0 votes


Below are some quotes from 'preferred' (who is most likely the same guy as 'bedr1', 'JFEJ004', billydee, onevoice, etc) and show pretty clearly what he thinks about Paul supporters who don't trust and support Barr, and who think Bush should be impeached. These guys are here to spread division and confusion. I'm a bit sick of them, I don't know about the rest of you.


On July 25th, 2008 preferred says:

"I'm convinced that most people on this forum are complete idiots. There are a few intelligent people, but most are idiots or crazy."

"These are the same people who were naive enough to think Dr. Paul had much of a chance at being elected president. ................So I doubt there is getting through to that irrational sect of Paul supporters. They're beyond reasoning with. Their heads are in the clouds. You're not talking to people playing with a full deck here."

"Who in their right mind could think someone advocating that much freedom could win the presidency anyway? Most Americans are nowhere near ready to accept that. "


***On July 25th, 2008 preferred says:
"There has been no evidence at all that Bush committed a crime. I don't see any way that Bush would be impeached. Impeachment is the filing of formal charges. Without strong probable cause they he broke the law, it's not going to happen.
This is just political grandstanding, and everyone there knows it."

On July 26th, 2008 docholladay says:

I realize that my post about the 'Barr Spammers' has caused quite a dust-up, and I would like to offer some more thoughts. There have been several intelligent posts about a 'cease fire' on this issue, some well thought out and well written, and I have spent a lot of time thinking about each of them. After consideration, I would like to clarify why I still believe that it is important to expose the troublemakers for what they are. Here's why:
I think that in an ideal world, it would be better to avoid these kinds of conflicts, but due to the fact that our 'enemies' (meaning the neocon establishment and their supporters) are insidious, cunning, and shrewd, it is obvious that we DON'T live in an ideal world. Unfortunately, the methods I've employed are necessary in order to reveal the true nature and motives of a few posters here at the DP whom I FULLY believe are full time employees of the neocon camp, sent here to the DP to distract, confuse, and divide the true patriots of this all important Revolution. It has been proven that these guys operate under multiple screen names, and change them regularly when they get caught, exposed, and blackballed. To prove my point, here's a couple of quotes from BillyDee (who I believe to be the same guy as bedr1, preferred, onevoice, minichrist, JFEJ004, and others)

"I change my username every week or so. When you think I'm gone in a few days, I'll actually still be here under another name. I like keeping people on their toes. I may actually start changing it daily." Billydee

"Trust is Irrelevant".Billydee

These guys have no integrity, and the constant changing of usernames shows that plainly. If they were sincere and honest, they wouldn't need to do this. There is no need for being 'covert' and evasive when your motives are sincere. These are the same guys who have colluded in the past to delete important posts regarding 9/11 and other topics which were actually having an impact, and which are incredibly vital to the fight for liberty in which we are now involved.

I (and most other DPers ) have no problem with liberty and personal choice..... People can vote for Bob Barr, Baldwin, Santa Clause, or Satan for that matter, if they want to. What we DO have a problem with is the CONTINUOUS spamming here for a candidate (Barr) who voted for the Patriot Act, and in whom perceptive Revolutionaries have little to no trust. This site is a Ron Paul site. These guys don't respect others on this site and are constantly trying to marginalize solid positions which are presented here on crucial issues.
"I'm convinced that most people on this forum are complete idiots. There are a few intelligent people, but most are idiots or crazy." preferred

I understand that many other DPers may actually also support Barr and have a different view than most of the rest of us who don't trust him. That is their right and healthy discussion and debate is a good thing. I am merely trying to expose the one or two 'members' here who are strictly working to undermine the momentum of the Ron Paul Revolution..... the ones who evade direct questions, use circular arguements, change user names every couple of days, and who 'talk to themselves' via different user names in an attempt to fool and manipulate others into believing that they have support for an indefensible position.

