Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Dear Ron Paul Supporters:
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
timmyprinz



Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 250
 Reply with quote  

Lusid wrote:
timmyprinz wrote:
Lusid wrote:
That article is recycling older ones.

*the first article, not Paul's.


Fair Enough. It would appear that he has dealt with this racist issue long ago. (Maybe he hasn't dealt with it well enough)

This story about his newsletter might have gotten buried cause it held no real weight and maybe its came back up because it was the day of the N.H primary....its all kinda fishy to me.

So it seems like they are just recyling a old issue...for political gain.



Regardless...Paul needs to clear things up MUCH better.


True, but a bunch of these articles are newly dug up, like yesterday new.
(which is shady politicially, but doesn't change the "facts")

I totally agree with you, he needs to clear this up himself asap.
Even if it kills all the momentum he's got.

And this is humorous. I honestly thought about making a video with the same concept a while back, so I'm glad someone made it either way.
(it kind of shows the dedication/cultistism of his supporters so it works for everyone)



It doesn't make it a "fact" that he is racist though. Just that he did a really shitty job of not paying attention of a newsletter, that was sent out in his name. Yet somebody show me proof of racist remarks actually being said by Ron Paul...where is it...So its its all speculation.There is no absolute proof that HE has ever said anything racist or even if he is racist.
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 12:58 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Lusid
http://youtube.com/watch?v=skCV2L0c6K0


Joined: 02 Apr 2007
Posts: 5081
Location: Dr. Pepperland
 Reply with quote  

I'll agree with that.
I mean as pro life is he is I've never heard he call any a baby killer, and you'd think that someone that would call Black people "animals" would slip up in public at least once.

Still though, it's all pretty ehhh.

I'm waiting to see if this has enough impact to make him do something about it.

I'm not throwing down the jump to conclusions mat for either side just yet.
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:11 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Dan Shay



Joined: 30 Aug 2003
Posts: 11245
Location: MN
 Reply with quote  

timmyprinz wrote:

It doesn't make it a "fact" that he is racist though. Just that he did a really shitty job of not paying attention of a newsletter, that was sent out in his name. Yet somebody show me proof of racist remarks actually being said by Ron Paul...where is it...So its its all speculation.There is no absolute proof that HE has ever said anything racist or even if he is racist.


He hasn't named anybody, nor has anybody come forward who wrote for the publication, which means, up till now, him not writing it, or having knowledge of it's content, is hearsay.

If he addressed this issue, people would dig into the archives. (Apparently some are archived at the University of Wisconsin)

This would bring attention to colorful subjects such as:

Jews and Israel
Blacks

and, this one is a hunch, homosexuality.

Among other things.
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:30 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan Shay



Joined: 30 Aug 2003
Posts: 11245
Location: MN
 Reply with quote  


Quote:

A February 1991 newsletter attacks "The X-Rated Martin Luther King."

An October 1990 edition of the Political Report ridicules black activists, led by Al Sharpton, for demonstrating at the Statue of Liberty in favor of renaming New York City after Martin Luther King. The newsletter suggests that "Welfaria," "Zooville," "Rapetown," "Dirtburg," and "Lazyopolis" would be better alternatives--and says, "Next time, hold that demonstration at a food stamp bureau or a crack house."


http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=74978161-f730-43a2-91c3-de262573a129

Apparently some are archived at the University of Kansas as well.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:43 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan Shay



Joined: 30 Aug 2003
Posts: 11245
Location: MN
 Reply with quote  


Quote:

The October 1992 issue of the Political Report paraphrases an "ex-cop" who offers this strategy for protecting against "urban youth": "If you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example)."


What does the author mean, "urban youth"?

He didn't write any of it? I find this passage odd...


Quote:

In an undated solicitation letter for The Ron Paul Investment Letter and the Ron Paul Political Report, Paul writes: "I've been told not to talk, but these stooges don't scare me. Threats or no threats, I've laid bare the coming race war in our big cities. The federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS (my training as a physician helps me see through this one.) The Bohemian Grove--perverted, pagan playground of the powerful. Skull & Bones: the demonic fraternity that includes George Bush and leftist Senator John Kerry, Congress's Mr. New Money. The Israeli lobby, which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica."


http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=74978161-f730-43a2-91c3-de262573a129
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:57 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

timmyprinz wrote:
It doesn't make it a "fact" that he is racist though. Just that he did a really shitty job of not paying attention of a newsletter, that was sent out in his name.


If dude can't cross the T's and dot the I's on a newsletter circulated in his name, do we want him as President...trying to cross the T's and dot the I's on foreign and domestic policy?

My magic 8 ball says that whatever YOUR answer to that question is, the American public will come back with an emphatic "no!"
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:17 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lusid
http://youtube.com/watch?v=skCV2L0c6K0


Joined: 02 Apr 2007
Posts: 5081
Location: Dr. Pepperland
 Reply with quote  

I believe most of the conspiracy shit.
I also believe he's pretty much fucked and way more than likely guilty on all charges.

This begs the question though, why is a racist the one that don't want to invade/occupy "colored" countries?
And why does he want to end the war on drugs, which is imprisoning a majority of minorities?

Strangeness in that camp.

P.S. Dirtburg? That should go to a way more white trashy city than NYC.
I vote Dirtburg as Pitt's new name.
(sounds like he was taking a lot of the names from ODB songs)
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:32 am
 View user's profile Send private message
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19373
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

Lusid wrote:


This begs the question though, why is a racist the one that don't want to invade/occupy "colored" countries?
And why does he want to end the war on drugs, which is imprisoning a majority of minorities?

Strangeness in that camp.



Not that strange. He's a libertarian racist, homophobic, anti-semite. A lot of these Republican candidates have things like this in their background. Huckabee wanted to put people infected with aids in isolation as late as 1992. And he will still straight up tell you that Homosexuality is a sin yada yada burn in hell suckerz.

So this doesn't really make him worse than the republican field. It just makes him a typical republican. And further illustrates a difference between the two parties.
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:39 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

Right. Republicans are racist and Democrats aren't. I almost forgot.
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:59 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19373
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

MessiahCarey wrote:
Right. Republicans are racist and Democrats aren't. I almost forgot.


And homophobic! And more likely to be beholden to antiquated views on women. Not saying there's not a few old school democrats out there. Because there certainly are. But to win in the republican party you have to bend over so much to the focus on the family people that you're pretty coming out a fucked up soldier of Christ sans proto-socialism he stood for.
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:06 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Scottie



Joined: 18 Jul 2003
Posts: 2829
 Reply with quote  

We are slowly losing the good old ones like Strom which made it really easy for us to point and yell racist. Today its becoming much more nuianced.


We have seen though very very recent examples of the republican using bigotry to win elections. i.e. would you be more or less likely to vote for McCain if he was a father of a black child...

or the whole preservation of marriage show to help keep George W. in office for the past 4 years.

Republicans use peoples insecurities to rally the base better, does that make it the more racist party...i am not sure...
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:08 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Lusid
http://youtube.com/watch?v=skCV2L0c6K0


Joined: 02 Apr 2007
Posts: 5081
Location: Dr. Pepperland
 Reply with quote  

Right, because don't ask don't tell doesn't have any kind of homophobic undertone.
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:20 am
 View user's profile Send private message
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19373
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

Lusid wrote:
Right, because don't ask don't tell doesn't have any kind of homophobic undertone.


The only reason Don't Ask Don't Tell exists is because Clinton wanted to allow all to serve regardless of orientation, and that was the best compromise he could get out of the republicans. When it was originally passed it was intended to stop harrassment. Of course over time it's meaning has changed. But I don't think we'd even be to the point of where we are in that debate without first Don't Ask Don't Tell. It was one of a few compromises the Clinton whitehouse made with regards to the LGBT community, ostensibly made because of what they were going up against from the republicans in the house and senate.

Don't Ask Don't Tell was quite progressive from Mike Huckabee's position around that time of "put them all on an island. ick ick ick"
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:32 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
the mean
Certified O.G.


Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 6497
Location: philly/sacto/kauai/ohio
 Reply with quote  

Are people still defending Ron Paul?

If you believe he had no knowledge of what was written in his news letter at the time it was printed, or any time after that where he could have run a retraction you are a straight up dumb ass.

File him next to David Duke, and let's move on.
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:48 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Dan Shay



Joined: 30 Aug 2003
Posts: 11245
Location: MN
 Reply with quote  

the mean wrote:


File him next to David Duke, and let's move on.


Go to David Duke's website. I hear Ron Paul's got his endorsement.

The KKK too. I'm not kidding.

But he's definately more of a nutty version of Pat Buchanan.

The kinda guy that is an isolationist to leave Israel out in the desert with their pants down, and better use the man power saved on the military to roust Mexicans and make black neighborhoods a police state. "State run" police state to get the politically correct feds out of the picture.
Post Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:56 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:05 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon