Main Stream Media Now admitting Ron Paul will be on the Ballot in Tampa

deprave

New Member
Interesting since at least 1 state on their own website says your numbers are completely wrong. Here is a link to Mass's numbers that are being reported by the secretary of state. http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/eleres/res12idx.htm. Paul didnt take a single district in Ma. Yes I am aware that the delegates do not have to vote the way the state tells it to, but I dont see any way that Paul will take the nod. I cant stand Paul or Rom, but the will of the people sure as hell isnt behind paul. Anyways since the numbers that the Secretary of State of most of the states dont check out with what your preaching I find that this thread is no longer worth reading or responding to since it seems more like a dream then a reality. Wow, I wish I wouldnt have read any of this, now I have to agree with UB about the Paul maniacs and I really never wanted to agree with UB ever.

Snooch
That is because you are looking at the primaries, I am talking about the caucus for MA, I am talking about the conventions going on. This is what really matters for delegates. You are looking at the wrong information, you are look at straw votes not the conventions.
 

jsamuel24

Active Member
That is because you are looking at the primaries, I am talking about the caucus for MA, I am talking about the conventions going on. This is what really matters for delegates.
Perhaps your are right, like I said, the Rep party is never known for following the will of their constituates. Right now I dont see it but if it turns out you are right when the Republican convention is over I will return to this thread and appologise. I just dont see the delegates going against the will of the people to this extent.
 

jsamuel24

Active Member
i'll take that as a positive somehow.
No offence inteded UB, I just see you in tons of arguements that get ya flamed every where here and till now I didnt agree with ya on much. But at least you seem to be doing your research so I can respect that brother.

Snoogins
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
No offence inteded UB, I just see you in tons of arguements that get ya flamed every where here and till now I didnt agree with ya on much. But at least you seem to be doing your research so I can respect that brother.

Snoogins
i'm doing the work of jesus.
 

deprave

New Member
Perhaps your are right, like I said, the Rep party is never known for following the will of their constituates. Right now I dont see it but if it turns out you are right when the Republican convention is over I will return to this thread and appologise. I just dont see the delegates going against the will of the people to this extent.
A couple more for you regarding MA specifically since you apparenlty can't google, its sad you fall for "UB's Research" - UB does no research except on yellow journalism because this is what he is preaching lol....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/some-top-romney-delegates-dont-make-the-cut-in-mass/2012/04/30/gIQARCgbrT_blog.html
http://articles.boston.com/2012-04-30/metro/31478610_1_romney-slate-mitt-romney-massachusetts-governor



 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
A couple more for you regarding MA specifically since you apparenlty can't google, its sad you fall for "UB's Research" - UB does no research except on yellow journalism because this is what he is preaching lol....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/some-top-romney-delegates-dont-make-the-cut-in-mass/2012/04/30/gIQARCgbrT_blog.html
http://articles.boston.com/2012-04-30/metro/31478610_1_romney-slate-mitt-romney-massachusetts-governor



why do you insist on the betterment of my "i told you so" thread?
 

jsamuel24

Active Member
A couple more for you regarding MA specifically since you apparenlty can't google, its sad you fall for "UB's Research" - UB does no research except on yellow journalism because this is what he is preaching lol....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/some-top-romney-delegates-dont-make-the-cut-in-mass/2012/04/30/gIQARCgbrT_blog.html
http://articles.boston.com/2012-04-30/metro/31478610_1_romney-slate-mitt-romney-massachusetts-governor



Me agreeing with UB on one topic does not mean I fall for his research. I didnt comment to start attacking anyone or to be attacked and I have not attacked you I just asked for trustworthy source material. Hell I even said if for some reason Paul did get the nod I would offer an appology to you for doubting you. Yet you have to take shots at me? Oh well dont really care anymore. Cheers and have a great life. No reason in trying to discuss anything with you since you seem to like the attack first method. Take care brother and good growing.

Unsubed
 

jsamuel24

Active Member
Oh before I unsub also reread what you posted as your qualifying arguement. Paul hasnt won anything yet. Paul supporters won some of the delegate spots and in the first round they HAVE to vote for rom according to GOP rules. With the mandatory rom votes do you really think paul will somehow pull it out? hell I almost hope he does but lets all be honest with ourselves. Can we name one of the current people running who would truely be good for us all. I think deep down we all know that they are all the exact same, Rom Paul Obama. Just carbon copy people who are owned by big buisness.

Now unsubed since this is pointless
 

deprave

New Member
Me agreeing with UB on one topic does not mean I fall for his research
Unsubed
Well when you wrote the following messaged directed at UB:
at least you seem to be doing your research so I can respect that brother.

