:rollinQuote:
Originally Posted by Blake
oh ok so as long as they only lie about other things they are much more credible than dr paul, got it
Printable View
:rollinQuote:
Originally Posted by Blake
oh ok so as long as they only lie about other things they are much more credible than dr paul, got it
The ones outlined in his newsletter?Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
OK.
:lol there were no policies in the newsletter in questionQuote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
you call these policies? :lmao
"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."
"We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational."
After the Los Angeles riots, one article in a newsletter claimed, "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."
One referred to Martin Luther King Jr. as "the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours" and who "seduced underage girls and boys."
Another referred to Barbara Jordan, a civil rights activist and congresswoman as "Barbara Morondon," the "archetypical half-educated victimologist."
BTW I agree 100% with the bolded statements. Does that make me a racist? :lol
I believe Obama and Romney believe they have a chance to win they presidencyQuote:
Originally Posted by DisAsTerBot
Che says Paul doesn't even believe in his own chances.
Is this true?
Pretty much.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
BTW:
nah, not a conspiracy :lolQuote:
CNN's Gloria Borger is married to LANCE MORGAN. Lance is the chief communications and crisis strategist of POWELL TATE. Powell Tate is a D.C. firm that represents every part of the very same MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX that Ron Paul wants to reduce!
This is a total conflict of interest! Her husband's firm includes overseeing a coalition to support congressional funding to parts of the U.S. Military
Every part?
Which parts specifically?
How many minorities are in jail on drug charges that would be released if Ron Paul wins and gets to legalize drugs and pardon these men/women. He's no racist.
According to the Ron Paul Newsletter, it will be easier to kill the blacks once they are out of prison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigzax
Chump your just being a chump to argue. You know damn well Ron Paul isn't a racist and had nothing to do with those newsletters. Admittedly that was in fact his failing since they bore his name. Anyhow, moot point. He just needs to refute it when asked and stand tall just like he did in 2008. Nothing to see here, move along, move along...
He hasn't been able to get ahead of this story in 20 years, and he's not standing tall -- he's running away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigzax
Ron fucked up and it's probably gonna cost him.
i dont know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blake
but i do know that lying in order to get the win is just as bad if not immensely worse. Your criticism of him taking campaign contributions while allegedly not trying to win is comparable to every other candidate lying in order to gain those same contributions.
is this true?
I wonder if there are any KKK members that are pro legalization.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigzax
Let's face he has 0% of winning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blake
SO he is either
a) a Don Quixote of politics who seriously believes he can beat the "ferocious giants"
b) is in it mainly to bring his ideologies to the spotlight and that way steer the nation even a bit
c) a little of both
I pick C. But in all honesty I don't know for sure.
still that makes him 100x better than Obama|Romney who's ideals take a backseat to lobbyist money and powertrips
At best, it appears Paul's ideals took a back seat to pandering to racists and conspiracy theorists to get their money.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
Can't say it didn't work.
hardly pandering if Dr. Paul was practicing medicine at the time
"paid" - where does it say he got paid?
I cant come up with a good reason for a candidate to ever lie or steal, so for all practical purposes, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by DisAsTerBot
Do you believe that Dr Paul's lying and stealing is acceptable?
Is Paul still accepting campaign contributions?Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
OK, you just proved your defense of Paul in this thread is simply a knee-jerk reaction and you did absolutely no research like you told me to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/1...uls-newsletterQuote:
Originally Posted by an article that has been around for three years but somehow you missed in the course of your research
You're welcome.
I already agreed he lied. I already proved all politicians do this. This is the definition of being a politician. (eg Obama's terrorist friends)Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
I already stated I like Paul cause he sticks to his guns on his policies. Still waiting for what policies of Paul's were in the newsletters, which he disavowed.
Let's stay on this subject for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
Do you accept that he got paid rather handsomely as a result of these publications?
Yes or no.
Already agreed. Already agreed he lied at some point. Already agreed all politicians lie about this. Now show me the policies he disavowed.
No you didn't agree. You specifically intimated he didn't get paid by demanding to know where is says he got paid.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
And I was using the term policies facetiously. I don't believe his advice on killing blacks was an official policy position. Just a friendly suggestion from a folksy country doctor.
Whatever keeps the checks rolling in, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
still waiting for this....Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
What part of the previous post did you not understand?Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
Quote it for me. I'm obviously here to help you.