February 10, 2011
— Gabriel Malor Donald Trump made a surprise appearance at CPAC this afternoon, after accepting the invitation of GOProud to appear. Trump is supposedly exploring a presidential run (a serious one).
During his speech, he managed to rile the unfortunately large crowd of Ronulans that Ron Paul bussed in for the straw poll.
“By the way, Ron Paul cannot get elected, I’m sorry to tell you,” Trump said. “I like Ron Paul, I think he’s a good guy but honestly he just has zero chance of getting elected.”. Video at that link.
Note: the Ronulans have consistently been the most classless group here. They repeatedly interrupted Cheney's introduction of Rumsfeld with shouts of "war criminal", "where's bin Laden", "draft dodger", and (reportedly) "show us the Shekels."
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
12:40 PM
| Comments (140)
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Captain Hate at February 10, 2011 12:42 PM (eh+ki)
Neither can Donald trump. What the purpose of this speech was I have no clue.
Posted by: Rocks at February 10, 2011 12:42 PM (Q1lie)
Posted by: Ben of the Logprof Freedom Brigade at February 10, 2011 12:43 PM (wuv1c)
Posted by: Enochf at February 10, 2011 12:43 PM (ZbtIh)
Posted by: Ben of the Logprof Freedom Brigade at February 10, 2011 12:44 PM (wuv1c)
Is there a "main" website/blog that the Ron Paul people use? I'd like to go mock the shit out of them.
Posted by: Lincolntf at February 10, 2011 12:44 PM (xMT+4)
Posted by: goldbricker esq at February 10, 2011 12:46 PM (S59+B)
Oh, wait...
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 10, 2011 12:46 PM (iBaup)
If we're purging anyone, I say let's start there.
Posted by: DrewM. at February 10, 2011 12:47 PM (HicGG)
Posted by: Steve the Pirate at February 10, 2011 12:47 PM (W54Uh)
Posted by: Ben of the Logprof Freedom Brigade at February 10, 2011 12:48 PM (wuv1c)
Posted by: the guy who yells "RON PAUL!" ironically at February 10, 2011 12:48 PM (VC56G)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 10, 2011 12:48 PM (UOM48)
Posted by: Chuckit at February 10, 2011 12:48 PM (w4t7/)
If we're purging anyone, I say let's start there.
Posted by: DrewM. at February 10, 2011 04:47 PM (HicGG)
There's no need to. The only place they ever make an impact and end up being distracting is at CPAC.
Posted by: Rocks at February 10, 2011 12:49 PM (Q1lie)
Posted by: Ben of the Logprof Freedom Brigade
Or knob-gobblers? We're not picky.
Posted by: Z Ryan at February 10, 2011 12:50 PM (FjmSl)
There's no need to. The only place they ever make an impact and end up being distracting is at CPAC.
an online polls, don't forget online polls
Posted by: Ben of the Logprof Freedom Brigade at February 10, 2011 12:50 PM (wuv1c)
Let me second Rocks comment "neither can Trump". Having said that Ron Paul's first run put some important issues on the table. Paul knew he couldn't run, but did so out of a dedication to his poltical philosophy.
Trump is running without an coherent political philosophy out of a dedication to his ego.
Who's the bigger loser?
BTW: Ron Paul has left a trail of humans he helped birth behind him. Trump has left a trail of people who got screwed when he used bankruptcy law to discharge his debts.
But, he is right about Ron Paul not being elected. Only Mitt, Huck or Paling can win the nomination and possibly be elected, everyone else is running VP - but they don't know it.
Posted by: Jackson at February 10, 2011 12:50 PM (eDJf1)
an online polls, don't forget online polls
Posted by: Ben of the Logprof Freedom Brigade at February 10, 2011 04:50 PM (wuv1c)
yes, those are critical.
