Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: George Whorewell on December 20, 2011, 05:06:49 PM
-
Look, I don't think he had much of a chance anyway-- but I still had his back.
What say you getbiggers?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57345702-503544/ron-paul-disavows-racist-newsletters-under-his-name/
-
This has been around for DECADES.
Anyone who thinks that a pro-open/free immigration anti-bombing brown people candidate is racist is just ::)
-
-
This has been around for DECADES.
Anyone who thinks that a pro-open/free immigration anti-bombing brown people candidate is racist is just ::)
This. But I also never underestimate the stupidity of the general public.
-
Look, I don't think he had much of a chance anyway-- but I still had his back.
What say you getbiggers?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57345702-503544/ron-paul-disavows-racist-newsletters-under-his-name/
Nah. I don't think this will hurt him much. It's the 911 nuttiness that will kill him. If he wins Iowa, people will be all over that stuff (appearing on the Alex Jones show, etc.).
-
Ron Paul saying that he wouldn't round up the millions of illegal immigrants in this country and send them back to their homelands:
Ron Paul calling a border fence or wall "offensive" and coming out in support of free and open immigration as long as welfare is eliminated first:
Ron Paul saying he supports free trade with Cuba and the right to travel freely to and from Cuba:
Ron Paul supporting free trade:
Ron Paul: "we could be a lot more generous about letting immigrants come here"
Are these positions a racist takes?
-
Nah. I don't think this will hurt him much. It's the 911 nuttiness that will kill him. If he wins Iowa, people will be all over that stuff (appearing on the Alex Jones show, etc.).
9/11 nuttiness?
Is the former head of the CIA's Bin Laden Unit a nut?
-
Why do you assume Scheuer is right....because he agree's with "blowback"..because it fits in with a very "leftist" ideology that we're to blame for everything?
-
9/11 nuttiness?
Is the former head of the CIA's Bin Laden Unit a nut?
I don't debate that garbage. It's arguably the stupidest conspiracy theory (or any theory) I have ever heard. If that crap gets on Ron Paul's shoes he will be completely marginalized.
Here is Ron Paul, being smart enough to reject that nonsense:
Here is Ron Paul telling 911 Troofers to leave him alone:
-
Why do you assume Scheuer is right....because he agree's with "blowback"..because it fits in with a very "leftist" ideology that we're to blame for everything?
I don't agree with everything he says, he is not a leftist but a conservative, and of course he agrees with "blowback," since blowback was a term coined by the CIA itself.
My point is that if you think Ron Paul is nutty, then you must call the CIA nutty for believing in blowback and for having someone who believes blowback caused 9/11 head their Bin Laden Unit.
I don't debate that garbage. It's arguably the stupidest conspiracy theory (or any theory) I have ever heard. If that crap gets on Ron Paul's shoes he will be completely marginalized.
Here is Ron Paul, being smart enough to reject that nonsense:
Here is Ron Paul telling 911 Troofers to leave him alone:
Had you actually watched the video I posted you would have noticed it had nothing to do with 9/11 "truthers."
-
I don't agree with everything he says, he is not a leftist but a conservative, and of course he agrees with "blowback," since blowback was a term coined by the CIA itself.
My point is that if you think Ron Paul is nutty, then you must call the CIA nutty for believing in blowback and for having someone who believes blowback caused 9/11 head their Bin Laden Unit.
Had you actually watched the video I posted you would have noticed it had nothing to do with 9/11 "truthers."
My comments specifically related to how 911 Troofers will prevent Ron Paul from ever getting off the ground.
-
My comments specifically related to how 911 Troofers will prevent Ron Paul from ever getting off the ground.
You said that Ron Paul's "911 nuttiness" will kill his campaign even though you acknowledge that he isn't a "truther," soooo what is it?
-
You said that Ron Paul's "911 nuttiness" will kill his campaign even though you acknowledge that he isn't a "truther," soooo what is it?
That's not what I said. Here is what I said:
Nah. I don't think this will hurt him much. It's the 911 nuttiness that will kill him. If he wins Iowa, people will be all over that stuff (appearing on the Alex Jones show, etc.).
I then posted two clips where Ron Paul expressly rejected that ignorant crap. So no, I don't think Ron Paul is a 911 Troofer. He's too smart for that. It's the fact he has a large 911 Troofer following and he appeared on a 911 Troofer's show that would hurt him.
-
Look, I don't think he had much of a chance anyway-- but I still had his back.
What say you getbiggers?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57345702-503544/ron-paul-disavows-racist-newsletters-under-his-name/
I doubt it. But I do feel ashamed for laughing at that racist joke in the first paragraph.
-
Since when do Repubs or for that matter TBaggers give a shit about racism
If anything, this should get him more votes
-
Since when do Repubs or for that matter TBaggers give a shit about racism
If anything, this should get him more votes
::)
You know how I know that you don't know any Republicans or Tea Partiers?
-
::)
You know how I know that you don't know any Republicans or Tea Partiers?
I know TONS
pretty much everyone I work with and most of my neighbors
I wasn't referring to them or you
just a certain segment, examples of whom sometimes post on this board occasionally
they know I'm right....about them
-
I know TONS
pretty much everyone I work with and most of my neighbors
I wasn't referring to them or you
just a certain segment, examples of whom sometimes post on this board occasionally
they know I'm right....about them
C'mon - I acknowledge that there are racist people out there, but if you make a racist remark in a caucus or primary you'll win some, you'll lose some. Most likely, you'll lose more votes than you gain UNLESS it's a case where people feel like you're being unfairly attacked over an out-of-context remark or something similar.
-
C'mon - I acknowledge that there are racist people out there, but if you make a racist remark in a caucus or primary you'll win some, you'll lose some. Most likely, you'll lose more votes than you gain UNLESS it's a case where people feel like you're being unfairly attacked over an out-of-context remark or something similar.
yeah but aren't we talking about a racist comment written in a newsletter 25+ years ago which RP may or may not have even written?
this is my opinion..... I don't think it will hurt him among people who already support him or are "attracted" to what he is selling
also, I personally do not think he is a racist so that is biasing my opinion as well
-
he's not a truther, and mccain's not a truther.
both ron paul and mccain have gone on Alex Jones show, along with many other politicians.
DIdn't hurt mccain in 2008.
-
Look, I don't think he had much of a chance anyway-- but I still had his back.
What say you getbiggers?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57345702-503544/ron-paul-disavows-racist-newsletters-under-his-name/
Way old news and it's been brought up in the media one a month at least. No it's not the end of him, there's even videos of blacks defending him on this. Everyone that knows him knows he wasn't behind the shit in those newsletters. It's not in his character at all and I think most believe him when he says he didn't write it or know about it when it happened.
-
Nah. I don't think this will hurt him much. It's the 911 nuttiness that will kill him. If he wins Iowa, people will be all over that stuff (appearing on the Alex Jones show, etc.).
your cred talking about Paul is below zero... How about we just assume you're going to talk shit on Paul which is a fucking givin at this point and you skip the thread. ::)
-
Ron Paul saying that he wouldn't round up the millions of illegal immigrants in this country and send them back to their homelands:
Ron Paul calling a border fence or wall "offensive" and coming out in support of free and open immigration as long as welfare is eliminated first:
Ron Paul saying he supports free trade with Cuba and the right to travel freely to and from Cuba:
Ron Paul supporting free trade:
Ron Paul: "we could be a lot more generous about letting immigrants come here"
Are these positions a racist takes?
Good clips giving a good overview of Paul on the topic...
