• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Mitt Romney: I dont know what the Constitution says! Ask Ron Paul

Why? Even if Ron Paul didn't have a laughably poor understanding of the Constitution, why would the person who understands it the best be the person we should elect president? That's incredibly silly.
 
Dr. Paul should be President Paul based on his virtues alone. His positions shouldn't matter to anyone.
wut

I love how you call him dr, like being a physician has any relevance whatsoever but saying it just to be sure we don't forget his highness has a doctorate of medicine.
 
Why? Even if Ron Paul didn't have a laughably poor understanding of the Constitution, why would the person who understands it the best be the person we should elect president? That's incredibly silly.

I've always wondered that as well. Certainly understanding the Constitution is an important part of being a good President, but that shouldn't be the ONLY factor. Ron Paul's long history of being totally unable to get anyone in government on board with anything he wants to do far outweighs any Constitutional knowledge his supporters might think he has, IMO. You're not voting for him as dictator for life, being able to actually govern in a democracy is probably something worth considering.
 
Dr. Paul should be President Paul based on his virtues alone. His positions shouldn't matter to anyone.

His main virtue seems to be steadfastly sticking to his position and refusing to move an inch for any reason. Sometimes admirable, but not a great trait when you want to lead a democracy.

He's an interesting guy who definitely helps shape the debate...and that's what his particular "virtues" are good for. Actually leading the country? He's had YEARS in Congress and been totally unable to produce anything that looks like a result of any kind. That's not particularly useful, IMO.

In any case, I don't think you're really being honest with yourself. If he was a steadfast communist, I doubt you'd support him.
 
His main virtue seems to be steadfastly sticking to his position and refusing to move an inch for any reason. Sometimes admirable, but not a great trait when you want to lead a democracy.

He's an interesting guy who definitely helps shape the debate...and that's what his particular "virtues" are good for. Actually leading the country? He's had YEARS in Congress and been totally unable to produce anything that looks like a result of any kind. That's not particularly useful, IMO.

In any case, I don't think you're really being honest with yourself. If he was a steadfast communist, I doubt you'd support him.
First of all, steadfast communism is a vice, not a virtue.

2nd, Dr. Paul's virtues include (but are not limited to) 100% honesty, giving back most of his salary to the tax payer, not being a billionaire who is generous with everyone's money but their own, and not being a chickenhawk. He also performed his services for free for those who could not afford to do so.
 
Mitt Romney: I dont know what the Constitution says! Ask Ron Paul

More like ask the Supreme Court, since they're the one deciding whether contraception should be handled by letting the states decide (on a 10th Amendment basis) or if it should be controlled by the "right to privacy" that's unwritten in the Constitution (although its implied existence is agreed to by most everyone).
 
even Constitutional Professor Obama, I'm sure, employs people far more versed than him in matters of constitutional law.
 
even Constitutional Professor Obama, I'm sure, employs people far more versed than him in matters of constitutional law.

I'm sure he does. You have to know the ins and outs of the Constitution to be able to shred it as efficiently as possible.
 
This reflects very poorly on Romney. Everyone already knows that Ron Paul shits upon the Constitution. No reasonable person would ask him.
 
If they want to ask about the Constitution maybe they should ask Obama. He knows it better than all of them combined. But like every other President after getting elected he might have ignored one or more of the tenants it espoused.
 
In the USA, we don't ask constitutional questions of our Legislators and Presidents, in our US constitutional system, interpreting the constitution is the exclusive providence of our Judicial branch.
 
I'm not sure how much an OBGYN knows about the Constitution and it really shows when we look at Ron Paul. Plus he's not much of a Constitutionalist when he wants to rip up so much of the Constitution.

Seriously, if Romney is looking at Ron Paul for help on the Constitution, then Romney is pretty clueless if he's going to someone as dumb and senile as Ron Paul.
 
I'm not sure how much an OBGYN knows about the Constitution and it really shows when we look at Ron Paul. Plus he's not much of a Constitutionalist when he wants to rip up so much of the Constitution.

Seriously, if Romney is looking at Ron Paul for help on the Constitution, then Romney is pretty clueless if he's going to someone as dumb and senile as Ron Paul.

You are clownshoes.
 
This reflects very poorly on Romney. Everyone already knows that Ron Paul shits upon the Constitution. No reasonable person would ask him.

Give me an example of Paul doing so.

From what I've seen (granted I haven't dug in too deeply) he seems to mind the Constitution more than Obama or Bush.
 
Give me an example of Paul doing so.

From what I've seen (granted I haven't dug in too deeply) he seems to mind the Constitution more than Obama or Bush.

You'll have to ignore CoW, and Rabidfailgoose, they are trolls of the highest order that get little boners when they find a RP thread to post their ignorance in.
 
This reflects very poorly on Romney. Everyone already knows that Ron Paul shits upon the Constitution. No reasonable person would ask him.

The thing is that Ron Paul has a huge ego and keeps saying "Constitution this" and "Constitution that" and then people who don't really know much about the Constitution then think that he's actually pro-Constitution. However, those of us who know about the Constitution and that racist troll of a man's positions on it know that he routinely takes shits upon the Constitution.

The man is truly vile.
 
You'll have to ignore CoW, and Rabidfailgoose, they are trolls of the highest order that get little boners when they find a RP thread to post their ignorance in.

I just want to see if they can give any examples or facts to back up their claims (as should anyone making claims about anybody, really).

How can you 'mind the Constitution' so much when you want to remove and forget entire portions of it?

See my comment above. Give solid, concrete examples to back up your claims.
 
See my comment above. Give solid, concrete examples to back up your claims.

14th Amendment. Ron Paul opposes it.

This has been repeated over and over by all sorts of people in all sorts of topics here. Just read any Paulbot topic and you'll discover the truth as mentioned by many posters. You'll just have to sift through the Paulbot lies.
 
14th Amendment. Ron Paul opposes it.

OK. When did he say he opposes it? Any written statements or video recordings?

This has been repeated over and over by all sorts of people in all sorts of topics here. Just read any Paulbot topic and you'll discover the truth as mentioned by many posters. You'll just have to sift through the Paulbot lies.

You mean I also have to sift through the piles of garbage that Paul haters also threw all over the place. Since you are so much more familiar with this information it would be a heck of a lot easier for you to just post a credible link or something instead of pointing to a pile of garbage and telling someone to find a relevant newspaper clipping in there 😉
 
Back
Top