I also tend to disagree with the idea that being agressive in the search for and presentation of truth in ANY form is harmful to the movement. I understand that certain topics are contriversial (9/11 in particular), but it is those very topics which hold the key to defeating the entire neocon powerbase. If we hold back the truth in order to 'spare someone's feelings' etc, then we are just as guilty of manipulation as the neocons, MSM, etc. The revolution is based on truth, personal responsibility, and the fact that A is A.... that reality is reality and must be dealt with accordingly. When we omit important truths and edit content to make the message more 'appealing' then we compromise the very integrity which gives the Revolution it's power. The thing about the truth is that no matter how ugly it is, it can't be changed, and therefore can be depended on to be a constant... an absolute.
The fact that these clowns are here all day, every day, doing nothing but attempting to detract from the truth of 9/11, the dubious nature of Bob Barr etc, shows that we have them scared. What's more, it shows that either they don't have a job, or more likely that spreading disinfo IS their job. I, for one, am not going to sit back and be 'nice' and 'tolerant' of people whose sole motivation and purpose here is to undermine the very priciples of liberty that I would give my life to defend.

So, say what you will, I refuse to sit back and be passive when it comes to those who obviously want the Revolution, 9/11 truth, and Liberty to fail. I will be as mean, aggressive, and juvinile as it takes to expose these disinfo ass clowns for what they are.

"Doc" Holladay
Nashville, TN

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Now if Barr

would be such a neocon and a devil in disguise, why would Dr. Paul root for him and Baldwin? Is Dr. Paul then also part of the "neocon conspiracy"? Really, please use some logic.
I have no problem that not all support Barr at the same time and some may take some time to "vet" him, but really insinuating that he was appointed by "neocons" is just downright stupid. The majority of the delegates of the LP has nominated him. Of all the LP candidates, it was clear Dr. Paul would prefer Bob Barr and Mary Ruwart. Ruwart is also not 100% on the same platform than Dr. Paul. Dr. Phllies and some radicals have been critical of Barr, just as they had been critical of Dr. Paul.
Bruce Fein - a friend and adviser of both Dr. Paul and Barr - has called for the impeachment of Bush a long time ago. Barr is now a leader of the LP and not a political prosecutor or sitting in congress, thus he is not in the same position and I really think his main message should be spreading the limited govt. and non-interventionist policy etc. etc. and not the impeachment of Bush in the first sense. The same with Dr. Paul, he has never made the impeachment of Bush any basis of his message.
I have done EXTENSIVE research on Barr, listnened to countless radio interviews with Chuch Baldwin, Alex Jones and Scott Horton, Thoma Hartmann etc. with Barr in 2004, 2005 etc. and see a great level of consistency and seriousness.Barr is a traditional "Old Right" conservative, just like Dr. Paul. Jack Hunter aka Southern Avenger and many others have held interviews with him and indicated they would support him. Hunter introduced Dr. Paul to the SC rally and supported Pat Buchanan a few years ago.

We might all have rallied around Barr

when the right time came, but NOOOOO, his support had to push, had to invade this site, had to tell us we had to get on board right now, had to say negativity that we did not want to hear about the status of the Ron Paul chances. If they had just done their own site and let us find them in our own good time, things would have worked out far better. They act as if we don't have a brain of our own. We can make our own decisions. We don't have to have anyone shoved down our throats. They turn a person totally off by being pushy. All people want to do is degrade Paul supporters, well I think it is time to look at Barr supporters trying to hijack a ship, trying to run it off course, trying to sabotage it.

What gets me

is that they come here spamming to beat the band, post under numerous fake names, sow discord trying to pry off some support for Barr, and then call for "tolerance" when they get blowback from it.

It would be hard to get any lower.
It's so "neocon-like", that it's sickening.

It is neo-conn like... I agree!

The good part is we all have seen in living color, how "NOT to Behave" when visiting other's sites.

Speaking for myself...I've invested time, money, hard work and my reputation supporting the message of Ron Paul and now continuing thru the Campaign for Liberty.

When the time comes I'll know what to do & who to vote for. I don't need to be "TOLD" what to do, I'm not a sheep... um, Left the hurd, get it?

We should all be able to to remain brothers & sisters in our cause for liberty wether we endorse, Paul, Barr or Baldwin. These are individual and personal choices. Some people don't understand that and that's what makes it neo-conn like in my opinion. I wont be "Forced" into anything anymore.


EVEN CONSIDER BARR FOR ANYTHING but a voter for the patriot act and a pro war platform and pro drug war etc...

He would not endorse

Chuck Baldwin either. He roots for both of them and that it as far as he can go. Are you aware that Dr. Paul is NOT allowed to endorse any third party candidate, for the presidency or for senator or congress? He may also not endorse a Ron Paul candidate running against a gOP incumbent, you know. So do not look for Dr. Paul to endorse someone officially before you would support him or her, Dr. Paul is simply not able to endorse some, although he would really have wanted to.

This is getting inane.

I've seen the headers for these kinds of threads, but I've never read one until now.

This little school yard feud is ridiculous. The truism of Libertarian types eating their own could not be be more clearly demonstrated than this and similar threads.

What if you characterized all Ron Paul supporters here by just a handful of threads? Or by the comments of some who support him? Geesh, I've seen some doozies here that would be either laughable or plain frightening if judged under the same criteria.

I'm still a Ron Paul guy, but may vote for Mr. Barr come election time. So he supported the Patriot Act? So he's not the carbon copy of Ron Paul? Guess what? I too thought the Patriot Act seemed like a good idea at the time. I suspect there are many here in the same boat. Or maybe... I'm just another neo-con plant who has yet to realize it. ;-[

I've come along way from that position and many others in the last year and a half. It's called growth, new understanding, intellectual development... use your own term to describe the phenomena. Isn't Bob Barr entitled to the same process? By any stretch, his refutation of his past support for some of these initiatives speaks for itself.

History points out that the founding fathers encompassed many cantankerous personalities and schools of thought on what this new adventure in government should be. What if these squabbles- some significant and some petty, were to divide them and divert them from the victory they eventually achieved? It's a big picture thing.

Whose on the side of liberty in this election? Obama, McCain or Bob Barr?

hint: The answer rhymes with "car".

Which one of these men testified for impeaching the President today?

hint: rhymes with "star".

Get over it guys, move on and spend this energy elsewhere. Use it to fight the good fight against the dark cloud of tyranny that is all too quickly enveloping this republic.

And if by chance, Bob Barr is elected president, sprouts neo-con horns, and reveals his NWO allegiance... then go ahead and read me the riot act.

In the mean time there's a real war to fight.

What is insane is...

Bob Barr supporters lecturing Paul supporters on the DAILYPAUL. Go to the DAILYBARR and we will have no problems. OR come back IF Dr.Paul ENDS his campaign instead of it's current suspension. Until then YOU ARE fighting against Ron Paul by trying to pull away his support. And if you mess with Ron Paul, then you are inviting the scorn that you deserve.

Aku Soku Zan

Aku Soku Zan

Is it not possible to

be both a supporter of Dr. Paul as well as Bob Barr and/or Chuck Baldwin? How on earth does supporting Barr for instance means abandoning support for Dr. Paul? It is simply an aissue of strategy, Barr and Baldwin are "plan B" options, but they also have to work on their campaigns NOW...they cannot wait for the outcome of the RNC in the beginning of September! If Dr. Paul id successful with the nomination, both of them would drop out and endorse him, I am sure. If Dr. Paul does not get the nomination, we have two plan B options available. Barr and Baldwin's personal positions are also quite close, it is a pity that they are divided but with this election year it would not make too much a diffeence that they are split in two parties, unless the "split: in vote could affect the outcome of elections in a state, e.g. that the LP and CP support combined would mean they would win a state.


I'm not sure if you are referring to me in your post, as being a Bob Barr supporter.. If so, please read the post again- slowly.