Posted by: Rocks at February 10, 2011 12:50 PM (Q1lie)
Posted by: toby928™: Popular Front for the Liberation of logprof at February 10, 2011 12:51 PM (GTbGH)
Posted by: Ben of the Logprof Soviet Republic at February 10, 2011 12:51 PM (wuv1c)
Posted by: joncelli at February 10, 2011 12:52 PM (RD7QR)
Posted by: qs at February 10, 2011 12:52 PM (FbCum)
Posted by: Judge of Bitch Slaps at February 10, 2011 12:52 PM (YZISw)
Posted by: Ben of the Logprof Soviet Republic at February 10, 2011 04:51 PM (wuv1c)
Yes but just think what he will do to the decor of the White House. Gold plating those pillars is going to be very tacky.
Posted by: Rocks at February 10, 2011 12:53 PM (Q1lie)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at February 10, 2011 12:54 PM (SJ6/3)
I will say that I agree with a lot of what the guy says w/r/t domestic issues and some of what he says w/r/t foreign policy BUT the crazy quotient among his base is pretty high. Their cultish behavior is a real turn off.
Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at February 10, 2011 12:54 PM (JxMoP)
Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 10, 2011 12:56 PM (iMgAa)
Posted by: Rocks at February 10, 2011 12:56 PM (Q1lie)
Posted by: nevergiveup at February 10, 2011 12:57 PM (0GFWk)
Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 10, 2011 12:57 PM (iMgAa)
Posted by: Dan at February 10, 2011 12:58 PM (mXBxH)
I thought about that for 10 seconds and LMAO because I knew the Paulbots would be there and the straw poll wouldn't be worht a shit/
Posted by: Vic at February 10, 2011 01:01 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: USA at February 10, 2011 01:01 PM (YZISw)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at February 10, 2011 01:01 PM (c5RQr)
Posted by: nevergiveup at February 10, 2011 01:01 PM (0GFWk)
Posted by: Dan at February 10, 2011 01:02 PM (mXBxH)
Posted by: GT at February 10, 2011 01:02 PM (Vyrg6)
Posted by: Dan at February 10, 2011 01:03 PM (mXBxH)
Fact is Ron Paul and his followers are dangerous. They can be very radical and could very well form a third party, fracture the Republican Party, and put Obama who has shown his utter incompetence in this Egypt crisis back in the White House and that would be a catastrophy.
Solution? Stay firm about reducing domestic welfare spending and repealing Obamunist care. Co-opt the serious aspects of Ron Paul. Once again:
Where Ron Paul Rules: Domestic policy, spending
Where Ron Paul Sucks: Foreign policy
This rests the case for, and against, Ron Paul.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at February 10, 2011 01:03 PM (ujg0T)
I was actually going to suggest a junket with an Uruguayan Rugby team across the Andes.
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 10, 2011 01:04 PM (iBaup)
Posted by: Jay in Ames at February 10, 2011 01:05 PM (UEEex)
Posted by: nevergiveup at February 10, 2011 01:07 PM (0GFWk)
Posted by: nickless: I'm with the banned (99.174.64.43) at February 10, 2011 01:07 PM (qdtoY)
Didn't Trump say the same thing about Palin? Not being electable, that is?
Posted by: Jay in Ames at February 10, 2011 05:05 PM (UEEex)
Yeah this coming from a guy who has declared bankruptcy a few times not to mention his all his wives and his hair
Trump is a jester. That said, jesters often tell it like it is.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at February 10, 2011 01:08 PM (ujg0T)
Posted by: Buzz at February 10, 2011 01:08 PM (i27M5)
I'm pretty sure it involves eye of newt and swelter'd venom.
Posted by: Waterhouse at February 10, 2011 01:10 PM (Q0w+1)
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 10, 2011 01:10 PM (HLFbQ)
Posted by: LA Liberty at February 10, 2011 01:10 PM (Ma+GP)
I hear Paul had these wild bunga buna parties where all the chicks would gather round the mother ship and yell Ron Paul! He won ever internet poll evahhh!
The headline should read. Trump gives Ron Paul a dirty sanchez at CPAC.
Posted by: BruceTheRobert at February 10, 2011 01:11 PM (h8+SZ)
And some are treating all components of that sentence seriously.
Let's move on before I start going all Buford Pussery with this stick, shall we?
