democrats complaining about Bush.

Do you honestly think that this website is hosted on hardware that is managed and run by the whole country of Holland, the Netherlands? No, it's run on private hardware owned by a private individual who happens to live in the Netherlands. You obviously can't grasp that it's possible for an individual to have different values than the average of his or her nation. Whether you admit it to yourself or not, this is a conservative forum. Most all of the political posts are by conservatives and represent conservative values. The very few and rare non-conservative political posters here are typically viciously attacked at every turn, and most have been driven off the board in the past. Toddster brags how he drove Euterpe off the board, for example. 80-90% of the political words posted here are by conservatives for conservatives and against anything that's not conservative. That makes it a conservative board whether you like it or not. As to the Democrats in power, if they were then they would have ended the conservative filibuster fiasco that's basically rendered this government non-functional. The loss of Kennedy was a big blow, especially when he got replaced by a conservative. Even back when Bush was in power the majority of posts here were in support of his policies and conservatism in general.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Second of all, I'm a Conservative, but I think most here would agree I'm pretty well a centrist. If you seem to think you're so far apart from me in ideology, then that would probably make you a FAR radical leftist. Unless of course you're just using "you" as a general term for everyone on here.

I'm pro-gun, anti-illegal immigration, pro fiscal responsibility, pro-choice, pro personal responsibility, pro social and economic justice, pro-truth, pro legal immigration, anti-H1-B visa, anti-guest worker program, so what does that make me compared to you? LOL. Remember the story I told about how a person came to a tee in the road, and turned right. He drove for a while, then stopped and got out of his car. He looked back in the direction he came and was surprised at how far the intersection had moved to the left of him. I'm not a "far radical leftist" as you are trying to portray me as. I don't believe in communism or socialism, as you automatically think I do due to the label you've stuck on me. If you say that I support either of those, then you are lying. Just so you know.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: And honestly, it's a joke if you actually think anyone believes that you are "above" the nonsense and that you really see the forest through the trees. As if there was anyone on this message board who was so ridiuclously delusional and fixiated on party label, it's you. You'll find plenty of posts by me on here praising Clinton and JFK... and even a few times when I've agreed with Obama (although, everything else is horrendous so it almost becomes a moot point with him now).

Here you're just slandering (or is it libeling? I always confuse the two) me by making false statements about my character. That's just the kind of person you are, though, attacking anything that's "other" than your razor-thin ideology. You're a very nasty person, that's how I see you. Filthy and nasty and mean, mainly interested in denigrating and humiliating those whose opinions you disagree with, never missing an opening to attack and tear down others, to stick in the knife and twist.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I have a sick fascination with your wierdness, and lack of social graces, so I do read all of your really lame political posts, and I can't remember ever reading a single positive comment you've ever made about a Republican.

Really? I made positive comments about Ford, for instance. I'd always believed he was a traitor to this country by pardoning Nixon for his treason. I'd always thought Nixon should have been tried, convicted, and stood up against the wall at Leavenworth and had a bullet put through his heart as he so deserved. However, when Ford died I went back and researched him to find out what kind of person he really was and what he was faced with. What I found out was that this country was at the brink of civil war because of Nixon's treason and the social stresses of the Vietnam "war". Ford felt that if he'd let Nixon get tried then Nixon's supporters, the conservatives, would probably have started a civil war and it would have escalated like an explosion. Ford decided to basically fall on his sword and commit political suicide for the greater good of this nation, betting that the shitstorm around the pardon would be less than that around the years a trial and conviction would take. He bet right.

I now agree with that decision after having learned more about it, a decision made by a conservative to protect the second worse conservative crook president ever to "serve" this nation. I now understand the kind of decision he was faced with, and believe that the decision he made made him a great man in my book. I respect him for it and I changed my views on him after doing my research and learning about more than just the surface facts. I think he was a good man put in an impossible situation, and that he did what was good for his country, my country, at great detriment to himself. I respect and honor him for that.

I posted this back soon after he died. Apparently you failed to notice that, hence your erroneous comment about me never posting positive things about Republicans. BTW, I don't normally post positive things about most politicions of either party. I'm just not the kind of guy to go around and "Rah Rah Rah!!!" about everyone serving in office. It's apparent that you regard a lack of positive posts as negativity, but sometimes maybe a lack of positive posts just means I'm neutral.

You really need to get off the mindset that not being for something automatically means being against something.

The actual spectrum is like this:

For something -- neutral, neither for or against -- against something.

