Ron Paul wins again.

[braeden0613]

People should listen to T Park's opinions regarding Presidential candidates, not because he's necessarily well-informed or that he has well-developed ideas, but rather because there are many, many more voters like him than any other kind.

To wit: regarding Paul, T Park probably only knows about him because 1) this is Texas, and 2) the Victoria brigade and others in this forum have been pushing him. Elsewhere, all that people know about him is that the media says he is a crank. Many lower-to-middle-class white males would identify with John Birchers if they knew what a John Bircher was.

Regarding Obama: Barack easily would be the most liberal President since FDR, and is probably the most pro-abortion Presidential candidate ever to mount a serious campaign. In all likelihood, T Park shares little to nothing in his political views with Obama, yet he ranks him highly, because Barack's rhetorical power is so great.

QFT

[JoeChalupa]

Barack isn't just pro-choice. His record in Illinois and in the U.S. Senate has been to expand what is permissible under the au es of abortion; for example, he struck down a bill that would have made it illegal to kill fully-born babies who survived attempts at partial-birth abortion. He also opposed a bill that would have made it explicitly illegal to abandon full-term babies with Down's Syndrome to die after being born.

Read into it what you will. But I've never heard him say he is pro-abortion. If I support gun rights does that mean I'm pro death?
I don't think so.
Are all the senators and congressmen who support gun rights pro-death and murder? I don't think so.
But that is just me.

[xrayzebra]

Ron Paul is overly simplistic. He is not in the real
world. But it is the USA and you can vote for who you
choose.

[thispego]

Ron Paul is overly simplistic. He is not in the real
world. But it is the USA and you can vote for who you
choose.

Isn't every candidate? I mean, they're addressing the AMERICAN PUBLIC, you go beyond simplistics and you lose the attention of the mass audience. Who are you voting for?

[thispego]

I can only hope that when Ron Paul drops out of the race that these crazed Ron Paul supporters are able to recognize that they need help and can get some kind of deprogramming to counter the cult-like brainwashing they've received, otherwise I suspect there might be another Jonestown incident in the near future.

HAHAHAHAHAHA, what and old dumbass you must be. Go to bed grandpa, it's getting late!

[atxrocker]

so i was at a bar in downtown austin the other night and when i was taking a much needed piss, i noticed some college kids wrote above the urinal "we all need ron paul" , "ron paul is the only way" and "paul can save us all". rofl. what a place to try and make a political statement.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

you man i'm a lawyer in your part time firm

[monosylab1k]

hey T Park what right wing message board are you cut-n-pasting your "opinions" from?

[Extra Stout]

Read into it what you will. But I've never heard him say he is pro-abortion. If I support gun rights does that mean I'm pro death?
I don't think so.
Are all the senators and congressmen who support gun rights pro-death and murder? I don't think so.
But that is just me.

If you work to expand the types of situations in which it is legal to kill somebody with a handgun, that is far different from working to maintain the right to own a gun.

[T Park]

hey T Park what right wing message board are you cut-n-pasting your "opinions" from?

They are my own dumb opinions thanks.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

basically im a rich, overweight, shallow voting american.

[inconvertible]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mffpkCH-PJw oh and here's where Ron won this thing, they cut it out on the replay.

they cut this out of the replay.....that is some crap. its obvious he is mopping the floor with these guys and fox news doesn't like it.

[PEP]

Paulistinians...

[smeagol]

So the V crowd also thinks alike when it comes to presidential candidates . . .

One more thing . . . and counting . . .

[Extra Stout]

Paulistinians...

Paul-Qaeda

[Ryvin1]

wonder why no one mentions that Ron Paul is in the thick of this race. Almost 30,000 Americans already have cast their ballots for Ron Paul in both Iowa and New Hampshire, so far he's 4th overall but that means he doesn't have a chance.. but hey Giuliani, and Thompson can still win it according to any of the talking heads on TV, but Paul is just a fringe candidate.

1. Romney 103,755 30%
2. McCain 102,361 29%
3. Huckabee 66,876 19%
4. Paul 29,648 9%
5. Giuliani 24,151 7%
6. Thompson 18,712 5%

[smeagol]

fascist

[Yonivore]

wonder why no one mentions that Ron Paul is in the thick of this race. Almost 30,000 Americans already have cast their ballots for Ron Paul in both Iowa and New Hampshire, so far he's 4th overall but that means he doesn't have a chance.. but hey Giuliani, and Thompson can still win it according to any of the talking heads on TV, but Paul is just a fringe candidate.

1. Romney 103,755 30%
2. McCain 102,361 29%
3. Huckabee 66,876 19%
4. Paul 29,648 9%
5. Giuliani 24,151 7%
6. Thompson 18,712 5%

Because he's unelectable and he's a racist liar.