-
your cred talking about Paul is below zero... How about we just assume you're going to talk shit on Paul which is a fucking givin at this point and you skip the thread. ::)
LOL. Credibility talking about Ron Paul? That's funny. :)
How about I say whatever the heck I want? That seems to work just fine. :)
-
yeah, beach, for 6 years, you've taken the official party position on just about everything, so yeah, we welcome you bashing ron paul.
to be honest, to the swing voters reading get big... seeing you trash ron paul, while memebrs ranging from hugo and 240, to 33 and Fury, all endorsing ron paul, really speaks volumes.
you were the one who always defended the establishment - and we saw where that got us. People look at a low-spending, anti-war candidate like Paul, and they say "well, we tried beach bum's candidates, and we see what that got us. Let's see what we can get with a guy who is supported by just about everyone else from all sides of the spectrum.
Carry on - your bashing of paul only makes us think he might be the RIGHT guy.
-
yeah, beach, for 6 years, you've taken the official party position on just about everything, so yeah, we welcome you bashing ron paul.
to be honest, to the swing voters reading get big... seeing you trash ron paul, while memebrs ranging from hugo and 240, to 33 and Fury, all endorsing ron paul, really speaks volumes.
you were the one who always defended the establishment - and we saw where that got us. People look at a low-spending, anti-war candidate like Paul, and they say "well, we tried beach bum's candidates, and we see what that got us. Let's see what we can get with a guy who is supported by just about everyone else from all sides of the spectrum.
Carry on - your bashing of paul only makes us think he might be the RIGHT guy.
LOL! Meltdown. If I happen to get bored and feel like responding, I'll actually quote what the board's resident Obama apologist (you) has said, instead of just being a lying liar (you again). Until then, I will continue to LOL. :)
-
:) no worries man.
seriously tho - you've trumpeted the 'establishment' thing very well. And most voters have decided the establisment options aren't all that diff and won't offer all that much change.
If anti-establishment vote wins in 2012, then Ron Paul wins in 2012.
-
LOL! Meltdown. If I happen to get bored and feel like responding, I'll actually quote what the board's resident Obama apologist (you) has said, instead of just being a lying liar (you again). Until then, I will continue to LOL. :)
Neo cons have to face reality. The era of perpetual war and nation building is over. You guys would follow Rumsfeld and Cheney off a cliff if it came down to it.
-
holy fucknig shit...............
538 predicts that???????????????????????????????????????????????
oh geez, they nailed every single state in 2008, didn't they? had the electoral vote 100% predicted right?
GEEZ, that's unreal.
-
LOL @ "This is not something you'd typically see on CNN..."
They don't even hide their obvious bias against him. So cute.
-
holy fucknig shit...............
538 predicts that???????????????????????????????????????????????
oh geez, they nailed every single state in 2008, didn't they? had the electoral vote 100% predicted right?
GEEZ, that's unreal.
I dont agree with RP on everything, however - on most issues - if you go issue by issue down the line - he is the best choice.
1. Spending - check
2. Bill of rights - check
3. Environmental bullshit - check
4. Health Care - check
5. Rendition law - check
6. Consistency and trust - check
-
Ron Paul's base ain't going anywhere. that's a huge key factor. They are 20% in every state.
You can't say the same for newt, perry, or bachmann. But you can for Mitt.
AND you can say that 80% of the GOP voters have been looking for an anti-Mitt for about a year now.
Ron paul might be the guy. yeah, he's not perfect, but he's the only guy in the race who isn't - ready for it? - A lying asshole.
So I'll take the honest guy with some quesiton marks, over the rest of the phony lying bought-and-paid-for liars.
-
Neo cons have to face reality. The era of perpetual war and nation building is over. You guys would follow Rumsfeld and Cheney off a cliff if it came down to it.
What exactly does that clip have to do with whether Ron Paul can win the nomination? Huckabee won it on 2008.
And you 911 Troofers are not doing Ron Paul any favors. He asked you in 2008 to leave him alone.
-
I dont think Huck had that kind of 20%-no-matter-what base in 2008 that Ron Paul has now.
You know what I mean? Ron paul could club a baby seal before every speech, and they'd cheer him for keeping stages safe from seal attacks.
his supporters are rabid, dude. They chased sean hannity down the street, remember?
I don't think huck enjoyed that kind of support loyalty, and I dont think he had ron paul kinds of $ either. RPaul is dumping a ton of money into new hampshire next week, right?
-
I dont think Huck had that kind of 20%-no-matter-what base in 2008 that Ron Paul has now.
You know what I mean? Ron paul could club a baby seal before every speech, and they'd cheer him for keeping stages safe from seal attacks.
his supporters are rabid, dude. They chased sean hannity down the street, remember?
I don't think huck enjoyed that kind of support loyalty, and I dont think he had ron paul kinds of $ either. RPaul is dumping a ton of money into new hampshire next week, right?
The reason we need ron paul is simple - V E T O
he wont rubber stamp the treason coming from the congress. BTW anyone who thinks Newt/Romney will be any different than obama on these issues is delusional.
-
I think the congress will shut down some of the more potentially dangerous ron paul actions. If they really wanna bomb congress, then they'll need 70 member of the senate to sign off on it. Big deal there.
agreed with you on newt/romney... we'll get exactly what we have from obama with them - the only diff is the money will dry up from the poor folks and will go to the rich folks. Middle class will keep getting raped, no doubt.
-
LOL. Credibility talking about Ron Paul? That's funny. :)
How about I say whatever the heck I want? That seems to work just fine. :)
for giving everyone a headache, yes it works great. Now STFU :)
-
Ron Paul Walks Out of CNN Interview When Asked About Newsletters
“It’s legitimate, it’s legitimate. These things are pretty incendiary,” Borger pressed.
“Because of people like you,” Paul riffed.
Is that his actual, considered position? That the newsletters are incendiary only due to a Liberal Media making them so?
He actually has made that claim before. When these first came to light, he did not disclaim authorship. He simply said you had to read them all "in context" and not seize upon any particular sentence, but read everything he's said "in context."
So he has in fact attempted to claim that these newsletters, like the Ron Paul Survival Report (!!!), were not actually a problem at all as far as substance.
Just this darned liberal media (and only this darned liberal media) making a stink about it.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/324942.php
Video at the link. He's going to have to toughen up if he wants to be president.
-
Neo cons have to face reality. The era of perpetual war and nation building is over. You guys would follow Rumsfeld and Cheney off a cliff if it came down to it.
Good post, hope you're right about that though!
-
agreed - he's gonna have a problem with them in the general election. however, how tough is it to find some texas good old boy to say "oh yeah, I wrote that, hell yeah", ya know? He will find some way to manage that.
ron paul ain't perfect. I like him because he is the only guy who isn't going to spend us into oblivion, it's that simple.
-
agreed - he's gonna have a problem with them in the general election. however, how tough is it to find some texas good old boy to say "oh yeah, I wrote that, hell yeah", ya know? He will find some way to manage that.
ron paul ain't perfect. I like him because he is the only guy who isn't going to spend us into oblivion, it's that simple.
....he says after he demanded that the GOP raise the debt ceiling for Obama.
-
Ron Paul Walks Out of CNN Interview When Asked About Newsletters
“It’s legitimate, it’s legitimate. These things are pretty incendiary,” Borger pressed.
“Because of people like you,” Paul riffed.
Is that his actual, considered position? That the newsletters are incendiary only due to a Liberal Media making them so?
He actually has made that claim before. When these first came to light, he did not disclaim authorship. He simply said you had to read them all "in context" and not seize upon any particular sentence, but read everything he's said "in context."
So he has in fact attempted to claim that these newsletters, like the Ron Paul Survival Report (!!!), were not actually a problem at all as far as substance.
Just this darned liberal media (and only this darned liberal media) making a stink about it.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/324942.php
Video at the link. He's going to have to toughen up if he wants to be president.
I agree that he doesnt handle this very well, (in the past he rambled on way to long), but I also understand that he`s been asked about it a million times. Funny how Obama can get away with the church and so forth but Ron is gets nuked over it. As far as Im concerned its close to being the same thing.
-
....he says after he demanded that the GOP raise the debt ceiling for Obama.
i dont believe in half-assing things.
If the tea party would have crashed the got, it woudl have been for no good reason. 4 weeks of shit, then they agree to another extension. That would have been it.
You can bet if Ron Paul crashes teh MFer, it's because we're about to see change across the board with no more business as usual.
Doesn't matter how many shitty little issues I disagree with RPaul on, if I agree with him on something like, say, not crashing the fucking US economy like the rest of these assclowns - Romney, newt, Obama, Hilary, etc - Will all do.
-
I agree that he doesnt handle this very well but I also understand that he`s been asked about it a million times. Funny how Obama can get away with the church and so forth but Ron is gets nuked over it. As far as Im concerned its close to being the same thing.
There's no doubt that they're similar. Obama has the luxury of having the media in his pocket whereas Paul doesn't. Every Republican candidate has been raked over the coals to this point and it's only going to get worse for them from here on out. He has to learn to deal with the questions if he wants to be the front-runner as the media is going to be coming at him hard.
i dont believe in half-assing things.
If the tea party would have crashed the got, it woudl have been for no good reason. 4 weeks of shit, then they agree to another extension. That would have been it.
You can bet if Ron Paul crashes teh MFer, it's because we're about to see change across the board with no more business as usual.
Doesn't matter how many shitty little issues I disagree with RPaul on, if I agree with him on something like, say, not crashing the fucking US economy like the rest of these assclowns - Romney, newt, Obama, Hilary, etc - Will all do.
Whatever you say, Mittack. ::)
-
He actually handled well I thought. He has more patiance then I do thats for sure. When you put it context though, in 40 years of being in the public this is the worst they could find, 4 sentences. If he was what they are making him out to be you'd think there would be more. I have to admit though that I would rather nothing like this was attached to him in any way.
?v=_zp6A-l-TwE[/youtube]
-
He actually handled well I thought. He has more patiance then I do thats for sure. When you put it context though, in 40 years of being in the public this is the worst they could find, 4 sentences. If he was what they are making him out to be you'd think there would be more. I have to admit though that I would rather nothing like this was attached to him in any way.
?v=_zp6A-l-TwE[/youtube]
Eh, bitch is annoying asking the same shit over and over. But BF is spot on, he's got to handle this better.
-
Ron Paul Racist Rant Caught On Tape!!! :)
-
no shit... over the years, ron paul has proven that it's all about EQUALITY.
Some dipshit put something shady on a newsletter 25 years ago. There's nothing to show Ron Paul has done anything to hurt minorities in his entire career.
One could argue that this kind of FAIRNESS trumps every other single candidate in the race - From EITHER party.
NOW - I expected this kind of bullshit attacks from chris mathews - but from Levin and Hannity? Disgusting!
-
He actually handled well I thought. He has more patiance then I do thats for sure. When you put it context though, in 40 years of being in the public this is the worst they could find, 4 sentences. If he was what they are making him out to be you'd think there would be more. I have to admit though that I would rather nothing like this was attached to him in any way.
?v=_zp6A-l-TwE[/youtube]
Geez. No wonder we are so screwed up. No questions on serious issues
-
Geez. No wonder we are so screwed up. No questions on serious issues
only one 2008 presidential candidate from either party nailed it when it came to predicting the economic collapse - Ron Paul.
They don't wanna talk about that. They wanna play gotcha with some bullshit like this.
I wouldn't bat an eye if the libs were the ones doing it - I saw Mathews come at Rand paul with this nonsense last year.
however I sure didn't expect the republican voices to all call ron paul a racist over this. Disgusting. They don't want a repub - they want a corporate tool.
-
He actually handled well I thought. He has more patiance then I do thats for sure. When you put it context though, in 40 years of being in the public this is the worst they could find, 4 sentences. If he was what they are making him out to be you'd think there would be more. I have to admit though that I would rather nothing like this was attached to him in any way.
?v=_zp6A-l-TwE[/youtube]
Saw this yesterday. Walking out of an interview over tough questions? Seriously? I don't believe he's a racist, but those were legitimate questions. And this is politics. Dirty business. How is he going to handle things when it really gets rough if he cannot handle a few minutes of questions like this?
-
Saw this yesterday. Walking out of an interview over tough questions? Seriously? I don't believe he's a racist, but those were legitimate questions. And this is politics. Dirty business. How is he going to handle things when it really gets rough if he cannot handle a few minutes of questions like this?
Kind of reminds me of Palin getting her panties in a twist when she was asked what she reads or what she thinks about the Bush Doctrine
-
Kind of reminds me of Palin getting her panties in a twist when she was asked what she reads or what she thinks about the Bush Doctrine
He should have done what obama did when asked about Rev. Wright - just lie about it.
-
Saw this yesterday. Walking out of an interview over tough questions? Seriously? I don't believe he's a racist, but those were legitimate questions. And this is politics. Dirty business. How is he going to handle things when it really gets rough if he cannot handle a few minutes of questions like this?
I could post 4 different CNN interviews over the last 2 days where he answered the questions in full. What more do they want?
-
I thought he handled it great. Looked stone cold. Gloria Borger is a joke.
-
I thought he handled it great. Looked stone cold. Gloria Borger is a joke.
lol
-
lol
He showed some balls and vigor. That's good. Screwe these leftists
-
He showed some balls and vigor. That's good. Screwe these leftists
People should look up who her husband is.
-
People should look up who her husband is.
for fucks sake - the economy is on the eve of the abyss and this is the bullshit they want to discuss? I mean really.
-
Ron Paul Racist Rant Caught On Tape!!! :)
I knew it! Ron Paul is darn racist! I hate racists.........and Hispanics... >:(
...Nah, I kid I kid! :)
-
CNN Poll: Ron Paul Most Popular Republican Amongst Non-Whites
While the establishment media continues to hype a 15-year-old story concerning decades old newsletters as part of a dirty tricks campaign to smear Ron Paul as a racist, the latest CNN poll shows that Paul has the most support from non-whites out of all the Republican candidates.
The latest CNN/ORC poll released Tuesday finds that Congressman Paul scores highest amongst minorities when matched up against Barack Obama in a hypothetical election head to head.
Paul scores 25% of the vote amongst non-whites, whereas Romney polls at 20% and Gingrich gets 15%.
-
I could post 4 different CNN interviews over the last 2 days where he answered the questions in full. What more do they want?
To answer the question if another reporter is asking. It's not that difficult. This stuff has been out there for years. He should have a canned response ready for them. Answer the questions. Then move on more important stuff. If he's going to get flustered over what happened in that clip he will have trouble managing multiple real crises in the White House.
-
To answer the question if another reporter is asking. It's not that difficult. This stuff has been out there for years.
From the same network? ::) And he's been asked about it a million times, even when he was low in the polls, (in 2008), so this has nothing to do with "being at the top and should be expected" and more to do with making him out to be a racist, which he is not. Its a total waste of time on tabloid journalism.
-
CNN Poll: Ron Paul Most Popular Republican Amongst Non-Whites
33,
Do you think RP can peel back some of that 95% african american base? I think he can
-
33,
Do you think RP can peel back some of that 95% african american base? I think he can
If he pushes free crack, coke, weed, 40's, and do whatever the fuck you want ? a ton will sign up for that.
-
If he pushes free crack, coke, weed, 40's, and do whatever the fuck you want ? a ton will sign up for that.
seriously - when ron paul gets on tv and says "the wars gotta end, we need the money and jobs here"
I dont care what color you are, you'll get behind it.
-
To answer the question if another reporter is asking. It's not that difficult. This stuff has been out there for years. He should have a canned response ready for them. Answer the questions. Then move on more important stuff. If he's going to get flustered over what happened in that clip he will have trouble managing multiple real crises in the White House.