There's a lot of room in that neutral position, and maybe with some work you could realize that sometimes someone who's not for your ideology isn't automatically against it either. Don't worry, I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to grow up mentally. You're completely fixed in stone, as unable to change your paradigms as the elephant is incapable of breaking the piece of twine holding its leg to the stake in the ground.

Slander (adv.) usage of verbal epithets which are not true to say something untrue about a person/persons.

Libel (adv). The above written on the printed page, IE a newspaper.

quote Jazzman said it confused him, here is is for clarification.

[This message has been edited by htexans1 (edited 11-09-2011).]

quote Originally posted by htexans1: Slander (adv.) usage of verbal epithets which are not true to say something untrue about a person/persons. Libel (adv). The above written on the printed page, IE a newspaper.

I always get brain-blocked on that difference, no matter how many times I look it up. Arghhhh....

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Here you're just slandering (or is it libeling? I always confuse the two) me by making false statements about my character. That's just the kind of person you are, though, attacking anything that's "other" than your razor-thin ideology. You're a very nasty person, that's how I see you. Filthy and nasty and mean, mainly interested in denigrating and humiliating those whose opinions you disagree with, never missing an opening to attack and tear down others, to stick in the knife and twist.

You complain about Todd calling you delusional and fixated on party labels, then go right into calling him a nasty, filthy, & mean person?

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Do you honestly think that this website is hosted on hardware that is managed and run by the whole country of Holland, the Netherlands? No, it's run on private hardware owned by a private individual who happens to live in the Netherlands. You obviously can't grasp that it's possible for an individual to have different values than the average of his or her nation. Whether you admit it to yourself or not, this is a conservative forum. Most all of the political posts are by conservatives and represent conservative values. The very few and rare non-conservative political posters here are typically viciously attacked at every turn, and most have been driven off the board in the past. Toddster brags how he drove Euterpe off the board, for example. 80-90% of the political words posted here are by conservatives for conservatives and against anything that's not conservative. That makes it a conservative board whether you like it or not. As to the Democrats in power, if they were then they would have ended the conservative filibuster fiasco that's basically rendered this government non-functional. The loss of Kennedy was a big blow, especially when he got replaced by a conservative. Even back when Bush was in power the majority of posts here were in support of his policies and conservatism in general.

Well, I don't know what to tell you JazzMan... I obviously know how the internet works, but if you think this message board is a "Conservative Forum" then well, I guess you'll either have to learn to like it, or...? Political posts are mostly boring when everyone agrees with me, so I think you shoul stick around.

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: I'm pro-gun, anti-illegal immigration, pro fiscal responsibility, pro-choice, pro personal responsibility, pro social and economic justice, pro-truth, pro legal immigration, anti-H1-B visa, anti-guest worker program, so what does that make me compared to you? LOL. Remember the story I told about how a person came to a tee in the road, and turned right. He drove for a while, then stopped and got out of his car. He looked back in the direction he came and was surprised at how far the intersection had moved to the left of him. I'm not a "far radical leftist" as you are trying to portray me as. I don't believe in communism or socialism, as you automatically think I do due to the label you've stuck on me. If you say that I support either of those, then you are lying. Just so you know.

I'm quite interested in what you mean by Social and Economic Justice? What exactly does that mean to you, and how is it that you hope to promote that without also supporting socialism?

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Here you're just slandering (or is it libeling? I always confuse the two) me by making false statements about my character. That's just the kind of person you are, though, attacking anything that's "other" than your razor-thin ideology. You're a very nasty person, that's how I see you. Filthy and nasty and mean, mainly interested in denigrating and humiliating those whose opinions you disagree with, never missing an opening to attack and tear down others, to stick in the knife and twist.

To all who know me, that's the exact opposite of what people think; however, I do know you feel this way about a lot of people. There doesn't seem to be any in-between with you. You either flat-out hate someone, competely and utterly, or you don't hate them YET. I'm pretty sure this isn't all about me. It's like that guy I knew who was always getting fired from his jobs. He kept saying that the managers were all "dickheads." After a while, he should have thought maybe it was something he was doing, and not his managers.

