MSNBC takes shot at Ron Paul "supporters"

So what you are saying is that he should be elected because he has never shown any leadership qualities while in congress. That's pretty awesome.

 

But we are talking about leadership in a whorehouse

 

Speak on brother.

Hey how about you show um up by showing the fine legislation that our guy, and front runner, Rudy Tutti Fresh And Frutti has written into law. Thata shut um all up.

 

Looks like the conspiracy sheeple are hard at work this morning, following alex jones instructions

Vote RP in 2008 if you support absolving terrorists of their crimes!

 

Really?

Maybe you can tell us when Ron Paul said he absolves anybody of any crimes? Or are you just parroting the words you heard on Fox?

 

Are you saying you and other "truthers" (aka "liars") don't absolve terrorists of their crimes by giving their credit away to others?

What were you saying about "frutti?"

 

By saying other truthers I see you are reffering to a claim that Ron Paul is a truther. And from your sarcastic nature and the sole inclusion of terrorist into the truther equation I expect you mean a 911 truther. So with all this being true show me any shred of evidence that Ron Paul has ever insinuated or said 911 was anything other than the official explanation.
As for Rudy Ghouliani being Frutti Tutti, I suppose a fetish of dressing as a woman is bad enough but doing it over and over again is a trend and not what I think defines our Commander in Chief.

Here while explaining why he is dressed as a woman he also says:

"I already played a republican, playing a democrat, playing a republican."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb2y1IM17sM

Here he can be found letting Trump grope him while dressed as a woman.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IrE6FMpai8

I do not know to you but that is damn frutti.
More Rudy in drag:

 

I see you avoided answering the question:

I already know the answer. I was just seeing if you were man enough to stand behind your past positions. Ashamed?

 

That is because we are talking about your comment here:

Have you forgot or just trying to spin this on to my beliefs because you cannot provide anything to back this up.

You want to talk about my position then then lets start another 911 thread and hash out the unhashable and waste a bunch of time.

Are you man enough not to try and always spin any debate to ad hominem attacks and strawman arguments?

 

Still have not answered the question. You are going to great lengths to avoid it, aren't you? My oh my, isn't it telling

 

No I am not. Try for once to not be dishonest in your posting. You made a claim, now back it up. You asked me to back up the Tutti claim, and I did, which you ignored. I didnt bother to spin the claim on you, did I? Nope. Now how about you back up your claim and quit with the childish games.

 

Fourth time's a charm?

 

Are you just used to debating with children and this stupid tactic flies with them? Grow up dude because every time you fail to back up a claim you made by asking me an irrelevant question your position weakens. If you can't then don't, but playing this game just make you look foolish.

 

I am reminded of this:

AP Charts Shifting Justifications for Iraq War


Shifting expectations when the facts don't support your assertions.

 

Changing the topic, Briant? Stick with me here. Find a piece of significant legistlation, sponsored (I'll even take co-sponsored) by Paul that was passed into law. Work with me here. I -want- support this magnificent leader; but I need a reason.

 

You don't want to support him or you would. You asked for legislation that he sponsored and I showed you plenty. Now you want him to be held responsible for the lack of concern for the republic shown by the other congressmen.

 

Nope. I want him to be held responsible to his (lack of) leadership skills he's demonstrated since he's been there.

His record shows him to be an ineffectual seat warmer. Help me out and prove he isn't. Show me those presidential credentials.

By contrast, let's look at Giuliani's record. (Who isn't my candidate)

http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/chart_murdock02-13-07.html

Tax Burden - down
city funded employees - down
overall crime - down
top personal income tax rate - down
welfare recipients - down
unsold housing units - down
unemployment rate - down
private employment rate - up

Demonstrable leadership results.

 

I live in NYC and could testify that it's BS.

 

Could it concieveable be that the Congress is full of the same corrupt politicians as the administration? Haven't you already been informed of this on this thread?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/28/AR2005112801697.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36039-2004Dec4.html

 

which is bs? these come from numbers that NYC put out. Please point to something that disputes these.

but that's not even the point. Giuliani has a record of leadership. Paul has none. Which is more likely to be a better executive - who has the experience? And who has been a seat warmer in the house?

So Ron Paul's lack of leadership isn't Ron Paul's fault? Would that be his excuse if he was elected? My leadership sucks, but its not my fault? Passing the buck. Now -that's- leadership.