Paul: Killing OBL “absolutely was not necessary”

posted at 8:48 am on May 12, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Ron Paul’s supporters plan on another run for the presidency from the Texas Congressman, and some are saying that the mainstream has finally begun to embrace his ideas on economics and the Fed.  On foreign policy and national defense, though, perhaps Paul is farther out than ever.  In a radio interview on Tuesday, reported this morning in Politico, Paul said he would not have greenlighted the mission that killed Osama bin Laden, and would have worked with Pakistan to arrest him instead:

“I think things could have been done somewhat differently,” Paul said this week. “I would suggest the way they got Khalid [Sheikh] Mohammed. We went and cooperated with Pakistan. They arrested him, actually, and turned him over to us, and he’s been in prison. Why can’t we work with the government?”

Paul also told WHO’s Simon Conway that the mission “absolutely was not necessary”:

“I don’t think it was necessary, no. It absolutely was not necessary,” Paul said during his Tuesday comments. “I think respect for the rule of law and world law and international law. What if he’d been in a hotel in London? We wanted to keep it secret, so would we have sent the airplane, you know the helicopters into London, because they were afraid the information would get out?”

For one thing, had we found him holed up in London, we would have been able to trust the British intelligence service to cooperate.  MI-5 didn’t spend more than a decade helping to build up the Taliban and playing footsie with radical Islamists the way Pakistan’s ISI did, primarily as a bulwark against India.  Moreover, as Paul should know, we tried trusting Pakistan once before on an opportunity to target bin Laden when Bill Clinton had a chance to target his compound.  The ISI warned bin Laden, and to paraphrase President George Bush, we wound up sending a $10 million rocket into a ten-dollar tent to hit a camel’s butt.

I would have had no problem with capturing Osama bin Laden, or with killing him.  He declared war on the United States and continued to pursue it until his last breath.  Furthermore, I have no problem with us conducting a military mission in Pakistan to get him.  Pakistan has proven themselves unreliable on high-level intelligence matters in the past, specifically on OBL, and we have had little cause to put any more trust in the Pakistani ISI ever since.

Paul has a few good ideas on fiscal policy, but is otherwise a nut.  Insisting that we should have asked the Pakistanis to arrest bin Laden proves rather clearly that Paul lives in a fantasy world.

Update: I forgot to hat-tip Jammie Wearing Fool — my apologies.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

So you believe he would perform…how, exactly? Assuming he does enter the race…

catmman on May 12, 2011 at 12:32 PM

Depends on who else gets in the race. I think he will beat the 10% he got in Iowa. He’ll do a lot better in NH, maybe even giving Romney a run for his money. And (depending if I decide to go to work for him ;-) ), I think he can beat Romney in NV. He’ll get creamed in SC and FLA, and might be able to steal some delegates in CA. Anything beyond that, I won’t predict, just because his performance in other states depends on strategy being devised in Lake Jackson, which I’m not privy to, and the strategies of other campaigns.

But the notion that he’ll do worse than last time, considering he is polling better now, and raising early money, is the braggadocio of someone who has clearly proven himself to be an amateur, given to hitting the Submit button before he thinks things through.

Yeah, I’m talking about you Rebar.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:39 PM

In order to arrive on time BlimpOne will have to leave two weeks before Paul’s first G-8 meeting.

Limerick on May 12, 2011 at 12:41 PM

J

ohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Do you honestly believe he has any chance of winning the nomination?

catmman on May 12, 2011 at 12:41 PM

Like the way even you say he cannot win?

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 12:21 PM

Please point to where I said that, or admit that you cannot.

I believe I have said exactly the opposite… that he can win. I believe I said that any GOP candidate can win.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:42 PM

On foreign policy:

Ron Paul = Michael Moore.

Not a good place to be!

Really Right on May 12, 2011 at 12:43 PM

catmman on May 12, 2011 at 12:41 PM

He doesn’t, he’s just my personal troll because I hate Ron Paul with the heat of a thousand suns, and he’s a cultist.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 12:44 PM

But the notion that he’ll do worse than last time, considering he is polling better now, and raising early money, is the braggadocio of someone who has clearly proven himself to be an amateur, given to hitting the Submit button before he thinks things through.

