Ron Paul: The Campaign Continues!

[maher_tyler]

IN RON WE TRUST!!!!

[mosca]

sorry man, but he's not running. posting youtube videos and comments really doesn't add anything. i have much respect for many of paul's positions, but if he wanted to run then he should have stayed on the ballot as an independent.

it's time to move forward to a real 3rd party solution and not stay fixated on one man who clearly is not the future.

[Blart]

[maher_tyler]

Originally Posted by mosca

sorry man, but he's not running. posting youtube videos and comments really doesn't add anything. i have much respect for many of paul's positions, but if he wanted to run then he should have stayed on the ballot as an independent.

it's time to move forward to a real 3rd party solution and not stay fixated on one man who clearly is not the future.

Sorry man but **** you...i'll post whatever i feel like..if you don't like it, don't click on the thread!

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by mosca

sorry man, but he's not running. posting youtube videos and comments really doesn't add anything. i have much respect for many of paul's positions, but if he wanted to run then he should have stayed on the ballot as an independent.

it's time to move forward to a real 3rd party solution and not stay fixated on one man who clearly is not the future.

Yeah. What was all that about if all he intended to do was just fold back into the Republican Party?

[Blart]

ps..

Paul wrote the newsletters.


http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...t-newsletters/

Paul also defended his claim, made in the same 1992 newsletter that “we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in [Washington, DC] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal” Paul told the Dallas Morning News the statistic was an “assumption” you can gather from published studies.
Paul’s failure to deny authorship was not an oversight. He was repeatedly confronted about the newsletters during his 1996 campaign and consistently defended them as his own. A few examples:

– In 1996, Ron Paul’s campaign defended his statements about the rationality of fearing black men. (“[W]e are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational.”) The Houston Chronicle reports, “A campaign spokesman for Paul said statements about the fear of black males mirror pronouncements by black leaders such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson.” [Houston Chronicle, 5/23/96]

– Paul said that his comments on blacks contained in the newsletters should be viewed in the context of “current events and statistical reports of the time.” [Houston Chronicle, 5/23/96]

– Paul defended statements from an August 12, 1992 newsletter calling the late Rep. Barbara Jordan (D-TX) a “moron” and a “fraud.” Paul also said Jordon was “her race and sex protect her from criticism.” In response, Paul said “such opinions represented our clear philosophical difference.” [Roll Call, 7/29/96]

– “Also in 1992, Paul wrote, ‘Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions.’ Sullivan said Paul does not consider people who disagree with him to be sensible. And most blacks, [Paul spokesman Michael] Sullivan said, do not share Paul’s views.” [Austin American Statesman, 5/23/96]

In May 1996, Paul was confronted in an interview by the Dallas Morning News about a line that appeared in a 1992 newsletter, under the headline “Terrorist Update”: “If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be.” His response:

“If you try to catch someone that has stolen a purse from you, there is no chance to catch them,” Dr. Paul said.

[BroncoInferno]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Yeah. What was all that about if all he intended to do was just fold back into the Republican Party?

That's what I don't get. The GOP primaries gave him a lot of momentum. He could have had a Perot like impact on the general if he had followed that up by running 3rd party. Why didn't he? Did he think it would be dishonest to run as a GOP candidate, then flip over to an independent ticket? And what did he do with all that money that his supporters said he received in donations?

[Blart]

Ron Paul with the founder of Stormfront, the biggest White Supremacist site:


"...people close to Paul’s operations said he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.'It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it,' said Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Paul’s company."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...FVQ_story.html

[Arkie]

Thanks for the video, maher. It's always refreshing to hear his words of wisdom, especially after all the lies at the debates.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

That's what I don't get. The GOP primaries gave him a lot of momentum. He could have had a Perot like impact on the general if he had followed that up by running 3rd party. Why didn't he? Did he think it would be dishonest to run as a GOP candidate, then flip over to an independent ticket? And what did he do with all that money that his supporters said he received in donations?

And shouldn't he have come out and endorsed Gary Johnson? I'm guessing the only reason he didn't is that he didn't want to muck up his son's career.

[baja]

Originally Posted by mosca

sorry man, but he's not running. posting youtube videos and comments really doesn't add anything. i have much respect for many of paul's positions, but if he wanted to run then he should have stayed on the ballot as an independent.

it's time to move forward to a real 3rd party solution and not stay fixated on one man who clearly is not the future.

Still and all this video is worth listening to.


By example paints a clear but bleak picture of how far we are from fixing any of the serious problems before the nation.