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Really? I made positive comments about Ford, for instance. I'd always believed he was a traitor to this country by pardoning Nixon for his treason. I'd always thought Nixon should have been tried, convicted, and stood up against the wall at Leavenworth and had a bullet put through his heart as he so deserved. However, when Ford died I went back and researched him to find out what kind of person he really was and what he was faced with. What I found out was that this country was at the brink of civil war because of Nixon's treason and the social stresses of the Vietnam "war". Ford felt that if he'd let Nixon get tried then Nixon's supporters, the conservatives, would probably have started a civil war and it would have escalated like an explosion. Ford decided to basically fall on his sword and commit political suicide for the greater good of this nation, betting that the shitstorm around the pardon would be less than that around the years a trial and conviction would take. He bet right. There's a lot of room in that neutral position, and maybe with some work you could realize that sometimes someone who's not for your ideology isn't automatically against it either. Don't worry, I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to grow up mentally. You're completely fixed in stone, as unable to change your paradigms as the elephant is incapable of breaking the piece of twine holding its leg to the stake in the ground.

Don't you think that's a bit radical to want the guy dead? During the Nixon administration, the US was no where near at the brink of a civil war. Nixon was guilty of theft... certainly something that makes him guilty of having to show up in front of an impeachment hearing, but I don't think it warrants death, and I don't think that's what they would have asked for either. On a side note, Nixon was fairly liberal in a lot of what he did. The list escapes me, but I know he passed most of the Federal emissions laws which a lot of environmentalists greatly support. What I don't like about him though is that he took us off the gold standard... should have never happened.

Anyway... mentally immature? JazzMan, you really should look at the threads you start on here... it's some of the most assinine & immature posts on here. It ranks up there with the poop and "ouch my balls" posts.

quote Originally posted by rogergarrison: Wouldnt surprise me in the least to find the Democratic Party is doing this. The current administration is running scared and we all know there willing to do anything they can think of to disrupt the oppostion. They might even think Caine is the strongest current opponent and aiming any scheme directly at him. We already know that they totally disregard any laws or the constitution to get it done.

The last I heard, Cain's people were accusing Romney's(sp?) people as one of Cain's ex employees "in the know" is now working for Romney. Of course, it could be the Dems, but if they had that level of "goods" on Cain, I think they would have waited until after the convention when it would be too late. The main one to benefit is Romney.

quote Originally posted by avengador1: Exposed? One of Cain’s Accusers Works for the Obama Administration http://conservativebyte.com...bama-administration/

She also previously worked in the dubya administration. And she's a Republican.

From my perspective, and I'm almost as upset with the dems as the republicans ( they both are pretty corrupt ) this section of the forum is about 5 to 1 conservative. It's OK to be either and I have no idea how it compares to the national ratio. Maybe there are more conservatives than liberals overall in the country. I normally try to find a sane medium and I don't feel like I've been attacked that much, but I sure wouldn't want to be a liberal posting my views here. Both extremes have SOME valid positions in my opinion.

quote Originally posted by dratts Both extremes have SOME valid positions in my opinion.

That is a very interesting statement. Would you care to elighten us as to what you think some of these"'valid" positons are for either extreme?

CRAP! I just wrote a fairly long reply and then touched the wrong part of my iPad and it disappeared. I'm so irritated by that that I'm going to wait a while for the reply that you requested. I classify myself as a compassionate conservative, but not in the same sense as Bush. I don't know why Bush had to add that adjective. If I was a liberal I would call myself a compassionate liberal.

[This message has been edited by dratts (edited 11-10-2011).]

....so...um....why have accusers not come out at against every candidate....?

I agree that sexual misconduct is a very tough one to prove, and, often there is nothing more than the word of a cheezed off chic.....

nope. this guy is pure sleeze trying to get some quick strange. after all - isnt this why you work for such positions? to get the benifits of such positions? especially if you are not very appealling. Clinton was brought up. and, we also see the differences: consent & willingness. the ladies wanted Clinton. Cain has to coherce. So, anyone want to picture the fun of Cain trying to coherce girls. white girls at that.
pretty safe bet he has a boat. and, I would bet more than once females have the option of swimming back or, well, you know......

sleeeeeze ball.

"And for every one person who comes forward with false accusations, there are thousands who would say, ‘None of that sort of activity ever came from Herman Cain." - Herman Cain

Soo, ahh, what's a good ratio?

For every serial killer there are a thousand non serial killers. So since there are a thousand women who don't charge Cain, obviously those are bogus charges. (sarcasm). I really should identify myself as someone who had a negative opinion of Cain right from the start. I don't like motivational speakers or preachers and their techniques of persuasion. But aside from that I don't like his tax proposal even though our tax system is in desperate need of simplification and in don't think that he is intelligent enough for the job.

[This message has been edited by dratts (edited 11-10-2011).]

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: pretty safe bet he has a boat. and, I would bet more than once females have the option of swimming back or, well, you know...... sleeeeeze ball.

