Yea, in America we allow people the freedom to voice their opinions even if we may not agree with them. So if a bunch of racist idiots want to give money to Ron Paul, by all means they should be allowed to. Why should they be barged from giving to a candidate they like because you don't like them? That's not fair. That's not American.

Suggesting he should give the money back seems to insinuating as such...

No. Which is why I wouldn't have taken it. It's not because I think little green pieces of paper are evil or that I can tell which ones came from Mother Teresa and which ones came from Stormfront once they hit my bank account. It's just because it will likely result in fewer donations by non-racists. And there's more of those. So it was dumb for him to accept them. But it wasn't immoral.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

Quite a few people (I'm in a group that has like 80,000 Ron Paul supporters) dismissed the nonsense of the "racist" giving money to Ron Paul and basically took the position I'm offering up.

That it doesn't matter.

Who is arguing otherwise?



By that same token, I am allowed to criticize Ron Paul for accepting it. BFD.



Who is claiming they should be prevented from giving Ron Paul money?


Suggesting that it would be MORAL to give the money back is not quite the same thing as saying that he should not be ALLOWED to accept the money.

Stretch much?



Then why did you say you disagreed with me when I said that "taking the money was wrong from a pragmatic view"?

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

I'm sure. It matters nothing to me, either. But the issue is that politics, in large part, is PR work. If you take money from a controversial group it will look bad to a certain (possibly large) segment of the population. Right or wrong, it simply will. So it might be best to refuse the money.

Just like with Obama. Anyone with a brain (about 15% of America give or take) knows that his ability to lead this country has 0% to do with anything his ex-minister does, says or thinks. But he has to address it because it's bad PR. It's not relevant in any way to his policies or ideas or leadership ability, but people will assume it is. So instead of focusing on the fact the dude is a socialist, which IS relevant, they will focus on his minister, which is not relevant. God Bless America. I swear they put something more than flouride in the water.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

If I recall correctly you said from a pragmatic view he didn't NEED the money. That's what I disagreed with. I'll grant you that he can't win, but he still needs money to run.

I don't recall ever stating it was wrong for him to accept it from a pragmatic view. I agree with that. I disagree that it's immoral to take it.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

It is relevant because it implies something about his morality.

His minister expressed positions (and in a very unambiguous way) that are racist and anti-American. He could have chosen any religious leader, but he chose THIS one. And it wasnt just a one time thing...he considers this guy a family friend and went to his sermons for years. This is where he is supposedly getting a lot of his moral advice from.

Would you say the same thing about McCain if it came out that McCain regularly attended Klan rallies? Gimme a break. Obviously it matters in a very real way. His policies will be influenced by his morality.

Ron Paul accepting money from a racist source does the same thing IMO.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

From a pragmatic view, the money caused him (predictably) more hard than good.

So what pragmatic reason would he have had to take it?

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

You're basically saying Ron Paul should not have accepted the money. Hence, the reason I'm inferring that you do argue otherwise.

Uh...yea.

I think it is....

Does Ron Paul receiving money from me mean he is going to denounce his Christian faith in favor of my atheism?

Is Ron Paul going to denounce government because he receives money from anarchists?

I mean come on, that's just stupid.