Lindsay Graham: "Ron Paul Is Not The Leader Of Our Party" [Archive]

angelatc

05-03-2009, 05:45 PM

It's pretty condescending, but it means we are loud enough to be heard. More people are listening to Paul than they are Graham these days.

I hear neocons say "Well, at least Paul is right about economics," but I never hear anybody say that Graham is right about anything.

When the Volokh Conspiracy pointed out that Specter's defection actually gave the GOP a chance at being able to keep judicial nominations from moving out of committee. the elation lasted about 30 seconds, because Graham is also on that committee. They only need 1 GOP vote to move the process ahead.

Paul is more of a party leader than Graham is, that's for sure.

satchelmcqueen

05-03-2009, 05:57 PM

well, grow the party without me then lindsey. im sticking with ron paul.

Liberty Star

05-03-2009, 05:59 PM

iddo

05-03-2009, 06:01 PM

Anyone knows what prompted Graham to say it? Who is the audience exactly? The youtube description says "Greenville County Republicans", so were they holding Ron Paul signs, or what?

johnrocks

05-03-2009, 06:04 PM

tonesforjonesbones

05-03-2009, 06:05 PM

Yes and those idiots clapped when he said it. tones

sailor

05-03-2009, 06:39 PM

Just that he needed to say that signals Ron has been making wawes and is a very visible Republican nowadays.

idiom

05-03-2009, 06:41 PM

Woo, we need some more denial going on.

ctiger2

05-03-2009, 06:41 PM

What made Flimsey Graham even mention Paul? Maybe they are taking notice of a real trend. We will take over this party. Only a matter of time.

max

05-03-2009, 06:43 PM

Lindsey Graham is of dubious sexual orientation.

angelatc

05-03-2009, 06:44 PM

Lindsey Graham is of dubious sexual orientation.

And that's relevant because.....?

max

05-03-2009, 06:47 PM

And that's relevant because.....?

Because public servants should be of impeccable moral caliber. That would disqualify men who like it in the ***

sailor

05-03-2009, 06:47 PM

And that's relevant because.....?

Because it`s true. :p

sailor

05-03-2009, 06:48 PM

Because public servants should be of impeccable moral caliber. That would disqualify men who like it in the ***

But not women?

Kludge

05-03-2009, 06:49 PM

Because public servants should be of impeccable moral caliber. That would disqualify men who like it in the ***

Perhaps, if we were some sect's interpretation of a Christian America.

satchelmcqueen

05-03-2009, 06:50 PM

Because public servants should be of impeccable moral caliber. That would disqualify men who like it in the ***

lol!

RSLudlum

05-03-2009, 06:56 PM

I could be mistaken, but isn't RP in the media more than Graham, McCain, and any of the former Republican presidential candidates? I sense a bit of envy from Graham (and other RINO's) directed towards RP standing up for principles that the R's suppose they do. Hell, even Hillary admitted she has never seen such enthusiastic supporters for a candidate.

Something's going on in this country, and I'm just glad to be part of it. ;)

slacker921

05-03-2009, 06:59 PM

Didn't Lindsay Graham vote for Obama's GIVE Act bill recently? And he's telling us who the leader of the GOP is?

brandon

05-03-2009, 07:02 PM

Yea he's clearly a ***

MRoCkEd

05-03-2009, 07:07 PM

Lindsay Grahamnesty clarifying that "Ron Paul is not the leader of the party" without being prompted is a good sign of our strength.

DAFTEK

05-03-2009, 07:12 PM

Would i get banned if i call this piece of shit a piece of GRAHAM SHIT?

This is why i think Obama stands a good chance to win 2012 again. These stupid wannabe Ronald Reagan republicans haven't learned anything from 2008 election and will loose badly again unless more people wake up to these old republican dogs and vote them out one by one starting with this idiot Linzy Graham.

steph3n

05-03-2009, 07:14 PM

leave the sexual orientation crap off the thread, it is really :rolleyes:

Now that said, the guy is a douche.

Brian4Liberty

05-03-2009, 07:16 PM

Graham conveniently left out his Bushie Republican TARP spending when claiming how "fiscally conservative" he is. What a hypocrite and liar...

RSLudlum

05-03-2009, 07:21 PM

steph3n

05-03-2009, 07:22 PM

Graham conveniently left out his Bushie Republican TARP spending when claiming how "fiscally conservative" he is. What a hypocrite and liar...

yep that was my thought exactly, and the war spending, and every other unbalanced budget and spending bill that passed his way.

itshappening

05-03-2009, 08:05 PM

why would Lord Graham name check a House Republican, we're making waves no doubt!

RSLudlum

05-03-2009, 08:13 PM

why would Lord Graham name check a House Republican, we're making waves no doubt!