I have no problem with the rational Barr and Baldwin supporters

it is great to have options. All I have been trying to do is ask that we show our delegates we support them by waiting to check out other options until after the convention. I am just asking that they hold their vote for Baldwin Barr posts until after the convention. The members listed in this post seem to me that they do not have the right intentions, I would have to agree with the poster.


how do we know that you aren't the original poster using another userid and agreeing with himself? How do you know that I'm not the poster?
How can I know for sure that there is not really just 2 of us on this site and you aren't all the other characters?
What happened to this place?

Because I'm the original

Because I'm the original poster, and don't hide behind different screen names.

"Doc" Holladay
Nashville, TN


Truth is treason in an empire of lies.

Tog you're such a liar

Yestarday you were the one who posted this, now your posting it under a different name and everyone knows that IamStillHere is one of your other screen names. This is crazy, you do the same thing you accuse other people of doing.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Penndel Borough needs to step up and eliminate the crime they've created by not paving and maintaining Robbins Avenue

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I am not "Tog". I've been a

I am not "Tog". I've been a member here for 28 weeks and 6 days. Feel free to go through my posting history and you'll see that I have always been consistant and used the same screen name. I don't hide, change names, and stand by my posts. In fact you can see that I'm not 'tog' by going to: http://www.myspace.com/docholladaymusic

Dr. William Holladay
Nashville, TN


Truth is treason in an empire of lies.

You should go away

just for posting such a ridiculous thread. But, I suppose the paranoid love freedom too. If you ignore the people you don't like, they go away. Unless of course the little voices are telling you otherwise...
I’d hate to be the guy trying to sell advertising on the DP…..no wonder Obomba is grinning at me as I type this.

Can't we all just get along?
Rodney King

So you take the words of one person

at one time, to outline an entire group of people? that makes no sense.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Penndel Borough needs to step up and eliminate the crime they've created by not paving and maintaining Robbins Avenue

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The post would be too long if he pointed out everything

But I think these examples give a pretty good depiction of the norm from these guys.

Aku Soku Zan

Aku Soku Zan

I would disagree

If the Ron Paul supporters who sympathize with Barr were one group of people and the quoted one was their leader, then yes one quote might summarize the whole group. But that isn't the case, they have all independently come to the conclusion that Barr is the next best choice after Paul, they have no leader and they have been with the movement for differing times. So they shouldn't all be grouped and looked down on by the comments of one person, especially when we don't know the context of the comments.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Penndel Borough needs to step up and eliminate the crime they've created by not paving and maintaining Robbins Avenue

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Simply put... Police your own.

I'm not going on the bob borring forums stumping for Paul. Lead by example. Realize that your postings come at the along with the constant spam of Bob CIA borring. So your voice is mixed in with the rest of the propaganda cheerleaders.

Aku Soku Zan

Aku Soku Zan

Here's my honest take...

It's really hard to debate the issue pertaining to Barr after the last several hours. I'm getting tired of being called every name in the book because of my support for Bob Barr. (I also support Baldwin mind you)

Please read this with an open and honest mind...and put yourself in my position...

Barr has been ridiculed relentlessly about everything, and he has even been criticized for being too short, too ugly, and having a hairy neck (no joke),. Now the most recent accusation is that Paul doesn't really support Barr and that he was just being nice when he stated those positive comments about Barr in the MSM...

How can I ever debate an issue with the the other side basing their current argument on nothing more than mere speculation, and not only is it mere speculation but it is stated and debated as fact? This argument reminds me of another argument concerning Barr. This argument consists of Barr being accused of being neo-con plant. This "argument" is the most speculative and unfounded accusation which I have ever heard, and that speculation is also stated freely on this site as fact! Is there anyway I could possibly answer this question without the non-Barr supporters criticizing me further? Seriously?

What's wrong with trying to get this man into the debates? I just wish we could all support him (not vote for him necessarily) in order for him to have a shot of embarrassing our true enemy, the big gov. clowns, Obama and Mccain on a national stage.

I tend to trust the true patriots judgement on this site

Your behavior and that of others of your cabal are the worst blow to Bob Barr if the truth be told. It sinks below and underminds his efforts even more than his shady record and shadowy ascent to media preferred 'alternative' candidate. Add that to the fact that Dr. Paul says a few kind words in the general direction of Barr, and you spam his message boards as it were a full blown endorsement or something of that magnitude.

And now its on to the puppy dog eyes. "put yourself in my position"... I almost threw up a lil in my mouth from the audacity.

Aku Soku Zan

Aku Soku Zan

This post proves my point...

Can I have a response that attacks my argument? Do you think it's fair that people base their arguments on speculation? How can I answer such comments such as he is a neo-con plant? Am I supposed to accept that argument as fact when it couldn't be more unfounded and further from the truth? Since I don't accept that position because their is no evidence, I am ridiculed for being a "troll". How can I respond to such blatantly disingenuous and unfounded opinions which are then concretely stated as facts?

If you were me, how would you answer those comments and unfounded opinions which are unjustly thrown at Barr?

Please attack my arguments is all I ask and all I want...

You have still avoided the

You have still avoided the question, "Are you the same person as 'preferred' ? You go off on all these rants, and purposely avoid answering this simple question in writing. It's funny that you (JFEJ004) and "preferred" always come to each other's rescue when you're getting destroyed in a debate. It almost seems like your talking to yourself... oh, wait... you ARE talking to yourself.

"Doc" Holladay
Nashville, TN


Truth is treason in an empire of lies.

LOL if I were you...

I'd pick a new candidate. Might I suggest Ron Paul? Did you know that he is still running for president? Well he is.

If that's not the option for you, you could always try reforming your candidates shortcomings from the bottom up. Barr's biggest shortcoming is the trust factor that Ron Paul sets the example on. But that might be a bit difficult so I should at this point refer you back to my first solution.

If the accusations are that he is a neo-con plant simply point out how and when he stands up to the neo-cons, if that's the truth of it. If you have counter examples against the arguments feel free to throw them out for debate. But spamming Dr. Pauls Site with Bob Barr propaganda, which is spotty at best is not convincing anyone. Sorry.

Ron Paul '08

Aku Soku Zan

Aku Soku Zan

Case in point...

I'm getting tired of typing, but if you saw the impeachment judiciary hearing today, you may have seen a man who was speaking on the panel who was calling for the impeachment of the head Neo-Con, George Bush. That man was Bob Barr. I think his presence on the panel calling for the impeachment of Bush is a pretty strong statement that he has turned his back from the past...

He wasn't really there.

It was a computer-generated image by the neocons.

Don't blame me if there's no voice for liberty opposing McCain and Obama in the general election Presidential debates. I donated to Bob Barr's campaign.

Don't blame me if there's no voice for liberty opposing McCain and Obama in the Presidential debates. I donated to Ron Paul Libertarian, Bob Barr's campaign.


Ron Paul Supporter Since 1997
“We have allowed our nation to be over taxed and over regulated and overrun by bureaucrats, the founders would be ashamed of us for what we're putting up with” Ron Paul

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
My ฿itcoin: 17khsA7MvBJAGAPkhrFJdQZPYKgxAeXkBY

Not only are they annoying but it seems they are disciplined.

They are avoiding the post that exposes them like roaches in the light. Don't they wish to engage us in coversation about their shiny savior that they support and inject into every topic they can manage? I mean, guys... are you scared?

Aku Soku Zan

Aku Soku Zan

Took a survey....

For what it's worth most that know me personally, agree I'm neither crazy or an idiot. Hehehehe

According to Ron Paul himself, "We that support him are some of the brightest & well read patriots".... I think I'll take his word for it. And yeah, I still think good can triump evil . so, I continue to fight for a Ron Paul Presidency.

Nothing can stop a r3volution whose time has come