Yeah, I’m talking about you Rebar.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:39 PM

I actually supported Ron Paul last time during the primaries, and I’m telling you he’ll do worse than last time.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 12:45 PM

I would actually have a hard time picking between Obama and Ron Paul, in a scary hypothetical.

Paul is strong on fiscal matters but an absolute disaster on foreign policy and defense.

Obama is Obama, but at least he is taking GWB’s lead on some defense matters and pulling the trigger when necessary.

So do I want to be destroyed from within or without? I would truly have a hard time deciding how to vote in this nightmare scenario.

MikeknaJ on May 12, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Ron Paul effectively rejects the Reagan coalition of economic conservatives, social conservatives and NATIONAL SECURITY conservatives. However attractive Ron Paul may seem concerning economic and social issues, he is a complete disaster concerning foreign policy, national security and military matters. He would make Obama seem like the stronger candidate concerning national security, and that is insane. The Republican Party would be badly hurt by Ron Paul’s dementia concerning foreign policy.

Phil Byler on May 12, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Do you honestly believe he has any chance of winning the nomination?

catmman on May 12, 2011 at 12:41 PM

He’s a long shot… but funny thing about long shots… sometimes they come in.

I think it is far more likely that at some point, he becomes the kingmaker, where some candidate who is running second, but within striking distance (and within Dr. Paul’s share of the vote) of Romney, and says… for example… “Drop out Ron. Get behind my campaign. And I’ll come out publicly in favor of: 1)Kicking the UN to the curb… 2) Pulling troops out of Europe… 3) and ending all foreign aid.”

And I think RP would, if for no other reason than his son’s political future, probably go for the deal.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:49 PM

Ron Paul is a pest and if he mounts any kind of third wheel run we are stuck with Odummy for another term.

FireBlogger on May 12, 2011 at 12:50 PM

He doesn’t, he’s just my personal troll because I hate Ron Paul with the heat of a thousand suns, and he’s a cultist.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 12:44 PM

I just have a low tolerance for lying braggarts.

But that might just be me.

BTW, still waiting for you to point out where i said RP can’t win. I expect I’ll be waiting until the Rapture for that though.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:50 PM

I would actually have a hard time picking between Obama and Ron Paul, in a scary hypothetical.

Paul is strong on fiscal matters but an absolute disaster on foreign policy and defense.

Obama is Obama, but at least he is taking GWB’s lead on some defense matters and pulling the trigger when necessary.

So do I want to be destroyed from within or without? I would truly have a hard time deciding how to vote in this nightmare scenario.

MikeknaJ on May 12, 2011 at 12:45 PM

That scenario would make the GOP split off into atleast 2 new parties, I’d join the Conservative one. Obama wins in landslide if Paul were to theoretically be nominated.

he’d also be ran out of DC by time dems and msm got finished with him and the corpse of the GOP he hijacked.

jp on May 12, 2011 at 12:51 PM

I actually supported Ron Paul last time during the primaries, and I’m telling you he’ll do worse than last time.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 12:45 PM

So… do you ever bet on such things?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

just have a low tolerance for lying braggarts.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:50 PM

I have a low tolerance of Ron Paul cultists – all of whom are liars and cheats of the first order.

I’d wait for you to regain sanity, but that is an impossibility when dealing with brain dead Ronbots.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Ron Paul is the only candidate who is strong on National Security as he is cautious of allowing the president to have a standing army. He knows how dangerous D.C. and the threat the represent to the states.

Spathi on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

I actually supported Ron Paul last time during the primaries, and I’m telling you he’ll do worse than last time.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 12:45 PM

So… do you ever bet on such things?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Nope. That’s silly.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Doddering Old Fool.

Goodale on May 12, 2011 at 12:56 PM

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

and I’m still waiting… I guess your failure to do so is an admission that you are a lying sack.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:56 PM

So… do you ever bet on such things?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Nope. That’s silly.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 12:55 PM

That’s what I thought.

What’s that smell?…. smells like fish…

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:57 PM

He’s a long shot… but funny thing about long shots… sometimes they come in.

I think it is far more likely that at some point, he becomes the kingmaker, where some candidate who is running second, but within striking distance (and within Dr. Paul’s share of the vote) of Romney, and says… for example… “Drop out Ron. Get behind my campaign. And I’ll come out publicly in favor of: 1)Kicking the UN to the curb… 2) Pulling troops out of Europe… 3) and ending all foreign aid.”