Ron Paul did answer her question twice in the video. He said twice that he did not write them, that he did not read them until 10 years later, and that he does not agree with them. She is the one that would not move on to the more important stuff and kept asking the same question over and over.
-
Ron Paul did answer her question twice in the video. He said twice that he did not write them, that he did not read them until 10 years later, and that he does not agree with them. She is the one that would not move on to the more important stuff and kept asking the same question over and over.
Loco she didn't really keep asking the same question. Here is what she asked:
- Did you ever read the letters?
- Did you ever object to any of them?
- Did you make any money off of them?
- There are reports you made $1 million in 1993?
- You read them, but didn't do anything about them?
- Is it a legitimate question to ask?
I understand him getting irritated, but terminating the interview? Did not look good at all.
-
Ron Paul Letter Warned 'Race War' Coming
Thursday, 22 Dec 2011
A direct-mail solicitation for Ron Paul's political and investment newsletters two decades ago warned of a "coming race war in our big cities" and of a "federal-homosexual cover-up" to play down the impact of AIDS.
The eight-page letter, which appears to carry Paul's signature at the end, also warns that the U.S. government's redesign of currency to include different colors - a move aimed at thwarting counterfeiters - actually was part of a plot to allow the government to track Americans using the "new money."
The letter urges readers to subscribe to Paul's newsletters so that he could "tell you how you can save yourself and your family" from an overbearing government.
The letter's details emerge at a time when Paul, now a contender for the Republican nomination for president, is under fire over reports that his newsletters contained racist, anti-homosexual and anti-Israel rants.
Reports of the newsletters' contents have Paul's campaign scrambling to deny that he wrote the inflammatory articles.
Among other things, the articles called the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. a "world-class philanderer," criticized the U.S. holiday bearing King's name as "Hate Whitey Day," and said that AIDS sufferers "enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."
As Paul made a campaign stop in Manchester, Iowa, on Thursday, his Iowa chairman, Drew Ivers, repeated Paul's assertions that he did not write the articles that resurfaced this week in a report in the Weekly Standard magazine.
Paul has said that he is not sure who wrote the articles that were published under his name. He has said the articles do not reflect his views, and noted that his public stances - supporting gays in the military for example - have run counter to the incendiary statements in the newsletters.
In an interview with CNN's Gloria Borger on Wednesday, Paul said of the newsletter's articles: "I didn't write them. I didn't read them at the time and I disavow them."
When Borger continued to pursue the subject, Paul removed his microphone and walked out of the interview.
"It is ridiculous to imply that Ron Paul is a bigot, racist, or unethical," Ivers said.
However, Ivers said, Paul does not deny or retract material that Paul has written under his own signature, such as the letter promoting Paul's newsletters.
When asked whether that meant Paul believed there was a government conspiracy to cover up the impact of AIDS, Ivers said, "I don't think he embraces that."
Paul's newsletters "showed good factual information and investment information," Ivers said. "It was a public service, helping people understand and equip them to avoid an unsound monetary policy."
"EXTRAORDINARY SOURCES"
The letter promoting Paul's newsletters was written about 1993. It was during a period in which Paul - who left Congress in 1985 after serving about eight years - returned to Washington after a decade's absence.
(For a PDF of the solicitation letter see link.reuters.com/vud75s)
The letter was provided to Reuters by James Kirchick, a contributing editor for The New Republic magazine. He says he found the letter in archives of political literature maintained by the University of Kansas and the Wisconsin Historical Society.
Early in the 2008 presidential campaign - in which Paul was a candidate - Kirchick published an article in The New Republic in which he described Paul as "not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are backing - but rather a member in good standing of some of the oldest and ugliest traditions in American politics."
The letter promoting Paul's newsletters claims that Paul - through what he describes as a network of "extraordinary sources" in Congress, the White House, the Treasury and Justice departments, the Federal Reserve and the Internal Revenue Service - had acquired unique insider information that would his subscribers to "neutralize" the plans of "powerbrokers."
Paul's letter went on to describe various plots and schemes that he had "unmasked," including a "plot for world government, world money and world central banking." He also claimed to have exposed a plan by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to "suspend the Constitution" in a falsely declared national emergency.
Despite being "told not to talk," Paul wrote that his newsletters also "laid bare" the "Israeli lobby, which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica," and a "federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS."
Paul claimed that his "training as a physician" helped him "see through" this alleged cover-up.
Paul also suggested that a planned U.S. currency with new notes designed to curb counterfeiting and money laundering would result in the distribution of "totalitarian bills" that "were tinted pink and blue and brown, and blighted with holograms, diffraction gratings, metal and plastic threads and chemical alarms."
Paul said the money was designed to allow authorities to "keep track of American cash and American citizens."
He urged the letter's readers to send in $99, which would buy subscriptions to his monthly political and investment newsletters, a copy of his book "Surviving the New Money," an investment manual and access to the "unlisted phone number of my Financial Hotline for fast breaking news."
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/paul-race-war-newsletter/2011/12/22/id/421943
-
He is absolutely right, sadly. Once the nations' financial system collapses, as it will, and the welfare checks and govt stops functioning etc, we are 3 weeks away from civil war and chaos.
-
He is absolutely right, sadly. Once the nations' financial system collapses, as it will, and the welfare checks and govt stops functioning etc, we are 3 weeks away from civil war and chaos.
shhhhh... don't ruin BB's moment... He thinks he's delivering something special that others haven't already seen lol... I'll let him feel special for a moment and then kick him back in his corner.
-
shhhhh... don't ruin BB's moment... He thinks he's delivering something special that others haven't already seen lol... I'll let him feel special for a moment and then kick him back in his corner.
am i the only one so sick and tired of mealy mouth political speak and people saying a lot of words and you still have no idea WTF they really think on something?
-
Kinds seems like a lot of the stuff they describe is happening as we speak.
I.E. -
Paul's letter went on to describe various plots and schemes that he had "unmasked," including a "plot for world government, world money and world central banking." He also claimed to have exposed a plan by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to "suspend the Constitution" in a falsely declared national emergency.
Makes you wonder.
-
Kinds seems like a lot of the stuff they describe is happening as we speak.
I.E. -
Makes you wonder.
After the BS of Fast and Furious how anyone can think these ideas are outlandish is beyond me.
-
After the BS of Fast and Furious how anyone can think these ideas are outlandish is beyond me.
No doubt. How people can ignore, rationalize, or flat out accept the unconstitutional and illegal scandals in this administration is beyond me.
I get the feeling Obama could murder an innocent and people would find a way to praise him.
-
Getting more problematic for him.
Ron Paul Touts Newsletters In 1987 Interview (VIDEO)
First Posted: 12/23/11 12:25 PM ET Updated: 12/23/11 12:58 PM ET
It is hardly a new revelation that newsletters sent under Rep. Ron Paul's name often contained provocative and occasionally racist material. When the Texas Republican ran against Lefty Morris for Congress in 1996, the issue first surfaced as a potentially crippling skeleton in the closet. When Paul gained popularity as a truth-telling Libertarian-leaning presidential candidate in 2008, it came up once again.
Each time, Paul has denied that he knew what was being published in the Ron Paul Political Report, Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, the Ron Paul Survival Report and the Ron Paul Investment Letter. They may have contained screeds against urban black culture; they may have ridiculed Martin Luther King Jr. as a philanderer; they may have accused the federal government of covering up the AIDS crisis; but none of it was being done with the congressman's sign-off, he claimed.
"I didn’t write them. I disavow them. That's it," Paul told CNN in a recent interview.
Now that he is poised to potentially win the Iowa Caucus in a matter of weeks, the idea that Paul was blissfully unaware of what was happening with his newsletters is being seriously challenged. On Thursday, USA Today reported that Paul had told the Dallas Morning News in 1996 that the contents of his newsletter were accurate -- including accusations that 95 percent of black men in Washington were "semi-criminal or entirely criminal" -- but that they needed to be taken in proper context. That same day, Reuters reported that Paul's signature was on a 1993 direct mailer warning of a "coming race war" and a "federal-homosexual cover-up," though the Paul campaign said he didn't write the mailer and disavows its content.