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 10, 2011 01:11 PM (gDbxE)
Fuck Ron Paul absolutely and forever.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at February 10, 2011 01:12 PM (FYCiJ)
Solution? Stay firm about reducing domestic welfare spending and repealing Obamunist care. Co-opt the serious aspects of Ron Paul. Once again:
Where Ron Paul Rules: Domestic policy, spending
Where Ron Paul Sucks: Foreign policy
This rests the case for, and against, Ron Paul
Tipping the scales in the "against" are his small army of obnoxious retards pulling shit like this at CPAC.
What's the point of bussing in Paulbots this year? Crazy Uncle Ron isn't going to run again, is he?
At this point I don't care how much I might agree with him on policy. I just want to see the douche and his idiot supporters go the fuck away.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at February 10, 2011 01:15 PM (SY2Kh)
Didn't Trump say the same thing about Palin? Not being electable, that is?
I don't know, but it doesn't take a political genius to recognize the obvious.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at February 10, 2011 01:17 PM (SY2Kh)
At this point I don't care how much I might agree with him on policy. I just want to see the douche and his idiot supporters go the fuck away.
And that is why the GOP must co-opt what is serious about Ron Paul. "LA Liberty" at #58 has a point.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at February 10, 2011 01:17 PM (ujg0T)
I won't defend any interruptions, but man, you guys just hate ideological consistency.
You want "small government" except in areas you don't.
Neither does Ron Paul. He's not been shy about getting earmarks for his district.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at February 10, 2011 01:19 PM (SY2Kh)
"While I am not at this time a candidate for the presidency, I will decide by June," the wealthy New York businessman said, declaring himself fed up with the way America has become "a whipping post for the world."
Trump laid claim to the mantle of conservatism. "I am pro-life. Against gun control... I will fight to end Obamacare and replace it with something that makes sense to people in business and not bankrupt the country. If I decide to run, I will not be raising taxes. We will be taking in hundreds of billions of dollars from other countries that are screwing us ... and we'll rebuild our country so that we can be proud. Our country will be great again," he said.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 10, 2011 01:19 PM (T5Brv)
Posted by: booger at February 10, 2011 01:22 PM (9RFH1)
Posted by: naturalfake at February 10, 2011 01:23 PM (+kzvp)
As for the paulbots, there should be some kind of a screen at the entrance to CPAC that throws them out. With them around no straw poll is worth a shit anymore.
Posted by: Vic at February 10, 2011 01:23 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Democratic Underground at February 10, 2011 01:23 PM (VgM+c)
You know who Ron Paul supporters remind me of? Christine O'Donnell supporters.
Yeah, I know. That was uncalled for.
Posted by: Virginia Bob at February 10, 2011 01:25 PM (xh3gA)
On a humorous note, that person was then bludgeoned to death by the rest of the audience....
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 10, 2011 01:25 PM (T5Brv)
Posted by: naturalfake at February 10, 2011 01:27 PM (+kzvp)
Can you feel the electricity in the air....
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 10, 2011 01:27 PM (T5Brv)
Ron Paul is a tremendous Representative.
Any situation in which he has more than 1/435 of a vote is asking for trouble.
Posted by: The Q at February 10, 2011 01:29 PM (AXHCj)
Posted by: naturalfake at February 10, 2011 01:30 PM (+kzvp)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, Chairman of the Non-Partisan Anti-nickless/logprof League at February 10, 2011 01:32 PM (xmuv/)
Posted by: nevergiveup at February 10, 2011 04:57 PM (0GFWk)
They tried to do that in '08. Because the Republican leadership is slack at the grassroots level many Ronulans were able to get into precinct leadership roles. They almost split several state conventions in '08. The Tea Party caught them by surprise...but they'll be back. I know of two states where they wanted to have the State Convention replace the McCain Delegates with Ron Paul Delegates. Will of the People my ass.
Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at February 10, 2011 01:33 PM (VgM+c)
Posted by: Adjoran at February 10, 2011 01:36 PM (VfmLu)
Posted by: MJH at February 10, 2011 01:38 PM (kBLec)
Trump is interesting. He can go toe to toe with zero on the celebrity front, and he's a successful businessman to boot. He's a lot better than most of the guys runnings.
