• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 15:54
CEST 21:54
KST 04:54
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Serral wins EWC 202538Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 202510Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202580RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15
Community News
LiuLi Cup - August 2025 Tournaments3[BSL 2025] H2 - Team Wars, Weeklies & SB Ladder9EWC 2025 - Replay Pack4Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced55BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10
StarCraft 2
General
Serral wins EWC 2025 The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Interview with Chris "ChanmanV" Chan Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 2025 Classic: "It's a thick wall to break through to become world champ"
Tourneys
Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament LiuLi Cup - August 2025 Tournaments Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) TaeJa vs Creator Bo7 SC Evo Showmatch FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $10,000 live event
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 484 Magnetic Pull Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune
Brood War
General
How do the new Battle.net ranks translate? BW General Discussion Nobody gona talk about this year crazy qualifiers? Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced Which top zerg/toss will fail in qualifiers?
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL20] Online Qualifiers Day 2 [ASL20] Online Qualifiers Day 1 Small VOD Thread 2.0
Strategy
[G] Mineral Boosting Muta micro map competition Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Total Annihilation Server - TAForever Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Beyond All Reason [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok)
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread 9/11 Anniversary Possible Al Qaeda Attack on 9/11 Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Movie Discussion! Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Gtx660 graphics card replacement Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
ASL S20 English Commentary…
namkraft
The Link Between Fitness and…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 762 users

Republican nominations - Page 273

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 271 272 273 274 275 575 Next
zalz
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Netherlands3704 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-15 21:15:30
January 15 2012 21:14 GMT
#5441
On January 16 2012 06:06 gold_ wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 16 2012 05:58 zalz wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:47 gold_ wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:40 zalz wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:30 gold_ wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:22 zalz wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:16 gold_ wrote:So because this guy from Stormfront is a racist he can't get a picture taken plus autograph with Ron Paul now? Got it. Please send me a quote of Ron Paul saying he wrote the racist letters. James B Powell was the name on one of the newsletters with a similar writing style though. Crawl back in your cave and watch CNN and Fox all day though please.


*Prove that Ron Paul wrote them

*Ron Paul signed them with his own name

*Ron Paul had complete control over the content

Are you people seriously going to keep demanding a higher and higher degree of evidence?

Am i eventually going to be asked to provide video footage of Ron Paul writing the newsletters?

Your hilarious. Do you know the guy that originally brought the newsletter story to the media was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kirchick in 1997 from The New Republic. He purposely left out the name on one of the few newsletters that was on them to make his case. Do I need to remind people of the accuracy of The New Republic? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Glass_(reporter)? The newsletters that contained racist material started during the time Dr. Ron Paul went back to practice medicine. Look at how many newsletters where published, then look how many contained racist material. Keep grasping at the only straw you have mate. Also, I need to let you know that stamps can be made with signatures on them FYI.


I got the guy's newsletters with his name on them and i am the one reaching for straws. You are suggesting that there was someone out there that decided to fake the signature of Ron Paul to spread racist newsletters under his name. Then, when confronted with this image sabotage Ron Paul decided not to figure out who wrote them but just shrug and go "ooh well, what's done is done, no use looking up who wrote it".

What candidate would seriously let such trash be written under their name? You know what, scrap candidate. Would any person allow such an assault of character?

Had this been any other candidate you wouldn't be talking like this and you know it.

I see years of TV has hurt your brain. The Ron Paul newsletters was a publication put out under his name, a business. Your saying every time I get a letter in the mail from Stephen Harper that he personally signs each one? Everytime Bell Canada sends me crap mail trying to win me back as a customer that George Cope signed it? Ron Paul was writing the newsletters then decided to go back to medicine, so he hired a team to run the newsletters. After this time the racist material started showing up. Please take your hatred for Ron Paul out of your head for just 5 minutes then read this and use your logical thought process you should have. PLEASE.


Let's pretend that you are right. Let us pretend for now that Ron Paul wasn't involved in the creation.

Then in 1996 he embraces the content of the newsletters.

Then in 2001 he says they were ghostwritten.

Then in 2008 and onward he says he never had anything to do with them in the slightest.


Why did he embrace the content if he didn't write it or agree with it? Hell, he didn't even bother to mention in 1996 that he didn't write them. That little fact slipped his mind back then.

He said you had to read them in context. That these "95% of all blacks are criminal or semi-criminal" were just quotes taken out of context. Why would he say that if he never wrote that and the content makes him throw up?


If your story is true then everything that follows after that doesn't make any sense. He embraces the content, then claims ghostwriters, then claims having nothing to do with them.

What he did does not match the story you are putting forth. A person that never wrote these things would not have acted in the fashion that Ron Paul did.

First of all, links to a reliable source ( Not the New Republic ). Embracing the content now means he wrote them? He has never said once that they were his words. Saying they are taken out of context means he wrote them? Like I said your grasping at the only thing that the main stream media can bring out to smear the guy. That and trying to blame apparent "supporters" of terrible ads.


http://reason.com/blog/2008/01/11/old-news-rehashed-for-over-a-d

Just because you call it grasping doesn't make it grasping. They are what one would actually call, very valid points.

Like a broken record he can't stop saying that he never wrote them, but back in 1996 he never even once says anything of the kind.

If you aren't racist and someone shows you a racist rant that you supposedly wrote, would you really never at any point make the (somewhat important) point that you didn't actually wrote any of it?

Why did he go on and give all those interviews, never ever denying that he wrote these newsletters? Is it his hobby to get burned to the ground by the press? He goes on all these interviews and never once figures it's important to mention:

"Ooh hey, btw, these racist newsletters that are giving me all this trouble and you accuse me of writing, i never actually wrote them"

No, he just goes on carrying the burden as if he did write them. Never bothering to point out the one thing that would make it all go away and make him immune from criticism.

Well its one thing to just disagree with a candidate, its a completely different thing to call someone a racist. Nothing except those newsletters that were published under his name when he was actually practising medicine is proof. Don't you think if he wasn't actually practising medicine at that time the media would be all over him for lying?


I don't recall that practicing medicine makes you unable to write.
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 15 2012 21:15 GMT
#5442
On January 16 2012 05:10 DoubleReed wrote:
Ron Paul never struck me as that tolerant in his personal life. But he's always saying things like "I will fight for the fact that I don't want to tell you how to run your life," so with his ideology, I doubt that his intolerance would be that damaging. Actually small government seems to be what he takes to heart.