Yes we are. I don't really know about the rest of SC but here in Charleston the local morning and mid-day daily talk show hosts (Richard Todd, Jack Hunter aka Southern Avenger, and Rocky D) all talk highly of RP and voted third party this past election. They all give Graham (and the core GOP along with Dems) hell and he rarely comes on for interviews. It's almost exactly the opposite for our junior senator DeMint and Gov. Sanford. Graham feels threatened and thus the platitudes towards RP and those that support his principles.

Graham is the epitome of all that's wrong with the GOP and their stated 'principles'.

slacker921

05-03-2009, 08:18 PM

oh look.. Lindsay Graham also voted for the "Stimulus Checks" in 2008 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-10).. remember it? It was a redistribution of wealth to the tune of $150,000,000,000 and it failed miserably. The only thing it did was take money from ME and handed it to someone who turned around and paid some credit card debt (and therefore it ended up in the hands of our good friends the banksters). Nice work there mister Lindsay "fiscally conservative" Graham.

Yeah, the Republican voters need to be listening to him. ha. They need to be voting that RINO out of office for voting for TARP, the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 (stimulus checks), and more recently Obama's GIVE Act.

angelatc

05-03-2009, 08:28 PM

Chester Copperpot

05-03-2009, 08:36 PM

I would not piss on Lindsay Graham if he was on fire, now, we all know RP isn't the face of the GOP and not it's leader,hell,that's it's biggest problem,it's controlled by ass wipes like Lindsay Graham and McCain.

Thats exactly right.. in fact im going to call his office tomorrow to let him know that too.

andrewh817

05-03-2009, 08:49 PM

OP original patriot

LibertyEagle

05-03-2009, 09:21 PM

They way I see it, he just gave props to Ron Paul.
Exactly. :)

Yes and those idiots clapped when he said it. tones
It sounded like only a few to me. The same few who clapped when he came on. lol.

Frankly, I think this is hilarious. For him to mention Ron Paul, it means that he and his big government leftist cohorts are feeling the pain from our guys involved in activism working to returning the Republican party back to its roots. I love it. :D

Imagine what would happen if we ALL decided to get serious about this. Ninety percent of winning is just showing up.

max

05-03-2009, 09:34 PM

Exactly. :)

IFor him to mention Ron Paul, it means that he and his big government leftist cohorts are feeling the pain from our guys involved in activism working to returning the Republican party back to its roots.

Imagine what would happen if we ALL decided to get serious about this. Ninety percent of winning is just showing up.

we need to keep hammering away at the neo-cons and weaken them NOW.

two years ago, we were not strong enough to withstand them and our movement was crushed. I figure we have two more years to "lift weights" before the next match.

muh_roads

05-03-2009, 09:48 PM

The future of the party is libertarian thinking. If Republicans don't embrace that they will just keep losing. If Republicans don't embrace those who were so embarrassed by Bush that they would only let him speak at the RNC during commercial break, they will lose. If Republicans don't drop their big ego's and admit their party is full of big spenders with no principles, they will lose.

Because they can't win if the intelligent minority continues to stay home.

ProBlue33

05-03-2009, 10:17 PM

Because public servants should be of impeccable moral caliber. That would disqualify men who like it in the ***

:eek:

ROFL

That comment is so politically incorrect in 2009, but that 's why I love it

Free speech baby

anaconda

05-04-2009, 12:11 AM

They way I see it, he just gave props to Ron Paul.

In a way he is right, current "leader" of Republican party is Michael Steele and not Ron Paul. It was McCain, sorrta, before that.

And people wonder why Republican party is going down to olblivion of nothingness?

Yup. The real conservatives are morphing into something new. People like Lindsey can either get with the program or be left on the scrap heap. The Ron Paul Revolution is taking over!

RonPaulFanInGA

05-04-2009, 01:28 AM

YouTube - Senator Graham says "Ron Paul is not the leader of our Party" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8sYGg4iREA)

Trigonx

05-04-2009, 01:44 AM

its toward 3:45 in the video, so you can skip forward.

TheTyke

05-04-2009, 01:57 AM

Heh, just the old guard vainly clinging to power. Hopefully Bob Conley will replace him next time - as I recall, he was surprisingly close last time, without that much of our support!

abruzz0

05-04-2009, 02:17 AM

As if being recognized as the leader of the GOP would be considered a good thing by today's standards...

Ron Paul is a key leader of the freedom movement, and that's all that matters

Objectivist

05-04-2009, 02:54 AM

"here's what I care about. I care about this party and I care about this country."

Hmm, what about the people that elected your ass Lindsey? What about the American People? I don't like the way he seems to talk down to people so I really don't give a rats ass about him.