Giuliani revisited. Similar skeletons falling out of the closet, too.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at February 10, 2011 01:40 PM (ujg0T)
Rumsfeld is being given CPAC's "Defender Of The Constitution" award, a concept that apparently rankled Paul supporters in the crowd. Many of them got up and walked out en masse at the mention of Rumsfeld, though some stayed behind in the conference hall to heckle the architects of the invasion of Iraq.
One shout of "where's Bin Laden?" rang out as Cheney spoke of Rumsfeld.
That led to the pro-Cheney contingent (which it should be said greatly outnumbers the opposition) to shout the hecklers down with the familiar "USA, USA" chant.
It was all very odd, especially considering that when Cheney appeared as the "surprise guest" at last year's CPAC he was greeted with the kind of cheers generally reserved for a rock star.
But Team Paul -- whose numbers appear to have grown at CPAC in 2011 -- were not going to let that happen this time around.
"Uh, Defender of the Constitution?" Justin Bradfield of Maryland scoffed when I caught up with him after he walked out of Rumsfeld's speech. "Let's see: he expanded the Defense Department more than pretty much any other defense secretary and he enforced the Patriot Act."
"[Speaking] as a libertarian, that's not really the type of person who should be getting Defender of the Constitution," he added.
Bradfield said the moment showed that "half" of CPAC this year is libertarian, which means his side is winning in the civil war between "libertarians and right-wing conservatives."
"We're loud," he said.
TPMDC
CPAC becoming a Libertarian date night may be due to the deliberate effort by the organizers to open the flaps of the big tent wide and invite in all comers. When you say you're the type of conservatives who are "cool" with drugs and gay sex, don't be surprised when these guys show up.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 10, 2011 01:40 PM (T5Brv)
If the so-called mainstream grassroots is so big, why can't they ever bother to show up anywhere. And don't even get me started about Paul's influence on the Tea Party movement, which was enormous.
And while I don't advocate heckling anybody, what exactly has Rumsfeld done that is "conservative"?-- He's a big-government establishment Republican hack who pursued foolish policies that help cost Republicans our congressional majorities.
Posted by: Dissapointing at February 10, 2011 01:41 PM (kuJJV)
You want "small government" except in areas you don't.
And?
Posted by: hobgoblin of small minds at February 10, 2011 01:41 PM (GTbGH)
Posted by: MJH at February 10, 2011 01:43 PM (kBLec)
Posted by: LA Liberty at February 10, 2011 01:44 PM (Ma+GP)
By the way, I have few problems with Ron Paul or disliking how big government and anti-liberty Cheney and Rumsfeld were.
It's the interrupting of speeches and yelling out whatever crosses your mind regardless of situation that makes me lose respect for the Paulians.
Posted by: The Q at February 10, 2011 01:48 PM (AXHCj)
And while I don't advocate heckling anybody, what exactly has Rumsfeld done that is "conservative"?-- He's a big-government establishment Republican hack who pursued foolish policies that help cost Republicans our congressional majorities.
Rumsfeld pushed illegal alien amnesty? Who knew?
Rumsfeld pushed prescription drug entitlements? Who knew?
Rumsfeld played rope-a-dope with the Iraq insurgents? Yes. And it worked. Sorry isolationists, but the world is too small now. Right-isolationism is honest and sincere unlike Left-isolationism, which simply wants to see the enemies of America win. But isolationism either way won't have a pleasant outcome...
Posted by: Curmudgeon at February 10, 2011 01:53 PM (ujg0T)
Newt Gingrich used his CPAC speech to rally against the EPA as well as President Obama's energy policies. Gingrich claimed that Obama was waging "a war on American energy." According to AP, Gingrich wants to scrap the EPA altogether and "replace it with an Environmental Solutions Agency that rewards innovation."
I guess Newt assumes no one saw his duet with Pelosi on climate change.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 10, 2011 01:57 PM (T5Brv)
Nice......
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 10, 2011 01:59 PM (T5Brv)
"The Donald" must be some kind of brilliant businessman, but I'm always kind of taken aback at how seriously clueless he is whenever he opens his mouth to talk about politics. He'll rattle stuff off that even I can tell you is just factually wrong, or simply is completely devoid of any logical basis. It's just weird. You might expect that from some goofball actor/actress or athlete, but you'd think this guy would do better.