Therefore, the fact that he is probably homophobic and racist doesn't seem like it would influence his policies, quite frankly. And considering republicans are all homophobic/sexist, and most seem pretty racist (gingrich on the daily show was hilarious), I'm way more scared of them.

Then there's Santorum however, who wants to run your life and tell you how to do things and honestly it sounds like he wants to make adultery a crime. He's easily the most frightening candidate.

On social front, of course Ron Paul seems quite a decent candidate, but only considering majority of Republican candidates. But Huntsman seems to be ok in this area as well. Actually even more decent.
gruff
Profile Joined September 2010
Sweden2276 Posts
January 15 2012 21:15 GMT
#5443
On January 16 2012 06:11 gold_ wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 16 2012 06:08 bOneSeven wrote:
I guess everyone who support Ron Paul in this thread can start completely dismissing zalz's post because it doesn't seem he wants to have a reasonable chat ... I would totally stop supporting Dr Paul if I found some proofs but still .... nothing appealing to that...

Well its one thing to just disagree with a candidate, its a completely different thing to call someone a racist. Nothing except those newsletters that were published under his name when he was actually practising medicine is proof. Don't you think if he wasn't actually practising medicine at that time the media would be all over him for lying?


Not that I'm saying he wrote the articles but what exactly is preventing someone from practising medicine and writing articles at the same time?
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-15 21:22:34
January 15 2012 21:19 GMT
#5444
On January 16 2012 05:22 zalz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 16 2012 05:16 gold_ wrote:So because this guy from Stormfront is a racist he can't get a picture taken plus autograph with Ron Paul now? Got it. Please send me a quote of Ron Paul saying he wrote the racist letters. James B Powell was the name on one of the newsletters with a similar writing style though. Crawl back in your cave and watch CNN and Fox all day though please.


*Prove that Ron Paul wrote them

*Ron Paul signed them with his own name

*Ron Paul had complete control over the content

Are you people seriously going to keep demanding a higher and higher degree of evidence?

Am i eventually going to be asked to provide video footage of Ron Paul writing the newsletters?

Actually there is some reasonably good evidence he did not write them. I doubt he did not know at least in general what was in them and he is still responsible for the use of his name, but saying he wrote them is not so clear cut.

Edit:typo
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 15 2012 21:28 GMT
#5445

On January 15 2012 21:27 BobTheBuilder1377 wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

On January 14 2012 04:50 mcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 13 2012 13:45 BobTheBuilder1377 wrote:
On January 12 2012 21:15 mcc wrote:
On January 12 2012 21:05 BobTheBuilder1377 wrote:
@mcc Glad you liked those videos but, as you can see it's from a FOX AFFILIATE. Not the original fox that misinforms people when it comes to REAL journalism.

As can be seen in my post I disliked parts of those videos even before I found out they are from Fox, for reasons mentioned in that post. I did not base my view of the videos on their origin, but in their content, The origin just makes me doubt those videos' credibility somewhat more than before.

So, you still think Ron Paul is a racist? I think it was more negligent IMO.

I did not say he is racist. I said either he is racist or he supports racists, by that I mean pandering to them, using their votes, in general not really opposing them).

EDIT:The possibility of just stupidity and negligence is there, but the chance of that seem high only if we just went by the newsletters.


mcc I want you to explain this then???





Exhibit A: Vociferously Supports an Anti-Racist Agenda

"Libertarianism is the enemy of all racism, because racism is a collectivist idea that you put people in categories. You say, well blacks belong here, and whites here, and women here and we don't see people in forms..or gays. You don't have rights because your gays, or women or minorities, you have rights because you’re an individual. So we see people strictly as individuals. We get these individuals in a natural way. So it's exactly opposite of all collectivism and it's absolutely anti-racism because we don't see it in those terms. "

-Ron Paul on Bill Moyers Journal, January 4, 2008





Exhibit B: Ferociously Insists that Courts and The Death Penalty are Racist

“That’s a pretty good question. Because people, somebody asked me yesterday, "When was the last time you ever changed your opinion? And I said well, it's been a while since I've had a major change of opinion, but I try to understand and study and figure out how things work you know and become better at economics and all.

But on that issue (the death penalty), I did have a change of opinion. And I stated this in the debates last go around, they asked…they asked a similar question, ‘when did you change your opinion last?’ And uh, and it, that was just not overnight, but I, my position now is, that since I'm a federal official and I would be a U.S. president, is I do not believe in the federal death penalty and in my book “Liberty Defined”, I explain in it more detail , but basically I make the argument for, uh, against the death penalty but I would not come and say the federal government and the federal courts should tell the states they can't have the death penalty anymore. I don’t go that far.

But no, I just don't think the uh ..with the scientific evidence now- **I think I read an article yesterday on the death penalty, and 68 percent of the time they make mistakes. And it’s so racist, too. I think more than half the people getting the death penalty are poor blacks. This is the one place, the one remnant of racism in our country is in the court system, enforcing the drug laws and enforcing the death penalty. I don’t even know, but I wonder how many of those, how many have been executed? Over 200, I wonder how many were minorities? You know, if you're rich, you usually don't meet the death penalty.”**

-Ron Paul, Interview with the Concord Monitor Editorial Board, August 18, 2011




Exhibit C: Stubbornly Refuses to Deny That Government Legalized Racism is Cruel and Unjust

“No form of political organization, therefore, is immune to cruel abuses like the Jim Crow laws, whereby government sets out to legislate on how groups of human beings are allowed to interact with one another.

Peaceful civil disobedience to unjust laws, which I support with every fiber of my being, can sometimes be necessary at any level of government. It falls upon the people, in the last resort, to stand against injustice no matter where it occurs.

In the long run, the only way racism can be overcome is through the philosophy of individualism, which I have promoted throughout my life. Our rights come to us not because we belong to some group, but our rights come to us as individuals. And it is as individuals that we should judge one another.

Racism is a particularly odious form of collectivism whereby individuals are treated not on their merits but on the basis of group identity. Nothing in my political philosophy, which is the exact opposite of the racial totalitarianism of the twentieth century, gives aid or comfort to such thinking. To the contrary, my philosophy of individualism is the most radical intellectual challenge to racism ever posed.

Government exacerbates racial thinking and undermines individualism because its very existence encourages people to organize along racial lines in order to lobby for benefits for their group. That lobbying, in turn, creates animosity and suspicion among all groups, each of which believes that it is getting less of its fair share than the others.