[baja]

Originally Posted by Blart

ps..

Paul wrote the newsletters.


http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...t-newsletters/

Paul also defended his claim, made in the same 1992 newsletter that “we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in [Washington, DC] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal” Paul told the Dallas Morning News the statistic was an “assumption” you can gather from published studies.
Paul’s failure to deny authorship was not an oversight. He was repeatedly confronted about the newsletters during his 1996 campaign and consistently defended them as his own. A few examples:

– In 1996, Ron Paul’s campaign defended his statements about the rationality of fearing black men. (“[W]e are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational.”) The Houston Chronicle reports, “A campaign spokesman for Paul said statements about the fear of black males mirror pronouncements by black leaders such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson.” [Houston Chronicle, 5/23/96]

– Paul said that his comments on blacks contained in the newsletters should be viewed in the context of “current events and statistical reports of the time.” [Houston Chronicle, 5/23/96]

– Paul defended statements from an August 12, 1992 newsletter calling the late Rep. Barbara Jordan (D-TX) a “moron” and a “fraud.” Paul also said Jordon was “her race and sex protect her from criticism.” In response, Paul said “such opinions represented our clear philosophical difference.” [Roll Call, 7/29/96]

– “Also in 1992, Paul wrote, ‘Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions.’ Sullivan said Paul does not consider people who disagree with him to be sensible. And most blacks, [Paul spokesman Michael] Sullivan said, do not share Paul’s views.” [Austin American Statesman, 5/23/96]

In May 1996, Paul was confronted in an interview by the Dallas Morning News about a line that appeared in a 1992 newsletter, under the headline “Terrorist Update”: “If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be.” His response:

“If you try to catch someone that has stolen a purse from you, there is no chance to catch them,” Dr. Paul said.

OK lets say he is a terrible racist. Listen to the words and ignore who the messenger is. Do you agree his perceptions accurate in this video?

Or do you refuse to watch it because you have decided Paul is a racist?

[maher_tyler]

Originally Posted by Blart

ps..

Paul wrote the newsletters.


http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...t-newsletters/

Paul also defended his claim, made in the same 1992 newsletter that “we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in [Washington, DC] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal” Paul told the Dallas Morning News the statistic was an “assumption” you can gather from published studies.
Paul’s failure to deny authorship was not an oversight. He was repeatedly confronted about the newsletters during his 1996 campaign and consistently defended them as his own. A few examples:

– In 1996, Ron Paul’s campaign defended his statements about the rationality of fearing black men. (“[W]e are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational.”) The Houston Chronicle reports, “A campaign spokesman for Paul said statements about the fear of black males mirror pronouncements by black leaders such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson.” [Houston Chronicle, 5/23/96]

– Paul said that his comments on blacks contained in the newsletters should be viewed in the context of “current events and statistical reports of the time.” [Houston Chronicle, 5/23/96]

– Paul defended statements from an August 12, 1992 newsletter calling the late Rep. Barbara Jordan (D-TX) a “moron” and a “fraud.” Paul also said Jordon was “her race and sex protect her from criticism.” In response, Paul said “such opinions represented our clear philosophical difference.” [Roll Call, 7/29/96]

– “Also in 1992, Paul wrote, ‘Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions.’ Sullivan said Paul does not consider people who disagree with him to be sensible. And most blacks, [Paul spokesman Michael] Sullivan said, do not share Paul’s views.” [Austin American Statesman, 5/23/96]

In May 1996, Paul was confronted in an interview by the Dallas Morning News about a line that appeared in a 1992 newsletter, under the headline “Terrorist Update”: “If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be.” His response:

“If you try to catch someone that has stolen a purse from you, there is no chance to catch them,” Dr. Paul said.

Even if what you posted is true, i still would much rather him be our president than Obama or Romney!

[mosca]

Originally Posted by maher_tyler

Sorry man but **** you...i'll post whatever i feel like..if you don't like it, don't click on the thread!

Sorry to ruffle your feathers. Of course you can post what you like, whoever said you can't? Just pointing out that the 'campaign' is not continuing. I have been a huge supporter of Paul since before his '08 run, but at a certain point in time people need to move on to a candidate that is serious about actually running.

[mosca]

Originally Posted by BroncoInferno

And what did he do with all that money that his supporters said he received in donations?

That's what I'm wondering about. What was with all the 'money bombs' right up until the end, and then he just let his campaign fizzle out instead of continuing it, as he clearly could have?

Paul probably had as much in his war chest as all the other 3rd party candidates combined.