Ron Paul touted his newsletters in 1995

Yeah I love how Paul followers just don't seem to care that he endorsed and profited from racist newsletters in his name that he bragged about, yet has no idea who was running the show, and is offended that anyone is asking. Can you imagine their reactions if this was any other candidate?

 

I guess he doesn't want to tell. It really doesn't matter because these are not his views.

 

Well said. He's either evil or really stupid.

 

I made it all the way to the point where he said sincerely, "libertarians can't be racists".

 

How do you know they weren't written by him? They bare his name and he endorsed them and profited off them. Why are you so sure he didn't?

 

LMFAO

Keep trying. It aint working though.

He was a practicing MD at the time. Oh yeah...he's too stupid.

It was nothing more than a bad investment. He has shown regret for it.

Moving along....

 

You asked for it, but didn't even listen. WTG

Libertarians are individualists. They do not put people in groups or categories such as race.

 

.....And made lots of money off them.

 

Ron Paul has all but admitted that he would have been willing to let the child butchery continue in Germany. Pacifists are the biggest butchers of all, because they refused to stop butchery.

 

You are going to assert that letting someone print things in your name without knowing what is being printed is smart?

He didn't disavow them in the 90's when he bragged about them.

The stink is all over him, but even given him the graciousness you want to show him, his too irresponsible to be President if he allowed himself to be used in that manner. YOU are responsibility for what YOU allow your name and character to be attached to.

 

So, it just doesn't matter that he's made millions off racist newsletters which he endorsed in 95, or that he's protecting the truth author of those letters, or that he lied and said he didn't know what was in them? Really???

 

Another Ron Paul thread rehashing old news trying to make it important again even though he has answered to it hundreds of times. What do you want Calminian? Want him to drop out so your Authoritarian Candidate gets the Nomination? Find something else to attack him with because obviously discussing his Policies is too hard considering every counter argument is filled with "fear of the Unknown" and Emotions.

 

Actually, he denied profiting from them. And allowing other people to use your name isn't exactly the same the thing as endorsing them. And we're talking about a half dozen articles out of hundreds or thousands over the period.

All this sort of pales against that whole child-slaughter and presidential-dictatorship thing, of course.

 

First I did make it more than 1/2 way through the youtube, and second the notion of individualism overcoming human natures proclivity to generalize about pretty much everything is naive at best.

 

And let's not forget that just recently Paul as asked by jewish conservatives to disavow himself from anti-semetic groups that were carrying Ron Paul's articles and touting his political views. Paul to this day has refused, to my understanding.

Boy if Iowa picks this guy, they will have tarnished their name forever.

 

Just stick to playing the race card and warmongering. Because when it comes to fiscal conservatism and not trampling on the constitution, the other top candidates fail with flying colors.

I just hope you're around in a few years, so all of the Paulistas can say "we told you so" as the establishment RINOs continue expanding the government, taxing your brains out, and selling out the American people.

 

You mean the child murders that were going on in Germany which Paul says he wouldn't have stopped if he were president? No wonder anti-semetic groups love him. He would have offered friendship to Hitler.

 

You guys don't seem to get it. Your excuse for him is just another reason he should never be President.

 

LMAO dude, they're IOWA, Iowa republicans, Iowa republicans that sit around all day to "causus" for their candidate.... not sure tarnish is of any worry.

 

Are you talking about when they handed half of Germany over to Stalin, an even bigger butcher than Hitler? When they fried the inhabitants of Dresden and Hamburg? Or are you referring to the fact that had the warmongers not engineered mass butchery in WWI, the Nazis would never have come to power in the first place?

In stark contrast to FDR, libertarians would have allowed any Jews that wanted asylum in USA to come freely, all six million. And we would have done it all without annihilating cities of innocent people. I know what a shame that would be...no good Hollywood war movies

Anyway, this news is even older than the newsletters; I'm talking about Obama's current rampage throughout the Middle East.

 

My excuse that he'd stop child butchery? I don't know, it seems like a pretty darned good reason to me.

 

The republican party has already tarnished itself forever. You stand for nothing except cronyism, authoritarianism, and imperialism.

 

Actually, had a Ron Paul been in power in the 1910s, there never would have been a Hitler or a Stalin. Had a Calminian been in power, there would have been both, and your solution would be to hand Eastern Europe from Hitler to Stalin. Excellent plan!

 

Does this suggest Mexican asylum? Exactly how do 6 million eastern European jews make their way to America without American involvement in WWII?

 

WWII wouldn't have even started yet. The Nazis at that point didn't want war with the West and wanted to find some way to kick the Jews out (the Final Solution wasn't the first solution). They may very well have agreed to allow the Jews to go to the vast open regions of the US, Canada, and Australia in exchange for a peace agreement with those countries and Britain.

Then they would have conquered east and ended up getting involved in a war with the Soviet Union and it would have remained a contest between those two tyrannies, which is what is primarily was anyway.