"All that are left to him now are the neo-Nazis, drug legalization freaks, gold bugs, White Supremacists, child porn lovers, anti-semites, and other assorted miscreants."

Unless your adding the additional description of "miscreants" you're forgetting the PaulBots.

Now, we can only hope the DNC does the same for loonbat Kucinich.

Fat chance I know, but one can hope.

I think the Paulbots are the very embodiment of the term, "assorted miscreants."

Cato threw in with the War Party when Saddaam was overthrown after playing coy during the run-up. Actually Cato has for years has been joined at the hip to the ostensible 2nd- and 3rd-way opinion journals, the Siamese twins, pro-war TNR and pro-war Natl Review. So, "libertarian", "liberal" and "conservative" opinion leaders were all in step about the Big Things, mainly war and its upkeep through government. As cover, Cato invents "positive libertarianism" to excuse the growth of government power for the greater good expressed as a liberal domestic policy including Wide Open Borders and amnesty for illegal aliens. In this new world Americans would be "knowledge workers" blah blah.
In this paradigm, Ron Paul is a negative libertarian because he's anti-war and anti-abortion and against amnesty.

PS. Cato has been pissed at the world ever since the people rejected Bush's SS privatization initiative. That program was Cato's baby 100%. And he promised!!! Cato whored for Bush's war and Bush half-asses Our privatization thingee!!! Waaaaaaa!!!

See? I say the magic words, "assorted miscreants," and, right on cue . . .

;-)

YOu know, the amazing thing I find when 'debating' with a Paulbot it how much volume of speech they can produce without actually saying anything? Their version of an argument seems to be to string together a bunch of buzzwords and catchphrases, throw in 'Constitution' "Deficit' 'Neo-cons' and 'Peace', and then sprinkle with epithets for flavour, and call anyone who disagrees idiots and 'whores' a few times.

And yet, what manner of intelligent debate have you just proposed?

At least the so-called "Paul-Bot" above makes some kind of a case.

And at what point did Ron Paul begin supporting Nazis, white supremacists, and others who support force against others?

As an anti-Ron Paul supporter, when did you start supporting the same kind of force, whether federal or otherwise?

"YOu know, the amazing thing I find when 'debating' with a Paulbot it how much volume of speech they can produce without actually saying anything?"-ryan

Visit today's Cato.org page.

http://www.cato.org/

See their motto "Liberty, Free Markets, and Peace" (Cato is for domestic electronic spying without warrant, finds the abysmal US rate of personal savings unimportant, and is supportive of wealth transfer schemes under the heading Nation-building despite being paid for on credit, and despite the lessons of Vietnam. But it's impolite to laugh.)

Now scroll down to Cato's "coverage" of the RealID scheme. You'll note that CATO takes an ostrich approach. Essentially, "It'll never happen anyway!" combined with: "Never fear! Eliott Spitzer is here! HE'LL save us!" (Eliott Effing Spitzer!!!)

So Ron Paul shows by his existence in the national consciousness that Cato are not for L, FM & P., but are just poseurs in the wingnut welfare hand-out line. Milton Friedman warned of the siren call to Compromise with Leviathan when Cato moved to DC from San Francisco like university grads flocking to the New Deal.

DK - "At least the so-called "Paul-Bot" above makes some kind of a case."

Which PaulBot are you refering to? If you speak of bryanD you have your wires crossed, he's anything but. Mostly BUTT!. (BUTT spelled correctly BTW)

DK - "And at what point did Ron Paul begin supporting Nazis, white supremacists, and others who support force against others?"

How about any time frame that covered 20 years as he published the Ron Paul Report that published just that type of hateful BS. He can hide by his pathetic "I didn't know defense" but even if true, and it's NOT, is that someone who should lead the,or any other country?

DK - "As an anti-Ron Paul supporter, when did you start supporting the same kind of force, whether federal or otherwise?"

I support the use of force when atttacked and when no other means are possible to resolve world situations or for the security of the U.S.

Question DK... Paul has said many, many times he's in favor of pulling ALL U.S. military forces from the Middle East area of operations.