Johnnybags

05-04-2009, 03:58 AM

that although Paul is not a leader in the Chamber of Commerce republican party there really is no way to win without his supporters joining you. The Paulites have a veto block on the party nominee. They can nominate who they want but if its vetoed by the Liberty folks, the odds of the nominee winning are zilcho or close to it.

go_carolina_528

05-04-2009, 04:45 AM

I hate Grahamnesty.

lynnf

05-04-2009, 05:29 AM

so, I'm wondering.... why did he feel it necessary to say that? were there a bunch of Ron Paul signs in the crowd? was it at a tea party? did he just feel threatened by Ron Paul's stands?

hmmmmmm...

lynn

Romantarchist

05-04-2009, 05:36 AM

Heh, just the old guard vainly clinging to power. Hopefully Bob Conley will replace him next time - as I recall, he was surprisingly close last time, without that much of our support!

It was 58% Graham, 42% Conley. Graham scored 4% higher than he did in 2002. Maybe that's just because he's the incumbent this time around, but still.

jkr

05-04-2009, 05:52 AM

but we arent welcome, they already proved that.

acptulsa

05-04-2009, 06:45 AM

Didn't Lindsay Graham vote for Obama's GIVE Act bill recently? And he's telling us who the leader of the GOP is?

No, he's telling us who the leader isn't.

And if he's right, then the G.O.P. no longer has either rudder or keel, and the current will carry it right over the falls.

georgiaboy

05-04-2009, 07:09 AM

This feels to me a lot like the old propaganda trick "repeat the lie and it will become the truth".

Lindsay Graham and his liberal cohorts are scared shitless and losing ground fast, and this proves it!!

Senator Graham, you fail.

Elwar

05-04-2009, 07:23 AM

I would not piss on Lindsay Graham if he was on fire.

I'd piss on him if he wasn't on fire.

He Who Pawns

05-04-2009, 07:56 AM

Lindsey Grahamnesty just joined McShame near the top of our hit list of "GOP" members to bring down.

BTW, when will Mr Grahamnesty come out of the homosexual closet?

JamesButabi

05-04-2009, 08:25 AM

This is pretty awesome. Ron Paul wasnt even a blip on the radar of the GOP a few years back. Now they are strategizing how to handle our progress

pacelli

05-04-2009, 08:39 AM

"I like Ron Paul but he is not the leader of our party".

Thank God. At least Lindsay has got something right.

scandinaviany3

05-04-2009, 08:56 AM

Graham conveniently left out his Bushie Republican TARP spending when claiming how "fiscally conservative" he is. What a hypocrite and liar...

yah noticed...he is all the worst of high profile lawyer mixed with politician...

Why anyone elects this demographic instead of has them only on someones staff i will never know.

What i would give to have a representative senate and house without any lawyers/politicians...but instead full of people of all walks of life/statesman and stateswomen.

Schiff and Paul 2010...lets start the movement 2.0!!!

scandinaviany3

05-04-2009, 08:58 AM

Yes we are. I don't really know about the rest of SC but here in Charleston the local morning and mid-day daily talk show hosts (Richard Todd, Jack Hunter aka Southern Avenger, and Rocky D) all talk highly of RP and voted third party this past election. They all give Graham (and the core GOP along with Dems) hell and he rarely comes on for interviews. It's almost exactly the opposite for our junior senator DeMint and Gov. Sanford. Graham feels threatened and thus the platitudes towards RP and those that support his principles.

Graham is the epitome of all that's wrong with the GOP and their stated 'principles'.

amen ...well spoken...

scandinaviany3

05-04-2009, 09:04 AM

we need to keep hammering away at the neo-cons and weaken them NOW.

two years ago, we were not strong enough to withstand them and our movement was crushed. I figure we have two more years to "lift weights" before the next match.

They only get one time at pushing us away...sad to say but they arent getting any younger...

Instead of supporting the young in the movement they supported the Television and the liberal washington to ny insiders....

We can still and should lead by being civil...but we should not waste any time taking command.

Our goal should be to campaign hard in at least 5 core states and dominate in them at all levels and take over the party leadership.

This opens the door at the national convention for our presidential candidate to always be heard and maintained...and with that comes our permanent voice just like the blue dog democrats have in the house...McClintock is in now...and now we need more of him in office...Schiff, Rand Paul, its time to go super nova on this and let them all feel the heat

pacelli

05-04-2009, 09:06 AM

This is pretty awesome. Ron Paul wasnt even a blip on the radar of the GOP a few years back. Now they are strategizing how to handle our progress

Great point.

scandinaviany3

05-04-2009, 09:07 AM

Heh, just the old guard vainly clinging to power. Hopefully Bob Conley will replace him next time - as I recall, he was surprisingly close last time, without that much of our support!

Sad thing was that he just needed a lot more money to shake things up...didnt get it but he still did very very good for coming out of no where.

Lucille

05-04-2009, 09:09 AM

Lindsey last month, Huckabee last week, and Frum today?

