I hate to admit this, but PROOF Ron Paul is a RACIST! :sigh: ::tears::
DriftingByTheStorm
Posts: 8,684
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Seriously, What's your point here?
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Lookie what part Fox cut from their re-airing of the debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvqM5E1Yie4
.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
major lame.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
well that's it.. now it's off to mccainforruler2008.com to get a bumper sticker to cover up my RP one.
oh well..
i was talking to a friend of mine who has as a major part of his job description the task of studying trends and behaviors of white supremacist groups. He was telling me that there has always been (it isn't a new thing) a significant degree of support for RP from these groups. i decided to do some quick (very quick research) into RP's potential with the far far right in general. Now, its fairly well documented around these parts how i feel about internet research and the need to careful when choosing your sources and i'l make no exceptions for myself here. That being said i found some interesting things. i offer the following not as proof of Paul's racism, but as an interesting read that lends itself to this discussion.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html
No, the President of the Austin NAACP branch vouching for him should do for a bit of reality though.
:rolleyes:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
i think ol' george needs to be reminded that HIS FATHER was a nazi banker.
also, michael medved has incredible pro-israel bias, and is one of those people who deem anyone who is remotely critical of israel's policies an anti-semite. i wouldn't respond to him either. this article has the same slant. yes, paul was critical of the influence of the israeli lobby - and he should be. why is it wrong to criticize anything tied to israel?
there are all kinds of nuts who support different candidates. people who literally want to nuke the middle east support people like dubya and giuliani. are they attacked for not repudiating the support of these hateful nuts? what's the difference?
All i'm saying is if i, as a candidate, were offered money from neo-nazi organizations or any special interest group, for that matter, with gross ideological differences from my own, i would flat out reject the money so as not to have my name or my campaign in anyway asociated with such wretchedness. Paul has not only taken monetary support from these groups, he has done nothing to repudiate their stances or distance himself from them on an ideological level i'm not saying he agrees with their white supremacist stances. Again, i don't no. But he isn't adequately addressing these issues. And, yes, by the way, folks like Bush and Giuliani ARE called out as war mongers and chastised for not "repudiating the support of these hateful nuts". As well, they should be.
i agree, i wouldn't want any association with groups like that. but i guess candidates need money to run campaigns, some more than others. it doesn't look good, for sure, and i too would like to see him come out and address the issue a little more fully.
and sure, bush/guillani types are called war mongers, but not in the press. ok, maybe in very small doses. but a guy like paul - an anti-war, anti-establishment guy - gets it a lot worse.
This is exactly how this propaganda works on people. The white supremacist donation was a total setup, and injected into the media on purpose.
Do you think anyone has the time to audit every person behind all their donations?
In the same respect, every candidate gets donations from one white supremacist or another.
It was all such a scam and you're supporting it. No laws were broken, the money is being used for a better cause. Those two facts circumvent the entire situation. It's a free society, and this was fabricated as a petty distraction by some very evil people who like killing other people to spin a profit, and you bought into their Trojan horse ideology.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
They do check out who donates to the campaigns.
Remember a couple months ago before this Ron Paul donation thing happened when Clinton had to return some donations because they looked bad?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=3866786&page=1
Hillary takes money from anything with decimal points. Bill pardoned a particular mossad agent (spy) on his very last day of office. How cute.
http://www.rense.com/general42/buddy.htm
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I believe that was ONE HUGE contributor. I mean, not just a contributor, a FUND RAISER, a close contact of hers ... basicaly someone pulling strings to make her money. She had to denounce him because he had some sort of felonious past.
And that is a huge scam that there is now a movie about.
:rolleyes:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
I'm sure returning such small donations didn't really hurt her campaign, and made the controversy go away mostly.
Being a Mossad spy is a bit different that some backwoods guy with a hood.
The ties and the lies go deeeeeep.
Give a little read on who Marc Rich is, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Rich
then apply the backwoods hillbilly hoodie wearing scenario again....lolololol
plus there this in her past already.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMfUajhL24I
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
The issue here is Ron Paul, we all know the Clintons are shady. It seems Ron is no saint either.
My point is the media checks out campaign donations(even small ones) and makes a stink about it when it comes from certain people.
i was talking about this guy.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
In comparison by the one donation he received, he's squeaky clean. Besides why give it back so the guy can go spread some hate instead? Why isn't it looked upon as perhaps one bad person actually may have went delusional and the right thing for a change (actually donated to a good cause)?
I agree with RP...why give a murderer his weapon back?
Hillary had to give the money back because the situation was in fact bigger than the election itself.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
i'm not supporting anything or buying into anyone's ideology. i've already said that i'm at this point, prepared to take Paul at his word. i must say however that when you start to put pieces of the puzzle together, its beginning to walk like a duck and quack like a duck. Furthermore it isn't just one 500 dollar stormfront contribution we all already knew about. Did you even skim the link i provided? It goes much deeper than that. Several organizations and several individuals. (The David Duke referrence to Paul as "our king" is one i found interesting). Again, i'm currently taking Paul at his word. It won't take me much more, however, to question his word. How much will it take you? The "its a fluke and a smear" angle has a finite number of uses. So far we have "the letters are a fluke and a smear" and "the donations from several known white supremacist organizations and individuals is a fluke and a smear". Paul and his supporters are running out of "fluke and smear cards" regarding this issue. What's next? "The hooded robe, wooden cross, and can of gasoline in the trunk of his car is a fluke and a smear"? i've got my limits. Do you?
Nobody seems to ever care about this guy.
If he was running for president I'm sure his past would come up pretty quick.
perhaps one of his groupies can address that for us.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
Who cares... the guy is going to go down as a mouse fart...
just curious to know how someone who calls himself a libertarian thought slavery SHOULD have been dealt with... maybe we shoulda just let those southern bumpkins figger it out fer themselves & let it run its course??
good plan.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
Don't put words in my mouth man...
buy having the federal government BUY the slaves, was one statement he made, i believe backed up by the quote "Just like everyother nation that had slaves dealt witht he issue. A civil war that bloody was not necessary." ...
of course the counter argument is that no other nation had slavery institutionalized to the extent of the USA.
The comment had nothing to do with the acceptability of slavery, only with the acceptability of the federal government waging a war against the states and using slavery as a scapegoat for what really was an assault on states rights .... although i concede that slavery is realy a HUMAN rights issue.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Some of you seem to think he's infallible, which is, imo, a very naive view.
naděje umírá poslední