PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul on CNN to talk Marijuana RIGHT NOW (after the break)




MRoCkEd
03-26-2009, 05:47 PM
Tune in to CNN now

trey4sports
03-26-2009, 05:48 PM
damn, you beat me by a minute

MRoCkEd
03-26-2009, 05:49 PM
haha

No1ButPaul08
03-26-2009, 05:52 PM
thanks!!

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 05:53 PM
sweet thanks!

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 05:54 PM
wow... ron is gonna school this guy!

trey4sports
03-26-2009, 05:57 PM
you FAT FUCKING piece of shit!!!!!!!!!!
alkjfdasljdfakl;sdjfl;kasjdfl;kasjdflkanscmdsnfgae rfwieo43gn aevr;oi23refi'j

Young Paleocon
03-26-2009, 05:58 PM
Paul is fucking pissed!!!!!!!

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 05:58 PM
Wow, that was brutal...

Ron looked kind of different in this interview, anybody know what i mean?

ronpaulfollower999
03-26-2009, 05:59 PM
What did Ron say at the end?

tribute_13
03-26-2009, 05:59 PM
I caught the last bit of it. That guy was an asshole. There was no discussion. This was a classic case of whoever talks loudest wins.

Paulitical Correctness
03-26-2009, 06:00 PM
tickle me furious after that one, folks!!! :mad::mad::mad:

StudentForPaul08
03-26-2009, 06:00 PM
I don't know how to react, am I embarrassed for Ron? Happy Ron got mad? I don't know....

sluggo
03-26-2009, 06:00 PM
That guy needs a kick in the balls.

MRoCkEd
03-26-2009, 06:00 PM
Wow. Waste of time. That asshole was talking over Ron during his turn to which Ron responded "I don't want to have a shouting match." Then the asshole got the final word and they didn't have time to let Ron rebuttal, and he looked really pissed and took off his microphone.

runningdiz
03-26-2009, 06:00 PM
He was trying to get a word in. The reason he looked different was he was pissed because they would not let him get a word in. If you notice he was taking his earpiece out b4 the interview ended because he realized it was a waste of his time

jillian
03-26-2009, 06:00 PM
Wow, that was brutal...

Ron looked kind of different in this interview, anybody know what i mean?

yep, i know exactly what you mean. he kept his lips pursed and it made him look old. i love that man and wish for him to have strength and peace. he needs it.

Bruno
03-26-2009, 06:02 PM
omg! Ron gave it to him. I clapped so hard I hurt my hand. That guy spewed out 30 years worth of government B.S. and proganda. Then she didn't even let him respond after promising to do so, and let that guy talk over over his response. She was also rude to him, I thought.

Ron was visually upset at the guy, and I think put him in his place extremely well, and also showed his disappointment in her for cutting the interview short.

F' that and the voice in her ear that said to cut the interview.

tribute_13
03-26-2009, 06:02 PM
That interview was apparently fixed. They brought in a guy who did nothing but holler.

jillian
03-26-2009, 06:03 PM
at least the guy said he respected RP for his stance, unlike Obama. Best part of the interview unfortunately.:cool:

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 06:03 PM
omg! Ron gave it to him. I clapped so hard I hurt my hand. That guy spewed out 30 years worth of government B.S. and proganda. Then she didn't even let him respond after promising to do so, and let that guy talk over over his response. She was also rude to him, I thought.

Ron was visually upset at the guy, and I think put him in his place extremely well, and also showed his disappointment in her for cutting the interview short.

F' that and the voice in her ear that said to cut the interview.

Best post of the thread! :cool:

Bruno
03-26-2009, 06:03 PM
yep, i know exactly what you mean. he kept his lips pursed and it made him look old. i love that man and wish for him to have strength and peace. he needs it.

he probably knew from the beginning it was a set up

jmlfod87
03-26-2009, 06:03 PM
i'll be boycotting cnn. the guy that said the violence isn't fueled by drugs is a moron, plain and simple.