That being said, it's probably true that Ron Paul has no real chance of being elected, but I don't see the point of Trump bringing that up. It's unfortunate how ill-behave the "Ronulans" can be. Some of their guy stands for is really refreshing, and we desperately need more of it. On other things, he's kind of off-the-wall - he's especially naive and impractical with his isolationism.
Posted by: Optimizer at February 10, 2011 02:00 PM (2lTU+)
Damn, has she got that much money? Good looking, conservative and rich! Does she own a liquor store?
Posted by: Vic at February 10, 2011 02:09 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Vic
Palin/Bachmann 2012: In a Naughty Way
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 10, 2011 02:18 PM (T5Brv)
Posted by: Reiver at February 10, 2011 02:19 PM (TPbXK)
and Trump is all about being classy. He'll tell you so.
Posted by: Ned Ryerson. I used to bone Ayn Rand at February 10, 2011 02:21 PM (AOruP)
Carl Camerones just said Ron Paul "triggered the Tea Party movement in 2008." WTF?
He didn't trigger it. However, if you don't understand that the "No Bailout!" Paulians are very much a part of the Tea Party movement, I don't know what to tell you.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at February 10, 2011 02:26 PM (ujg0T)
Posted by: JASmius at February 10, 2011 02:26 PM (VS0P/)
Posted by: Vic at February 10, 2011 02:33 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Jeff B. at February 10, 2011 02:37 PM (NjYDy)
97 Ron Paul "triggered the Tea Party movement in 2008." WTF?
There were two separate groups that came together in late 2008 after the Bush TARP bailout to form the Tea Party:
1. The Paulian anti-war, anti-Bush surveillance and PATRIOT ACT crowd
2. The pro-GWOT conservatives who hated Bush for Dubai Ports, amnesty, Harriet Miers, etc.
They both hated big government in certain ways, and for both, TARP was a bridge too far. Together, the Tea Party movement began.
It's important to point that out especially because conventional ignorance states that the Tea Party formed in response to Obama. It did not.
Posted by: The Q at February 10, 2011 02:40 PM (AXHCj)
Posted by: Buzz at February 10, 2011 02:41 PM (i27M5)
Ron Paul's "tea party" in 2007 was an Anti-War, anti-American protest first and foremost.
Tea Parties today are not anti-war nutjob gatherings like what Paul had in 2007.
Posted by: jp at February 10, 2011 02:56 PM (x7byD)
Posted by: Eliza Dolittle Flower Girl and Community Organizer at February 10, 2011 03:15 PM (UL/HQ)
Posted by: Uncle Jed at February 10, 2011 03:18 PM (vXwmy)
Posted by: John at February 10, 2011 03:19 PM (65bDX)
The second one got about a half-hour into the conversation before he brought up "Jew bankers".
I just said "I'm a Jew *and you're leaning on a third-floor railing."
Oddly enough, he didn't want to talk about it anymore.
* - I'm a Technical Jew - I'm mostly German and wasn't raised in any way Jewishly, but my Mother's Mother's Mother was a Jew (full stop) so in some circles that makes me one. Close enough for shtting-p-an-asshole work.
I call myself a "Bacon-eatin' Jew," when the topic comes up.
Posted by: Merovign, Bond Villain at February 10, 2011 03:21 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Jackson at February 10, 2011 03:22 PM (65bDX)
Posted by: Merovign, Bond Villain at February 10, 2011 03:22 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Uncle Jed at February 10, 2011 03:26 PM (vXwmy)
Being anti-military overspending is anti-conservative.
Being a draft dodger is a patriot. Two draft dodgers together is "USA! USA! USA!".
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
The term is "magical fairy dust isolationists" not "anti-American." You Paulbots are consistently tiresome, I'll give you that much.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 10, 2011 03:28 PM (gDbxE)
Posted by: John at February 10, 2011 03:34 PM (65bDX)
Posted by: Uncle Jed at February 10, 2011 03:40 PM (vXwmy)
Posted by: Micah Nelson at February 10, 2011 03:42 PM (aufmq)
Ron Paul founded the Tea Party movement.