Instead, we should quit thinking in terms of race—yes, in 2008 it is still necessary to say that we should Stop thinking in terms of race—and recognize that freedom and prosperity benefit all Americans.”

-Ron Paul, ‘The Revolution: A Manifesto”, 2008 (http://books.google.com/books/about/The_revolution.html?id=MuATfqcjS5QC)

Exhibit D: Refuses to Deny that Courts Discriminate Against Minorities

“But in order to attract Latino votes, I think, you know, too long this country has always put people in groups. They penalize people because they’re in groups, and then they reward people because they’re in groups.

But following up on what Newt was saying, we need a healthy economy, we wouldn’t be talking about this. We need to see everybody as an individual. And to me, seeing everybody as an individual means their liberties are protected as individuals and they’re treated that way and they’re never penalized that way.

So if you have a free and prosperous society, all of a sudden this group mentality melts away. As long as there’s no abuse — one place where there’s still a lot of discrimination in this country is in our court systems. And I think the minorities come up with a short hand in our court system."

-Ron Paul, CNN Western Republican Debate, October 18, 2011




Exhibit E: Refuses to Back the Unfair Punishment of Minorities

"A system designed to protect individual liberty will have no punishments for any group and no privileges.

Today, I think inner-city folks and minorities are punished unfairly in the war on drugs.

For instance, Blacks make up 14% of those who use drugs, yet 36 percent of those arrested are Blacks and it ends up that 63% of those who finally end up in prison are Blacks. This has to change.

We don’t have to have more courts and more prisons. We need to repeal the whole war on drugs. It isn’t working. We have already spent over $400 billion since the early 1970s, and it is wasted money. Prohibition didn’t work. Prohibition on drugs doesn’t work. So we need to come to our senses. And, absolutely, it’s a disease. We don’t treat alcoholics like this. This is a disease, and we should orient ourselves to this. That is one way you could have equal justice under the law."

-Ron Paul, 2007 GOP Presidential Forum at Morgan State University, September 27, 2007




Exhibit F: Vehemently Insists that Drug Wars Harms Blacks and Other Minorities Disproportionately

“…the federal war on drugs has wrought disproportionate harm on minority communities.

Allowing for states’ rights here would surely be an improvement, for the states could certainly do a better and more sensible job than the federal government has been doing if they were free to decide the issue for themselves. And although people studying my record will discover how consistent I have been over the years, they will uncover one major shift: in recent years I have dropped my support for the federal death penalty.

It is a dangerous power for the federal government to have, and it is exercised in a discriminatory way: if you are poor and black, you are much more likely to receive this punishment.

We should not think in terms of whites, blacks, Hispanics, and other such groups. That kind of thinking only divides us. The only us-versus-them thinking in which we might indulge is the people—all the people— versus the government, which loots and lies to us all, threatens our liberties, and shreds our Constitution.

That’s not a white or black issue. That’s an American issue, and it’s one on which Americans of all races can unite in a spirit of goodwill. That may be why polls in 2007 found ours the most popular Republican campaign among black voters.”

-Ron Paul, “The Revolution: A Manifesto”, 2008 http://books.google.com/books/about/The_revolution.html?id=MuATfqcjS5QC)

Exhibit G: Openly Admits That Skin Color should be Irrelevant in Society. That Racism is a Sin.

“Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans only as members of groups and never as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike; as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called “diversity” actually perpetuate racism. Their intense focus on race is inherently racist, because it views individuals only as members of racial groups.

Conservatives and libertarians should fight back and challenge the myth that collectivist liberals care more about racism. Modern liberalism, however, well-intentioned, is a byproduct of the same collectivist thinking that characterizes racism. The continued insistence on group thinking only inflames racial tensions.

The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims.

Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity. In a free market, businesses that discriminate lose customers, goodwill, and valuable employees- while rational businesses flourish by choosing the most qualified employees and selling to all willing buyers. More importantly, in a free society every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality.

This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Rather than looking to government to correct what is essentially a sin of the heart, we should understand that reducing racism requires a shift from group thinking to an emphasis on individualism.”

-Ron Paul, “What Really Divides Us”, December 23, 2002

http://www.ronpaularchive.com/2002/12/what-really-divides-us/

Exhibit G: Despises Political and Media Code Words for Racism.

“Worst of all, the left has gotten away with using “extreme” as a code word for “racist.” The exceedingly thin “evidence” given for the racism allegation is that Ashcroft once voted against the nomination of a federal judge who happened to be black. Never mind that more than 50 other Senators voted with Ashcroft; the left is all to eager to assure us that the only conceivable rationale is that Ashcroft is a racist. This type of smearing, aided and abetted by a complicit media, is at the heart of the left’s efforts to demonize conservatives who dare oppose their unconstitutional agenda.”

– Ron Paul, “The Ashcroft Controversy Exposes Disdain for Conservative Principles”, January 22, 2001

http://www.ronpaularchive.com/2001/01/the-ashcroft-controversy-exposes-disdain-for/

Exhibit H: Hates Racist Government Stereotyping of Wants and Needs

“One of the worst aspects of the census is its focus on classifying people by race. When government tells us it wants information to help any given group, it assumes every individual who shares certain physical characteristics has the same interests, or wants the same things from government. This is an inherently racist and offensive assumption. The census, like so many federal policies and programs, inflames racism by encouraging Americans to see themselves as members of racial groups fighting each other for a share of the federal pie.”

-Ron Paul, “None of Your Business”, July 12, 2004 http://www.ronpaularchive.com/2004/07/none-of-your-business/)

Exhibit I: Hates Racist and Xenophobic Government Profiling

“We can think back no further than July of 1996, when a plane carrying several hundred people suddenly and mysteriously crashed off the coast of Long Island. Within days, Congress had passed emergency legislation calling for costly new security measures, including a controversial “screening” method which calls for airlines to arbitrarily detain passengers just because the person meets certain criteria which border on racist and xenophobic.”

-Ron Paul, “Emotion Should Never Dictate Policy”, January 12, 1998

http://www.ronpaularchive.com/1998/01/emotion-should-never-dictate-policy/

Exhibit K and L: Despises Racist Laws that Intend to Harm What others Called “Cheap Colored Labor”

“The racist effects of Davis-Bacon are no mere coincidence. In fact, many original supporters of Davis-Bacon, such as Representative Clayton Allgood, bragged about supporting Davis-Bacon as a means of keeping cheap colored labor out of the construction industry.”

