Posted on 01/08/2008 11:04:11 AM PST by mnehring
Ron Paul never said blacks were animals and never praised David Duke. The quotations in the article show nothing of the sort. You are smearing a good man.
Facts don't matter when guilt by association is in play.
I had no problem understanding what was written. But, I don't wear blinders.
You'd have no problem with the Giulianites infesting FR again?
I didn’t post it in Breaking News, but considering it just broke today and even Drudge sought fit to headline it in bold red. I bet if these were comments made by McCain or Mitt, people wouldn’t be complaining it was listed in news.
But heck, you can always hit the Report Abuse button.
The fact that Paul is on speaking terms with Lou Rockwell is enough to tell me he is even more of a nut job than I always thought he was.
I'm confused, who is the 'association' with this time, the 'ghost writer' of the news letter?
Good man?
Please take the fawning support of this lunatic America hating kook to some forum sympathetic to his Al Qaeda echoing views.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-releases/125/ron-paul-statement-on-the-new-republic-article-regarding-old-newsletters
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.
So, I guess the campaign is calling some of you all 'small minded' who are defending the comments. Sorry.
Also FYI:
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 publically taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.”
###
Are you making this up? I have not seen any evidence of this, and I frequent this forum almost as often as you do.
Is Juliani a foreign policy purse-swinger like Paul now? If not, then we are mixing oranges and apples.
In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC's Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, "Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo." "This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s," the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter's author--presumably Paul--wrote, "I've urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming."
I know, he was concerned about chipmunks taking over DC. Bot his family .410s.
In a passage titled “The Duke’s Victory,” a newsletter celebrated Duke’s 44 percent showing in the 1990 Louisiana Republican Senate primary. “Duke lost the election,” it said, “but he scared the blazes out of the Establishment.” In 1991, a newsletter asked, “Is David Duke’s new prominence, despite his losing the gubernatorial election, good for anti-big government forces?” The conclusion was that “our priority should be to take the anti-government, anti-tax, anti-crime, anti-welfare loafers, anti-race privilege, anti-foreign meddling message of Duke, and enclose it in a more consistent package of freedom.”
I know, that's political commentary, not praise.
He's a racist, better for his supporters to embrace and defend his views, those that haven't. This Ron Paul didn't say it or Ron Paul didn't mean it is old. If it's true, he's a near incompetent or simply a liar.
That wasn't my point. It just seems odd that so many Paul-bashing threads show up in Breaking News, when they seem more appropriate for general news. Having Breaking News cluttered up with insubstantial stuff bugs me. Can you tell?
That will not phase them. When one lacks common sense and a sense of reality, a slick internet driven campaign, and a willingness to march to a new religion will easily do the trick.
Actually his "non-intervention B.S." means that he would let Israel alone to kick a$$ if they needed to do so.
Or do you agree with the keeping Israel on a short leash like the past administrations have done?
No, I think he’s saying that some of the newsletters were at least partially authored by him, but that he was out of the loop during the time that the questionable stuff was published. Whether that’s a reasonable argument, I don’t know. Then again, we have another candidate who holds basically the opposite view on pretty much every issue than he did ten years ago.
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.