And I think RP would, if for no other reason than his son’s political future, probably go for the deal.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:49 PM

That’s an interesting level of delusion. Tell me, did anybody from the 2008 primaries offer him anything like that? If not, why?

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 12:57 PM

That’s what I thought.

What’s that smell?…. smells like fish…

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Um, what? So, you are challenging me to bet on whether or not Ron Paul will do well in the primaries?

I’ll do you one better.

I’ll bet you any amount of money he doesn’t even win the nomination.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Ron Paul is the only candidate who is strong on National Security as he is cautious of allowing the president to have a standing army. He knows how dangerous D.C. and the threat the represent to the states.

Spathi on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Wait. I thought y’all wanted the Army to come home and secure the border. So which is it? No Army or just the Army of Pauliana?

Limerick on May 12, 2011 at 12:58 PM

and I’m still waiting…

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:56 PM

Sane yet?

Nope.

I’ll check back later.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Depends on who else gets in the race. I think he will beat the 10% he got in Iowa. He’ll do a lot better in NH, maybe even giving Romney a run for his money.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Here in NH, Paul couldn’t even beat Huckabee or Mayor Rudy in 2008. He only got 7.7% of the votes here. Romney got 31% and McCain got 37%.

Believe me, Paul will be lucky to get 5% in 2012 here.

Del Dolemonte on May 12, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Tell me, did anybody from the 2008 primaries offer him anything like that? If not, why?

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Romney was out and far enough behind McCain that RP couldn’t deliver. But do you think for a second that if he was close enough, that Romney wouldn’t have tried?

And delusion is an interesting word for someone who thinks that RP will do worse than last time, but is unwilling to back up their words.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:59 PM

I believe I have said exactly the opposite… that he can win. I believe I said that any GOP candidate can win.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:42 PM

Win what? The nomination, or against Obama? He has to win the first one before he can win the second one.

JannyMae on May 12, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Believe me, Paul will be lucky to get 5% in 2012 here.

Del Dolemonte on May 12, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Once again, do you ever bet on such things? You know, put your money where your mouth is?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Ron Paul is trying to justify other wacko statement by piling on with even more wacked out statements.

Ron Paul says that America can be defended by just two submarines and we all know that you can’t kill terrorists by relying on submarines.

Ron Paul – Lake Jackson’s Crazy Uncle

Bleed_thelizard on May 12, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Whoa … 4 pages … quick question: Did anyone bring up Saddam, and how he was captured, tried and hung?

j_galt on May 12, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Ron Paul is the only candidate who is strong on National Security as he is cautious of allowing the president to have a standing army. He knows how dangerous D.C. and the threat the represent to the states.

Spathi on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

It’s… it’s like you’re on drugs or something.

Yes, our standing army has really been a huge threat to the states these past 200 years. Scary stuff indeed.

MikeknaJ on May 12, 2011 at 1:00 PM

I’ll bet you any amount of money he doesn’t even win the nomination.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 12:58 PM

What odds will you give me?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:01 PM

So… do you ever bet on such things?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

I’ll give you 2 to 1.

VegasRick on May 12, 2011 at 1:02 PM

Romney was out and far enough behind McCain that RP couldn’t deliver. But do you think for a second that if he was close enough, that Romney wouldn’t have tried?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:59 PM

Yep. Romney despises Paul.

And delusion is an interesting word for someone who thinks that RP will do worse than last time, but is unwilling to back up their words.

Interesting that you think betting money is the only way to back up words. How primitive. I could construct an argument, but I see now that you only value placing wagers as valid. Oh well. What’s next? You challenge me to a duel at dawn?

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:02 PM

What odds will you give me?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Just as I thought – you don’t have the guts to back up your words.

Smells like…fish…

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:03 PM

I’ll give you 2 to 1.

VegasRick on May 12, 2011 at 1:02 PM

Will you give me 75-1?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:03 PM

And delusion is an interesting word for someone who thinks that RP will do worse than last time, but is unwilling to back up their words.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:59 PM

You mean the way you are backing up yours by challenging people to make a bet with you, and implying that if they won’t that makes you right?

JannyMae on May 12, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Isn’t it great how unsuitable and/or stupid candidates always do themselves in.

rrpjr on May 12, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Will you give me 75-1?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Aren’t you supposed to be supremely confident in your candidate? Why are you demanding odds? Will he win or not?

