Covert Classic Conservatives
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Official Ron Paul Thread

4 posters

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty David Horowitz fan vs. Ron Paul fan

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Wed Nov 10, 2010 1:12 pm

http://www.yaliberty.org/posts/horowitz-fan-refuses-to-debate-wes-messamore

Wes Messamore wrote:As many of you know, I recently penned a piece to correct the eight egregious errors of an inaccurate hit piece on Ron Paul which went so far as to refer to the gentle, even grandfatherly Congressman from Texas as "an abomination who should be cast out of decent society."

The author of that piece -- Calvin Freiburger -- ended up responding with another piece of his own (There's the link, Calvin -- no accusing me of keeping your rebuttals under wraps. It's right there for everyone to visit, read, and draw their own conclusions.)

Now I'm not a fan of wasting hours responding back and forth five times, playing blog tag, and having to chase down every last evasion, obfuscation, equivocation, dropped context, (etc.) that people with flimsy arguments and bankrupt ideologies are usually guilty of committing to appear like they are engaging ideas, when they are actually evading them.

So after the master of Horowitz hyperbole posted a link to his rebuttal on my website, the following exchange occurred, in which I challenged him to a live debate so we could settle this once and for all and move on. We would each have a chance to cross examine each other. No one could get away from it looking like anything but an idiot if they can't defend their ideas. Calvin declined. That's probably a smart move for him:

Calvin: http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/10/24/a-ron-paul-apologist-demonstrates...

Calvin: So, I take it Mr. Messamore isn't interested in answering for his dishonesty....or perhaps he simply isn't able....

(LOL! PS: sorry -- I have to interject here -- I love how it's not that I'm mistaken, but that I'm dishonest. Apparently in his eyes, if I say anything in disagreement with him, I'm not merely wrong, I'm lying. And I don't need to be corrected or enlightened -- I need to "answer for" it like I've committing some great crime for daring to disagree with Calvin or Horowitz. Geeze, adversarial much?)

Wes: Hey Calvin -- yeah I saw your response, but I'm a little jammed up presently with the election (timed perfectly to coincide with some other heavy lifting I'm doing for my non-political, commercial enterprises)... give me some time and I'll respond. Or if you're up for it, I propose we set up a debate to stream live. We would have to agree of course to a resolution and a format for the debate, but that wouldn't be difficult to set up. I'm willing to go as narrow as foreign policy as I suggested in my article, or to zoom out and debate on the matter of Dr. Paul in general. Let me know and I will get back to you as soon as I can.

Calvin: My schedule's a little too up in the air over the next several days to set up a streamed debate, so text would probably be better. Take your time, and I look forward to seeing what you have to say.

Wes: The problem is that it's too easy to wiggle around, equivocate, ignore key arguments, misinterpret (deliberately or not) assertions, and just generally waste time when writing columns back and forth to each other.

A proper, live, spoken debate with time allotted for us each to cross examine each other will ensure that no one can wiggle out of answering the tough questions.

So let me propose that we set this up as soon as your schedule permits because my schedule (and patience) simply don't permit me to engage in an endless back and forth.

It's just more time consuming for me to correct your evasions, obfuscations, and equivocations than it is for you to make them, so it's a losing proposition for me in terms of my disposal time and mental resources.

Let's settle this decisively in a live debate or not at all.

Calvin: "...it's too easy to wiggle around, equivocate, ignore key arguments, misinterpret (deliberately or not) assertions..."

As this hasn't taken place on my end of the exchange, I'm not too worried about this.

"It's just more time consuming for me to correct your evasions, obfuscations, and equivocations than it is for you to make them, so it's a losing proposition for me in terms of my disposal time and mental resources."

If you can't even propose setting up a discussion without lying about my conduct, that doesn't exactly make me think a debate would be worthwhile...

Look, I put the link to my rebuttal in these comment threads because I wanted you and your readers to see a good takedown of your nonsense, and because it's generally interesting and amusing to see how apologists for any political figure react when they're confronted with reality.

My rebuttal's currently the last word in the debate, so unless you come up with some substantive defense of your words or a substantive criticism of mine, I have no need to pursue this any further. Whether you want to stand by your hit piece, or feel incapable of defending it in writing, is entirely up to you.