Ron Paul, “Repeal of the Davis-Bacon Law”, October 23, 1997, Before the House of Representatives
http://www.ronpaularchive.com/1997/10/repeal-of-the-davis-bacon-law/

“The racist effects of Davis-Bacon are no mere coincidence. In fact, many original supporters of Davis-Bacon, such as Representative Clayton Allgood, bragged about supporting Davis-Bacon as a means of keeping `cheap colored labor’ out of the construction industry.”

-Ron Paul, “Introducing the Davis-Bacon Repeal Act”, February 11, 1999, Before the House of Representatives

http://www.ronpaularchive.com/1999/02/introducing-the-davis-bacon-repeal-act/

Exhibit M: Hates Foreign Aid to African Dictators Who Turn Aid into a “Power to Impoverish” their People

African poverty is rooted in government corruption, corruption that actually is fostered by western aid. We should ask ourselves a simple question: Why is private capital so scarce in Africa? The obvious answer is that many African nations are ruled by terrible men who pursue disastrous economic policies. As a result, American aid simply enriches dictators, distorts economies, and props up bad governments. We could send Africa $1 trillion, and the continent still would remain mired in poverty simply because so many of its nations reject property rights, free markets, and the rule of law. As commentator Joseph Potts explains, western money enables dictators like Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe to gain and hold power without the support of his nation’s people. African rulers learn to manipulate foreign governments and obtain an independent source of income, which makes them far richer and more powerful than any of their political rivals. Once comfortably in power, and much to the horror of the western governments that funded them, African dictators find their subjects quite helpless and dependent. Potts describes this process as giving African politicians the “power to impoverish.”

-Ron Paul, “What Should Americans do for Africa?”, July 11, 2005, Before the House of Representatives

http://www.ronpaularchive.com/1999/02/introducing-the-davis-bacon-repeal-act/

Exhibit O: Insists on Congratulating our First African-American President. MLK “Would be Proud”

“With the election behind us, our country turns hopeful eyes to the future. I have a few hopes of my own. I congratulate our first African-American president-elect. Martin Luther King, Jr. certainly would be proud to see this day. We are stronger for embracing diversity, and I am hopeful that we can continue working through the tensions and wrongs of the past and become a more just and colorblind society. I hope this new administration will help bring us together, and not further divide us. I have always found that freedom is the best way to break down barriers. A free society emphasizes the importance of individuals, and not because they are part of a certain group. That’s the only way equal justice can be achieved.”

Ron Paul, “Hope for the Future”, November 9, 2008

http://www.ronpaularchive.com/2008/11/hopes-for-the-future/

Exhibit P: "Despises Racial and Ethnic Stereotyping by Self Serving Politicians"

“After 200 years, the constitutional protection of the right of the individual to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is virtually gone. Today’s current terminology describing rights reflects this sad change. It is commonplace for politicians and those desiring special privileges to refer to: black rights, Hispanic rights, handicap rights, employee rights, student rights, minority rights, women’s rights, gay rights, children’s rights, student rights, Asian-American rights, Jewish rights, AIDS victims’ rights, poverty rights, homeless rights, etc. Unless all the terms are dropped & we recognize that only an individual has rights, the solution to the mess in which we find ourselves will not be found. The longer we lack of definition of rights, the worse the economic and social problems will be.”

-Ron Paul, “Freedom Under Siege”, by Ron Paul, p. 14-15 Dec 31, 1987


First a lot of those quotes have nothing to do with being against racism. You could have saved a lot of space. Also I did not say that he is necessarily racist, I said he might just support racism and I even specified that I do not mean ideologically (as that would make him basically a racist), but in practice. And as we know people lie and are duplicitous. Why exempt Ron Paul from that observation when his words are somewhat at odds with his actions.
gold_
Profile Joined December 2010
Canada312 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-15 21:35:01
January 15 2012 21:33 GMT
#5446
On January 16 2012 06:14 zalz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 16 2012 06:06 gold_ wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:58 zalz wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:47 gold_ wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:40 zalz wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:30 gold_ wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:22 zalz wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:16 gold_ wrote:So because this guy from Stormfront is a racist he can't get a picture taken plus autograph with Ron Paul now? Got it. Please send me a quote of Ron Paul saying he wrote the racist letters. James B Powell was the name on one of the newsletters with a similar writing style though. Crawl back in your cave and watch CNN and Fox all day though please.


*Prove that Ron Paul wrote them

*Ron Paul signed them with his own name

*Ron Paul had complete control over the content

Are you people seriously going to keep demanding a higher and higher degree of evidence?

Am i eventually going to be asked to provide video footage of Ron Paul writing the newsletters?

Your hilarious. Do you know the guy that originally brought the newsletter story to the media was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kirchick in 1997 from The New Republic. He purposely left out the name on one of the few newsletters that was on them to make his case. Do I need to remind people of the accuracy of The New Republic? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Glass_(reporter)? The newsletters that contained racist material started during the time Dr. Ron Paul went back to practice medicine. Look at how many newsletters where published, then look how many contained racist material. Keep grasping at the only straw you have mate. Also, I need to let you know that stamps can be made with signatures on them FYI.


I got the guy's newsletters with his name on them and i am the one reaching for straws. You are suggesting that there was someone out there that decided to fake the signature of Ron Paul to spread racist newsletters under his name. Then, when confronted with this image sabotage Ron Paul decided not to figure out who wrote them but just shrug and go "ooh well, what's done is done, no use looking up who wrote it".

What candidate would seriously let such trash be written under their name? You know what, scrap candidate. Would any person allow such an assault of character?

Had this been any other candidate you wouldn't be talking like this and you know it.

I see years of TV has hurt your brain. The Ron Paul newsletters was a publication put out under his name, a business. Your saying every time I get a letter in the mail from Stephen Harper that he personally signs each one? Everytime Bell Canada sends me crap mail trying to win me back as a customer that George Cope signed it? Ron Paul was writing the newsletters then decided to go back to medicine, so he hired a team to run the newsletters. After this time the racist material started showing up. Please take your hatred for Ron Paul out of your head for just 5 minutes then read this and use your logical thought process you should have. PLEASE.


Let's pretend that you are right. Let us pretend for now that Ron Paul wasn't involved in the creation.

Then in 1996 he embraces the content of the newsletters.

Then in 2001 he says they were ghostwritten.

Then in 2008 and onward he says he never had anything to do with them in the slightest.


Why did he embrace the content if he didn't write it or agree with it? Hell, he didn't even bother to mention in 1996 that he didn't write them. That little fact slipped his mind back then.