On Friday, The Huffington Post located an Oct. 11, 1996, article from the Houston Chronicle in which a Paul spokesman once more didn't dispute that he had authored some of the newsletters but accused the candidate's opponent of trying to make a political issue of something written in an "abstract" sense. Reviewing old videos in the C-SPAN Video Archive, The Huffington Post also uncovered previously unreported footage of Paul talking about how in his time away from public office he spent time on his newsletter.
"I also put out an investment type of letter because I've always been fascinated with the hard money school, and been interested in the gold standard, so I put out an investment letter on those lines," he said in a C-SPAN interview on May 29, 1987, amidst his run for the presidency on the Libertarian ticket.
WATCH the original video:
It is worth noting that the most controversial of the Paul newsletters -- Ron Paul Political Report -- was started in 1987, while the Ron Paul Investment Letter and the Ron Paul Survival Report began in 1985. Likewise, most of the inflammatory material that has surfaced (much of it published Friday by the New Republic) came years after the C-SPAN interview.
Paul may, indeed, have not authored the political and cultural commentary that would make these newsletters such a political liability. The most common suspicion is that the material was written by Lew Rockwell, his former chief of staff and the man listed as editor on these letters' mastheads.
But the notion that he was totally unaware is increasingly difficult to believe. Certainly, in May of 1987, he was acknowledging that he knew about and was invested in the success of these newsletters, and they would generate an estimated $1 million in one year alone. And as reported by Andrew Kaczynski, the video archivist, he continued to take ownership of them through 1995.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/23/ron-paul-newsletter-interview_n_1167645.html
-
He was mostly spot on. God forbid anyone tell the truth anymore.
-
The full, unedited interview. This woman asks some stupid questions.
-
Any chance he had of performing well outside of Iowa is done. Not that he was going to do much anyway, but this is really going to hurt him.
Newsletters, Statements Cause Campaign Trail Problems for Ron Paul
Published December 24, 2011
FoxNews.com
Ron Paul is facing new questions on the campaign trail about inflammatory newsletters dating back to the 1980s, as the outsider Republican candidate gains steam in Iowa just days before the caucuses.
The newsletters from the 1980s and 1990s, under names like Ron Paul's Freedom Report and the Ron Paul Investment Letter, contained several instances of racially charged language and other offensive statements. While the newsletters have attracted renewed scrutiny in the media over the last few days, Newt Gingrich piled on Friday, saying the missives raise "fundamental questions" about the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman.
"These things are really nasty, and he didn't know about it? Wasn't aware of it?" Gingrich said at a stop in South Carolina.
Paul has since denied writing, and in some cases even reading, some of the newsletters that bore his name. But the issue could continue to haunt him as he rides a wave of support in Iowa at just the right time.
A line from one of the newsletters referring to the 1992 riots in Los Angeles said: "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."
Reuters this week also reported on an ad for the newsletters from the early '90s that discussed "the coming race war in our big cities" and the "federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS" -- all under Paul's name.
Paul told Fox News on Friday that if he's guilty of anything, it's negligence.
"I think the charge, which could be a correct charge, is I was pretty negligent as a publisher of a newsletter, not paying more attention," Paul said, adding: "I think that if someone thinks I'm perfect, then they are going to be disappointed."
But he said any attempt to portray him as racist would be "ironic," because as a civil libertarian he "champions civil liberties, regardless of race, creed, or color."
"The judicial system is very unfair to minorities. Nobody else would dare touch that," Paul said.
Paul said the controversial passages in those newsletters represented "probably one-hundredth of 1 percent or even less of all the thousands and thousands of pages."
He said they were mostly about financial and economic issues.
Paul's explanation has attracted skepticism from Gingrich and others.
"Now Ron Paul wants us to believe he didn't know anything about these newsletters even though he was profiting from them?" questioned Rich Lowry, editor of the National Review.
Paul's well-known positions on foreign policy and other issues are also attracting new scrutiny.
After Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., got in a tense dispute with Paul at the most recent presidential primary debate over his foreign policy views, Gingrich on Saturday assailed Paul's "isolationist" policies.
"The only person I know who's for a weaker military than Barack Obama is Ron Paul," Gingrich said. "His positions are fundamentally wrong on national security."
Paul wants to dramatically shrink the U.S. military presence around the world and has rejected as war propaganda warnings about the Iranian nuclear program.
Paul also once criticized the government's treatment of WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning.
"Should he be locked up in prison or should we see him as a political hero? Maybe he is a true patriot -- who reveals what's going on in government," Paul said.
Karl Rove, former adviser to former President George W. Bush, said if any other candidate had made that kind of a statement, "it would be on the front page of the newspaper."
Analysts say most GOP contenders don't take Paul seriously enough to spend any of their campaign cash on ads highlighting his edgy positions, and that the statements actually work against him with the GOP base. For the time being, Paul's numbers are soaring in Iowa, where several recent polls have put him a few points ahead of Gingrich and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
But while it may be unlikely that Paul will be the GOP nominee, some experts believe he will have a significant impact on who ultimately is.
"My sense like the last time -- he stayed in the race all the way. He'll have delegates this time and he can play some kind of a role if the race is close," said Republican strategist Ed Rollins.
Fox News' Shannon Bream contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/24/newsletters-statements-cause-campaign-trail-problems-for-ron-paul/
-
Any chance he had of performing well outside of Iowa is done. Not that he was going to do much anyway, but this is really going to hurt him.
Newsletters, Statements Cause Campaign Trail Problems for Ron Paul
Published December 24, 2011
FoxNews.com
Ron Paul is facing new questions on the campaign trail about inflammatory newsletters dating back to the 1980s, as the outsider Republican candidate gains steam in Iowa just days before the caucuses.
The newsletters from the 1980s and 1990s, under names like Ron Paul's Freedom Report and the Ron Paul Investment Letter, contained several instances of racially charged language and other offensive statements. While the newsletters have attracted renewed scrutiny in the media over the last few days, Newt Gingrich piled on Friday, saying the missives raise "fundamental questions" about the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman.
"These things are really nasty, and he didn't know about it? Wasn't aware of it?" Gingrich said at a stop in South Carolina.
Paul has since denied writing, and in some cases even reading, some of the newsletters that bore his name. But the issue could continue to haunt him as he rides a wave of support in Iowa at just the right time.
A line from one of the newsletters referring to the 1992 riots in Los Angeles said: "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."
Reuters this week also reported on an ad for the newsletters from the early '90s that discussed "the coming race war in our big cities" and the "federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS" -- all under Paul's name.
Paul told Fox News on Friday that if he's guilty of anything, it's negligence.
"I think the charge, which could be a correct charge, is I was pretty negligent as a publisher of a newsletter, not paying more attention," Paul said, adding: "I think that if someone thinks I'm perfect, then they are going to be disappointed."
But he said any attempt to portray him as racist would be "ironic," because as a civil libertarian he "champions civil liberties, regardless of race, creed, or color."
"The judicial system is very unfair to minorities. Nobody else would dare touch that," Paul said.
Paul said the controversial passages in those newsletters represented "probably one-hundredth of 1 percent or even less of all the thousands and thousands of pages."
He said they were mostly about financial and economic issues.
Paul's explanation has attracted skepticism from Gingrich and others.
"Now Ron Paul wants us to believe he didn't know anything about these newsletters even though he was profiting from them?" questioned Rich Lowry, editor of the National Review.
Paul's well-known positions on foreign policy and other issues are also attracting new scrutiny.
After Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., got in a tense dispute with Paul at the most recent presidential primary debate over his foreign policy views, Gingrich on Saturday assailed Paul's "isolationist" policies.