Answer the question – and put your money where your mouth is.

Will he win or not?

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Just as I thought – you don’t have the guts to back up your words.

Smells like…fish…

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Why would I give you an even-money bet, when you could turn around to bookies, get good odds, and get a sure-fire win?

Learn a little something about oddsmaking.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Why would I give you an even-money bet, when you could turn around to bookies, get good odds, and get a sure-fire win?

Learn a little something about oddsmaking.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Nice red herring.

Now answer the question – will Ron Paul win or not?

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:05 PM

You mean the way you are backing up yours by challenging people to make a bet with you, and implying that if they won’t that makes you right?

JannyMae on May 12, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Yup, he’s a lunatic.

Moreover, not falling for his nonsense somehow gives him “moral authority” to follow you from topic to topic calling you a “coward” and whatever else pops out of his fevered imagination – for years.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste… on Ron Paul.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 1:06 PM

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Why do you think he will win, when he’s never busted 10 % in any National Election that I can remember?

kingsjester on May 12, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Aren’t you supposed to be supremely confident in your candidate?

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Clearly someone has a little trouble reading.

let’s go to the videotape sports fans..

He’s a long shot…

Now, maybe you see a relationship between “supremely confident” and “long shot”.

But that would make you an idiot.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:49 PM

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:06 PM

I must say, that of all the things I expected from the Paultards on this thread, ten year old talking points wasn’t one of them.

They use the word “neocon” the way the leftists use “fascist” and “racist.”

Of course, when it comes to national security, they are even worse than the left. If Ron Paul gets the Republican nomination, I will write in my own name on the ballot.

JannyMae on May 12, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Now answer the question – will Ron Paul win or not?

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:05 PM

it is likely that he will not.

It is also likely thatthe GoP candidate, regardless of who they are, will lose to Obama. But I’m not willing to write them off.

Once again, learn a little something about probabilities.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM

Now, maybe you see a relationship between “supremely confident” and “long shot”.

But that would make you an idiot.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 12:49 PM

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:06 PM

So, even you don’t think he has a good chance to win, and yet I won’t back up my words by not placing an illegal bet over the internet with somebody I don’t even know?

Who is the idiot again?

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM

Ron Paul ain’t gonna win, Galt. Using bets as a weak ploy to sow uncertainty ain’t gonna change that.

MadisonConservative on May 12, 2011 at 1:09 PM

it is likely that he will not.

It is also likely thatthe GoP candidate, regardless of who they are, will lose to Obama. But I’m not willing to write them off.

Once again, learn a little something about probabilities.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM

No amount of red herrings or ad hominem attacks will distract from the fact that Ron Paul is a waste of a vote, no matter how much you agree with him on policy or principle.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:09 PM

So, even you don’t think he has a good chance to win, and yet I won’t back up my words by not placing an illegal bet over the internet with somebody I don’t even know?

Who is the idiot again?

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM

No, he does not have a good chance.

That doesn’t mean he has no chance.

Perhaps you should learn the difference.

Illegal? What… illegal?

don’t know me? Win a bet from me… and you’ll know me. Lose a bet to me… and damned sure you’ll get to know me.

Doesn’t make you an idiot… makes you a coward.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Suggestion: It’s more fun to remind Paulhriods like JohnGalt23 of Ron Paul’s own actions and words rather than debate on whether he wins or not.

Ron Paul loves the Constitution? Why does he rape the taxpayers of America by accepting confiscated wealth to fund Wild Shrimp Research?

Bleed_thelizard on May 12, 2011 at 1:11 PM

No, he does not have a good chance.

That doesn’t mean he has no chance.

Perhaps you should learn the difference.

Illegal? What… illegal?

don’t know me? Win a bet from me… and you’ll know me. Lose a bet to me… and damned sure you’ll get to know me.

Doesn’t make you an idiot… makes you a coward.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:11 PM

LOL…I’m a coward because I didn’t give you ODDS on Paul’s election chances?

I could offer you 2 to 1 on a $500 bet and you’d fold.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 1:06 PM

And still waiting on a lying coward to back up his claims… just like I’m still waiting on RP to lose his Congressional primary, like that lying coward swore up and down the pike was going to happen.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:13 PM

I could offer you 2 to 1 on a $500 bet and you’d fold.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Offer me 75-1 on that nickel, and I’ll take it.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:14 PM

Offer me 75-1 on that nickel, and I’ll take it.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:14 PM

Coward.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Paul has a few good ideas on fiscal policy, but is otherwise a nut.