He said you had to read them in context. That these "95% of all blacks are criminal or semi-criminal" were just quotes taken out of context. Why would he say that if he never wrote that and the content makes him throw up?


If your story is true then everything that follows after that doesn't make any sense. He embraces the content, then claims ghostwriters, then claims having nothing to do with them.

What he did does not match the story you are putting forth. A person that never wrote these things would not have acted in the fashion that Ron Paul did.

First of all, links to a reliable source ( Not the New Republic ). Embracing the content now means he wrote them? He has never said once that they were his words. Saying they are taken out of context means he wrote them? Like I said your grasping at the only thing that the main stream media can bring out to smear the guy. That and trying to blame apparent "supporters" of terrible ads.


http://reason.com/blog/2008/01/11/old-news-rehashed-for-over-a-d

Just because you call it grasping doesn't make it grasping. They are what one would actually call, very valid points.

Like a broken record he can't stop saying that he never wrote them, but back in 1996 he never even once says anything of the kind.

If you aren't racist and someone shows you a racist rant that you supposedly wrote, would you really never at any point make the (somewhat important) point that you didn't actually wrote any of it?

Why did he go on and give all those interviews, never ever denying that he wrote these newsletters? Is it his hobby to get burned to the ground by the press? He goes on all these interviews and never once figures it's important to mention:

"Ooh hey, btw, these racist newsletters that are giving me all this trouble and you accuse me of writing, i never actually wrote them"

No, he just goes on carrying the burden as if he did write them. Never bothering to point out the one thing that would make it all go away and make him immune from criticism.

Show nested quote +
Well its one thing to just disagree with a candidate, its a completely different thing to call someone a racist. Nothing except those newsletters that were published under his name when he was actually practising medicine is proof. Don't you think if he wasn't actually practising medicine at that time the media would be all over him for lying?


I don't recall that practicing medicine makes you unable to write.

Practising medicine as in away from keyboard, for your simple mind to understand. Next this website and the quotes doesn't mean anything, just like James Kirchick's article meaning nothing. Since now we know he left off the name of the one of the few newsletters that actually had a name "James B Powell". People make stuff up all the time and to call someone a racist without real proof is ignorant on your part. Would you like if someone saw you looking at a under age girl and called you a pervert, but in truth she just bumped into you which is why you looked? He has never said he wrote them, and has says yes they are taken out of context. These newsletters are the only thing that link him to racism in fucking 30 years in the public eye. The one article in particular that was about Barbara Jordan is the one written by James B Powell.

EDIT: Also yes he takes ownership of them as he feels it was his error in judgement.
I am from Canada, eh!
zalz
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Netherlands3704 Posts
January 15 2012 21:44 GMT
#5447
Practising medicine as in away from keyboard, for your simple mind to understand.


What is up with all the insults? This is like the third time now. Keep a grip on yourself.

Next this website and the quotes doesn't mean anything, just like James Kirchick's article meaning nothing.

'
It means nothing, it means nothing, it means nothing!

And like that you have destroyed all doubt that this evidence should have given you. You declare them to mean nothing, thus they mean nothing.

This isn't a proper debate. Regardless of what i bring forth, you just declare "it means nothing" and you actually think that is all it takes to condemn something as meaningless.

Since now we know he left off the name of the one of the few newsletters that actually had a name "James B Powell". People make stuff up all the time and to call someone a racist without real proof is ignorant on your part. Would you like if someone saw you looking at a under age girl and called you a pervert, but in truth she just bumped into you which is why you looked? He has never said he wrote them, and has says yes they are taken out of context. These newsletters are the only thing that link him to racism in fucking 30 years in the public eye. The one article in particular that was about Barbara Jordan is the one written by James B Powell.


Now we get all kinds of weird analogies that are just too random to discuss.

Under aged girls? Pervert? Can you stick with the subject please?
Keifru
Profile Joined November 2010
United States179 Posts
January 15 2012 21:47 GMT
#5448
On January 16 2012 06:10 mcc wrote:
Actually, I think he puts a show for the white-supremacist crowd really. He needs their votes. I do not think he is a racist, he might be, but I think he supports racists, not ideologically, but in practice by using their money, votes and support.

That right there has always bugged me about any public figure, is the 'bad people' who follow them affecting them negativily, whether they want that crowed with them or not. Everyone's going to have their less-than-desirable supporters, which makes it a bit silly to point out specific ones to slash. And, really, those people are American to and have every right to their vote just as you do as well.
Conflict is the gadfly of thought. It stirs us to observation and memory. It instigates us to invention. It shocks us out of sheeplike passivity, and sets us at noting and contriving. - John Dewey
Scribble
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
2077 Posts
January 15 2012 21:52 GMT
#5449
On January 16 2012 06:14 zalz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 16 2012 06:06 gold_ wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:58 zalz wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:47 gold_ wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:40 zalz wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:30 gold_ wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:22 zalz wrote:
On January 16 2012 05:16 gold_ wrote:So because this guy from Stormfront is a racist he can't get a picture taken plus autograph with Ron Paul now? Got it. Please send me a quote of Ron Paul saying he wrote the racist letters. James B Powell was the name on one of the newsletters with a similar writing style though. Crawl back in your cave and watch CNN and Fox all day though please.


*Prove that Ron Paul wrote them

*Ron Paul signed them with his own name

*Ron Paul had complete control over the content

Are you people seriously going to keep demanding a higher and higher degree of evidence?

Am i eventually going to be asked to provide video footage of Ron Paul writing the newsletters?

Your hilarious. Do you know the guy that originally brought the newsletter story to the media was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kirchick in 1997 from The New Republic. He purposely left out the name on one of the few newsletters that was on them to make his case. Do I need to remind people of the accuracy of The New Republic? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Glass_(reporter)? The newsletters that contained racist material started during the time Dr. Ron Paul went back to practice medicine. Look at how many newsletters where published, then look how many contained racist material. Keep grasping at the only straw you have mate. Also, I need to let you know that stamps can be made with signatures on them FYI.


I got the guy's newsletters with his name on them and i am the one reaching for straws. You are suggesting that there was someone out there that decided to fake the signature of Ron Paul to spread racist newsletters under his name. Then, when confronted with this image sabotage Ron Paul decided not to figure out who wrote them but just shrug and go "ooh well, what's done is done, no use looking up who wrote it".

What candidate would seriously let such trash be written under their name? You know what, scrap candidate. Would any person allow such an assault of character?