Following a post in which your insinuated that I am not doing my research...What do you expect me to write? How am I taking shots at you? You can be on the offense and I can't then? Ok...lol
 

deprave

New Member
Oh before I unsub also reread what you posted as your qualifying arguement. Paul hasnt won anything yet. Paul supporters won some of the delegate spots and in the first round they HAVE to vote for rom according to GOP rules. With the mandatory rom votes do you really think paul will somehow pull it out? hell I almost hope he does but lets all be honest with ourselves. Can we name one of the current people running who would truely be good for us all. I think deep down we all know that they are all the exact same, Rom Paul Obama. Just carbon copy people who are owned by big buisness.

Now unsubed since this is pointless
Well thats exactly why I noted that about MAS in my little TALLY list....If you had been following this thread you would see I also noted that rule 34 allows the delgates to abstain from the first round forcing it into a second round which some are planning to do....making bound delegates irrelevant...Your right it still going to be tough but its getting very insteresting.....I am sorta feeling like anything can happen now..especially if Ron Paul won Texas and CA then he could probably actually have a VERY good chance at winning the nomination
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Well when you wrote the following messaged directed at UB:

[/B]Following a post in which your insinuated that I am not doing my research...What do you expect me to write? How am I taking shots at you? You can be on the offense and I can't then? Ok...lol
i have done extensive research and come to the conclusion that ron paul is a loser and he will lose.
 

InCognition

Active Member
you wouldn't know truth if it bit you in the ass.

i'll post the full section in question, along with a link to the bill. then i'll let you, the genius with the big brain, explain to me just how i took anything out of context.

Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds to any organization which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:HR07955:@@@L&summ2=m&



[video=youtube;w7zQQB4QR2s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7zQQB4QR2s[/video]

skip to about 5:10. ron paul refers to an article in 'texas monthly' written about him called 'dr. no'. you can go into their archives and read it. he fully admits to lying in it.



just tell me: how were they debunked? ron paul bragged about writing them in 1996. he admits doing as much in the texas monthly article i referred you to. now he completely disavows them. but he's still buddying around with neo-nazis during this campaign cycle and he never sent back the money e made by publishing those racist newsletters. these are all facts.



the problem is that there is enough information on a site like this one that no one (save those 17 year olds trying to grow without mommy and daddy knowing) should be able to harvest more than the 3-5 grams you'll pull after 4 months worth of work.

the fact that you did so poorly while frequenting a site like this is an obvious sign that you are a poor consumer of information. ya know, that and the whole being completely ignorant about the candidate whose dick you might suck if given the chance.



say what you want, fact is that ron paul tried to impose his bigoted morality onto the nation with HR 7955. facts speak louder than teenagers who just read ayn rand.
I do know truth when it bites me in the ass, you just don't speak it, so of course I'm not going to acknowledge your fallacies, information-manipulation, and bigotry as fact.

Trying to explain to you, that you took something out of context is not possible, because bigots don't acknowledge when they've taken something out of context. They warp information to enforce their bigotry. You know, like when a funding bill is passed to prevent the wasting of federal money, yet is somehow construed as an act of hatred towards gays or the a forcing of a "morality" upon a people. The bill you're referring to is neither an act of hatred, nor an attempt at forcing a certain morality upon people, but a bigot will make it seem like it is.


So your "voice recording" all the sudden isn't what you originally claimed in regards to what Ron Paul said. I'm not even going to quote you on what you previously said you had "evidence" on, because you're lack of evidence and ignorance at this point is shinning bright on that subject.

If RP bragged about writing them in 1996 do you have a voice recording of that too? If you spent 10 seconds with a simple search on google, you would see pages upon pages of articles regarding the debunking. However the voice recordings you always speak of and his "bragging", is not plastered all over the internet. One would believe it would be easily accessible if it held any truth, as the anti-pauls are just as relentless as the pro-pauls when it comes to publicizing that stuff.

To put it simply the debunking states that while yes, the racist writings were put out under his newsletter, and his name, the writings were not written by him. You can deny this all you want, but a 10 second google search would save you of your denial. I think your bigotry has gotten the best of you on this subject as well though, so keep denying.



Regarding my grow again, I'm glad you're concerned, but yields can always believed to have been higher than what they are upon harvest, even if the yields can't actually be higher. That's just the "more, more, more" mentality of growing a plant like cannabis. You can say "more" all you want, but you'll just never really know.

On a side note, as a testament to how little I ultimately care, I consumed little information, other than curing which I looked up quite a bit of info on. No one needs any scientific guide to throw a seed in some soil. You seem to be angry at the fact that I didn't bother to consume much information on growing, because I didn't care about doing so. Now that's an LOL. Do you have a problem with free will? Yes, I chose not to research the deep science of placing a seed in soil... too funny.

