On ‘The Five’ on Fox, Gutfield (sp?) in discussion of the debaters last night, said Ron Paul, as usual, continued to say something brilliant followed with something stupid- like ordering steak topped witn neccos. LOL
So Paul is both an Anti Semite and a racist...
Gee I’ll act shocked if it will help...
The Occupy Mom’s Basement crowd should be so proud of their man...
This guy is a dishonest “something”. He is getting his source materials from tnr.com, tnr.com posted it online after they did their own (might I add, real and proper yellow) investigative journalism on the subject of Paul’s newsletters, tnr.com already found the ghostwriter, back during the 2008 primary season. So... the guy is just another partisan hack, repeating already repudiated story, as posted here on FR extensively, for the lulz or trolling Freepers.
Why?
Then again, why not create another civil war on FR before the Iowa and NH primaries? Sounds like a plan, meet you in the trenches.
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-plank/who-wrote-ron-pauls-newsletters
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/angry-white-man
http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/who-wrote-ron-pauls-newsletter
The site is a joke. If what’s there is intended to prove that Ron Paul is a racist, it fails. You may disagree with his foreign policy views but the racism charge, so overworked these days, won’t stick.
I love his PS to the Paul supporters:
Saying NU-UH, doesn’t make the facts above go away.
Shouting, “LIAR!” – doesn’t make the facts above go away.
Giving a link to a Ron Paul denial doesn’t make the facts go away.
Shouting neocon, shill, warmonger, hit piece, or any other word in your vocabulary, doesn’t make the above facts go away.
Saying this is old news, doesn’t make the above truth go away. If a candidate for president built wealth for two decades off of being racist, voters deserve to know.
Saying this was debunked years ago, doesn’t make the truth above go away. The above facts debunk any supposed debunking from Ron Paul.
Sitting there and spouting off any other rhetoric while you ignore the evidence, does not make the evidence go away.
Calling this a joke or an act of desperation does not make the above facts go away.
Spewing a quote about how racism is about collectivism doesn’t make the above facts untrue.
Calling the evidence bogus doesn’t make the newsletters go away. Plus if you say these are all bogus, then you’re calling Ron Paul’s denial bogus too! How could he blame a ghost writer for writing something that never happened?
Saying the first person language and the presence of Ron Paul’s name doesn’t prove a thing, shows you’re clearly biased. Ron Paul defended his newsletters in 1996. Showing that he was involved and did know about them. Combine that with his actual name and first person language in them, pretty much shows he did write them. Making the presence of his name and first person references inconsequential, is laughable at the least.
Paul supporters may ask, “How is this any different than someone going off and publishing a newsletter in your name?” It is very different. First, Ron Paul started a company called Ron Paul and Associates. The newsletters were printed under the umbrella of that organization. Ron Paul profited from the newsletters. Ron Paul defended the newsletters. Ron Paul’s name, signature and first person references are found in the newsletters he defended. This is much different than some random person somewhere just starting a newsletter in someone’s name without their consent or permission.
Sitting there asking for evidence, when the evidence is right there and is all over the place, makes you look very insincere in your demands for evidence. Oh and that doesn’t make the above evidence go away either.
Saying Ron Paul forcefully denied the racist newsletters, followed by a link to a Youtube video, does not negate the facts above. Politicians lie all the time. Look at the evidence, not his words. Yes Ron Paul can lie. He’s not the messiah. He’s not perfect. He’s not pure. The evidence shows he is clearly lying. I don’t care how forcefully he denies it. Nixon forcefully said he wasn’t a crook. Clinton forcefully said he didn’t have sexual relations with that woman. Politicians lie.
Referencing African Americans supporting Paul, does not negate the facts above. Ron Paul said in his newsletter that 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions. Those backing him would be viewed as the 5%. Well what about the other 95%?
You can’t negate the above evidence, facts and truth by demanding we find a video or tape of Ron Paul using such language. We see how Ron communicates when he thinks no one else is looking. First of all, it’s laughable for a Paul supporter to act like they take evidence in to consideration. Paul supporters are putting on a guise when they demand video or audio proof. The guise is that they actually care about evidence in the first place. The evidence provided in the newsletters is enough. To ignore this evidence, shows us you would ignore any video or audio evidence if it were presented. Once again, any demand for evidence from a Paul supporter is merely a guise. They don’t care about proof in the first place.
P M
bttt. :)
It may be true. Many black men are fast.
But you can’t go fast and far.
With that said however, the culprit who wrote the controversial articles was a Ron Paul staffer named Eric Dondero, who was fired by Paul after the newsletter incidents. If the blogger had bothered to do his/her research with an open mind, the real story about the newsletters is out there from credible sites.
This has been hashed, rehashed and triple-hashed. It's utter bull and was debunked years ago. Yet every time Paul runs for his seat or for POTUS, this crap resurfaces again and again.
Paul will never win the GOP nomination. His positions, especially on foreign policy are quite easy to ridicule without the need to drag up old rumors.
Beck is too busy attacking Newt... He can’t be bothered...
Ping for later, thank you.
And Ron Paul has the NERVE to play the “hate” card against Santorum and Bachmann on Leno’s show?