TruthisTreason
03-26-2009, 06:04 PM
CNN is a joke!

MRoCkEd
03-26-2009, 06:04 PM
Don't post the youtube of this. It was a real waste of time.

trey4sports
03-26-2009, 06:04 PM
istook@mail.house.gov

give that fat fucking piece of shit a kick in the balls

Paulitical Correctness
03-26-2009, 06:05 PM
At least B-list Baldwin was respectful, this was just ridiculous though.

StudentForPaul08
03-26-2009, 06:05 PM
istook@mail.house.gov

give that fat fucking piece of shit a kick in the balls

lets do it

zach
03-26-2009, 06:05 PM
Ron was PEE-ISSED.

never saw him like that before..

ionlyknowy
03-26-2009, 06:05 PM
seeing that 40% of americans agree with Ron on this issue at least with weed..

anyone watching it will realize that the other guy was being immature and not wanting a debate on the issues. Ron came out being the bigger man in that exchange.

The other guy seemed like a creepy car salesman at best. Slicked hair in a suit. Talking over a congressman when he was giving his opinion of the subject. I think he did a good job in not getting too upset on camera with that guy.

jillian
03-26-2009, 06:06 PM
Ron was PEE-ISSED.

never saw him like that before..

i'd be pissed too.

Dripping Rain
03-26-2009, 06:06 PM
this is effin BS
another setup bs journalism by CNN
FUCK CNN

MelissaCato
03-26-2009, 06:07 PM
Does anyone have the TOOOOOOOOB linky ...

Darn it !!

Young Paleocon
03-26-2009, 06:08 PM
That Anderson Cooper bullshit is coming back to mind from the Cali debate.

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 06:09 PM
CNN is the worst of all the networks :mad:

zach
03-26-2009, 06:09 PM
That Anderson Cooper bullshit is coming back to mind from the Cali debate.

That's exactly what I was thinking!

The chick substituting for LK the other week was good though.
She should do something like that more.

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 06:09 PM
That Anderson Cooper bullshit is coming back to mind from the Cali debate.

Whenever Giuliani or Romney's time was up, he'd give a little wimper for a warning.

Whenever Ron Paul's time was up he flatout cut him off :mad:


Ugh, I hate CNN so much!

Young Paleocon
03-26-2009, 06:11 PM
That's exactly what I was thinking!

The chick substituting for LK the other week was good though.
She should do something like that more.

Well, I also think the Steven Baldwin was a respectful opponent.

Paulitical Correctness
03-26-2009, 06:12 PM
That Anderson Cooper bullshit is coming back to mind from the Cali debate.

I was cursin' at the tv like a sailor that night!

wareami
03-26-2009, 06:13 PM
I am new here, first post but I've been a member for months.
I think what just happened on CNN was a travesty and an insult to Dr. Ron Paul and as I feared all along, drastic action is going to be our only recourse in taking back control of this country and restoring our UNalienable rights under the constitution.
I know Dr.Paul was disgusted at not having his say and in the coming months I look forward to engaging with this community in a proactive way toward helping Dr. Paul establish an foothold in this government even if it means levying political leverage toward legally abolishing this form of government and establishing anew.

I AM with you Dr. Paul.
That exchange saddened me as much as it clearly frustrated Dr. Paul!

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 06:14 PM
Well, I also think the Steven Baldwin was a respectful opponent.

agreed, although he was a little too passive in my opinion... let Ron talk too much.

devil21
03-26-2009, 06:14 PM
I havent seen the "interview" but it sounds like CNN absolutely had to bring someone on to parrot Obama's "no pot legalization" stance published today. What a shill of a company. Is their only job to reinforce the policies of the President???