[smeagol]

Because he's unelectable and he's a racist liar.

Is he?

Any material about this topic I can read about?

[Ryvin1]

Because he's unelectable

and other then "because you said so" why is he unelectable?

and he's a racist liar.

Guess the NAACP disagrees with you on the racist BS.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder, who has known Ron Paul for 20 years, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist in light of recent smear attempts, and said the reason for him being attacked was that he was a threat to the establishment.

Linder joined Alex Jones for two segments on his KLBJ Sunday show this evening, during which he commented on the controversy created by media hit pieces that attempted to tarnish Paul as a racist by making him culpable for decades old newsletter articles written by other people.

"Knowing Ron Paul's intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Cons ution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that....so I think it's very easy for folks who want to to take his position out of context and that's what I'm hearing," said Linder.

"Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he's a very fair guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian platform," he added.

Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.

"I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him," said Linder.

"If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context," he added.

"What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear," concluded the NAACP President.

[remingtonbo2001]

If you could combine Thompson, Huckabee, and McCain, you'd have one of a candidate.

We do! His name is Rudy Giulliani!

[Yonivore]

Is he?

Any material about this topic I can read about?

Yeah, read his newsletters from the last 20 years.

[Yonivore]

and other then "because you said so" why is he unelectable?


Guess the NAACP disagrees with you on the racist BS.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder, who has known Ron Paul for 20 years, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist in light of recent smear attempts, and said the reason for him being attacked was that he was a threat to the establishment.

Linder joined Alex Jones for two segments on his KLBJ Sunday show this evening, during which he commented on the controversy created by media hit pieces that attempted to tarnish Paul as a racist by making him culpable for decades old newsletter articles written by other people.

"Knowing Ron Paul's intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Cons ution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that....so I think it's very easy for folks who want to to take his position out of context and that's what I'm hearing," said Linder.

"Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he's a very fair guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian platform," he added.

Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.

"I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him," said Linder.

"If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context," he added.

"What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear," concluded the NAACP President.

Nelson Lindner is an idiot.

Did he or did he not have knowledge of the racist bull being published under his name for a number of years?

It's a simple question.

I'm not asking if he wrote it and I'm not asking if he approved it. I'm asking if he ever read his own ing newsletters...

[Ryvin1]

Nelson Lindner is an idiot.

Did he or did he not have knowledge of the racist bull being published under his name for a number of years?

It's a simple question.

I'm not asking if he wrote it and I'm not asking if he approved it. I'm asking if he ever read his own ing newsletters...

The problem is that every word Ron Paul has ever said refutes the newsletters... But that doesn't matter.

Once a claim is made by the media, even on evidence as slim as something someone else wrote on his letterhead decades ago, there is no possible way to fight it. If you say he isn't a racist, all that will do is reinforce the word racist with Ron Paul...

Wolf Blitzer even said HE KNEW FOR A FACT that what was written on that newsletter sounded NOTHING like anything Ron Paul had ever said, but you're going to believe what you want.

Doesn't matter if he says he didn't write it, doesn't agree with it and he says such thoughts are totally against his belief system. He stated that he takes responsibility for them because it was published in a newsletter with his name on it for, and he should have done a better job concerning what was published in his name, but it wasn't his thoughts or beliefs. Nothing will change your mind because you've already decided he's a racist.

[Yonivore]

The problem is that every word Ron Paul has ever said refutes the newsletters... But that doesn't matter.

One is more likely to say what they believe others want to hear...especially when they're running for elected office.

It's a simple question. Why did he allow racist, anti-semitic vitriol be spewed out under his name for multiple years...IN WRITING?

Don't muddy the water. Is there any evidence he condemned those writing on his behalf?

Once a claim is made by the media, even on evidence as slim as something someone else wrote on his letterhead decades ago, there is no possible way to fight it. If you say he isn't a racist, all that will do is reinforce the word racist with Ron Paul...

Find me a Ron Paul newsletter from the period that praises MLK or shows he's not a racist.

Wolf Blitzer even said HE KNEW FOR A FACT that what was written on that newsletter sounded NOTHING like anything Ron Paul had ever said, but you're going to believe what you want.

Wolf Blitzer?

Doesn't matter if he says he didn't write it, doesn't agree with it and he says such thoughts are totally against his belief system. He stated that he takes responsibility for them because it was published in a newsletter with his name on it for, and he should have done a better job concerning what was published in his name, but it wasn't his thoughts or beliefs. Nothing will change your mind because you've already decided he's a racist.

Were they his newsletters?