Wes: So to be clear -- you are rejecting my challenge for a live debate?

Calvin: If that's the way you'd like to spin it, be my guest. If "wailtd" is representative of this audience's objectivity and analytical skills, I'm not too worried about the hit to my rep.

I'm content that the record currently shows that your idea of debate is to cast wild accusations about how conservative your opponents are or aren't, without even trying to back them up with evidence, and that you aren't as offended by politicians lying about issues of war & peace as you are by bloggers who dare to notice.

If that's the kind of blogger you want to be known as, be my guest. If not, you're welcome to try doing something about it. The ball's in your court.

Wes: That's not "spinning it" any way, Calvin. I've challenged you to a live debate, and you have refused.

And if as you say, I am casting wild and baseless accusations, then in a live debate where you have a few minutes to cross examine me, you can pin me down and force me to defend my claims, or else they'll appear just as you say they are- baseless and wild.

You see- that's why I'd like to debate you. The person with the least credible arguments has the most to lose in a direct confrontation of ideas like that, so it's telling that you have refused to debate me.

Now while *you* will spin this as my inability to defend my arguments against your rebuttals- the truth is that I am all too willing and able to do so in a live debate with you. You're the one who's chickening out here, Calvin. Let's be honest.

Calvin: "Let's be honest."

Interesting choice of words from somebody I've already caught lying about me.....

(Bwa ha ha ha ha! Sorry -- can't help it. Notice how he skips everything I've said in the most recent comment except for the very last sentence? He neither concedes that I'm not spinning anything to say he's refused to debate me, nor offers a reason why that is in fact "spin." He simply grabs on to my words "Let's be honest" as an opportunity to ridiculously accuse me of dishonesty yet again.)

Wes: Lol. Quit trolling dude. How have I lied to you?

Calvin: First, I said "about" me, not "to" me (there's that legendary Paulite reading comprehension again). Second, your dishonesty is clearly exposed here:

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/10/24/a-ron-paul-apologist-demonstrates...

### (original comments here)

So there you have it. Any rebuttals or arguments Calvin makes at this point are futile, because if they're really that great and I'm really that wrong, he could make me "answer for" it in a live debate during a cross examination and force me to defend my assertions and answer any questions he has.

And no using the "time" argument. It takes (wastes) a lot of time to write lengthy posts back and forth, which I'm sure Calvin would perversely enjoy doing ad nauseam. It also takes (wastes) time to troll around and argue about my typos like "lied to" versus "lied about" in an endless comment thread. It would only take one hour to debate. And then the matter would be settled.

So that is my final word on this. If Calvin wants to debate me, he knows how to get in touch with me. Otherwise, I've got other things to do and I think his refusal to debate is just about the most eloquent argument that either one of us can make.

Reminds me of the many debates I've had over the years with rude conservatives. This wasn't just on the CC board, but on the ACOC board as well where this kind of intellectual dishonesty went on. I've long since learned that when people behave like Carl, they know they've been beaten, but they refuse to give up. It's like arguing with a liberal, except you get less insults and accusations of racism.
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by Doc Trock Wed Nov 10, 2010 1:20 pm

I was expecting you to reveal that Calvin was actually Solo.....

Trying to debate a conservative is like trying to debate a bag of hair, whereas debating a liberal is like debating a bag of hammers. While it's easier to kick the bag of hair down, if the wind is blowing, like it did last week, you've got to be careful, because sometimes the bag of hair can be blown in the right direction......by accident of course.
Doc Trock
Doc Trock

Posts : 206
Pundit Level : 322
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-07-12

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Is Ron Paul Weird?

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Mon Jan 03, 2011 10:04 pm



Yeah, a consistent politician who doesn't fold on his ideals is definitely a weirdo, that's for sure.
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty More reasons why conservatives hate Ron Paul

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:28 am

Because he agrees with Ralph Nader on several fundamental issues:



If this was *cough*another forum*cough*, I'd be seeing flames everywhere. A regular burning man concert.
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by Doc Trock Mon Jan 24, 2011 1:01 pm

Conservatism, more and more, is defined by who they are against, rather than principles they believe in.