MRoCkEd
03-26-2009, 06:15 PM
I am new here, first post but I've been a member for months.
I think what just happened on CNN was a travesty and an insult to Dr. Ron Paul and as I feared all along, drastic action is going to be our only recourse in taking back control of this country and restoring our UNalienable rights under the constitution.
I know Dr.Paul was disgusted at not having his say and in the coming months I look forward to engaging with this community in a proactive way toward helping Dr. Paul establish an foothold in this government even if it means levying political leverage toward legally abolishing this form of government and establishing anew.

I AM with you Dr. Paul.
That exchange saddened me as much as it clearly frustrated Dr. Paul!
Welcome to the forums! Nice first post

orafi
03-26-2009, 06:16 PM
youtube? ill brace for the maddening nonsense in it, so no hard feelings to anyone who posts it. :)

Bruno
03-26-2009, 06:25 PM
I havent seen the "interview" but it sounds like CNN absolutely had to bring someone on to parrot Obama's "no pot legalization" stance published today. What a shill of a company. Is their only job to reinforce the policies of the President???

ding ding ding

He Who Pawns
03-26-2009, 06:37 PM
toooooooob?

Paulfan05
03-26-2009, 06:39 PM
youtube is my feeding tooooobe!

Dripping Rain
03-26-2009, 06:41 PM
I am new here, first post but I've been a member for months.
I think what just happened on CNN was a travesty and an insult to Dr. Ron Paul and as I feared all along, drastic action is going to be our only recourse in taking back control of this country and restoring our UNalienable rights under the constitution.
I know Dr.Paul was disgusted at not having his say and in the coming months I look forward to engaging with this community in a proactive way toward helping Dr. Paul establish an foothold in this government even if it means levying political leverage toward legally abolishing this form of government and establishing anew.

I AM with you Dr. Paul.
That exchange saddened me as much as it clearly frustrated Dr. Paul!

thanks wareami
welcome to the forum

devil21
03-26-2009, 06:43 PM
Shall we crash the Heritage Foundation's email server?

staff@heritage.org?subject=To Ernest Istook

Valli6
03-26-2009, 06:47 PM
You can send Cambell Brown a complaint from this page: http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form4.html?125
I asked her not to waste Ron Paul's time like this again.

RSLudlum
03-26-2009, 06:54 PM
Shall we crash the Heritage Foundation's email server?

staff@heritage.org?subject=To Ernest Istook


I'd take part if I'd seen the segment myself. I guess I'll have to wait for the toob :( before forming my own opinion and an appropriate response. ;)

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 06:55 PM
I'd take part if I'd seen the segment myself. I guess I'll have to wait for the toob :( before forming my own opinion and an appropriate response. ;)

Oh dude, be prepared to get pissed the hell off ;)

This is one of the most infuriating interviews we've ever had.

Bruno
03-26-2009, 06:56 PM
Guess who advertises for the "intellectual 'firepower'" (ever fucking day he says that) of the Heritage Foundation?

Mr. Sean Hannity

RSLudlum
03-26-2009, 06:59 PM
Oh dude, be prepared to get pissed the hell off ;)

This is one of the most infuriating interviews we've ever had.

Yeah, I'm looking forward to it. :D I stopped reading the thread after the first 3 posts because I want to experience it myself.

dr. hfn
03-26-2009, 07:56 PM
Paul/Goldwater 2012! FTW!

hillertexas
03-26-2009, 08:00 PM
If anyone knows how to contact Ron, he needs to know about Portugal. It is a perfect case study for drug legalization...so he can throw it back in the assholes faces:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/03/14/portugal/index.html


SATURDAY MARCH 14, 2009 06:19 EDT

The success of drug decriminalization in Portugal

In 2001, Portugal became the only EU-member state to decriminalize drugs, a distinction which continues through to the present. Last year, working with the Cato Institute, I went to that country in order to research the effects of the decriminalization law (which applies to all substances, including cocaine and heroin) and to interview both Portuguese and EU drug policy officials and analysts (the central EU drug policy monitoring agency is, by coincidence, based in Lisbon). Evaluating the policy strictly from an empirical perspective, decriminalization has been an unquestionable success, leading to improvements in virtually every relevant category and enabling Portugal to manage drug-related problems (and drug usage rates) far better than most Western nations that continue to treat adult drug consumption as a criminal offense.