Oh Geez….

And then I scroll down to find FOUR PAGES of comments. Be careful Ed you’ll make AP jealous!

BTW, I agree, Paul is a nut.

jnelchef on May 12, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Ron Paul is the only man who sees the big picture of a true isolationist foreign policy…ask him and he will tell you that everyone but himself is still a big fool. Therefore Paul will get his 5% of the vote from like minded proud insiders. But that leaves 95% for Obama. Now that is a big picture.

jimw on May 12, 2011 at 1:15 PM

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Coward.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Oh by the way, JG23 – Cynthia McKinney says thanks for the support.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:16 PM

Coward.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:15 PM

That’s what I thought.

Of course, 2-1 odds indicates to me you think that RP has a 1 in 3 shot of getting the nomination.

We’ve gone a long way from “he’ll do worse than last time.”

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:18 PM

I could offer you 2 to 1 on a $500 bet and you’d fold.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:13 PM

He folded like the liying coward he is.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 1:19 PM

That’s what I thought.

Of course, 2-1 odds indicates to me you think that RP has a 1 in 3 shot of getting the nomination.

We’ve gone a long way from “he’ll do worse than last time.”

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:18 PM

No, I just don’t have $37,500 to put up. Sorry, your wild assumption is false.

Your rejection of 2-1 odds indicates to me you think RP does not have a 1 in 3 shot of winning the nomination.

Put your money where your mouth is, coward.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:20 PM

I work with a typical Ron Paul fan. He is a Truther, talks about violence against public officials, is about to divorce with his wife, hates Israel, is selling America short. Such lovely people those Ron Paul drones.

Bleed_thelizard on May 12, 2011 at 1:20 PM

HELP!!!

Grandpa’s crazy and he wants to be President!

He looks like the leader of the Heaven’s Gate death cult.
The propellor on his beannie is spinning too fast.
His “It’s our fault they hate us” meme is identical to the America hating left.

Really Right on May 12, 2011 at 1:22 PM

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:20 PM

No, I just don’t have $37,500 to put up. Sorry, your wild assumption is false.

Fair enough. Do you have $1500 up against $20?

Your rejection of 2-1 odds indicates to me you think RP does not have a 1 in 3 shot of winning the nomination.

I don’t think he does have a 1 in 3 chance. Thus my statement up front that he is a long shot.

Try thinking things through before hitting Submit Comment.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:22 PM

That’s what I thought.

Of course, 2-1 odds indicates to me you think that RP has a 1 in 3 shot of getting the nomination.

We’ve gone a long way from “he’ll do worse than last time.”

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:18 PM

I’ve gotta say, this has to be a new low as a strategy for arguning about the electabilty of a perenial loser.

No, he does not have a good chance.

That doesn’t mean he has no chance.

Perhaps you should learn the difference.

Illegal? What… illegal?

don’t know me? Win a bet from me… and you’ll know me. Lose a bet to me… and damned sure you’ll get to know me.

Doesn’t make you an idiot… makes you a coward.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:11 PM

And in the end it all boils down to a peacock display of manliness based on a persons “courage” to gamble. How pathetic.

Scrappy on May 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM

He knows how dangerous D.C. and the threat the represent to the states.

Spathi on May 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Again…talking points.

And still waiting for you to explain how – if he knows DC is such a danger – how exactly, what exactly he has done in his 20+ years in Washington to address those dangers?

What has he done? Has he accomplished anything in his over two decades of working in Washington?

Anything other than talk? Platitudes? Campaign?

What is his greatest legislative accomplishment to turn Washington from an enemy to an ally? Does he have any legislative accomplishments to speak of?

He’s written several books. He’s run for President now a few times. He’s given tons and tons of talks and speeches over the years. He’s brought a lot or pork into his district. That’s all well and good, but what has he actually done with his office legislatively? I’m not talking about submitted bills. Has he ever had one passed that did anything?

catmman on May 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Fair enough. Do you have $1500 up against $20?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:22 PM

$20 isn’t worth my time, moron. Try thinking things through before hitting Submit Comment. I’ve made the offer, you’ve rejected it. Coward.