IE, hating liberals and those who don't also hate liberals.
Doc Trock
Doc Trock

Posts : 206
Pundit Level : 322
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-07-12

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Mon Jan 24, 2011 4:14 pm

Hey, it worked for liberals. The Democrats took back Congress due to being against conservatives. The trouble conservatives face is having a coherent ideology that isn't bogged down by pseudo-conservatives like David Frum.
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by Doc Trock Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:21 pm

Modern conservatives are so confused they don't know they're confused:

IE

Every human life is sacred.

They actually mean American babies still in the womb must not be killed, but foreigners must be killed in foreign wars, all the time, every day, forever.

Or,

Limited Government!

By which they really mean let conservative big government fix all the problems caused by liberal big government.

Then there's,

Cut Spending!

It's spelled "cut" but it's actually pronounced INCREASE.

Lastly,

Strong National Defense!

When they say this they really mean, foreign wars a'plenty, with wide open undefended borders here at home. And if a border agent tries to do their job, throw 'em in jail!

So, yeah....their ideology is a bit inconsistent. But they are against democrats!

Doc Trock
Doc Trock

Posts : 206
Pundit Level : 322
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-07-12

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:01 am

Back to the video, the only difference between Ron Paul and Ralph Nader is the implementation of some of the solutions for the topics discussed. They both agreed on the Federal Reserve and the solutions for that.

But because Ralph Nader said it, now conservatives will be against auditing the Fed because it's now a communist idea.
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by Doc Trock Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:45 pm

Yep. That pretty much sums it up. Conservatives are against things, and nothing gets their "againstness" so riled up as Ralph Nader. So, since Paul and Nader agree on something, nothing more needs to be said.

Conservatives are against it, because.....well, because that's what they do.
Doc Trock
Doc Trock

Posts : 206
Pundit Level : 322
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-07-12

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Ron Paul Deserves More Respect!

Post by dsmbaptist Sun Mar 06, 2011 11:30 am

Ron Paul Deserves More Respect!

Ron Paul deserves far more respect!
By Brent Budowsky - 03/04/11 03:37 PM ET

Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul, chairman of a major House subcommittee and a man with serious ideas and a significant base of support, deserves far more respect than he is getting from the media and pundit communities.

I predict that when the voting begins in the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary, Newt Gingrich, Donald Trump and Sarah Palin will not be running. Neither will Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, though unlike those three he would be a serious presidential candidate if he decides to run, which I do not believe he will. The media darling of the month, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, will not be a factor either, because he will not run, and the pundits will move on to another flavor of the month long before then.

If he runs, I predict again that Ron Paul will be one of three Republican finalists, and if the other two are close, he could be a kingmaker. So why doesn't Ron Paul get more respect?

Paul has serious ideas that have become a significant factor in our national discussion. He has intensely loyal supporters who will come out to vote. He has enormous potential to raise money. The most recent money bomb for Paul was a major success. He chairs a major subcommittee with potential to regularly raise his issues and influence the debate.

As presidential candidates I think Gingrich, Trump, Palin and Christie are nothing more than media hype and will not be players in 2012. Ron Paul will be a serious player, one way or the other. He deserves far more respect from the political chattering class.



Just keep bringing up the fact that Huckabee and Newt-y Newt Newt are shills for the CFR and New World Order, and Paul's got a decent chance this time around! cheers
dsmbaptist
dsmbaptist

Posts : 495
Pundit Level : 997
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 62
Location : Des Moines, IA

http://mitchellandmichael.blogspot.com/ http://michaelsmusings.forumotion.net/forum.htm http://twitter.com/Dsmbear

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:22 am

Everyone is talking about potential Presidential candidates these days. And yet, Ron Paul is never mentioned, despite winning the CPAC straw poll twice in a row.
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by dsmbaptist Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:43 am

...There's even some talk from one branch of the Ron Paul camp of a Ron/Rand Paul 2012 run, but some of Ron's supporters are saying that's too "Kennedy-esque", and people are tired of political dynasties.