"The only person I know who's for a weaker military than Barack Obama is Ron Paul," Gingrich said. "His positions are fundamentally wrong on national security."
Paul wants to dramatically shrink the U.S. military presence around the world and has rejected as war propaganda warnings about the Iranian nuclear program.
Paul also once criticized the government's treatment of WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning.
"Should he be locked up in prison or should we see him as a political hero? Maybe he is a true patriot -- who reveals what's going on in government," Paul said.
Karl Rove, former adviser to former President George W. Bush, said if any other candidate had made that kind of a statement, "it would be on the front page of the newspaper."
Analysts say most GOP contenders don't take Paul seriously enough to spend any of their campaign cash on ads highlighting his edgy positions, and that the statements actually work against him with the GOP base. For the time being, Paul's numbers are soaring in Iowa, where several recent polls have put him a few points ahead of Gingrich and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
But while it may be unlikely that Paul will be the GOP nominee, some experts believe he will have a significant impact on who ultimately is.
"My sense like the last time -- he stayed in the race all the way. He'll have delegates this time and he can play some kind of a role if the race is close," said Republican strategist Ed Rollins.
Fox News' Shannon Bream contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/24/newsletters-statements-cause-campaign-trail-problems-for-ron-paul/
Im kind of surprised that you would be posting so many of these articles considering you don't believe he thinks that way. So what is the popint of posting so many? Just curious. By the wway, his national poll numbers are up.
-
Im kind of surprised that you would be posting so many of these articles considering you don't believe he thinks that way. So what is the popint of posting so many? Just curious. By the wway, his national poll numbers are up.
I'm posting them because they're newsworthy and will hurt him at a time when he was actually getting some traction in the polls.
Also highlights how poorly he prepared for what he should have known was coming.
He's at 12.6 percent. I never thought he'd get above 10, so he has proved me wrong. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
-
I'm posting them because they're newsworthy and will hurt him at a time when he was actually getting some traction in the polls.
Also highlights how poorly he prepared for what he should have known was coming.
He's at 12.6 percent. I never thought he'd get above 10, so he has proved me wrong. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
That makes no sense. They would only be newsworthy if you felt they were true. Otherwise, you are just fanning the flames on an individual who doesnt deserve the negative press.
-
That makes no sense. They would only be newsworthy if you felt they were true. Otherwise, you are just fanning the flames on an individual who doesnt deserve the negative press.
Thats what is going to happen everywhere to Paul ; He doesnt pander to anyone, so he's not going to get support from anyone.
The 2 parties are going to annihilate his character. He's fucked - even if all of its bullshit - the american public is just too stupid to think for themselves.... Theyll take whatever is shown on TV as gospel.
-
Thats what is going to happen everywhere to Paul ; He doesnt pander to anyone, so he's not going to get support from anyone.
The 2 parties are going to annihilate his character. He's fucked - even if all of its bullshit - the american public is just too stupid to think for themselves.... Theyll take whatever is shown on TV as gospel.
As much as I would like to beleive this wont hurt him in long run....I think it will, which sucks. You're right. They will just keep bringing this up over and over and over again untill he's gone. Too bad as he's the only one that would really change things. Whta a fucked up system.
-
As much as I would like to beleive this wont hurt him in long run....I think it will, which sucks. You're right. They will just keep bringing this up over and over and over again untill he's gone. Too bad as he's the only one that would really change things. Whta a fucked up system.
Im hoping that people are just so fed up with the political bullshit that they figure out its just that; bullshit, and vote on the candidates stances instead of the person the media tries to potray him to be.
Cause you can already see the damage - just look at Benny.
Bennys already convinced a man known for his stances on racial fairness is a anti-semetic racist. ::)
-
That makes no sense. They would only be newsworthy if you felt they were true. Otherwise, you are just fanning the flames on an individual who doesnt deserve the negative press.
What?? I post plenty of stories or opinions that are newsworthy, but that I disagree with.
This isn't a situation where someone is accusing Paul of doing something. It's not "he said, she said," or anything like that. It's something he produced with his name all over it. He's the only one responsible for letting kooky stuff get published under his name. Of course this will be an issue if he starts to cross over from fringe candidate to contender in a primary.
-
What?? I post plenty of stories or opinions that are newsworthy, but that I disagree with.
This isn't a situation where someone is accusing Paul of doing something. It's not "he said, she said," or anything like that. It's something he produced with his name all over it. He's the only one responsible for letting kooky stuff get published under his name. Of course this will be an issue if he starts to cross over from fringe candidate to contender in a primary.
So its not an issue of racism for you but lack of judgement for having his name unknowingly attached to this material?
-
Ron paul was just doing what our esteemed attorney general said we needed to do, have an honest discussion about race. I don't see the problem at all.
-
So its not an issue of racism for you but lack of judgement for having his name unknowingly attached to this material?
Yes. Just be clear:
1. I do not believe he is a racist or a 911 Troofer.
2. I believe he is solely responsible for letting all that stuff get published under his name. He admits this: "I think the charge, which could be a correct charge, is I was pretty negligent as a publisher of a newsletter, not paying more attention . . . ."
3. I think he deserves criticism for failing to properly prepare for this and for the way he has handled the questions (walking out on an interview).
-
Paul did absolutely the right thing walking out of that CNN interview. They acted like they had not already asked about this with Paul. Blitzer already did an extensive interview with Paul over the newsletters and then Blitzer sicks this other reporter on Paul with the exact same questions pretending they needed to be asked and insisting they needed to be answered? WTF... Usually when the questions have already been asked and answered they will refer back to that interview instead of acting like this is the first time for it ::) Paul is busy running a campaign right now, the last thing he needs to do is spend time doing an interview on the same thing twice. CNN should have aired the old interview if they just wanted to ask the same questions.
-
by the way, paul just jumped a little more in the polls. I hope they dig up some more lame shit against him ;D
Maddow saying that Paul is absolutely finished because of these newsletters. I hope maddow keeps attacking Paul, best thing that could happen she is so hated.
-
Madcow is another far lestist thug who ignored obamas racism and and now attacks everyone else. Typical pofs obamabot who needs a beating within an inch of her life.
-
Madcow is another far lestist thug who ignored obamas racism and and now attacks everyone else. Typical pofs obamabot who needs a beating within an inch of her life.
Someones in the Christmas spirit. :D
-
Someones in the Christmas spirit. :D
I can get my hate on for those commies no matter the day or occasion.
-
Former Ron Paul Aide: He's Anti-Israel
Wednesday, 28 Dec 2011
WASHINGTON — A former aide to Ron Paul has labeled the Republican White House hopeful as "anti-Israel" after the rediscovery of racially charged newsletters published under the lawmaker's name in the 1980s and 1990s.
The staunchly libertarian candidate "wishes the Israeli state did not exist at all," Eric Dondero wrote in a column for website RightWingNews.com published Monday. "He expressed this to me numerous times in our private conversations."
Dondero, a senior aide from 1997 to 2003 and earlier an assistant in various campaign roles beginning in the late 1980s, said the Texas lawmaker "sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs."
However, he insisted that Paul is not a racist, as some critics have charged after the newsletters released in recent weeks foretold a "coming race war" in U.S. urban centers.
"Is Ron Paul an anti-Semite? Absolutely no. As a Jew [half on my mother's side], I can categorically say that I never heard anything out of his mouth, in hundreds of speeches I listened to over the years, or in my personal presence, that could be called, 'anti-Semite.' No slurs. No derogatory remarks," Dondero said.
"Is Ron Paul a 'racist'[?] In short, no. I worked for the man for 12 years, pretty consistently. I never heard a racist word expressed towards blacks or Jews come out of his mouth. Not once," Dondero added.
In a statement to CBS, the Paul campaign on Tuesday dismissed Dondero as a "disgruntled former staffer who was fired for performance issues."