He also voted to allow the Afghanistan invasion. Why would anyone with a sane mind hold both positions?

DK, you and the rest of the PaulBot coo-coo bird flock go commiserate among yourselves and leave the adults to run the important things in life.

Hey Bryan. . . .

Talk about a non-sequitor. .

YOu can attack Cato all you like, but that doesn't make Ron Paul sane.

I know I agree with him on a wide range of economic issues. .that doesn't mean that he isn't crazy. You watch the debates even briefly and you can see he has an often tenuous connection with reality.

The naive view that 'If we just pull out of the middle east all the terrorists will decide to be nice' is ludicrous to say the least.

"He also voted to allow the Afghanistan invasion. Why would anyone with a sane mind hold both positions?"-marc

Excuse me for BUTTing in...

Paul voted for the Afghanistan operation because the Taliban admitted AlQaeda were their guests in country and thus were subject to protection by the Taliban regime. They may have added "Nanny nanny boo boo!" in the postscript. Not sure.

Then Rumsfeld puts the Army in charge mid-way through the operation so the army would have authority to siphon away troops to Iraq before the Afghan mission was accomplished, saying the Afghanis would know best how to find Osama.

W'uh??? The Afghanis already SAID they would NOT turn him over! That's why we invaded in the first place! Taliban-Afghan? Blood is thicker than $$$. And where's a "traitor" going to go? His own family would kill him to save their own skins!

So that's the beef with the boondoggle called GWOT. It's a charade. A charade is worse than a clusterf@ck, BTW, because charade denotes Intent.

Fun Fact 1: Paul voted support for the Israeli strike at the Osirak nuclear reactor.

F F 2: Paul was also one of 4 Republicans to support Reagan in 1976 against incompetent incumbent G Ford.

For G.P...
http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul.htm

"The naive view that 'If we just pull out of the middle east all the terrorists will decide to be nice' is ludicrous to say the least."
Posted by Ryan

Newsweek reported that "U.S. military sources have given the FBI information that suggests five of the alleged hijackers of the planes used in Tuesday's terror attacks received training at secure U.S. military installations in the 1990s." Knight Ridder's news account was more specific which said Mohamed Atta had attended International Officers School at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama. In addition, Abdulaziz Alomari had attended Aerospace Medical School at Brooks Air Force base in Texas, they reported, and Saeed Alghamdi had been to the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California."

It's a charade, I tells ye.

. . ok. . and you are proving the point.

PAranoid delusions.

bryanD - "Paul voted for the Afghanistan operation because the Taliban admitted AlQaeda were their guests in country and thus were subject to protection by the Taliban regime. They may have added "Nanny nanny boo boo!" in the postscript. Not sure."

How does that change anything? Presumably, assuming OBL is not worm food (not that it matters his other henchmen are alive), OBL is still hiding on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Yet Paul is advocating pulling all troops from the middle east and doing exactly what you claim Bush did. Leave before "the job is done."

BTW, can you explain why Paul implied the recent Iranian gunboat incident in the Straits of Hormuz may have been a setup?

bryanD - if you want to attribute some coo-coo bird scheme to Newsweek it should be easy to provide a link. Right?

BTW... does steel really not melt when exposed to fire?

Speaking of coo-coo bird thoughts...bryanD "Then Rumsfeld puts the Army in charge mid-way through the operation so the army would have authority to siphon away troops to Iraq before the Afghan mission was accomplished, saying the Afghanis would know best how to find Osama."

So... your saying the army...all by it little lonesome (albeit with Rumsfeld approval) decided to up and pull out of Afghanistan.

Who was in charge prior to this momentous decision? Why did the army need to be "put in charge" for this to happen?

And BTW... who knocked down WTC #7?

It was planned by the Trilateral commission with the assistance of the Illuminati and a secret Cabal of Jewish Neocons.

(Tongue in cheek)

"It was planned by the Trilateral commission with the assistance of the Illuminati and a secret Cabal of Jewish Neocons."

