Ron Paul's racist ties - has he done enough to separate himself?

Just pointing out that their are groups that have a unified mission that are exclusive to that group.

 

Already discredited this.
One is about advocacy, one is about denegration.
No equivalency at all.

 

You have not.

Segregation is only acceptable to guilt-ridden white libs when blacks are the ones doing it.

But thanks for filling in the blank about what your political motivation is.

 

You would equate a group that is trying to uplift its constituency with a group that is targeting a demographic for villification and destruction?
Interesting.

 

And they are trying to uplift blacks by practicing the same racial segregation that was once used agains them?

How do you create a color-blind society by practicing racism yourself?

And where is the targeted vilification against blacks by pointing out that MLK was an adulator?

Isn't that the same topic of discussion about Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich by libs today?

 

An adulator?
Yes, he had an adulation for Christ.
LOL.
Can you show a piece of legislation supported by the black caucus that encourages segregation?

 

MLK illicit sex life outside his marriage is well documented.

If is coming as news to you then you are either very new to the party or you have not been paying attention.

As for the CBC it IS segregated.

That in itself is wrong and unAmerican as we define the term in the 21st Century.

 

I wasn't defending MLK.
I was making fun of your inability to handle the English language.
Sorry you didn't get it.

 

OK.

For some reason my computer tries to guess the word I want to use and fills it in for me based on the first couple of letters I type.

Sometimes it guesses wrong and I fail to catch it.

 

you're confused

 

Am not.


.....

 

your comments indicate otherwise

 

So let me get this right.

Ron Paul is racist cause someone else who donated money to him that Ron never spoke at their convention or gathering is a racist? Ron has never went to the racist organization, never went out of his way to meet with a highly well know racist, or said anything racist himself, but is considered racist? He also appologizes for what remarks are said using his name.

Obama is NOT racist or a terrorist because...? But yet Obama has hung out with Rev Wright, visited his church for over 20 years. Quoted his pastor and used his preachings in his book. Joins and supports the stickly one race segment of congress. Stays with and announces his campaign for president from Bill Ayers living room knowing full well who the man was. But yet Obama is not what his friends are?

Am I missing something?

 

These malicious accusations have been done to death by Ron Paul's opponents; none of them have any merit.

He's repeatedly repudiated the fringe elements you refer to in your opening post.

It's really sad what people will stoop to in the name of politics.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v60TWZNVgtk"]Ron Paul denies 9/11 conspiracy theories - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gKXyBgr24c"]Ron Paul "I don't want white supremacists support" - YouTube[/ame]

How many times does Ron Paul have to repeat himself before these smear merchants will drop this lame canard?

 

"Quit side tracking the thread. Another fanatical Paul supporter. Noted."

I'll do it for them. Fact is, all these threads prove he stands a chance, and those making vast sums off of our faux system are getting nervous. For some reason, the switching back and forth between people who are basically the same isn't working anymore. It has been so successful for a century the establishment is at a loss as to what to do. It is no wonder originality outside of tech is disappearing from the realm of man. Not even the political elite have one brain amongst them. The more I study Paul, the more I lean towards him being controlled opposition to mainstream thought. However, the farmer has screwed up the crop to the point the wife and kids would prefer the scarecrow ran the farm.

 

What an absurd position you are taking. Just take a deep breath and think for one second how silly you sound right now.

Ron Paul HAS repudiated these people. Ron Paul has no control, however, over what articles they carry or how much money they donate to his campaign. If you expect him to spend time and effort sifting through millions of donations attempting to filter out the racist donations from the non-racist donations, then there's no reason to take anything you say seriously from this point forward.

 

Also a good point. However, Paul has spent all these years pushing for an audit, when the number one thing that needs to be publicly disclosed is the actual names of the main bank house members who make up the FED. The banks pulling the strings. Once that information is disclosed, all sorts of bankers could be arrested overnight for insider trading. The Federal Reserve Act does not protect their private arms from SEC rule violations, for surely knowing which companies would be bailed out would count, and any genuine opposition would have that on the forefront of their platform.