On April 3, at 12:00 noon, at the Cato Institute in Washington, I'll be presenting the 50-page report I wrote for Cato, entitledDrug Decriminalization in Portugal. Following my presentation, a supporter of drug criminalization laws -- Peter Reuter, a Professor in the University of Maryland's Department of Criminology -- will comment on the report (and I'll be able to comment after that), and then there will be a Q-and-A session with the audience. The event is open to the public and free of charge. Details and registration are here at Cato's site, where the event can also be watched live online (and, possibly, on C-SPAN).

There is clearly a growing recognition around the world and even in the U.S. that, strictly on empirical grounds, criminalization approaches to drug usage and, especially, the "War on Drugs," are abject failures, because they worsen the exact problems they are ostensibly intended to address. "Strictly on empirical grounds" means excluding from the assessment: (a) ideological questions regarding the legitimacy of imprisoning adults for consuming drugs they choose to consume; (b) the evisceration of Constitutional and civil liberties wrought by drug criminalization; and (c) the extraordinary sums of money devoted to the War on Drugs both domestically and internationally.
Very recent events demonstrating this evolving public debate over drug policy include the declaration of the Drug War's failure from several former Latin American leaders; a new Economist Editorial calling for full-scale drug legalization; new polls showing substantial and growing numbers of Americans (and a majority of Canadians) supportive of marijuana legalization; the decision of the DEA to make good on Obama's campaign pledge to cease raids on medical marijuana dispensaries in states which have legalized its usage; and numerous efforts in the political mainstream to redress the harsh and disparatecriminal penalties imposed for drug offenses, including Obama's supportfor treatment rather than prison for first-time drug offenders.
Particularly in the U.S., there is still widespread support for criminalization approaches and even support for the most extreme and destructive aspects of the "War on Drugs," but, for a variety of reasons, the debate over drug policy has become far more open than ever before. Portugal's success with decriminalization is highly instructive, particularly since the impetus for it was their collective recognition in the 1990s that criminalization was failing to address -- and was almost certainly exacerbating -- their exploding, poverty-driven drug crisis. As a consensus in that country now recognizes, decriminalization is what enabled them to manage drug-related problems far more effectively than ever before, and the nightmare scenarios warned of by decriminalization opponents have, quite plainly, never materialized.

The counter-productive effects of drug criminalization are at least as evident now for the U.S. as they were for pre-decriminalization Portugal. Beyond one's ideological beliefs regarding the legitimacy of criminalization, drug policy should be determined by objective, empirical assessments of what works and what does not work. It's now been more than seven years since Portugal decriminalized all drugs, and dispassionately examining the effects of that decision provides a unique opportunity to assess questions of drug policy in the most rational and empirical manner possible.
-- Glenn Greenwald

Texan4Life
03-26-2009, 08:08 PM
I missed it :(

tube?

robert4rp08
03-26-2009, 08:12 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88REf0tjZHo#t=0m15s

Carole
03-26-2009, 08:13 PM
The private companies that run US prisons get paid, I believe, by the person--kind of like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's Franklin Raines' bonus got bigger depending on the number of mortgages they held.

Therefore, the more prisoners, the more the companies make, plus the cheap slave labor.

It is wrong. And it is why the US continues its "war" on Drugs and will keep it that way. Maybe it is also why they encourage drugs coming across the border.

The prison industry in the United States: big business or a new form of slavery?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8289

Texan4Life
03-26-2009, 08:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88REf0tjZHo#t=0m15s


lol... so I assume it went something like that?