The former aide "has zero credibility and should not be taken seriously," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton told CBS.
The Paul campaign did not immediately respond to AFP's request for comment.
Paul already lacked key support from Republican Jewish leaders for his White House bid, largely over his consistent opposition to U.S. military aid to Israel, in synch with his views across the board against sending U.S. aid overseas, and scaling back U.S. military ambitions.
Backing from influential Jewish leaders in the party is seen as key to gaining the Republican party nomination for president.
Polls suggest that only around 2 percent of voters nationwide are Jewish, but they could wield decisive power in vital swing states such as Florida and Pennsylvania.
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/paul-israel-aide-iran/2011/12/27/id/422272
-
Former Ron Paul Aide: He's Anti-Israel
Wednesday, 28 Dec 2011
WASHINGTON — A former aide to Ron Paul has labeled the Republican White House hopeful as "anti-Israel" after the rediscovery of racially charged newsletters published under the lawmaker's name in the 1980s and 1990s.
The staunchly libertarian candidate "wishes the Israeli state did not exist at all," Eric Dondero wrote in a column for website RightWingNews.com published Monday. "He expressed this to me numerous times in our private conversations."
Dondero, a senior aide from 1997 to 2003 and earlier an assistant in various campaign roles beginning in the late 1980s, said the Texas lawmaker "sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs."
However, he insisted that Paul is not a racist, as some critics have charged after the newsletters released in recent weeks foretold a "coming race war" in U.S. urban centers.
"Is Ron Paul an anti-Semite? Absolutely no. As a Jew [half on my mother's side], I can categorically say that I never heard anything out of his mouth, in hundreds of speeches I listened to over the years, or in my personal presence, that could be called, 'anti-Semite.' No slurs. No derogatory remarks," Dondero said.
"Is Ron Paul a 'racist'[?] In short, no. I worked for the man for 12 years, pretty consistently. I never heard a racist word expressed towards blacks or Jews come out of his mouth. Not once," Dondero added.
In a statement to CBS, the Paul campaign on Tuesday dismissed Dondero as a "disgruntled former staffer who was fired for performance issues."
The former aide "has zero credibility and should not be taken seriously," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton told CBS.
The Paul campaign did not immediately respond to AFP's request for comment.
Paul already lacked key support from Republican Jewish leaders for his White House bid, largely over his consistent opposition to U.S. military aid to Israel, in synch with his views across the board against sending U.S. aid overseas, and scaling back U.S. military ambitions.
Backing from influential Jewish leaders in the party is seen as key to gaining the Republican party nomination for president.
Polls suggest that only around 2 percent of voters nationwide are Jewish, but they could wield decisive power in vital swing states such as Florida and Pennsylvania.
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/paul-israel-aide-iran/2011/12/27/id/422272
Well, we all knew this was coming... weather true or not doesnt matter, it was only a matter of time until they came up with something to try and slander him.
-
The unfortunate dirty nature of politics.
-
and another former ron paul aide has come out to say the opposite is true.
what have ron pauls VOTES been for his 10 terms in office? Pro or Anti Israel?
-
He is solely responsible, but it's good that he is taking at least some responsibility.
Paul Admits 'Some Responsibility' for Racist Newsletters
Thursday, 29 Dec 2011
By Newsmax Wires
Ron Paul now says he accepts "some responsibility" for controversial newsletters, published in the 1980s and 1990s under Paul's name, that spoke of coming race wars in the United States.
"These were sentences that were put in, I think it was a total of eight or 10 sentences and it was bad stuff — it, it wasn't a reflection of my views at all," said Paul in response to a caller's question on WHO's Jan Mickelson radio show in Iowa. "I think it was terrible. It was tragic and I had some responsibility because the [letter went out under my name]."
Jon Huntsman’s presidential campaign released a new video Thursday attacking Paul for the publications, and Newt Gingrich slammed the Texas congressman last week for what he called "really nasty" content, The Hill reported.
The newsletters once referred to Martin Luther King Jr. as "the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours" and who "seduced underage girls and boys."
In another article, the author writes that "given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."
In 2008, Paul said that he did not know who had written the offending essays and that they did not represent his views.
He told listeners Thursday that he acted as a publisher rather than an editor of the newsletters.
"If you think about publishers of newspapers every once an a while they get some pretty chunky stuff in their newspapers and they have to say 'this is not the sentiment and position of that newspaper' and this is certainly the case ... this is probably 10 sentences out of 10,000 pages for all I know," Paul said.
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/paul-racist-newsletters-responsibility/2011/12/29/id/422542
-
He is solely responsible, but it's good that he is taking at least some responsibility.
Paul Admits 'Some Responsibility' for Racist Newsletters
Thursday, 29 Dec 2011
By Newsmax Wires
Ron Paul now says he accepts "some responsibility" for controversial newsletters, published in the 1980s and 1990s under Paul's name, that spoke of coming race wars in the United States.
"These were sentences that were put in, I think it was a total of eight or 10 sentences and it was bad stuff — it, it wasn't a reflection of my views at all," said Paul in response to a caller's question on WHO's Jan Mickelson radio show in Iowa. "I think it was terrible. It was tragic and I had some responsibility because the [letter went out under my name]."
Jon Huntsman’s presidential campaign released a new video Thursday attacking Paul for the publications, and Newt Gingrich slammed the Texas congressman last week for what he called "really nasty" content, The Hill reported.
The newsletters once referred to Martin Luther King Jr. as "the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours" and who "seduced underage girls and boys."
In another article, the author writes that "given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."
In 2008, Paul said that he did not know who had written the offending essays and that they did not represent his views.
He told listeners Thursday that he acted as a publisher rather than an editor of the newsletters.
"If you think about publishers of newspapers every once an a while they get some pretty chunky stuff in their newspapers and they have to say 'this is not the sentiment and position of that newspaper' and this is certainly the case ... this is probably 10 sentences out of 10,000 pages for all I know," Paul said.
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/paul-racist-newsletters-responsibility/2011/12/29/id/422542
He's always said he should have payed more attention. This is nothing new.
-
I don't think his comments are controversial.
Paul Defends Past Criticism of AIDS Patients, Says Support in Iowa Is Strong
Published January 01, 2012
FoxNews.com
Ron Paul on Sunday defended controversial comments he made about AIDS patients in a 1987 book, while also disputing indications from recent polls that his support is slipping in Iowa.
The Texas congressman wrote in his book, "Freedom Under Siege," that people with sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS bear some responsibility for their condition and should not burden others with the cost of their care.
"The individual suffering from AIDS certainly is a victim -- frequently a victim of his own lifestyle -- but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing them to pay for his care," he wrote.
Asked about the comments on "Fox News Sunday," Paul said: "I don't know how you can change science." Sexually transmitted diseases are "caused by sexual activity," he said, and "in a free society people do dumb things, but it isn't to be placed as a burden on other people, innocent people."
"Why should they have to pay for the consequences?" he said.
Paul called that idea a "socialistic attitude" and said insurance companies should determine coverage. "The market should handle this," he said.
The congressman said the law certainly shouldn't deny AIDS patients coverage, but suggested they should be subject to the same considerations insurance companies make for other groups -- like smokers.
"You don't have a right to demand that somebody else take care of you because of your habits," Paul said.
Paul also defended a passage from the same book that suggested victims of sexual harassment should quit.
"They have the right to work there or not work there," he said, adding that federal law does not need to cover sexual harassment as violence in the workplace is already prohibited.
The latest Des Moines Register poll shows Paul in second place in Iowa, trailing Mitt Romney by just 2 points. However, the final two days of polling in the four-day poll show Paul slipping into third place and Rick Santorum moving up into second.
Paul's hands-off approach to foreign policy, as well as controversial writings, such as in his 1987 book and other newsletters which he has since distanced himself from, have drawn criticism in recent weeks.