Had this been any other candidate you wouldn't be talking like this and you know it.

I see years of TV has hurt your brain. The Ron Paul newsletters was a publication put out under his name, a business. Your saying every time I get a letter in the mail from Stephen Harper that he personally signs each one? Everytime Bell Canada sends me crap mail trying to win me back as a customer that George Cope signed it? Ron Paul was writing the newsletters then decided to go back to medicine, so he hired a team to run the newsletters. After this time the racist material started showing up. Please take your hatred for Ron Paul out of your head for just 5 minutes then read this and use your logical thought process you should have. PLEASE.


Let's pretend that you are right. Let us pretend for now that Ron Paul wasn't involved in the creation.

Then in 1996 he embraces the content of the newsletters.

Then in 2001 he says they were ghostwritten.

Then in 2008 and onward he says he never had anything to do with them in the slightest.


Why did he embrace the content if he didn't write it or agree with it? Hell, he didn't even bother to mention in 1996 that he didn't write them. That little fact slipped his mind back then.

He said you had to read them in context. That these "95% of all blacks are criminal or semi-criminal" were just quotes taken out of context. Why would he say that if he never wrote that and the content makes him throw up?


If your story is true then everything that follows after that doesn't make any sense. He embraces the content, then claims ghostwriters, then claims having nothing to do with them.

What he did does not match the story you are putting forth. A person that never wrote these things would not have acted in the fashion that Ron Paul did.

First of all, links to a reliable source ( Not the New Republic ). Embracing the content now means he wrote them? He has never said once that they were his words. Saying they are taken out of context means he wrote them? Like I said your grasping at the only thing that the main stream media can bring out to smear the guy. That and trying to blame apparent "supporters" of terrible ads.


http://reason.com/blog/2008/01/11/old-news-rehashed-for-over-a-d

Just because you call it grasping doesn't make it grasping. They are what one would actually call, very valid points.

Like a broken record he can't stop saying that he never wrote them, but back in 1996 he never even once says anything of the kind.

If you aren't racist and someone shows you a racist rant that you supposedly wrote, would you really never at any point make the (somewhat important) point that you didn't actually wrote any of it?

Why did he go on and give all those interviews, never ever denying that he wrote these newsletters? Is it his hobby to get burned to the ground by the press? He goes on all these interviews and never once figures it's important to mention:

"Ooh hey, btw, these racist newsletters that are giving me all this trouble and you accuse me of writing, i never actually wrote them"

No, he just goes on carrying the burden as if he did write them. Never bothering to point out the one thing that would make it all go away and make him immune from criticism.

Show nested quote +
Well its one thing to just disagree with a candidate, its a completely different thing to call someone a racist. Nothing except those newsletters that were published under his name when he was actually practising medicine is proof. Don't you think if he wasn't actually practising medicine at that time the media would be all over him for lying?


I don't recall that practicing medicine makes you unable to write.




Literally the first link I found googling.

And this:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/12/22/Ron-Paul-denies-writing-racist-comments/UPI-89041324574627/

"Why don't you go back and look at what I said yesterday on CNN and what I've said for 20-something years, 22 years ago?" Paul said in a CNN interview Wednesday. "I didn't write them. I disavow them. That's it."
gold_
Profile Joined December 2010
Canada312 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-15 22:14:34
January 15 2012 21:55 GMT
#5450
On January 16 2012 06:44 zalz wrote:
Show nested quote +
Practising medicine as in away from keyboard, for your simple mind to understand.


What is up with all the insults? This is like the third time now. Keep a grip on yourself.

Show nested quote +
Next this website and the quotes doesn't mean anything, just like James Kirchick's article meaning nothing.

'
It means nothing, it means nothing, it means nothing!

And like that you have destroyed all doubt that this evidence should have given you. You declare them to mean nothing, thus they mean nothing.

This isn't a proper debate. Regardless of what i bring forth, you just declare "it means nothing" and you actually think that is all it takes to condemn something as meaningless.

Show nested quote +
Since now we know he left off the name of the one of the few newsletters that actually had a name "James B Powell". People make stuff up all the time and to call someone a racist without real proof is ignorant on your part. Would you like if someone saw you looking at a under age girl and called you a pervert, but in truth she just bumped into you which is why you looked? He has never said he wrote them, and has says yes they are taken out of context. These newsletters are the only thing that link him to racism in fucking 30 years in the public eye. The one article in particular that was about Barbara Jordan is the one written by James B Powell.


Now we get all kinds of weird analogies that are just too random to discuss.

Under aged girls? Pervert? Can you stick with the subject please?

Sorry I don't mean to insult sometimes I do get frustrated, I apologise. My feelings on calling someone a racist is not that the proof be a preponderance of the evidence but rather beyond reasonable doubt. It means nothing because the site could have easily made up any quotes they want, that's why it means nothing (no links to their findings).

Also they could have easily mis-quoted Dr.Paul, just like Fox news did last week when he gave speech during his New Hampshire rally. He said that "We are dangerous to the status quo". But Fox labelled his quote as " We're dangerous!". It's clear that many media sites are against Dr.Paul. Go look at CNN/Fox/ABCnews/MSNBC and con't all the Ron Paul news, then count Steven Colbert news (someone not even in the GOP race).

EDIT: Just wanted to add this linked for you. I know it's Fox news but this guy "Ben Swann" is actually really good at trying to find the truth.
http://www.fox19.com/story/16458700/reality-check-the-name-of-a-mystery-writer-of-one-of-ron-pauls-racist-newsletters
I am from Canada, eh!
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 15 2012 22:03 GMT
#5451
On January 16 2012 06:47 Keifru wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 16 2012 06:10 mcc wrote:
Actually, I think he puts a show for the white-supremacist crowd really. He needs their votes. I do not think he is a racist, he might be, but I think he supports racists, not ideologically, but in practice by using their money, votes and support.

That right there has always bugged me about any public figure, is the 'bad people' who follow them affecting them negativily, whether they want that crowed with them or not. Everyone's going to have their less-than-desirable supporters, which makes it a bit silly to point out specific ones to slash. And, really, those people are American to and have every right to their vote just as you do as well.

As a general issue I think that if a big enough block supports a politician, then even if he does not really agree with them or even dislikes them, there is very high likelihood that all things considered it will help them one way or another. But that is not the point I try to make as I think that is so hard to analyze as to be irrelevant other than an academic issue really.
Problem is that Ron Paul is not really bashing them, criticizing them, basically doing nothing to change their mind or ostracize them. This just leads me to a conclusion he just does not care about racist support or anything else other than his "freedom"/state-rights issues and otherwise the world can burn. He also gladly seeks their support.