I guess we’re done.

I don’t think he does have a 1 in 3 chance. Thus my statement up front that he is a long shot.

Try thinking things through before hitting Submit Comment.

This isn’t a horse race. You know deep down that Ron Paul has ZERO SHOT, ZEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOO SSSSHHHHHHHOTTTTTTTTTTT, you’re just too ashamed to admit that he can’t win the primary. I guess you aren’t willing to back up your words.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Paul subscribes to the Ralph Nader School of International Solutions. Both men have some very good ideas, but neither connect to reality

It wasn’t necessary to kill Bin Laden, right away.

They could have spirited away OBL, and then announced his secret location

All over America, peaceful muslims would begin ripping doors off passenger planes yelling allu-aka-laka

We could even have had a military trial at Gitmo, which would divert most passenger planes towards Cuba.

It would certainly have brought the disease infecting some of our dual nationality citizebs out into the open.

The best reason to kill Bin Laden immediately was it removed the burden from the Pakistani security to do something about it. With a dead Obama, ISI could complain and beat their chests. It transfers guilt from them, to us. These guys are not deep, and they have a level of access to nukes

IMHO Obama wanted Osama dead so he could control the scenario, the next act. A dead Bin Laden is like a sock puppet. It does what you need

If I was on the American hit squad, I would want the sucker squished like a bug, so I could get in, and get out. A chopper was lost. Reportedly no one was hurt.

entagor on May 12, 2011 at 1:32 PM

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM

$20 isn’t worth my time, moron.

Really? I’d have thought that someone who doesn’t have 37.5 grand to wager on what he claims is a sure thing would be willing to pick up an easy $20.

So how much would be worth your time, weighed against what you can afford to put up?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:34 PM

This isn’t a horse race. You know deep down that Ron Paul has ZERO SHOT, ZEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOO SSSSHHHHHHHOTTTTTTTTTTT,

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Funny… I heard the same thing about Bill Clinton in 1992.

Of course, the person I heard it from wasn’t so yellow as to refuse to back his words up with appropriate odds.

Do so love when longshots come in!

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Maybe he doesn’t want a lunatic like you to know his real identity and address – that peace of mind is worth a lot more than 20 bucks.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Funny… I heard the same thing about Bill Clinton in 1992.

Of course, the person I heard it from wasn’t so yellow as to refuse to back his words up with appropriate odds.

Do so love when longshots come in!

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM

You’re the one too cowardly to place a bet, dbag.

And Bill Clinton wasn’t HATED by 95% of his BASE, moron.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Maybe he doesn’t want a lunatic like you to know his real identity and address – that peace of mind is worth a lot more than 20 bucks.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Yeah the way he stalks people, you gotta be careful these days. I’d hate to leave my family home alone knowing that people like him knew where I lived.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Maybe he doesn’t want a lunatic like you to know his real identity and address – that peace of mind is worth a lot more than 20 bucks.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM

You really have to wonder about someone who thinks gambling is the only way to “back up your words”.

Scrappy on May 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

You’re the one too cowardly to place a bet, dbag.

And Bill Clinton wasn’t HATED by 95% of his BASE, moron.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Uh huh. cowards often have an excuse.

I’ll tell you what… I’ll give you 2-1 odds, and i’ll bet against Paul.

Does that sound fair to you?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Of course, the person I heard it from wasn’t so yellow as to refuse to back his words up with appropriate odds.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Gotta love seeing idiots who move the goalposts when their bluff gets called. You keep changing the rules, dude.

Anything to avoid looking bad on the internet. Must be really important for you to polish your e-peen.

That sound you hear?

It’s me, laughing at you.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Uh huh. cowards often have an excuse.

I’ll tell you what… I’ll give you 2-1 odds, and i’ll bet against Paul.

Does that sound fair to you?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:41 PM

So, in addition to moving the goalposts, now you want to change the bet completely?

Keep backtracking, tool.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:42 PM

You really have to wonder about someone who thinks gambling is the only way to “back up your words”.

Scrappy on May 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Really? I have to wonder about those who claim something as absolute, undeniable truth, and then won’t take up an offer to prove their belief in that.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Uh huh. cowards often have an excuse.

I’ll tell you what… I’ll give you 2-1 odds, and i’ll bet against Paul.

