Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And the addendum posted at the end of that article
UPDATE: After taking some heat across the interwebs and elsewhere, the RJC clarified its stance on Ron Paul earlier today.
Paul was not invited to attend the RJC's candidates forum because the organization - as it has stated numerous times in the past - "rejects his misguided and extreme views," said Brooks.
"He's just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican party and this organization," Brooks said. Inviting Paul to attend would be "like inviting Barack Obama to speak."
And the addendum posted at the end of that article
UPDATE: After taking some heat across the interwebs and elsewhere, the RJC clarified its stance on Ron Paul earlier today.
Paul was not invited to attend the RJC's candidates forum because the organization - as it has stated numerous times in the past - "rejects his misguided and extreme views," said Brooks.
"He's just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican party and this organization," Brooks said. Inviting Paul to attend would be "like inviting Barack Obama to speak."
Mystery solved.
He was never invited.
UPDATEII: As they're known to do, Ron Paul backers have bombed this blog with comments (read: lunacy). If you want to get a picture of why the RJC is right to exclude Paul, just peruse through some of the bizarre rants in the comments section below. Many verge on being anti- Semitic, while most express overt hostility to the state of Israel.
The RJC got blasted (by readers) for this decision to the point of having to make an (IMO ubsurd) UPDATEII. Read the 3-4 pages of comments. See for yourself if the above accurately describes said comments.
Sounds like the OP is taking a page right out of the Sal Alinsky school of radicalism. Is Trace possibly obama himself?
Considering that the OP has made multiple threads basing Obama, Democrats, and liberals, I highly doubt it. Some Republicans and conservatives are not found of Ron Paul.
UPDATEII: As they're known to do, Ron Paul backers have bombed this blog with comments (read: lunacy). If you want to get a picture of why the RJC is right to exclude Paul, just peruse through some of the bizarre rants in the comments section below. Many verge on being anti- Semitic, while most express overt hostility to the state of Israel.
The RJC got blasted (by readers) for this decision to the point of having to make an (IMO ubsurd) UPDATEII. Read the 3-4 pages of comments. See for yourself if the above accurately describes said comments.
I swear, there's gotta be a central control room which constantly scans all media for mentions of the Dr. Ronpaul in order to direct his flock to their comment section.
Ron Paul was one of the few in Congress who voted against against condemning Israel for bombing Iraq's nuclear reactors in 1981.
The same reason as always when it comes to Israels sovereignty, Israel does not have to answer to America for how she defends herself.
Always defend the constitution and the limited role of our Federal government. It's not too hard to figure Ron Paul out. Can't say the same about others. It all depends on which crowd they pander too.
Ron Paul was one of the few in Congress who voted against against condemning Israel for bombing Iraq's nuclear reactors in 1981.
The same reason as always when it comes to Israels sovereignty, Israel does not have to answer to America for how she defends herself.
Always defend the constitution and the limited role of our Federal government. It's not too hard to figure Ron Paul out. Can't say the same about others. It all depends on which crowd they pander too.
It's a shame he's changed so much in the last 30 years.
Wow, I didn't realize he had been in Congress that long. He's a career politician.
It's a shame he's changed so much in the last 30 years.
Wow, I didn't realize he had been in Congress that long. He's a career politician.
The "career politician" aspect certainly doesn't count when you find self intrigued by Newt. Probably because you prefer politicians who change their tone, to what you want to hear when you want it? Ron Paul is about as honest, as consistent as they come. And I respect him for that.
It's a shame he's changed so much in the last 30 years.
sigh... did you read the entire post? "The same reason as always when it comes to Israels sovereignty, Israel does not have to answer to America for how she defends herself."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trace21230
Wow, I didn't realize he had been in Congress that long. He's a career politician.
He was out from '85-'97. That's another thing you didn't know.
It's a shame he's changed so much in the last 30 years.
Wow, I didn't realize he had been in Congress that long. He's a career politician.
You make all these comments about the man, it is about time you really knew him before you speak.
Far from a career politician! He has taken a couple of breaks from congress and gone back to his medial practice, only to be begged by his constituents, to represent them once again. I don't think he has ever lost an election, beside his primary runs at President.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