As for their rights, of course they can, but that does not mean other people should not condemn them for their immoral views. And politicians who want to pretend to be decent should not seek their support and should condemn them.
bOneSeven
Profile Blog Joined January 2012
Romania685 Posts
January 15 2012 22:13 GMT
#5452
Listen about the racist thing in general, I don't mind if people are white power or communists or whatever . If I walk near a store where it says " no black people allowed in " , I'll simply say ... Wow , what a terrible mindset , I would never buy anything from that so I won't support their business because they are really messed up . But saying to make it illegal to have that mindset ? What's up with that ?
Planet earth is blue and there's nothing I can do
Saryph
Profile Joined April 2010
United States1955 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-15 22:30:43
January 15 2012 22:24 GMT
#5453
On January 16 2012 07:13 bOneSeven wrote:
Listen about the racist thing in general, I don't mind if people are white power or communists or whatever . If I walk near a store where it says " no black people allowed in " , I'll simply say ... Wow , what a terrible mindset , I would never buy anything from that so I won't support their business because they are really messed up . But saying to make it illegal to have that mindset ? What's up with that ?


But there are areas of this country where such a sign could actually be a benefit to business, while hurting minority groups such as Muslims or Hispanics or African-Americans.

Our country has a dark history of discrimination against minorities by both people and the government. Look at the controversy across the country in the last few years of communities trying/succeeding at preventing Muslims from building places of worship, because the majority is scared of their religion and people, considering them all terrorists.

P.S. I doubt that Ron Paul is a racist, though he made a very poor decision with the newsletter. However, his campaign is supported by racists because they will give them the most freedom to discriminate. Like most of Ron Paul's ideas, once again it falls back onto the 'let everyone do whatever they want, as long as they don't hurt someone' without thinking of the idea that certain activities almost always lead to a negative conclusion.

For example, why not allow people to use drugs/drink alcohol and then go driving, as long as they don't hurt anyone (actually cause an accident) they should not have their freedoms infringed! Maybe you support that, but the idea of allowing drunk people to drive until they crash their car into someone (and probably kill them) doesn't sound as smart as making it illegal to drive drunk in the first place.
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
January 15 2012 22:26 GMT
#5454
On January 16 2012 07:13 bOneSeven wrote:
Listen about the racist thing in general, I don't mind if people are white power or communists or whatever . If I walk near a store where it says " no black people allowed in " , I'll simply say ... Wow , what a terrible mindset , I would never buy anything from that so I won't support their business because they are really messed up . But saying to make it illegal to have that mindset ? What's up with that ?


Well it becomes dangerous when the majority of a state or community is like that. Why would they change? What would create change? The free market would not do anything if the majority is as bigoted as the store itself. If anything, the moderates would get frustrated and leave such an area, and it would become more and more extreme.

Of course, the other option is basically to force people to comply. Say "you can have whatever opinion you'd like, but that can't affect your business." This doesn't really sound fair to the individuals or the business. I understand that.

I don't know, are there other options to alleviating racism? Maybe try it from the education side of things?
gruff
Profile Joined September 2010
Sweden2276 Posts
January 15 2012 22:26 GMT
#5455
On January 16 2012 07:13 bOneSeven wrote:
Listen about the racist thing in general, I don't mind if people are white power or communists or whatever . If I walk near a store where it says " no black people allowed in " , I'll simply say ... Wow , what a terrible mindset , I would never buy anything from that so I won't support their business because they are really messed up . But saying to make it illegal to have that mindset ? What's up with that ?

Not allowing black people into a store is not a mindset. You could justify anything thinking that way. What if it happens to something where you don't have another option? Tough luck?
bOneSeven
Profile Blog Joined January 2012
Romania685 Posts
January 15 2012 22:29 GMT
#5456
On January 16 2012 07:26 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 16 2012 07:13 bOneSeven wrote:
Listen about the racist thing in general, I don't mind if people are white power or communists or whatever . If I walk near a store where it says " no black people allowed in " , I'll simply say ... Wow , what a terrible mindset , I would never buy anything from that so I won't support their business because they are really messed up . But saying to make it illegal to have that mindset ? What's up with that ?


Well it becomes dangerous when the majority of a state or community is like that. Why would they change? What would create change? The free market would not do anything if the majority is as bigoted as the store itself. If anything, the moderates would get frustrated and leave such an area, and it would become more and more extreme.

Of course, the other option is basically to force people to comply. Say "you can have whatever opinion you'd like, but that can't affect your business." This doesn't really sound fair to the individuals or the business. I understand that.

I don't know, are there other options to alleviating racism? Maybe try it from the education side of things?


It's obviously the education thing ... A find it rather disguisting , the idea of racism...but ... oh well ... I'm a bit racist , in the example that I rather like white girls than black girls but still ... Other than that I don't see how racism exists, other than it's being a part of a child's education...Also TV allways help spread this kind of mentality... I won't go the route of conspiracy blabla to explain it, but in a special, Russell Peters made a good case for it.
Planet earth is blue and there's nothing I can do
hmunkey
Profile Joined August 2010
United Kingdom1973 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-15 22:38:24
January 15 2012 22:35 GMT
#5457
On January 16 2012 07:13 bOneSeven wrote:
Listen about the racist thing in general, I don't mind if people are white power or communists or whatever . If I walk near a store where it says " no black people allowed in " , I'll simply say ... Wow , what a terrible mindset , I would never buy anything from that so I won't support their business because they are really messed up . But saying to make it illegal to have that mindset ? What's up with that ?

The US was the first country ever founded on Enlightenment principles, principles which were new and progressive to Europe at the time and which were eschewed by a small group of intellectuals. Basically, the US Constitution is one of the most important documents in human history for that reason -- it was the first real government document to codify Enlightenment principles into law.

Anyway, Tocqueville and Mill (and Nietzsche to an extent) famously wrote about a concept they termed the "tyranny of the majority." The basic idea is that it is the government's duty to protect the minority from the wishes of the majority, regardless of the prevailing attitudes, because they saw oppression of any form as wrong.