He had had hundreds of tea parties nation wide long before Santelli called for more of them.
Posted by: qs at February 10, 2011 03:42 PM (FbCum)
Posted by: Mr. Diddy Wah Diddy at February 10, 2011 03:43 PM (BZEkR)
Posted by: Mr. Diddy Wah Diddy at February 10, 2011 03:54 PM (BZEkR)
Posted by: Berserker at February 10, 2011 04:07 PM (gWHrG)
Posted by: Captain Hate at February 10, 2011 04:19 PM (eh+ki)
1. Trump would not be my nominee but he is electable and one poll I saw had him tied w/ Obama and another beating him. He's unelectable in the primaries however and I hope he's not Ross Perot 2.0
2. Paul is unelectable and everything about his trutherism and douchebag supporters is right on but to the commenter who mentioned Trump talking about Palin being unelectable...um...that's true too. In fact Paul polls better against Obama in Rasmussen then Palin and they both get beat easily by him
3. To the commenter that compared Christine O'Donell supporters to Pauls' I'd say that's right on ecept O'Donell supporters aren't truthers just ignorant of facts on the ground and the background of their candidate (just like Paul supporters)
Posted by: YRM (Rarest Ace Commenter, Most Common Ace Reader) at February 10, 2011 04:31 PM (UzBwz)
Posted by: Dan at February 10, 2011 04:36 PM (31+li)
If that's what you think the purpose of bombing is you are beyond help.
But we already knew that, right?
Tell us again how to make the whole letters of marque thing work in the 21st century. I always get a kick out of that. (Note: Check the post at the top of the blog for reason number one why this was yet another of Ineffectual Ron's stupid, empty, meaningless "ideas".)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 10, 2011 04:42 PM (gDbxE)
Posted by: jp at February 10, 2011 04:43 PM (SV1nj)
Unless it's that place with all the Jooooooooos.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 10, 2011 04:45 PM (gDbxE)
Posted by: carl hungus at February 10, 2011 04:47 PM (ONJpP)
Posted by: carl hungus at February 10, 2011 08:47 PM (ONJpP)
they remind me of TNA Wrestling fans, oh wait no moron's gonna get that anology since im the only pro-wrestling fan on Ace
okay they remind me of...generation Y!
Posted by: YRM (Rarest Ace Commenter, Most Common Ace Reader) at February 10, 2011 04:51 PM (UzBwz)
Two Bush regimes left us adrift in a sea of negative electability.
Rep. Michele Bachmann respects the Patriot Act, but also listens to the FiCon (Ronulans included) concerns regarding the deficit, debt, inflation, etc.
If she can't unite the warring SoCons and FiCons by 2012, we are looking at another 4 years of Obama.
Can't we work with the libertarian wing to prevent that?!?!
IMO, Reagan would.....
Posted by: Black Hawk at February 10, 2011 04:58 PM (k+XzD)
Posted by: Steph at February 10, 2011 05:32 PM (AkdC5)
Posted by: cheshirecat at February 10, 2011 06:42 PM (Mt9hi)
She flashed her tits?
Posted by: OregonMuse at February 10, 2011 06:48 PM (R88Ry)
Posted by: Spurwing Plover at February 10, 2011 08:13 PM (vA9ld)
Posted by: Greta at February 11, 2011 02:38 AM (POE3L)
Posted by: Mikey NTH at February 11, 2011 05:55 AM (O9Cc8)
Why did the big tough chickenhawks and homophobes CUT & RUN, instead of staying and holding their conservative territory?
Are the Neocons CONDEDING the fight to the Ronulans?
It sure looks like it these past couple of years....
Posted by: Black Hawk at February 11, 2011 01:27 PM (k+XzD)
I said several years ago that the first party to adopt the libertarian mindset without its more loony fringe would be the big winner for a while. Looks like the GOP is picking them up.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 11, 2011 03:05 PM (61b7k)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3253 seconds, 268 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: goldbricker esq at February 10, 2011 12:42 PM (S59+B)