CasualApathy
03-26-2009, 08:17 PM
lol... so I assume it went something like that?

sounds like it, but without the RP ownage.

can't wait for the tube...

jake
03-26-2009, 08:47 PM
I await the tube!! :eek:

jake
03-26-2009, 08:49 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVjSyBfFM6g

poor ron :( unbelievable.

purplechoe
03-26-2009, 08:50 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVjSyBfFM6g

THANKS! and yes, it's real... :)

Maverick
03-26-2009, 08:54 PM
Istook: "Marijuana smoke has 4x the tar of tobacco smoke."

Wtf is he talking about? Can somebody tell me where the hell he could have gotten this information from (other than his ass)?

CasualApathy
03-26-2009, 08:56 PM
Istook: "Marijuana smoke has 4x the tar of tobacco smoke."

Wtf is he talking about? Can somebody tell me where the hell he could have gotten this information from (other than his ass)?

no filter, sounds logical at first glance.

Maverick
03-26-2009, 08:57 PM
CB: "Congressman Paul, you're from Texas, right there on the Mexican border, uh, in your district..."

She can't be that stupid right? Galveston borders Mexico now?

satchelmcqueen
03-26-2009, 09:00 PM
I was cursin' at the tv like a sailor that night!

i broke my remote on the couch arm that night. cost me $50 to get another one.

Maverick
03-26-2009, 09:00 PM
no filter, sounds logical at first glance.

I dunno, as a cigarette smoker I've heard millions of times how much worse cigarettes are for you - in terms of tar or other carcinogens - than anything else. So something being more harmful than smokes would be news to me.

trey4sports
03-26-2009, 09:00 PM
Istook: "Marijuana smoke has 4x the tar of tobacco smoke."

Wtf is he talking about? Can somebody tell me where the hell he could have gotten this information from (other than his ass)?

thats true, marijuana does have 4x the tar that cigarettes have

while its true that marijuana has 4x the tar and many more carcinogens, the THC seems to inhibit tumor growth quite possibly canceling out any cancer risk effects of marijuana. the amount of tar ingested is quite bad, Marijuana IS bad for your lungs if smoked

Rangeley
03-26-2009, 09:02 PM
I don't think he did badly, but you could tell he was obviously frustrated about being interrupted and not having a chance to respond.

Paulfan05
03-26-2009, 09:02 PM
Ron is pissed, he needs some of that stuff Obama had where he keeps laughing lol

CasualApathy
03-26-2009, 09:04 PM
I dunno, as a cigarette smoker I've heard millions of times how much worse cigarettes are for you - in terms of tar or other carcinogens - than anything else. So something being more harmful than smokes would be news to me.

Well, when you roll a joint you mix it with the same tobacco used for regular cigarettes, so you have basically: (cigarette + weed - filter) as I understand it.

Epic
03-26-2009, 09:06 PM
No Bias No Bull All BITCH

trey4sports
03-26-2009, 09:08 PM
Well, when you roll a joint you mix it with the same tobacco used for regular cigarettes, so you have basically: (cigarette + weed - filter) as I understand it.


huh? when i roll a joint its stright bud. no tobacco

Maverick
03-26-2009, 09:09 PM
Well, when you roll a joint you mix it with the same tobacco used for regular cigarettes, so you have basically: (cigarette + weed - filter) as I understand it.

Well, maybe it is true then, or maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way. Rather than looking at per unit, if you look at the overall numbers, I think the average marijuana smoker would probably still take in less tar than the average cig smoker. Let's say I smoke 20 cigarettes a day. The marijuana smoker would have to smoke at least 5 joints a day to keep up with me in tar. Maybe some people can burn through joints that fast, but not most of the people I know.

LibertyEagle
03-26-2009, 09:09 PM
Guys, I hate to say this, but Ron needs to learn how to debate better. Now, I don't particularly like Ventura, but you know as well as I, that he would have stopped Istook. Think about what he did to O'Reilly when O'Reilly tried running over him. Most of these congressmen are lawyers; they learned how to debate. Ron never did, but it sure would help him if he would learn.

Just my opinion, of course.

RSLudlum
03-26-2009, 09:09 PM
Oh dude, be prepared to get pissed the hell off ;)

This is one of the most infuriating interviews we've ever had.