Could be! I hear tell a special flight out of NYC left hours before the first Tower was hit and was full of Jewish Neocons.

There are also reports at that precise time is when Kucinich saw his UFO.

"It was planned by the Trilateral commission with the assistance of the Illuminati and a secret Cabal of Jewish Neocons."
16. Posted by Ryan

I've posted this before, but it's a good backgrounder on the countdown to 9/11. Bill Jempy might appreciate the Florida angle.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9007079754355711945&q=everybody%27s+gotta+learn+sometime&total=187&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

"BTW... does steel really not melt when exposed to fire?" 14. Posted by marc

You confusing "fire" and heat.

ANYWAY(eye roll)...This is my newest favorite 9/11 video. Technical details? This has it, plus historical footage. Goody good-good! This is a must-see if only to prepare newer (better) talking points for yourself.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8548617462304492986&q=911_mysteries&total=2&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Naturally, why would anyone accept the investigation of the 9/11 Commission, the independent work of the American Association of Consulting Engineers, or the panel of experts assembled by Popular Mechanics when they can instead see "information" from uneducated and unqualified morons on the internet?

JA - "...or the panel of experts assembled by Popular Mechanics when they can instead see "information" from uneducated and unqualified morons on the internet?"

'Cause the toofers would have no life otherwise.

"Naturally, why would anyone accept the investigation of the 9/11 Commission..."-ja

These government commissions are packed commissions. From the navy "finding" that aeroplanes cannot sink a ship of the line, to the one that found that the normal way for a president's assassin to hide is to not pay the two bits admission and have the theater owner call the cops on you.

"...the independent work of the American Association of Consulting Engineers..."-ja

Which boils down to one or two crucial people of an organization which relies on referrals. No bulwark against elective controversy.

"...or the panel of experts assembled by Popular Mechanics..."

See cousin Ben Chertoff. I know! Coincidences can happen, but I take this as another small sign that YHVH is royally pissed at shedders of innocent blood and those who abide them.

Gee, sounds like EVERYBODY is in on the conspiracy - except, of course, Ron Paul and his coterie of nuts.

Do you sleep in a different place every night? Aren't you afraid they will catch up to you?

And naturally, you and Ron Paul know about this massive conspiracy, talk about it publically all the time and yet. .yet. .NOTHING HAPPENS TO YOU. Somehow they have the power and control to pull something like this off, yet nothing happens to you, is that odd, or what?

YOu are just proving our point further and further each and every time you put fingertips to keyboard and type out more conspiracy theorist drivel.

But if you want to play the 'link game'

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4#steel

ANd this in general

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4

I realize hard science is unlikely to disabuse you of your paranoid fantasies, but there you go. Of course the Jewish Cabal is probably in control of Popular Mechanics as well. . .

(Eyes, they are a - rollin')

ANd yes, I realize that you will just say anyone that disproves your little fantasies is 'in on the conspiracy' - however, how about you try actually disputing the science involved - of course, facts and actual scientific data are frustrating things: They tend not to cooperate with paranoid delusions.

"how about you try actually disputing the science involved -ryan"

AMEN! PM refuses to address the science involved! Namely:

= What explains Mass falling INTO the point of MOST Resistance? (save for controlled demolition, of course)

Again, in the spirit of your superfluous double PM link"

= WHAT explains Mass falling INTO the point of MOST Resistance?

--------------------------------------
PS. Here's the famous BBC video wherein a correspondent reports that WTC7 ("Salomon")has already collapsed even as it remains standing on-screen (to the right of her head) behind her. The video link is interrupted just in time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gbc

ITs called A: Gravity and B: weight. Try taking an elementary physichs course sometime.

Once that much weight starts moving downwards, the 'resistance' is futile, and irrelevant.

Try a little harder to support your unsoupportable conspiracies. I realize that your worldview revolves around you being one of the 'special few' in posession of a 'secret', but this is lame. ..

You know, the amazing thing would be just how LARGE your alleged conspiracy would have to be, spanning across multiple countries and private institutions, the media - heard of Occam's Razor much?