Laws banning discrimination are simply a natural progression of these ideals. As people became more and more tolerant of other races, they saw the need to further cement protections of this nature. You have to remember when discrimination was outlawed (mostly by the courts), the prevailing attitudes in the US (and in most other developed countries) was not tolerant in the slightest. The fact that courts mandated anti-discriminatory policies is what changed public attitude. So when you say you wouldn't support their business, you only feel that way because you grew up in a society where discrimination was not commonplace (because of these laws). We feel the way we do about these things because laws were passed that forced us to treat other people equally.

On January 16 2012 07:13 bOneSeven wrote:
... I'm a bit racist , in the example that I rather like white girls than black girls but still

Haha, that isn't racism. I'm not homophobic because I don't find men attractive nor am I ageist because I don't want to enter a relationship with a senior citizen.
Vaelestrasz13
Profile Joined January 2012
United States2 Posts
January 15 2012 22:41 GMT
#5458


Even though people think Paul is radical, he is right on just about everything...itsa just not stuff that people want to hear or accept as truth..he is the only person who says shit how it is and doesnt care if the generally redarded american population can't comprehend him... the big problem i have with obama is that he just tells people what they want to hear no matter how stupid it is.. and thats conforting to people because he's a charming, cool, collective guy... sorry, but the presidency isnt a popularity contest.. i dont care if Obama has a likable personality or if hes charming and witty...hes not qualified to be president and he needs to go. with that being said i want the most intelligent and the most straight forward person available to be in that position of power... and that happens to be Ron Paul...
You're All Idiots...
hmunkey
Profile Joined August 2010
United Kingdom1973 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-15 22:53:37
January 15 2012 22:51 GMT
#5459
On January 16 2012 07:41 Vaelestrasz13 wrote:
Even though people think Paul is radical, he is right on just about everything...itsa just not stuff that people want to hear or accept as truth..he is the only person who says shit how it is and doesnt care if the generally redarded american population can't comprehend him...

He isn't right on just about everything. His supporters only post videos where he is. No one is right on all their predictions and the only reason this video is getting attention is because it is an example of him being right.

the big problem i have with obama is that he just tells people what they want to hear no matter how stupid it is.. and thats conforting to people because he's a charming, cool, collective guy... sorry, but the presidency isnt a popularity contest..

Obama absolutely does not do this. Paul, Hunstman, and Obama are all similar in this regard -- they do not necessarily say what their "bases" want to hear. In fact, they do the opposite all the time.

... sorry, but the presidency isnt a popularity contest..

It absolutely is one. The presidency is decided through popular votes in each state. If Paul wins, it will be because he'es the most popular...

i dont care if Obama has a likable personality or if hes charming and witty...hes not qualified to be president and he needs to go.

What about him indicates he is less qualified than Paul? The argument could easily be made that he's in fact more qualified seeing as he's already been president (over wartime and an economic recession no less).

Don't get me wrong, I like Ron Paul a lot and many of the things he says are indeed correct. There's no doubt he's extremely intelligent. However, he is not some messiah like a lot of his supporters (yourself included) are hyping him up to be. It's like you think he's infallible despite having no reason to feel that way and none of your states reasons for Paul over Obama are actually substantive.

Also, this "Ron Paul is racist" thing is just nonsense. Come on, he's not racist. If you want to attack him, there are plenty of valid things to go after.
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
January 15 2012 22:57 GMT
#5460
On January 16 2012 07:29 bOneSeven wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 16 2012 07:26 DoubleReed wrote:
On January 16 2012 07:13 bOneSeven wrote:
Listen about the racist thing in general, I don't mind if people are white power or communists or whatever . If I walk near a store where it says " no black people allowed in " , I'll simply say ... Wow , what a terrible mindset , I would never buy anything from that so I won't support their business because they are really messed up . But saying to make it illegal to have that mindset ? What's up with that ?


Well it becomes dangerous when the majority of a state or community is like that. Why would they change? What would create change? The free market would not do anything if the majority is as bigoted as the store itself. If anything, the moderates would get frustrated and leave such an area, and it would become more and more extreme.

Of course, the other option is basically to force people to comply. Say "you can have whatever opinion you'd like, but that can't affect your business." This doesn't really sound fair to the individuals or the business. I understand that.

I don't know, are there other options to alleviating racism? Maybe try it from the education side of things?


It's obviously the education thing ... A find it rather disguisting , the idea of racism...but ... oh well ... I'm a bit racist , in the example that I rather like white girls than black girls but still ... Other than that I don't see how racism exists, other than it's being a part of a child's education...Also TV allways help spread this kind of mentality... I won't go the route of conspiracy blabla to explain it, but in a special, Russell Peters made a good case for it.


Who would educate them? Why would the racist parents want their kids being educated like that? Education is done by the community, and if the community is intolerant, then the education will be too. It's foolish and naive to think that there is this sort of inevitability of social change. I don't think it's a simple issue.

No, liking white girls more than black girls is not racist. People have very real reasons for who we are sexually attracted to. It would really only be racist if you claimed that you are not at all attracted to black women or you find them disgusting. Everybody has sexual preferences and familiarity is commonly a factor.
Prev 1 271 272 273 274 275 575 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
14:00
Playoff - Day 2/2 - Final
Mihu vs BonythLIVE!
ZZZero.O459
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
IndyStarCraft 346
BRAT_OK 120
MindelVK 29
CosmosSc2 19
StarCraft: Brood War
ZZZero.O 459
Larva 245
firebathero 152
ggaemo 123
Aegong 44
Terrorterran 17
Dota 2
qojqva4782
capcasts86
League of Legends
Reynor56
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K736
flusha456
oskar281
byalli264
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu656
Khaldor601
Other Games
tarik_tv10400
Grubby2847
Gorgc2354
fl0m1422
B2W.Neo891
420jenkins470
mouzStarbuck244
Sick34
JuggernautJason34
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1684
StarCraft 2
angryscii 22
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 20 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH249
• davetesta93
• HeavenSC 65
• StrangeGG 51
• sitaska49
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• sooper7s
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• 80smullet 15
• FirePhoenix13
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota2906
League of Legends
• Doublelift1294
Other Games
• imaqtpie1233
Upcoming Events
Wardi Open
15h 6m
OSC
1d 4h
Stormgate Nexus
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
2 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
LiuLi Cup
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
4 days
RSL Revival
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
[ Show More ]
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
FEL Cracow 2025
CC Div. A S7

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL 20 Non-Korean Championship
BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Qualifiers
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
HCC Europe
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025

Upcoming

ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
MESA Nomadic Masters Fall
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
Roobet Cup 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.