"because of the implication"

quote Originally posted by ktthecarguy: She also previously worked in the dubya administration. And she's a Republican.

Oops!

I like that word now, it's famous...

quote Originally posted by avengador1: That is a very interesting statement. Would you care to elighten us as to what you think some of these"'valid" positons are for either extreme?

Words from the last Libertarian nominated by the Republicans:



That's what is remembered but this is what he said:

quote “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. Why, the beauty of the very system we Republicans are pledged to restore and revitalize — the beauty of this Federal system of ours — is in its reconciliation of diversity with unity. We must not see malice in honest differences of opinion, and no matter how great, so long as they are not inconsistent with the pledges we have given to each other in and through our Constitution. Our Republican cause is not to level out the world or make its people conform in computer regimented sameness. Our Republican cause is to free our people and light the way for liberty throughout the world. Ours is a very human cause for very humane goals.”

Thanks dratts. Now will the real dratts answer?

quote Originally posted by avengador1: Thanks dratts. Now will the real dratts answer?

Probably merciful that I lost my post. It was kind of a stream of consciousness rant anyway. Basically I go along with hard work being rewarded which seems to be sort of a conservative slant, and I go along with compassion for those less fortunate which trate I associate more with the libs.

quote Originally posted by Tigger: "And for every one person who comes forward with false accusations, there are thousands who would say, ‘None of that sort of activity ever came from Herman Cain." - Herman Cain Soo, ahh, what's a good ratio?

What was Bill Clinton's ratio?

quote Originally posted by fierobear: What was Bill Clinton's ratio?

What was Bob Packwood's ratio?

Bet you were salivating at the chance to bring Clinton into this discussion weren't ya?

quote Originally posted by Tigger: Bet you were salivating at the chance to bring Clinton into this discussion weren't ya?

Its a valid comparison. Clinton was proven to have actually done the things he was accused of, then, as a sitting president, perjured himself on front of a grand jury. Then when all was said and done, the Clintonistas excused it all away with a casual "Its just sex..." as though that made it all okay.

However, as of yet the accusations against Cain are just that, accusations with no proof, nor corroborating witnesses, the only thing any "witness" can supply as of yet is hearsay "yeah, she told me it happened, weeks/months/years after it was supposed to have happened, but I believe her!" or my personal favorite the so-called "fifth accuser" - "Sure, he never did or said anything inappropriate, but my women's intuition TOLD me he was up to no good!" Really?! I mean she flat out ADMITS that he did nothing inappropriate the entire evening! But we're relying on "women's intuition" as "evidence", now? REALLY?!

Now the accusations leveled against Cain are serious and if true he should, at the very least, be invalidated as a candidate for president, and hopefully prosecuted for any crimes he may have committed, but lets be fair and not hang the man based on a "woman's intuition".

[This message has been edited by OKflyboy (edited 11-11-2011).]

quote Originally posted by OKflyboy: Its a valid comparison. Clinton was proven to have actually done the things he was accused of, then, as a sitting president, perjured himself on front of a grand jury. Then when all was said and done, the Clintonistas excused it all away with a casual "Its just sex..." as though that made it all okay. However, as of yet the accusations against Cain are just that, accusations with no proof, nor corroborating witnesses, the only thing any "witness" can supply as of yet is hearsay "yeah, she told me it happened, weeks/months/years after it was supposed to have happened, but I believe her!" or my personal favorite the so-called "fifth accuser" - "Sure, he never did or said anything inappropriate, but my women's intuition TOLD me he was up to no good!" Really?! I mean she flat out ADMITS that he did nothing inappropriate the entire evening! But we're relying on "women's intuition" as "evidence", now? REALLY?! Now the accusations leveled against Cain are serious and if true he should, at the very least, be invalidated as a candidate for president, and hopefully prosecuted for any crimes he may have committed, but lets be fair and not hang the man based on a "woman's intuition".

Keep in mind that three of the four women accusers already have cash settlements from the National Restaurant Association along with non-disclosure agreements.

BTW hearsay is when you tell something to someone, then that person relates it in court.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." - Inigo Montoya, "The Princess Bride"

quote Originally posted by Tigger: What was Bob Packwood's ratio? Bet you were salivating at the chance to bring Clinton into this discussion weren't ya?

Two deflections but no answer. Typical liberal tactic. You can't handle actual debate and you can't face that your saviors are flawed.

I'll bet you were hoping I *wouldn't* mention Clinton, because he DID get caught - several times - harassing women, messing around on his wife, and so on. Really, Tigger, you Democrats are pathetic.

[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 11-12-2011).]