R U serious? It might be a valid question, but has an obvious answer.
Depends on your point of view, we counter-attack, they invade.No, you did the invading. The correct term for what we did would be "counter-attacked".
Depends on your point of view, we counter-attack, they invade.
The counter-attack, by definition, can't come first.
Spunk?American usage of this word must differ from British usage.
![]()
If Ron Paul got close to winning he would be assassinated. Too many very powerful people would be hurt by him
INRM
(And to Parky and other members, no this does not mean the Jews)
Your definition doesn't appear to account for the preemptive counter-attack.
If some insanely deadly disease runs rampant through America and kills off the 95% of the population that wouldn't vote for Ron Paul under any circumstances then yes, Ron Paul could win.
Well then he doesn't have to worry about getting assassinated, does he?If Ron Paul got close to winning he would be assassinated.
Too many very powerful people would be hurt by him
INRM
(And to Parky and other members, no this does not mean the Jews)
25 reasons Why Ron Paul can win in 2012 (Summary)
Well then he doesn't have to worry about getting assassinated, does he?
Exactly who are these non-Jewish "powerful people"? Please be specific.
Ron Paul did not win in 2008. He didn't even run against Obama and McCain.
He will not win in 2012. He probably won't even run in 2012.
RP will be too old in 2012