 

Another absurd statement from the resident progressive talking-point machine.

Libertarians are the only real social liberals to speak of. Your precious Democratic party has absolutely no interest in ending the war on drugs and other victimless crimes. And why would they? The police unions have the Democrats on a leash. Only libertarians like Ron Paul have consistently and vocally held true socially liberal positions. Democrats are just a bunch of phonies and hypocrites.

Blacks and other racial minorities ought to realize that so-called "liberals" and Democrats have no intention of providing them with the opportunity to achieve social mobility in our society. They're more than happy keeping them on welfare and in a never-ending cycle of criminal deviancy and poverty.

 

Go ahead and talk about it. Nobody with half a brain lends your loony accusations any credence or credibility.

It's just transparent partisan politics meant to undermine a candidate with whom you do not agree.

So, go ahead and make your stupid accusations. Maybe someone important will happen upon this thread and give a crap...

 

While I don't like their economics as it lacks any loyalty to one's nation, as well as is basically anarchy for people with money, socially there is no one pushing for true freedom like that of the libertarians. But your evaluation of the democratic party is spot on. Plus 1.

 

This thread illustrates an ironic point.

It's always the anti-Paul contingent that is attacking his supporters for being obsessive and irrational, but it's the anti-Paul contingent that is truly obsessive and irrational.

They show up in every single Ron Paul thread repeatedly making false accusations and clinging to outlandish theories no matter how ridiculous and untrue they may be.

And they never stop. They just keeping repeating themselves over and over again in the vain hope that they'll somehow validate their delusional hatred of Paul, but all they're really doing is making a fool of themselves.

 

LOL. You have to read between the lines. The mere fact they feel they have to, speaks volumes. One must truly think about where the establishment is at. They didn't want Obama. Obama was elected grassroots, and the establishment just got lucky in the fact the man was for sale. Internet was the main tool, and now that tool is pushing for Paul, who if elected can't renege on his stances or the threat of all out revolution will be real. Even if controlled opposition, they will have to lose ground on their agenda to pretend he was real the whole time. Not to mention, if he runs as 3rd party, which many are pushing, he forever discredits the "wasted vote" claim, maybe the biggest game changer this nation has seen in its history.

 

That's the sad part, liberals DON'T have half a brain, so they keep believing the establishment lies. Ever wonder why Detroit has been ran by liberal for so long and all the city has done is fall further and further into ruin while still electing more liberals to rule them?

 

when people lie about the newsletters and say ron paul didn't write them, i'll let them know they don't have a clue what they're talking about

ron paul may have denied the newsletters, but it's obvious that he wrote some of the pieces in the newsletters and that the newsletters were his


Since libertarians are supposed to be all about running the government by the standards of private business, let me clue you in on how this kind of lackadaisical failure-to-pay-attention goes down in the private sector.

If somebody goes into court to get out of a contract because "My lawyer wrote it for me, and I didn't really read it, even though I did sign my name to it," the judge will rightly laugh them right out of the courtroom -- and probably award the plaintiff extra damages just for the stupidity factor.

A corporate manager who claims, "Oh, some underling of mine let that defective product out onto the market -- I wasn't really watching, so I had nothing to do with it" is still going to be out of a job so fast he'll have asphalt marks on the butt of his Brooks Brothers suit.

How do people expect a man who can't exercise basic oversight for a lousy monthly newsletter to take full responsibility for the entirety of the government of the most powerful nation on earth?

 

Supporters of Ron Paul are generally far less racist than supporters of any other candidate (including those of Hermain Cain and Barack Obama, who just support them for PR purposes to show how "non-racist" they are, like the liberal kid who only has one black friend... they both deviate from mainline Democrat/Republican platforms so if they were white they'd not be supported).

This is a smear campaign by the media and Israel lobby to discredit him because he does not support Israel or other points of aggressive foreign policy.