You were right!! :mad: If I was RP I would've gotten up and walked off the damn set muttering "I don't have time for these disrespectful pseudo-intellectual statists". Now that would've grabbed headlines and put the talk into 'conservative/republican' circles tomorrow. ;)


Damn it must be quite perplexing for liberal pro-legalization advocates right now?? :p

Maverick
03-26-2009, 09:11 PM
Guys, I hate to say this, but Ron needs to learn how to debate better. Now, I don't particularly like Ventura, but you know as well as I, that he would have stopped Istook. Think about what he did to O'Reilly when O'Reilly tried running over him.

It wasn't a debate, it was a shouting match. I'm glad Ron didn't stoop to Istook's level.

However, if it was a real debate, I don't see much wrong with RP's debating tactics, especially in this case. If Ron had been allowed to speak, he would've owned that scumbag.

HRD53
03-26-2009, 09:15 PM
I'm probably going to get some flak for this, but Ron sometimes seems to have problems/gets flustered easily when he gets into a debate with a smooth/fast talking member of the opposition. This guy was spewing some major bullshit, but he probably seemed rational to a person uneducated on this subject. It just seems that when he gets into these situations, he starts getting flustered and isn't able to put together his argument as well.

That being said, this guy he debated is just another douche trying to perpetuate the status quo in this country. Anyone who is against the legalization of marijuana is either misinformed on the subject or has their own agenda

Texan4Life
03-26-2009, 09:16 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvjsybffm6g

poor ron :( unbelievable.

thanks

LibertyEagle
03-26-2009, 09:19 PM
It wasn't a debate, it was a shouting match. I'm glad Ron didn't stoop to Istook's level.
Yes, it was. That's the thing. If he knew how, he couldn've stopped Ishtook. That's part of debating.


However, if it was a real debate, I don't see much wrong with RP's debating tactics, especially in this case. If Ron had been allowed to speak, he would've owned that scumbag.
I just think knowing debating techniques would help him get his message out, especially without getting so flustered. He would then have the tools to shut them up, which is one of the most frustrating things when someone is interrupting you.

satchelmcqueen
03-26-2009, 09:19 PM
just watched it, and i am pissed to. bad moderating and douche bagery to the highest.

He Who Pawns
03-26-2009, 09:26 PM
toob link aint working

tropicangela
03-26-2009, 09:31 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVjSyBfFM6g

poor ron :( unbelievable.

Message I get:


The video you have requested is not available.

If you have recently uploaded this video, you may need to wait a few minutes for the video to process.

Maverick
03-26-2009, 09:39 PM
Really, Campbell Brown did a shit job of controlling the situation. I sent off a message to CNN.

He Who Pawns
03-26-2009, 09:39 PM
i demand TOOBS NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tropicangela
03-26-2009, 09:41 PM
Here's the vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVjSyBfFM6g

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 09:41 PM
Yes, it was. That's the thing. If he knew how, he couldn've stopped Ishtook. That's part of debating.


I just think knowing debating techniques would help him get his message out, especially without getting so flustered. He would then have the tools to shut them up, which is one of the most frustrating things when someone is interrupting you.

Somebody get LE on the phone with Ron, quick! :cool:

I agree with you, but i still like Ron's passive approach because he's not the one who looks like a pompous dickhead.

I'm not sure how the avg CNN viewer would view this.

He Who Pawns
03-26-2009, 10:01 PM
Holy Crap! Dr Paul was seriously pissed off at the end, and rightly so.

How can we punish that piece of garbage who was debating him?

ClayTrainor
03-26-2009, 10:02 PM
Holy Crap! Dr Paul was seriously pissed off at the end, and rightly so.