I'm not sure what I think of that. Shocked
dsmbaptist
dsmbaptist

Posts : 495
Pundit Level : 997
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 62
Location : Des Moines, IA

http://mitchellandmichael.blogspot.com/ http://michaelsmusings.forumotion.net/forum.htm http://twitter.com/Dsmbear

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Fri Mar 25, 2011 9:23 am

This comes from the Humble Libertarian:

Official Ron Paul Thread Ee6d3da2
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Joe Rogan on Drug Laws & Ron Paul & Freedom

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Mon Jun 27, 2011 8:58 am



Comedian and actor Joe Rogan discusses marijuana laws, Ron Paul, and the nature of freedom.

There is filthy language, but hey, it's my forum
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Great Picture from Thomas Woods on Ron Paul

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Mon Aug 15, 2011 1:17 pm

Official Ron Paul Thread Dunces1
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by Doc Trock Mon Aug 15, 2011 1:23 pm

I saw this too......so true!

The media blackout of Ron Paul is really disturbing.....they act like Bachman had a runaway victory, but she only one by 152 votes!

Paul, the "fringe" candidate, was the real story. But they pretend he never existed!

Are the sheep this stupid, or is the establishment in total panic mode? Can people see this for what it is?
Doc Trock
Doc Trock

Posts : 206
Pundit Level : 322
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-07-12

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Ron Paul - The Only One We Can Trust!

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:08 pm

swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by mason Thu Sep 15, 2011 4:18 pm

swiftfoxmark2 wrote:Everyone is talking about potential Presidential candidates these days. And yet, Ron Paul is never mentioned, despite winning the CPAC straw poll twice in a row.
Amazing what spammers can accomplish ain't it?

mason

Posts : 14
Pundit Level : 33
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-12-02

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:05 pm

Dick Cheney wrote:
swiftfoxmark2 wrote:Everyone is talking about potential Presidential candidates these days. And yet, Ron Paul is never mentioned, despite winning the CPAC straw poll twice in a row.
Amazing what spammers can accomplish ain't it?

Kettle meet pot.
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by dsmbaptist Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:11 pm

Hey, Swifty---

Isn't the whole reason that this forum exists in the first place becasue of the s---ty way that we Ron Paul supporters were treated at Overt Republicans...I mean, Covert Conservatives? scratch

Just checkin'! Laughing
dsmbaptist
dsmbaptist

Posts : 495
Pundit Level : 997
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 62
Location : Des Moines, IA

http://mitchellandmichael.blogspot.com/ http://michaelsmusings.forumotion.net/forum.htm http://twitter.com/Dsmbear

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by swiftfoxmark2 Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:34 pm

Yep. I'll be backing off a bit. Just trying to highlight that he is no different that all of us "spammers".
swiftfoxmark2
swiftfoxmark2

Posts : 437
Pundit Level : 1365
Poster Popularity : 2
Join date : 2009-08-29
Age : 42
Location : A leaf in the wind

http://swiftfoxmark2.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/swiftfoxmark2/

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by mason Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:38 pm

dsmbaptist wrote:Hey, Swifty---

Isn't the whole reason that this forum exists in the first place becasue of the s---ty way that we Ron Paul supporters were treated at Overt Republicans...I mean, Covert Conservatives? scratch

Just checkin'! Laughing
You're treated that way because you're a bunch of projecting liberals pretending to be conservative. Can't debate in the arena of ideas? Create your own little echo chamber. I expect you loons won't like what I'm saying and will ban me in the name of free speech!
lol!

mason

Posts : 14
Pundit Level : 33
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-12-02

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by Doc Trock Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:41 pm

I sure wouldn't ban you for saying that.

It would be nice to have an idea from you, however. All I see in your post above is insults.

Why did you come here? Debate is most welcome, but insults get boring after a while.

Doc Trock
Doc Trock

Posts : 206
Pundit Level : 322
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-07-12

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by mason Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:52 pm


mason

Posts : 14
Pundit Level : 33
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-12-02

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by Doc Trock Fri Sep 16, 2011 2:01 pm

Mr. Cheney.....I think you're bored.

I don't think you're going to have much fun here using your current tactics. If you have something substantive to say, please share.

Otherwise, I don't think you're going to get much satisfaction.
Doc Trock
Doc Trock

Posts : 206
Pundit Level : 322
Poster Popularity : 0
Join date : 2010-07-12

Back to top Go down

Official Ron Paul Thread Empty Re: Official Ron Paul Thread

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum