ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – In response to an article published by The New Republic, Ron Paul issued the following statement:
“The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.
“In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person's character, not the color of their skin. As I stated on the floor of the U.S. House on April 20, 1999: ‘I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.’
“This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.
“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.”
CONCERNING POINT B, wow what a shock people are going to talk about stuff that happen in the past for political reason. one would think that there is an election going on or something.
People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
- Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
- Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
Here's my take on the Ron Paul letters. i don't know if he wrote them. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. He swears up and down he did not and doesn't know who did. i'm willing to take his word for it, but that doesn't fully excuse him. As someone indicated, either in this thread, or one of the other several regarding this situation, the newsletter DOES bear his name. This, makes him responsible for it. You'd better believe if i had a newsletter bearing my name i would be monitoring its contents pretty thouroughly. If i was to busy to do this, i would either discontinue the newsletter, or have someone i trust monitor it for me. Its his newsletter, he is responsible for everything in it whether he penned the words or not. i understand, this was awhile ago and has come up before. Did he every write a retraction? i heard him yesterday with Wolf Blitzer vehemently denying writing the words or even knowing who did, but he didn't seem to be appologetic. His response seemed more like "oh well, didn't write 'em. Don't know who did. Shut up about it." i'm sorry, but that isn't how it works. Personally, i would have retracted the statements made in my name the very second they came to my attention. i don't think he has effectively done that, nor does he seem willing to do it now. Bad news for a Paul campaign that already had very little chance. Although, his supporters are relative few and very enthusiastic about thier support. i don't think it phases them much.
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
i agree, i'd definitely like to hear a more complete response to this issue. and it is curious that these things were put out for years without anyone putting a stop to it. was paul just not paying attention to them and oblivious to the whole thing? possible, but like you said.. his name is there in big letters at the top of these things.
but being someone who has become familiar with this guy and his record, it's just hard to believe that he is someone who would support these positions. but it looks bad, no doubt.
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
He wasn't in congress at the time. We was back to practicing medicine full time. He didn't write any of it.
Again.. what does his occupation of the time have to do with a newsletter.
I don't think he wrote it, but like said a hundred times, if there is a newsletter out there claiming to be from him, you don't think that he has any responsibility to keep an eye on it, or have them take his name off of it? It's like he's trying to have it both ways...
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
The image destroying aspects of this deal are equal to Rove's orchestration of the 2000 South Carolina campaign when Bush beat out McCain.
If Paul had any hope....this pretty much kills it.
I think the McCain 2000 thing was a lot dirtier and outright disgusting. And it was something absolutely false that McCain had nothing to do with.
This is kind of different, and something that he could have shut down way back when. If his quotes from 1996 are accurate, then he's to blame for the mess he's in now. If he would have just come out then and outright denied anything and distanced himself from the newsletter, then we wouldn't even have be having this discussion. Instead, he just made excuses and justifications for the newsletter.
edit - Not arguing your post Paco, just adding to it. Re-reading my post it makes is sound like you are comparing the two actions instead of the effect.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Again.. what does his occupation of the time have to do with a newsletter.
I don't think he wrote it, but like said a hundred times, if there is a newsletter out there claiming to be from him, you don't think that he has any responsibility to keep an eye on it, or have them take his name off of it? It's like he's trying to have it both ways...
If you've ever had to run two businesses and have your fingers in a lot of pies, you'd know exactly how this is possible, and the fact that there is only 24 hours in the day. Sometimes you trust people that are close to you, and they let you down.
It's easy to sit back and think someone can be everywhere at once. In reality this is never the case.
Watch any of his explanations on it, and it becomes pretty clear what the situation is, and that he's not a racist.
It's happened, it's a well timed smear, so many are eating up the propaganda because they want to. The media controls small minds imo. It's like looking at a pile of crap and trying to describe who and what made it in precise detail.
ridiculous.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I think the McCain 2000 thing was a lot dirtier and outright disgusting. And it was something absolutely false that McCain had nothing to do with.
This is kind of different, and something that he could have shut down way back when. If his quotes from 1996 are accurate, then he's to blame for the mess he's in now. If he would have just come out then and outright denied anything and distanced himself from the newsletter, then we wouldn't even have be having this discussion. Instead, he just made excuses and justifications for the newsletter.
I just meant that like McCain's run this is pretty much the end of viability for Paul.
I just meant that like McCain's run this is pretty much the end of viability for Paul.
gotcha.. i was just adding the edit to my other post
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
If you've ever had to run two businesses and have your fingers in a lot of pies, you'd know exactly how this is possible, and the fact that there is only 24 hours in the day. Sometimes you trust people that are close to you, and they let you down.
It's easy to sit back and think someone can be everywhere at once. In reality this is never the case.
Watch any of his explanations on it, and it becomes pretty clear what the situation is, and that he's not a racist.
It's happened, it's a well timed smear, so many are eating up the propaganda because they want to. The media controls small minds imo. It's like looking at a pile of crap and trying to describe who and what made it in precise detail.
ridiculous.
Of course... you are never wrong Roland, we already know that.
But, I've worked several jobs, and I am currently running operations in three venues in Oklahoma, NY & Ontario, so I know what it is like to juggle a bunch of things at once.
You keep saying he didn't have time and are insinuating that people don't know how busy he was then, but in reality, you don't know how busy he was then either. I don't know how often these newsletters were put out, but you can't tell me that he didn't have like 10 minutes every month or so to read the newsletter and make a call to have it shut down or issue a retraction or apology. No one is that busy.
And this doesn't change the fact that in 1996, he apparently tried to justify some of the comments instead of denying them then.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
If you've ever had to run two businesses and have your fingers in a lot of pies, you'd know exactly how this is possible, and the fact that there is only 24 hours in the day. Sometimes you trust people that are close to you, and they let you down.
It's easy to sit back and think someone can be everywhere at once. In reality this is never the case.
Watch any of his explanations on it, and it becomes pretty clear what the situation is, and that he's not a racist.
It's happened, it's a well timed smear, so many are eating up the propaganda because they want to. The media controls small minds imo. It's like looking at a pile of crap and trying to describe who and what made it in precise detail.
ridiculous.
I can see how maybe he wasn't running the show at the newsletter, but did he even "read" the newsletter and be like uh, this isn't good, who wrote this.
All I know is if I had a newsletter coming out under my name and I wasn't really involved in it, I would at least take the time to read it. How many hours of the day could it take to actually read the newsletter with your name attached to it.
I can see how maybe he wasn't running the show at the newsletter, but did he even "read" the newsletter and be like uh, this isn't good, who wrote this.
All I know is if I had a newsletter coming out under my name and I wasn't really involved in it, I would at least take the time to read it. How many hours of the day could it take to actually read the newsletter with your name attached to it.
I agree, but even giving in to that argument and accepting that he didn't know anything about it or what was written, when asked about it in 1996, he basically tried to justify the comments (and his campaign manager said he was still writing the newsletter).
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Of course... you are never wrong Roland, we already know that.
But, I've worked several jobs, and I am currently running operations in three venues in Oklahoma, NY & Ontario, so I know what it is like to juggle a bunch of things at once.
You keep saying he didn't have time and are insinuating that people don't know how busy he was then, but in reality, you don't know how busy he was then either. I don't know how often these newsletters were put out, but you can't tell me that he didn't have like 10 minutes every month or so to read the newsletter and make a call to have it shut down or issue a retraction or apology. No one is that busy.
And this doesn't change the fact that in 1996, he apparently tried to justify some of the comments instead of denying them then.
I'm just saying it's definitely possible he didn't know about it, and in your case if you are busy you can also see that quite it's possible he didn't have time to proof read every single word of every article. Is it questionable, yes.
He vehemently denies it now, the libertarian platform is not really racist by design. It's troubling to a certain degree, is he a racist? Good question, I'm not getting that vibe in any way shape or form, and neither are all the (many) black voters supporting him, or all has it affected all his re elections throughout the years.
I think many are making this out to be a smoking gun, and again looking at a turd and then trying to describe it's maker.
This is FOX level propaganda rehashed to destroy the message of freedom at a crucial time. For some small minds it will work.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I'm just saying it's definitely possible he didn't know about it, and in your case if you are busy you can also see that quite it's possible he didn't have time to proof read every single word of every article. Is it questionable, yes.
He vehemently denies it now, the libertarian platform is not really racist by design. It's troubling to a certain degree, is he a racist? Good question, I'm not getting that vibe in any way shape or form, and neither are all the (many) black voters supporting him, or all has it affected all his re elections throughout the years.
I think many are making this out to be a smoking gun, and again looking at a turd and then trying to describing it's maker.
This is FOX level propaganda rehashed to destroy the message of freedom at a crucial time. For some small minds it will work.
But then why in 1996 when asked, did he apparently try to justify the comments? That's what bugs me about this story.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
... “This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.
hmmm. i'm thinking that the obvious political reason is that he's running for president of the united states.
something like this would undoubtedly come out if were about ANY of the candidates (which, incidentally, it's not...). mr. paul, if you can't take the heat, get the fuck outa the race.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"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
I can see how maybe he wasn't running the show at the newsletter, but did he even "read" the newsletter and be like uh, this isn't good, who wrote this.
All I know is if I had a newsletter coming out under my name and I wasn't really involved in it, I would at least take the time to read it. How many hours of the day could it take to actually read the newsletter with your name attached to it.
about 15 minutes... i am sure it wasnt a novel
if solat13 and i are agreeing on something political... you know this shit must be legit... and hell has frozen over
How much review do you think any of the five (ahem, six) members of Pearl Jam before "Deep" goes out twice a year?
Seriously.
[half expecting Sea to show up and pwne me with inside information. ]
i'm betting that the people who DO write & edit Deep are close enough to the band that they know what they would approve being written in their name, and what they wouldn't. and i'm also pretty fucking sure that if some nimrod let an article get published in Deep that was racist, sexist or otherwise disgusting, the band would immediately come out with a statement apologizing for the gross oversight and detailing how the problem was handled.
did paul do any of those things? except for NOW, of course, when he's running for the highest office in the land.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"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
hmmm. i'm thinking that the obvious political reason is that he's running for president of the united states.
something like this would undoubtedly come out if were about ANY of the candidates (which, incidentally, it's not...). mr. paul, if you can't take the heat, get the fuck outa the race.
Huckabee's kid hung a dog as a camp counselor with a few other kids. I don't see this paraded on FOX, or elsewhere. Everyone has skeletons. Look at all their advisor's alone....that's some scary shit right there. Those are the ingredients in the final product. If you want to know your candidate, look at their advisor's.
It's very apparent why RP is a target. And it's very apparent why he is being marginalized.
Remember Kennedy...MLK? Political figures get murdered in the US for possessing the same sentiment on freedom Dr Paul has.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
some of you guys just refuse to ackowledge it... but, that's your prerogative
Maybe you missed the second paragraph in the CNN article saying there was no proof or evidence of the author.
You're fabricating your "proof" based on blind prejudice.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Huckabee's kid hung a dog as a camp counselor with a few other kids. I don't see this paraded on FOX, or elsewhere. Everyone has skeletons. Look at all their advisor's alone....that's some scary shit right there. Those are the ingredients in the final product. If you want to know your candidate, look at their advisor's.
that comparison is cute. grasping at straws, anyone??
besides, this is about what the candidate HIMSELF said & did, not what someone's overpriviledged child did at camp one year.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"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
But then why in 1996 when asked, did he apparently try to justify the comments? That's what bugs me about this story.
That's concerning. He may have been trying to protect a friend. You know it would have been a witch hunt, and someone's life would have been ruined over a few paragraphs of text. You can still have a loyal friend whose values differ from you in some aspects, it doesn't mean you accept them, or subscribe to them.
It's still not smoking gun evidence that Dr Paul is a racist imo.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
It's very apparent why RP is a target. And it's very apparent why he is being marginalized.
something tells me that some of paul's supporters are his worst enemies- those marginalized geeks who blog and post all day about their messiah. i think it's because of THEIR reputation as overzealous nutjobs that paul's skeletons are too delicious to let slide.
well, that and the fact that he's apparently a racist homophobe, running for president of the united states.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"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
i dont see how anyone can excuse or explain this away? i really cant...
Precisely why a case based on your "supposed evidence" would lose in court, in 5 mins flat, and also why CNN had the legal obligation to state UP FRONT they had no proof.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
as far as a smoking gun... your right... it's not a smoking gun... it;s the FUCKING BULLET HOLE!
Your logic is flawed, and overtly biased.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
something tells me that some of paul's supporters are his worst enemies- those marginalized geeks who blog and post all day about their messiah. i think it's because of THEIR reputation as overzealous nutjobs that paul's skeletons are too delicious to let slide.
well, that and the fact that he's apparently a racist homophobe, running for president of the united states.
You just committed an act of blatant hypocrisy.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Precisely why a case based on your "supposed evidence" would lose in court, in 5 mins flat, and also why CNN had the legal obligation to state UP FRONT they had no proof.
that comparison is cute. grasping at straws, anyone??
besides, this is about what the candidate HIMSELF said & did, not what someone's overpriviledged child did at camp one year.
Look up up for yourself instead of pretending to know something you obviously don't.
I get the idea a rational discussion with you is an impossibility in this universe short of 15 years of much needed life experience.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Comments
CONCERNING POINT B, wow what a shock people are going to talk about stuff that happen in the past for political reason. one would think that there is an election going on or something.
- Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
- Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
but being someone who has become familiar with this guy and his record, it's just hard to believe that he is someone who would support these positions. but it looks bad, no doubt.
Again.. what does his occupation of the time have to do with a newsletter.
I don't think he wrote it, but like said a hundred times, if there is a newsletter out there claiming to be from him, you don't think that he has any responsibility to keep an eye on it, or have them take his name off of it? It's like he's trying to have it both ways...
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
The image destroying aspects of this deal are equal to Rove's orchestration of the 2000 South Carolina campaign when Bush beat out McCain.
If Paul had any hope....this pretty much kills it.
I think the McCain 2000 thing was a lot dirtier and outright disgusting. And it was something absolutely false that McCain had nothing to do with.
This is kind of different, and something that he could have shut down way back when. If his quotes from 1996 are accurate, then he's to blame for the mess he's in now. If he would have just come out then and outright denied anything and distanced himself from the newsletter, then we wouldn't even have be having this discussion. Instead, he just made excuses and justifications for the newsletter.
edit - Not arguing your post Paco, just adding to it. Re-reading my post it makes is sound like you are comparing the two actions instead of the effect.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
If you've ever had to run two businesses and have your fingers in a lot of pies, you'd know exactly how this is possible, and the fact that there is only 24 hours in the day. Sometimes you trust people that are close to you, and they let you down.
It's easy to sit back and think someone can be everywhere at once. In reality this is never the case.
Watch any of his explanations on it, and it becomes pretty clear what the situation is, and that he's not a racist.
It's happened, it's a well timed smear, so many are eating up the propaganda because they want to. The media controls small minds imo. It's like looking at a pile of crap and trying to describe who and what made it in precise detail.
ridiculous.
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 just meant that like McCain's run this is pretty much the end of viability for Paul.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-mccain10jan10,1,3001117.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&track=crosspromo
You know what's kind of ironically funny in a sad way is that Strom Thurmond the senator from South Carolina...actually DID have a black daughter...
gotcha.. i was just adding the edit to my other post
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Of course... you are never wrong Roland, we already know that.
But, I've worked several jobs, and I am currently running operations in three venues in Oklahoma, NY & Ontario, so I know what it is like to juggle a bunch of things at once.
You keep saying he didn't have time and are insinuating that people don't know how busy he was then, but in reality, you don't know how busy he was then either. I don't know how often these newsletters were put out, but you can't tell me that he didn't have like 10 minutes every month or so to read the newsletter and make a call to have it shut down or issue a retraction or apology. No one is that busy.
And this doesn't change the fact that in 1996, he apparently tried to justify some of the comments instead of denying them then.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I can see how maybe he wasn't running the show at the newsletter, but did he even "read" the newsletter and be like uh, this isn't good, who wrote this.
All I know is if I had a newsletter coming out under my name and I wasn't really involved in it, I would at least take the time to read it. How many hours of the day could it take to actually read the newsletter with your name attached to it.
- 8/28/98
- 9/2/00
- 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
- 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
- 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
- 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
- 8/2/07, 8/5/07
- 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
- 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
- 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
- 9/11/11, 9/12/11
- 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
I agree, but even giving in to that argument and accepting that he didn't know anything about it or what was written, when asked about it in 1996, he basically tried to justify the comments (and his campaign manager said he was still writing the newsletter).
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I'm just saying it's definitely possible he didn't know about it, and in your case if you are busy you can also see that quite it's possible he didn't have time to proof read every single word of every article. Is it questionable, yes.
He vehemently denies it now, the libertarian platform is not really racist by design. It's troubling to a certain degree, is he a racist? Good question, I'm not getting that vibe in any way shape or form, and neither are all the (many) black voters supporting him, or all has it affected all his re elections throughout the years.
I think many are making this out to be a smoking gun, and again looking at a turd and then trying to describe it's maker.
This is FOX level propaganda rehashed to destroy the message of freedom at a crucial time. For some small minds it will work.
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)
(")_(")
But then why in 1996 when asked, did he apparently try to justify the comments? That's what bugs me about this story.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
hmmm. i'm thinking that the obvious political reason is that he's running for president of the united states.
something like this would undoubtedly come out if were about ANY of the candidates (which, incidentally, it's not...). mr. paul, if you can't take the heat, get the fuck outa the race.
"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
about 15 minutes... i am sure it wasnt a novel
if solat13 and i are agreeing on something political... you know this shit must be legit... and hell has frozen over
i'm betting that the people who DO write & edit Deep are close enough to the band that they know what they would approve being written in their name, and what they wouldn't. and i'm also pretty fucking sure that if some nimrod let an article get published in Deep that was racist, sexist or otherwise disgusting, the band would immediately come out with a statement apologizing for the gross oversight and detailing how the problem was handled.
did paul do any of those things? except for NOW, of course, when he's running for the highest office in the land.
"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
Huckabee's kid hung a dog as a camp counselor with a few other kids. I don't see this paraded on FOX, or elsewhere. Everyone has skeletons. Look at all their advisor's alone....that's some scary shit right there. Those are the ingredients in the final product. If you want to know your candidate, look at their advisor's.
It's very apparent why RP is a target. And it's very apparent why he is being marginalized.
Remember Kennedy...MLK? Political figures get murdered in the US for possessing the same sentiment on freedom Dr Paul has.
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)
(")_(")
Maybe you missed the second paragraph in the CNN article saying there was no proof or evidence of the author.
You're fabricating your "proof" based on blind prejudice.
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)
(")_(")
that comparison is cute. grasping at straws, anyone??
besides, this is about what the candidate HIMSELF said & did, not what someone's overpriviledged child did at camp one year.
"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
no... i am basing my proof on HIS NEWSLETTER
i dont see how anyone can excuse or explain this away? i really cant...
That's concerning. He may have been trying to protect a friend. You know it would have been a witch hunt, and someone's life would have been ruined over a few paragraphs of text. You can still have a loyal friend whose values differ from you in some aspects, it doesn't mean you accept them, or subscribe to them.
It's still not smoking gun evidence that Dr Paul is a racist imo.
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)
(")_(")
huckabee's kid isnt running for president of the united states of america...
he seems to be more then a racist...
as far as a smoking gun... your right... it's not a smoking gun... it;s the FUCKING BULLET HOLE!
something tells me that some of paul's supporters are his worst enemies- those marginalized geeks who blog and post all day about their messiah. i think it's because of THEIR reputation as overzealous nutjobs that paul's skeletons are too delicious to let slide.
well, that and the fact that he's apparently a racist homophobe, running for president of the united states.
"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
Precisely why a case based on your "supposed evidence" would lose in court, in 5 mins flat, and also why CNN had the legal obligation to state UP FRONT they had no proof.
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)
(")_(")
Your logic is flawed, and overtly biased.
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)
(")_(")
You just committed an act of blatant hypocrisy.
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)
(")_(")
this guy is nailed...
and you know it good friend...
Look up up for yourself instead of pretending to know something you obviously don't.
I get the idea a rational discussion with you is an impossibility in this universe short of 15 years of much needed life experience.
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)
(")_(")