How can we punish that piece of garbage who was debating him?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=185871

dannno
03-26-2009, 10:18 PM
thats true, marijuana does have 4x the tar that cigarettes have

while its true that marijuana has 4x the tar and many more carcinogens, the THC seems to inhibit tumor growth quite possibly canceling out any cancer risk effects of marijuana. the amount of tar ingested is quite bad, Marijuana IS bad for your lungs if smoked

Ahh, but cannabis also helps activate the scilia in your lungs promoting cleansing, and it is also an expectorant. I also don't smoke a pack a day of cannabis, I smoke about 1 or 2 cigarettes worth, or about 4-6 cigarettes worth of tar according to government funded studies. However, when I used to smoke cigarettes I couldn't smoke more than 2 or 3 cigarettes a day because I have asthma and it hurt my lungs really bad to smoke even 3 or 4 cigarettes, so I know that they are more damaging.

Cannabis, however, relaxes the bronchials and it actually relieves my asthma. You can potentially get a doctor's recommendation to use cannabis for asthma.

AggieforPaul
03-26-2009, 10:34 PM
Holy Crap! Dr Paul was seriously pissed off at the end, and rightly so.

How can we punish that piece of garbage who was debating him?

Uhh, why would we want to do that? The man debating him was exercising his freedom of speech outlined in the Constitution.

We're supposed to be defenders of liberty, not censorship.

He Who Pawns
03-26-2009, 10:35 PM
Uhh, why would we want to do that? The man debating him was exercising his freedom of speech outlined in the Constitution.

We're supposed to be defenders of liberty, not censorship.

He was disrespectful to Dr Paul, that's why.
:mad:

Gage
03-26-2009, 11:01 PM
Here's the vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVjSyBfFM6g
Where's the beginning?

RonPaulVolunteer
03-26-2009, 11:34 PM
This is a perfect example of emotions over ideas. Emotion is VERY hard to attack with ideas. I am thinking that we need to find our own emotional arguments to counter them with, that are backed up by our ideas. Then, with emotive ideas, we can defeat emotionalism.

BenIsForRon
03-26-2009, 11:51 PM
Ron Paul took the high road, I'm proud of him.

AggieforPaul
03-27-2009, 12:00 AM
He was disrespectful to Dr Paul, that's why.
:mad:

And Dr. Paul handled it very well. We can't help him with obnoxious mob tactics.

IPSecure
03-27-2009, 12:00 AM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=158739

robert4rp08
03-27-2009, 12:04 AM
Bah, that was crap. That gas bag wouldn't shut up.

tremendoustie
03-27-2009, 12:09 AM
I think RP came out looking good. It was obvious that the other douche was talking on both his turn and Ron's. -1 to the moderator for letting the situation get completely out of hand.

I really think the objective observer could see what was going on there. And, they really have no answer to the prohibition argument, it's a devastating one.

Join The Paul Side
03-27-2009, 01:17 AM
Ron won by being a class act. I'm sure a lot of people noticed that.

I however am not a class act, which is why I can say Campbell Brown is a cunt for wating Ron's time.

Ninja Homer
03-27-2009, 01:32 AM
Guys, I hate to say this, but Ron needs to learn how to debate better. Now, I don't particularly like Ventura, but you know as well as I, that he would have stopped Istook. Think about what he did to O'Reilly when O'Reilly tried running over him. Most of these congressmen are lawyers; they learned how to debate. Ron never did, but it sure would help him if he would learn.

Just my opinion, of course.

You're right about Ventura, but wrong about Ron. Ron knows how to debate, he just doesn't have the fire or the voice he used to. Let's face it, he's getting old. Remember this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHB2I83_N_k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGGDVm4mmTo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waesMWjaqnU

Everybody should watch these again, even if it's just to make you feel better after the CNN interview.

ClayTrainor
03-27-2009, 01:42 AM
You're right about Ventura, but wrong about Ron. Ron knows how to debate, he just doesn't have the fire or the voice he used to. Let's face it, he's getting old. Remember this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHB2I83_N_k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGGDVm4mmTo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waesMWjaqnU

Everybody should watch these again, even if it's just to make you feel better after the CNN interview.

Liberty said Ventura was on Oreilly? is this true?

LibertyEagle
03-27-2009, 02:19 AM
Liberty said Ventura was on Oreilly? is this true?

Yeah, it wasn't all that terribly long ago. Definitely within the last year. We talked about it on the forum. O'Reilly started to talk over him like he usually does and I believe question his patriotism or something like that, and Ventura reminded him that he was a Navy Seal. It shut O'Reilly on up.

The video has to be around somewhere.

ClayTrainor
03-27-2009, 03:00 AM
Yeah, it wasn't all that terribly long ago. Definitely within the last year. We talked about it on the forum. O'Reilly started to talk over him like he usually does and I believe question his patriotism or something like that, and Ventura reminded him that he was a Navy Seal. It shut O'Reilly on up.

The video has to be around somewhere.

Oh man, i gotta see this!

I'm searching youtube with no luck. If you ever stumble upon it, please pm me :cool:

LibertyEagle
03-27-2009, 03:05 AM
Oh man, i gotta see this!

I'm searching youtube with no luck. If you ever stumble upon it, please pm me :cool:

Yeah, I'm looking too. Maybe I just imagined it. :p Or, it was someone other than O'Reilly. I really don't think so though. So yeah, if I find it, I'll let you know.

idiom
03-27-2009, 04:18 AM
Lol. Campbell Brown is CNN's answer to Bill O'Reilly, complete with narcissitic talking points.

What did you expect?

MRoCkEd
03-27-2009, 06:25 AM
Yeah, it wasn't all that terribly long ago. Definitely within the last year. We talked about it on the forum. O'Reilly started to talk over him like he usually does and I believe question his patriotism or something like that, and Ventura reminded him that he was a Navy Seal. It shut O'Reilly on up.

The video has to be around somewhere.
Hmm.. you might be thinking of Hannity
Hannity said, "you should've ran for senate - you chickened out"
to which Ventura replied, "you're calling a navy seal a chicken?"

But if it was Oreilly, I NEED THE TUBE

acptulsa
03-27-2009, 07:13 AM
Uhh, why would we want to do that? The man debating him was exercising his freedom of speech outlined in the Constitution.

We're supposed to be defenders of liberty, not censorship.

STFU.

Get it yet?

He was exercising his freedom not only of speech, but of volume, and using the latter to ensure only his opinion could be heard. And you wish to paint him as a bastion of free speech? Lol.


Bah, that was crap. That gas bag wouldn't shut up.

I can assure you that's one reason he's no longer in Congress. The people of eastern Oklahoma aren't particularly easy to embarass, particularly by association. But Istook is extra talented. I wonder how long before the Heritage Whores figure out that he's just as embarassing to them?

Feenix566
03-27-2009, 07:22 AM
Television news networks show the people what they think the people want to hear. The fact that they even had a five-minute debate on the subject of decriminalizing marijuana is ground-breaking. Five years ago, this debate would never have made it onto the airwaves, because the media producers were unaware that anyone would want to watch it. Today, they are waking up to the fact that a large portion of Americans have realized just how ridiculous this war on drugs is. That's why they televised a discussion on the subject.

You guys need to stop being distracted by the fact that the other guest was obnoxious and wrong. That's a minor detail. The most important part of this is the fact that the debate took place at all. It's a sign that we're making progress. The cracks are beginning to show in the prohibitionists' veneer of public support.

This is good news!!

Feenix566
03-27-2009, 07:27 AM
PS Somebody find it on Youtube, Digg it, and post a link to the Digg article. (I would but I don't have access to Youtube from work)

We need to spread the word on Digg that Ron Paul is the only actual anti-prohibitionist in Washington. It would garner him a lot of support from that crowd, especially in light of Obama's admission yesterday that he has no intention of legalizing anything.

Feenix566
03-27-2009, 09:35 AM
Digg it:

http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_Debates_Marijuana_Prohibition_on_CNN