But Paul said "our numbers aren't going to go down," claiming his supporters are more loyal than the supporters of his competitors.
"They don't desert," he said. "They're not going to leave us, as they have with the other ones ... so I think our numbers will continue to grow, even in these last couple days."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/01/paul-defends-book-passage-on-aids-patients-says-iowa-support-strong/
-
lol
This is how they fucked him on the anti Isreal and racism stuff.
There is nothing wrong with what hes saying here. Anyone that doesn't practice safe sex, or does intravenous drug use with dirty needles is a victim of their own lifestyle. That is what he means. That has nothing to do with making homophobic statements. The same applies for anything else we do to ourselves that can potentially harm us. We cant then turn around and expect others to clean up our messes. The country is a slave to political correctness. Cant people fucking read anymore...
and Santorum serging, please...all manipulation of numbers and hype.
-
Just another mistake I guess. Maybe they should be more carefull about what gets printed. Too bad the damage is already done.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news...inal-iowa-poll
*** Paul talks Civil Rights Act, Iran, and third-party bid: Meanwhile, on CNN this morning, Paul was asked about his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He said the country was better off without Jim Crow laws, but said the Civil Rights Act “destroyed the principle of private property and private choices.” He added that it creates the slippery slope of the government coming into people’s bedrooms. “It is the government that causes so much of the racial tensions,” he said. On Iran and it acquiring nuclear weapons: “I don’t want them to have a weapon… We just need to be more cautious… We don’t need a war in Iran carelessly.” And Paul once again didn’t rule out a third-party presidential bid, if he doesn’t become the GOP nominee. “I don’t like absolutes,” he said. “I have no plans on doing it.” Paul added, “On Tuesday, we’ll find out a lot more on the future of this election.” *** EDITOR'S NOTE *** This item mistakenly said earlier today that Paul had said the country was better "with" Jim Crow laws. That was a typo and has since been fixed. He said that the country was better off "without" Jim Crow laws.
-
Just another mistake I guess. Maybe they should be more carefull about what gets printed. Too bad the damage is already done.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news...inal-iowa-poll
*** Paul talks Civil Rights Act, Iran, and third-party bid: Meanwhile, on CNN this morning, Paul was asked about his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He said the country was better off without Jim Crow laws, but said the Civil Rights Act “destroyed the principle of private property and private choices.” He added that it creates the slippery slope of the government coming into people’s bedrooms. “It is the government that causes so much of the racial tensions,” he said. On Iran and it acquiring nuclear weapons: “I don’t want them to have a weapon… We just need to be more cautious… We don’t need a war in Iran carelessly.” And Paul once again didn’t rule out a third-party presidential bid, if he doesn’t become the GOP nominee. “I don’t like absolutes,” he said. “I have no plans on doing it.” Paul added, “On Tuesday, we’ll find out a lot more on the future of this election.” *** EDITOR'S NOTE *** This item mistakenly said earlier today that Paul had said the country was better "with" Jim Crow laws. That was a typo and has since been fixed. He said that the country was better off "without" Jim Crow laws.
Those people know exactly what they do. It was probably calculated.
-
they bash Ron paul for wedge issues that affect few.
they bash newt and mitt for their actual liberal POLICY. You know, laws they passed..
They grab a few quotes from 25 years ago on ron paul and ignore his 25 years of voting strict constitution.
-
Congrats to Mitt for wining Iowa and the overall GOP nomination..
-
I watched his interview today with Chris Wallace. He really struggles to talk about anything other than the economy. His talk about sexual harassment beginning at 5:35 was pretty alarming. He said in his book that victims of sexual harassment should just quit. I had to listen to the clip again just to ensure I heard him correctly. I agree with him about people abusing sexual harassment claims, but he said victims who haven't been sexually assaulted should just quit. That's crazy talk.
-
I watched his interview today with Chris Wallace. He really struggles to talk about anything other than the economy. His talk about sexual harassment beginning at 5:35 was pretty alarming. He said in his book that victims of sexual harassment should just quit. I had to listen to the clip again just to ensure I heard him correctly. I agree with him about people abusing sexual harassment claims, but he said victims who haven't been sexually assaulted should just quit. That's crazy talk.
HOLY FUCK... By what measure does this assclown Wallace say that Paul has fallen to third place? ::)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_primary-1588.html
Santorum ::) Really... morons...
-
I watched his interview today with Chris Wallace. He really struggles to talk about anything other than the economy. His talk about sexual harassment beginning at 5:35 was pretty alarming. He said in his book that victims of sexual harassment should just quit. I had to listen to the clip again just to ensure I heard him correctly. I agree with him about people abusing sexual harassment claims, but he said victims who haven't been sexually assaulted should just quit. That's crazy talk.
Yeah, Im trying to catch all the logic behind that statement but cant find it. Terrrible explaination.
-
Yeah, Im trying to catch all the logic behind that statement but cant find it. Terrrible explaination.
He's a very smart man. I think he just hasn't spent the time to really focus on anything outside of the economy. He's actually pretty fortunate that some of this stuff hasn't been discussed during the debates.
-
Anybody wondering why Fox's ratings are falling, just watch this video. Watch Wallace, out of his extreme hate of Paul, happy to take on the stance of a far left liberal just to oppose Paul. Fucking wow....
How long has Wallace been with Fox and he doesn't get his own audience? Douchebag extraordinaire.... Even if you don't like Paul, you don't challenge him from a far left stance. Rightwingers should consider Wallace relevantly dead even if they don't like Paul. In this interview alone, Wallace furthered causes of the far left more than he damaged Ron Paul.
-
also, did you notice in that interview with Wallace that every single question was an attack? Really Wallace, you can't take the time for one single question on the positive? All you had was a list of attack points to go down?
-
Absurd interview. Wallace should be ashamed f himself.
-
I didn't have a problem with anything Wallace asked him. He's fortunate to have gotten so much airtime throughout the campaign. So much for the media (and Fox) ignoring him.
-
I didn't have a problem with anything Wallace asked him. He's fortunate to have gotten so much airtime throughout the campaign. So much for the media (and Fox) ignoring him.
Why wouldnt he get air time, hes tied for first. Even they cant ignore that fact but you ignore that for the better part of a week and a half, the only thing discussed were 20 something year old newsletters and constant bashing, mischarachterization and belittlement. Everything he had to offer while campaining was almost completly ignored and overshadowed by the unrelenting negative attacks. Hes still being asked if hell run third party for crying out loud. That is not important news.
-
Why wouldnt he get air time, hes tied for first. Even they cant ignore that fact but you ignore that for the better part of a week and a half, the only thing discussed were 20 something year old newsletters and constant bashing, mischarachterization and belittlement. Everything he had to offer while campaining was almost completly ignored and overshadowed by the unrelenting negative attacks. Hes still being asked if hell run third party for crying out loud. That is not important news.
He should get air time after polling so well in Iowa. Nationally, he was below ten percent for most of the campaign. Today he's at 12 percent. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
He has shown zero possibility of being the nominee. In spite of that, he's all over the media, getting a slew of interviews, including a plethora of interviews on Fox. He was invited to every debate. So now that he has gotten more exposure than his performance warrants, it's the kinds of questions people have problems with? Seriously?
Everything they've asked him about is legitimate. Every candidate gets asked about "controversy." People were all over the Cain sexual harassment nonsense. This isn't any different than what Cain went through. Actually it's much lighter IMO.
-
I watched his interview today with Chris Wallace. He really struggles to talk about anything other than the economy.
9.
9.
9.
Cain didn't know shit about anything except 999, and repubs were cool with that.
Ron Paul knows MUCH More about the eocnomy than Cain, and suddenly "He's so one-dimensional"
LOLZERS. ity's gonna be cold in iowa tomorrow. Let's see how dedicated Romney's crowd is.