And you can say what you want, fact is that you try to impose your bigoted views of RP onto others. Weren't you just condemning the act of imposing? Eh, I forgot I got lost in your sea of hypocrisy. Yes facts speak louder, and the facts say you're the bigot here.

My popcorn supply is dwindling quickly.
 

InCognition

Active Member
Oh before I unsub also reread what you posted as your qualifying arguement. Paul hasnt won anything yet. Paul supporters won some of the delegate spots and in the first round they HAVE to vote for rom according to GOP rules. With the mandatory rom votes do you really think paul will somehow pull it out? hell I almost hope he does but lets all be honest with ourselves. Can we name one of the current people running who would truely be good for us all. I think deep down we all know that they are all the exact same, Rom Paul Obama. Just carbon copy people who are owned by big buisness.

Now unsubed since this is pointless
Thinking Ron Paul is owned by big business is the epitome of brainwashing. Those YouTube conspiracy theories really screw with people's mental health eh?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I do know truth when it bites me in the ass, you just don't speak it, so of course I'm not going to acknowledge your fallacies, information-manipulation, and bigotry as fact.

Trying to explain to you, that you took something out of context is not possible, because bigots don't acknowledge when they've taken something out of context. They warp information to enforce their bigotry. You know, like when a funding bill is passed to prevent the wasting of federal money, yet is somehow construed as an act of hatred towards gays or the a forcing of a "morality" upon a people. The bill you're referring to is neither an act of hatred, nor an attempt at forcing a certain morality upon people, but a bigot will make it seem like it is.


So your "voice recording" all the sudden isn't what you originally claimed in regards to what Ron Paul said. I'm not even going to quote you on what you previously said you had "evidence" on, because you're lack of evidence and ignorance at this point is shinning bright on that subject.

If RP bragged about writing them in 1996 do you have a voice recording of that too? If you spent 10 seconds with a simple search on google, you would see pages upon pages of articles regarding the debunking. However the voice recordings you always speak of and his "bragging", is not plastered all over the internet. One would believe it would be easily accessible if it held any truth, as the anti-pauls are just as relentless as the pro-pauls when it comes to publicizing that stuff.

To put it simply the debunking states that while yes, the racist writings were put out under his newsletter, and his name, the writings were not written by him. You can deny this all you want, but a 10 second google search would save you of your denial. I think your bigotry has gotten the best of you on this subject as well though.



Regarding my grow again, I'm glad you're concerned, but yields can always believed to have been higher than what they are upon harvest, even if the yields can't actually be higher. That's just the "more, more, more" mentality of growing a plant like cannabis. You can say "more" all you want, but you'll just never really know.

On a side note, as a testament to how little I ultimately care, I consumed little information, other than curing which I looked up quite a bit of info on. No one needs any scientific guide to throw a seed in some soil. You seem to be angry at the fact that I didn't bother to consume much information on growing, because I didn't care about doing so. Now that's an LOL. Do you have a problem with free will? Yes, I chose not to research the deep science of placing a seed in soil... too funny.

And you can say what you want, fact is that you try to impose your bigoted views of RP onto others. Weren't you just condemning the act of imposing? Eh, I forgot I got lost in your sea of hypocrisy. Yes facts speak louder, and the facts say you're the bigot here.

My popcorn supply is dwindling quickly.
are you ever going to explain how i took anything at all out of context?

i mean, i posted the full bill and the relevant section. if it were simply about funding, it would prohibit funding to any institution which dictates what type of lifestyle is acceptable.

as it is written, ron paul only finds gays unworthy of funding, straight he has no problem with. that's the full context.

you're just too brainwashed by the fabulous dr. paul to admit it. you'd have to be dumb not to see how that is discriminatory and bigoted.

i mean, c'mon. homosexuality is not an acceptable lifestyle? is that an attitude you hold as well? is that an attitude which, if you held it, you would try to legislate onto the population as a whole, imposing your bigoted belief?

ron paul defended the racist newsletters as his writings in 1996, this is incontrovertible fact. it was reported on in a half a dozen papers. old ronnie says he lied about it, but that just throws his credibility into question.

if he's willing to lie about that for political gain, what else won't he lie about for political gain?

old ronald, the bigoted liar. and you just fucking love him. dumbass.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
ron paul writes bills calling homosexuality "unacceptable" and tries to legislate his belief onto others.

ron paul profits off of racist newsletters, defends them, and then says he was just lying.

these are facts that even ron paul supporters have to admit.

incocknition is too coddled and dishonest to accept these facts.
 
Top