Does that sound fair to you?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Under no circumstances would I ever bet a dime on Paul.

Unlike you, I know a loser when I see one.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:43 PM

So, in addition to moving the goalposts, now you want to change the bet completely?

Keep backtracking, tool.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Unless I missed a post, the last offer you made was 2-1. Who exactly is backtracking?

Smells

Like

Fish

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Yeah the way he stalks people, you gotta be careful these days. I’d hate to leave my family home alone knowing that people like him knew where I lived.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

He’s been stalking me on this blog for over a year.

Creepy.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Really? I have to wonder about those who claim something as absolute, undeniable truth, and then won’t take up an offer to prove their belief in that.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Or maybe sensible people just don’t want to make monetary deals with brave internet warriors.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Unlike you, I know a loser when I see one.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Well, you are the one who looks back at you in the mirror…

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Unless I missed a post, the last offer you made was 2-1. Who exactly is backtracking?

Smells

Like

Fish

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:43 PM

LOL what? You don’t even remember what you said in your last post.

But hey, congratulations, you managed to hijack the thread. Go boast about it to your wife, I’m sure she cares.

I’m out, folks.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Or maybe sensible people just don’t want to make monetary deals with brave internet warriors.

fossten on May 12, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Yes, brave internet warriors who claim someone has no chance, but don’t have the guts to pick up sure money.

Fishy…

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Really? I have to wonder about those who claim something as absolute, undeniable truth, and then won’t take up an offer to prove their belief in that.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:42 PM

I don’t believe gambling has any place in a civil discussion about anything. I don’t need to risk my money(however slight the risk may be) to prove to you that I belive what I say. And I’m not here to try to make a buck off of people who want to discuss politics.

As for “absolute undeniable truth”, perhaps you should refrain from trying to put words into other people’s mouths.

Scrappy on May 12, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Every generation or so, the electrorate needs their own Harold Stassen – the perennial candidate. We had Ralph Nader for a while, then we have Ron Paul. I think we need a national memorial to the never-had-a-chance-never-nominated-by-a-major-party perennial candidates this country produces.

Old Country Boy on May 12, 2011 at 1:49 PM

Reading the last part of this page of comments, something I saw in a movie once comes to mind.

catmman on May 12, 2011 at 1:53 PM

catmman on May 12, 2011 at 1:53 PM

+1

Scrappy on May 12, 2011 at 1:56 PM

catmman on May 12, 2011 at 1:53 PM

I was thinking more of A Christmas Story. I’m waiting for Galt to put his tongue on a frozen flagpole.

kingsjester on May 12, 2011 at 1:57 PM

O/T: Rush just said something which caused me to think, “Did they actually find a dialysis machine in the house w/UBL?”

catmman on May 12, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Believe me, Paul will be lucky to get 5% in 2012 here.

Del Dolemonte on May 12, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Once again, do you ever bet on such things? You know, put your money where your mouth is?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 1:00 PM

“Once again”? That was my first and only reply to a post of yours on this thread.

You really need to drink some more coffee.

Del Dolemonte on May 12, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Spathi. The element to any Ron Paul thread that makes it worth your while.

hawkdriver on May 12, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Del Dolemonte on May 12, 2011 at 2:12 PM

You didn’t answer my question… do you wager on the outcome of elections, and are you willing to back up your assertion about NH?

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 2:36 PM

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Talk about doubling down on stupid.

You really need to take a time out, and realize how your “bet me bet me bet me” tactic is making you look not just dumb, but unhinged as well.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 2:42 PM

You really need to take a time out, and realize how your “bet me bet me bet me” tactic is making you look not just dumb, but unhinged as well.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Still waiting for a coward to sack up and point out where I said Paul could never win.

Or admit that he was lying.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 2:50 PM

Still waiting for a coward to sack up and point out where I said Paul could never win.

Or admit that he was lying.

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 2:50 PM

I guess your “bet me bet me bet me” tactic isn’t the only thing that makes you look unhinged.

gryphon202 on May 12, 2011 at 2:52 PM

JohnGalt23 on May 12, 2011 at 2:50 PM

I gave you good advice, but clearly you’re dead set on doubling down on stupid. Actually you’re already on tripling or quadrupling, but who’s counting?

Good luck with that, you are certainly winning friends and influencing people here.

Rebar on May 12, 2011 at 2:53 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5