I Told You Glenn Beck & Ron Paul Bots Were Dangerous

Share

Something is very, very wrong with conservatives when they can’t tell the difference between the truth and a lie and can’t tell the difference between Ron Paul Bots and Libertarian losers.  When a good man like Bob Inglis is booed because he stated that he was a Republican and not a Libertarian, we have a very real problem – a serious problem – that is going to cost us the House and the Senate once again.

Newsbusters is playing up the way Bob Inglis was booed the other night.  Problem is Newsbusters IS NOT TELLING THE TRUTH about the meeting.

According to the local rag, Inglis was basically verbally assaulted by a bunch of out of control Libertarians and Ron Paul Bots.  He kept telling people he was a Republican and not a Libertarian.  The Ron Paul Bot audience booed – and conservatives don’t care about the truth!  You might want to read the comments on Newsbusters and ask yourself what will happen when Glenn Beck’s LOSERTARIAN followers cause us to lose to Obama – again?

“...One man stood up, said he considered himself a mainstream conservative and said, “I look at the government, and they’re so far outside the Constitution and there’s not a week that goes by that I don’t hear talk about revolution in our country. The only one I know in Congress who abides by our Constitution is Ron Paul.”…”

Ron Paul is mainstream?

Once again SC’s bad boy blog, FTS is making trouble for Republicans.  From what I gather we’re dealing with more Libertarians Gone Wild.  We’re also dealing with conservatives who don’t give a damn about the truth and are determined to lie to further their libertarian cause.  Case in point is the deplorable lies at Newsbusters about the incident.

In 1994, when Bob Inglis was elected to the 4th District in SC he was by far the most conservative Republican in the state.  Things have gone so far astray, the libertarians have taken over – actually we’re dealing with a bunch of Ron Paul Bots gone bad.

The other night Inglis was booed at a town hall when he told people to quit listening to Glenn Beck!   The problem is Noel Sheppard from Newsbusters obviously knows none of the background, or the fact that Inglis was accosted by the usual suspect, in all likelyhood egged on in their bad behavior by FTS.  (It has happened before – FTS makes a heck of a lot of trouble, including some nasty threats to Gresham Barrett).

If the GOP loses the House and the Senate in 2010, it will be because of Glenn Beck and his over the top Libertarian demands.

It also looks like Noel Sheppard was not telling the whole truth about the meeting, and that the Ron Paul Tea Party Bots were out in force.

“…All of this took place despite Inglis saying repeatedly that he was against the current health care bill. His office sent out a list of 16 reasons why earlier in the day, though his focus was on what he called a public option for health care that would wipe private providers out of the market and lead to a single-payer system.

But, he said, “It’s not enough to say no to that and not have solutions to the problems that exist.”…”

Share

4 thoughts on “I Told You Glenn Beck & Ron Paul Bots Were Dangerous

  1. Bob Inglis is incompetent, voted for the Bailout of 2008 and other money-sucking bills which our children and grandchildren will be paying for. It’s immoral and unethical.

    The real problem is Republi-cons like you, who go along to get along, marching to the Socialist, mushy-middle like a good Neo-con-bot. Bad writers like us, can only name-call instead of debate policy, right Ms. Inglis-bot-loser?

  2. If you chose to stay in power you must follow the party of power this senator understands that and is compling as he should he knows that his party doesnt have the answer and if his state wishes to get the funding it needs to survive he along with the others of his state will have to join us, is not far fetched to even say at some point he may even join the party moment and pledges his alegence to our goals.

  3. The quote said that Ron Paul was the one who followed the constitution. You then sarcastically question if Paul is mainstream. So according to you, the basis of constitutionality is being mainstream? Either your understanding of the constitution or quotes is fail.

Comments are closed.