What are with all these attacks and back-handed compliments from the GOP on Paul lately?

acptulsa

05-04-2009, 09:12 AM

What are with all these attacks and back-handed compliments from the GOP on Paul lately?

When we sound like Ron Paul, it's not because we're following him! Really! He's not our leader, we just happened to be going the same general direction! That's all! Don't read anything into it or anything! WE have all the ideas, not him!

Cowlesy

05-04-2009, 09:55 AM

Sad thing was that he just needed a lot more money to shake things up...didnt get it but he still did very very good for coming out of no where.

That's a big part of the problem. People like Graham have all sorts of special interest money. Conley got little love from the Democrats who wrote him off right from the get-go, so that's why he was spanked in the election.

It always comes down to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Minarchy4Sale

05-04-2009, 10:07 AM

this douchebag is NOT a Reagan Republican

anaconda

05-04-2009, 12:59 PM

this douchebag is NOT a Reagan Republican

I get uncomfortable with the Reagan references. Mostly what I think of is Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, GHW Bush, the CIA brain washing Afghanis into jihad, Iran Contra, nerve gas for Saddam, a further increasing federal government, etc.

I do not equate Ron Paul even remotely to Reagan. The current GOP slobs babble much of the freedom platform but never follow through, but rather do the NWO bidding.

I prefer to think of "Ron Paul Republicans" instead of "Reagan Republicans."

All of the neocon presidential candidates used the word "Reagan" as much as humanly possible in the debates. Actually, even RP did it, but I only remember him doing it once.

Reagan would have joined the Ron Paul Revolution because he was a good guy with his heart in the right place. But the Reagan administration is a whole different concept. We want to attract people to the RP Revolution from across the spectrum. The references to Reagan is a potential turn off to millions of voters who might join our movement if they can see through the mist and see what it is they will be getting compared to the garbage they are settling for. A Ron Paul administration would be a million miles from a Reagan administration.

Join The Paul Side

05-04-2009, 04:53 PM

The Ron Paul comment comes at 3:55 in the video for all of those who don't want to sit there and listen to this idiot ramble on nearly 4 minutes. :cool:

RSLudlum

05-04-2009, 06:54 PM

Heh, just the old guard vainly clinging to power. Hopefully Bob Conley will replace him next time - as I recall, he was surprisingly close last time, without that much of our support!

Conley only raised $17K and wound up getting 42% of the vote against Graham who spent $7 millioin for 57% of the vote all the while many of the SC Dem. leaders came out in support of Graham over their own party's candidate, Conley. Pretty damn telling of where Graham's laurels rest.

Minarchy4Sale

05-04-2009, 11:24 PM

I get uncomfortable with the Reagan references. Mostly what I think of is Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, GHW Bush, the CIA brain washing Afghanis into jihad, Iran Contra, nerve gas for Saddam, a further increasing federal government, etc.

I do not equate Ron Paul even remotely to Reagan. The current GOP slobs babble much of the freedom platform but never follow through, but rather do the NWO bidding.

I prefer to think of "Ron Paul Republicans" instead of "Reagan Republicans."

All of the neocon presidential candidates used the word "Reagan" as much as humanly possible in the debates. Actually, even RP did it, but I only remember him doing it once.

Reagan would have joined the Ron Paul Revolution because he was a good guy with his heart in the right place. But the Reagan administration is a whole different concept. We want to attract people to the RP Revolution from across the spectrum. The references to Reagan is a potential turn off to millions of voters who might join our movement if they can see through the mist and see what it is they will be getting compared to the garbage they are settling for. A Ron Paul administration would be a million miles from a Reagan administration.

The problem with the Reagan administration is that Reagan wasnt in charge. He was relegated to figurehead status almost immediately. GHWB ran that show. The NEOs put a Goldwater Republican up as the mascot to get in power, and then filled the cabinet with trotskyites and blue blood elitists. Its a recipe for disaster, and if you are paying attention, they are trying to do the same thing again. This is why I have no belief in the sudden turn in folks like Beck.

These shitheels wrap themselves in the flag and constitution long enough to get into office, and then procede to burn them both once they get there.

angelatc

05-05-2009, 04:33 AM

The Southern Avenger weighs in on the topic: http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/SouthernAvenger/archives/2009/05/03/lindsey-graham-ron-paul-is-not-the-leader-of-the-republican-party

Graham is right. He wanted the leader of the GOP to be that standard bearer of staunch limited government conservatism, John McCain, and to a large extent, the Arizona senator's brand of Republicanism still defines the party.

It is telling that a self-described "conservative" like Graham will always go to bat for establishment candidates like McCain, despite their countless faults, yet will always attack actual conservatives like Ron Paul, despite their near ideological perfection.

Here's a stark reminder of why Graham, undeniably, unquestionably and unequivocally - sucks.