Posted on 09/20/2007 6:40:58 PM PDT by Petronski
Over the last two days The Oregon Poll was seen by almost 400 "unique visitors," most of them in support of Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul. The majority of these people came from these two links on the web.
ronpaulforums.com
stormfront.org
Just thought I’d be post #501.
Ron Paul is respected by Bill Mahr. That makes him unelectable as far as I am concerned.
You typing retard.
Ron Paul must be a vegan then...
Or at least kind to small animals...
No. Karl Rove was sent by the White House to the La Raza "festival".
CORPORATIONS + LA RAZA = OPEN BORDERS??
Internet exclusive: On Full Disclosure® Video News Blog
Video | 11:52 mins. | Release Date: July 24, 2006
Featured Clips of Speakers favoring open borders/amnesty for illegals:
John Menzer, Vice Chairman, Wal Mart
Marsha White, Corporate Spokesperson, Shell Oil
Nicholas Utton, Chief Marketing Officer, E*Trade Financial
Karl Rove, "sent by the Bush Administration"
OK. Interesting aspiration.
Let’s give Paul the benefit of the doubt that he had no background on what this site was really about when submitted articles to them.
Congressman Paul is not, in fact, a columnist for the American Free Press. All that publication does is reprint the columns from his House website (which are not copyrighted).
SJackson has been corrected on this point in the past (I encourage you to read George W. Bush's condemnation in post 99), yet continues to insinuate that Paul writes for them by using misleading phrasing (as in post #384 - "But yes, Ron Paul is advertised as a regular columnist for the American Free Press").
He didn't specify the precise breakdown. Let's say 200 came from Ron Paul forums, 75 from Stormfront, and 125 from regular internet traffic. 75 nuts, even less if they're technically adept poll-pushers, could be the of this sloppy guilt by association smear.
Basing outrage on stats from 400 unique visitors is stupid stupid stupid stupid.
“Congressman Paul is not, in fact, a columnist for the American Free Press. All that publication does is reprint the columns from his House website (which are not copyrighted).” JTN
“SJackson has been corrected on this point in the past (I encourage you to read George W. Bush’s condemnation in post 99), yet continues to insinuate that Paul writes for them by using misleading phrasing (as in post #384 - “But yes, Ron Paul is advertised as a regular columnist for the American Free Press”).” JTN
Sorry, SJackson is absolutely correct in his assertion that Ron Paul is “advertised as a regular columnist for the American Free Press”. In support of this claim I provide the following link:
http://www.americanfreepress.net/Media_Kit_Ad_Sizes_New.pdf
As you will note this is a PDF file which makes it a bit difficult to cut and paste. However, you’ll find this is the media kit for AFP. If you follow the link you’ll find the statement on page two of the pdf: “We are also proud to publish these columnists”. Ron Paul is the first “columnist” listed. BTW, this is the ‘media kit’ for AFP so it is certainly fair to say that AFP advertises Ron Paul as a columnist.
BTW, if you use the google search engine on the AFP home page limiting the search to AFP, you’ll get 144 hits on Paul and 51 on Ron Paul within that website.
About the only defense remaining to you and GWB would be a claim that Ron Paul has not authorized them to use his name or his work. That is a rather weak defense open to attack along these lines: “Why hasn’t Ron Paul denied an organization of this nature, the use of his name or works?”
I also note that no one has denied or asserted that Ron Paul is not a columnist for Lew Rockwell or antiwar.com. Both of these websites should be considered, especially antiwar, ‘truther’ websites.
We now have three examples where Ron Paul has allowed his name and his works to be affiliated with questionable websites. About the kindest thing one can say is that this, at best, indicates very poor thinking on his part. Hardly a qualification for President.
Did I say “you”? I was referring to those who have made an idol of the state of Israel and therefore have a habit of resorting to name calling of people who dare criticize the Israeli government. Many of these people who resort to that are misguided Christian conservatives, unfortunately.
No, you keep trying to force things into ridiculous sounding statements i’ve never made but the stone cold fact is this: Ron Paul voted to permit porn on monopolistic cable companies. Regardless of whether he thought they should be monopolies, the plain fact was that they were, aand his vote wasn’t going to change that.
Ron Paul,
For self-deluded, pig-headed fantasies, he’ll side with abortionists, pornographers, terrorists, you name it. As long as he can imagine that his are clean.
I drove down 11W through Hawkins County last week and saw several Ron Paul signs.
I also saw quite a few overturned rocks. I think maybe the Paul sign placers came from under the rocks.
I’m pretty much in agreement with SJackson on my assessment of Ron Paul, and I hope SJackson will thus hear my out on this:
SJackson isn’t lying, and he has a legitimate point: that Ron Paul is so far out of the mainstream, that every brand of kook, wierdo and nutjob cites him. The controversy seems to be over the phrase, “columnist for the American Free Press” (which I’ll call AFP, in spite of the French outfit).
The use of the word “for” suggests that the purpose of Ron Paul’s “column” is at least partly to benefit AFP. But Ron Paul actually has been clear that he disagrees with some of the conspiracies for which AFP is infamous, has not granted permission to AFP to use his writings (inasmuch as he doesn’t need to, since his writings are in the public record) and does not receive direct benefit from AFP.
I’d recommend that, in the future, SJackson say something more along the lines of “a regular columnist IN the” AFP, or, to be still more accurate, simply note that his writings are exploited BY the AFP, since even the use of the word “colunmist” could be misleading.
We are also proud to publish these columnists:
Rep. Ron Paul, a medical doctor, is a Republican member of the U.S. Congress who represents the 14th District of Texas. Often called “Dr. No” because he bucks his party establishment, refusing to support policies contrary to traditional constitutional principles, Paul was the Libertarian Party presidential candidate in 1988.
It is obviously a fabrication designed to confuse your feeble mind. The Paulnati know better. Facts will not stand in they way of their "truth"
I think the issue presented by this news item is simply this: Stormfront and what seems like a sunsidiary thereof, RonPaulforums, have been doing their best to do the equivalent of Freeping polls for Ron Paul. That Paul has inspired the fervent loyalty of Stormfront is noteworthy, I believe, especially since Paul supporters on FR love to cite such results as evidence that Paul is more popular than the 3% ratings he gets in most polls.
On the other hand (and I doubt this is wht the thread or Petronski were TRYING to say), this insignificantly tiny datapoint hardly is evidence that anyone who supports Paul is likely to be a member of Stormfront or any other such organization, or that Paul has in any way condoned or solicited such support.
I want to be post 515, let’s see if I am right
All I did was weed out the epithets and perjoratives. If it comes out sounding ridiculous, it's beacuse it started out that way.
dangus got me....
Oh well...
David Duke was a Democrat when he attracted the levels of support that got him newsworthy. When he tried to tar the Republican party by association with himself, the Republican Party did everything it could to disavow him. The fact he could get an ‘R’ after his name in the ballot had only to do with the unique voting procedures in Louisiana, where primaries have nothing to do with parties or registration.
>> Did Karl Rove disassociate himself from La Raza? Did the administration and the Republicans criticize the White House top aid, or condemn him for this? <<
No, but I hate them for their fervent support of the immivasion.
Two wrongs, no matter how vile and disgusting the 2nd one is, do not make a right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.