Daily Mail UK: Raw footage shows Ron Paul DIDN'T storm out of CNN interview over racist newsletters.

[glamourmodels]

Raw footage shows Ron Paul DIDN'T storm out of CNN interview over racist newsletters... the interview was simply done

Reports that Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul stormed out of a CNN interview earlier this week seem to be dramatically over-exaggerated.

Raw footage of the Thursday interview shows that it lasted nearly ten minutes, which is not unusually brief on the campaign trail.

After discussing foreign policy, the payroll tax, negative advertisements, and super fund PACs, the interview concluded with three whole minutes of discussion on the issue of the incendiary racist and homophobic letters that were published in Mr Paul's name in the Eighties and Nineties.

Initial news reports made it seem that Mr Paul recited his one line response- that he didn't write the letters, that he didn't read them until about a decade after they were published, and that he disavows them- and stormed off, tossing away his microphone and charging out.

The newly-released CNN footage shows something entirely different.

After fielding repeated questions about the controversial newsletters, Mr Paul began wrapping up the interview.

The footage was released on YouTube on the RonPaul.com channel and has the CNN logo in the bottom right hand corner.

The CNN reporter, Gloria Borger, didn't even seem particularly upset or surprised that the interview was ending considering the fact that she was beginning to repeat the same questions on the issue presumably in hopes of receiving a new answer.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

Did CNN Unfairly Edit The Ron Paul Walk Off Interview? Watch The Uncut Interview

The full-length, uncut video of CNN?s contentious interview with Ron Paul has been uploaded to the web.

According to a popular post on the social link-sharing website Reddit and Daily Paul, a site for Ron Paul supporters, CNN?s original aired interview was ?edited? and ?misleading?.

The full-unedited cut still shows Paul leaving the interview while Gloria Borger is peppering him with questions about his controversial newsletters. But some say that the original cut makes Paul look bad and was unfairly edited.

?By watching the full one, it looks like he refused to answer the question and then walked off,? said user SCope13.

?The edited video was very convincing. I believed he cut and ran. Now that I?ve seen the uncut one though? It gives you an entirely different impression than the one I originally saw,? said user globalvar.

What do you think?

http://www.mediaite.com/online/did-c...cut-interview/

Uncut Ron Paul Interview - CNN Lies and Cuts over 30 seconds of the interview to make it seem that Ron Paul was storming off, when actually the interview was OVER.

http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/com...and_cuts_over/

[glamourmodels]

Ron Paul No Racist: NAACP Austin President

Texas Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul is not a racist and is being smeared as one because he is a clear threat to the political establishment, says Nelson Linder, Austin president of the NAACP.

Speaking out against the charges when they first surfaced during the last Republican primary in 2007, Linder said he has personally known Paul for 20 years and heard him speak out against police oppression in minority communities, racial biases in mandatory drug sentencing, and favorably about late civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

?Knowing Ron Paul?s intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution 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,? Linder told talk radio host Alex Jones during an interview on January 13, 2008.

?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.

?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.

Linder echoed his statements during another interview during the same time, with Texas libertarian radio host Scott Horton.

?There are quite a few folks who don?t understand the libertarian philosophy,? Linder said, adding the ideology is one African-Americans should more open to.

?The two-party system has failed America,? he said.

?I hope that more folks in the other parties develop the courage to join him in addressing that, I think, will decide the fate of this country in the future.?

http://www.therightperspective.org/2...tin-president/

[glamourmodels]

[BIGTYMER]

The powers at be fear Ron Paul.

[moeloubani]

love how she throws out the israel bit at the end

any other republican candidate knows that when the word israel comes up you apologize and you say only good things about them like a good little bitch so she had to give it a try, unfortunately for her ron paul isn't any republican candidate and didn't give a shit

if you threw out the word israel to any other candidate they would pretty much get on their knees and give a blowjob live on tv before allowing anything bad to be said about israel and having their name attached to it

[glamourmodels]

Interestingly, the "reporter", whose name is Gloria Borger is married to Lance Morgan who is a PR flack for a firm tied to Newt Gingrich:

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/316564

http://www.politicalforum.com/electi...-gingrich.html

BTW, not that it should matter, at least ideally in society it should not matter a persons religion but seemingly it does matter to her as she is Jewish and so maybe she does not like that Ron Paul would cut off foreign aid to Israel. Or maybe not. I dont prejudge those things but there does seem to be a nexus of her (or CNN) editing the video to make it look like he walked off + her husband working for a Newt Gingrich connected firm. Whether her Judiasm plays a role, only she knows but regardless there do seem to be some shenanigans going on with her.

Originally Posted by moeloubani

love how she throws out the israel bit at the end

any other republican candidate knows that when the word israel comes up you apologize and you say only good things about them like a good little bitch so she had to give it a try, unfortunately for her ron paul isn't any republican candidate and didn't give a shit

if you threw out the word israel to any other candidate they would pretty much get on their knees and give a blowjob live on tv before allowing anything bad to be said about israel and having their name attached to it

[porno jew]

when she asked him about the newsletters he stopped the interview, took off his mic and left.

i know in your delusional paulbot reality you see things that aren't there but sorry, objectively, we "walked off."

[glamourmodels]

Ironic you call me delusional but you are so far out of touch with reality you are living on a different planet... or you are just spouting off about something that you know nothing about... as usual.

If you look at the video, the REAL unedited video you can see he talked about the newsletters for 3 minutes before he got tired of her brow beating him asking the same question over and over again wanting a different answer. Something he had talked about on CNN the previous day with Ali Velshi, which she even admits in the video. You phrase it as that she asked him and he immediately walked off.

You are full of shit. Period.

Originally Posted by porno jew

when she asked him about the newsletters he stopped the interview, took off his mic and left.

i know in your delusional paulbot reality you see things that aren't there but sorry, objectively, we "walked off."

[DWB]

Originally Posted by porno jew

when she asked him about the newsletters he stopped the interview, took off his mic and left.

Hardly. He answered her several times, for a few minutes, and tried a few different ways to tell her, then wrapped up the interview, as he should have. She was clearly reaching at the end and you can tell the interview is over before he even takes his mike off.

Looking back on the clip, she starts about the newsletters at 5:35 and the interview goes for a few more minutes, ending at 8:30.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by DWB

Hardly. He answered her several times, for a few minutes, and tried a few different ways to tell her, then wrapped up the interview, as he should have. She was clearly reaching at the end and you can tell the interview is over before he even takes his mike off.

Looking back on the clip, she starts about the newsletters at 5:35 and the interview goes for a few more minutes, ending at 8:30.

yes he ended the interview because he refused to answer any questions about the racist newsletters. that is reality, not psychological projection.

[porno jew]

yes i watched the unedited version. only a paulbot would see anything else but him ending the interview because he refused to talk about the racist newsletters.

sure they edited it down because he lied and evaded for three minutes?

Originally Posted by glamourmodels

Ironic you call me delusional but you are so far out of touch with reality you are living on a different planet... or you are just spouting off about something that you know nothing about... as usual.

If you look at the video, the REAL unedited video you can see he talked about the newsletters for 3 minutes before he got tired of her brow beating him asking the same question over and over again wanting a different answer. Something he had talked about on CNN the previous day with Ali Velshi, which she even admits in the video. You phrase it as that she asked him and he immediately walked off.

You are full of shit. Period.

[porno jew]

how does it feel to be unmoored from reality, seeing things that aren't there, interpreting reality through the worldview if a geriatric neo-confederate cult leader?

your parents should kidnap you and take you to deprogramming camp.

[DWB]

Originally Posted by porno jew

yes he ended the interview because he refused to answer any questions about the racist newsletters. that is reality, not psychological projection.

He answered her questions, repeatedly. He only stopped when she kept asking the same thing over and over, which at that point the interview was clearly over anyway, as she was reaching.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by DWB

He answered her questions, repeatedly. He only stopped when she kept asking the same thing over and over, which at that point the interview was clearly over anyway, as she was reaching.

she kept asking because he was being evasive, it stretches credulity that he didn't know.

she was doing what a journalist should do, put people in power's feet to the fire.

paul has been surrounded by his fawning paulbots for too long, he doesn't know how to deal with criticism or hard questions. god forbid if he was president.

when did obama ever pout and stomp off and take his ball home because a reporter wasn't playing nice?

[DWB]

Originally Posted by porno jew

she kept asking because he was being evasive, it stretches credulity that he didn't know.

she was doing what a journalist should do, put people in power's feet to the fire.

paul has been surrounded by his fawning paulbots for too long, he doesn't know how to deal with criticism or hard questions. god forbid if he was president.

He told her more than once that he didn't read them, didn't write them, and doesn't support them, and that was all there was to it. What answer should he have given?

You either didn't watch the video or are just trolling, because he answered her multiple times.

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

Originally Posted by DWB

He told her more than once that he didn't read them, didn't write them, and doesn't support them, and that was all there was to it. What answer should he have given?

You either didn't watch the video or are just trolling, because he answered her multiple times.

It is undeniable that Ron Paul has changed his position over the years about the newsletters, and he has displayed no apparent intellectual curiosity whatsoever about who on his payroll was writing such terrible things using his name.

That alone should give the public cause for concern, and demands further explanation.

Yet his supporters want to grant Ron Paul a no-questions asked free pass, and simply sweep everything under the carpet.

Ron Paul is back in the hunt for the Presidency. Many see him as an appealing candidate, one who opposes the wars, wants drugs legalized and supports fiscal responsibility. What they don?t know, is his long history of racism and connection to white supremacists. He has dodged questions on his connections to white supremacists and the newsletters, full of abhorrent racism that he put out in his name and he made millions from, spreading racism.

There has been controversy over Ron Paul?s ties to racism for some time now. Many people have pointed to Ron Paul?s Newsletters as proof of his racism. Paul has previously admitted to writing the newsletters and defended the statements in 1996, then blamed them on an unnamed ghostwriter in 2001 and then denied any knowledge of them in 2008.

He has given no explanation, for how the racism entered his newsletter and has dodged questions about them without casting blame on anyone. If we are to take Paul at his word, he is guilty of at least promoting racism on a large scale. Paul earned almost a million dollars a year from the racist, conspiracy theorist newsletters.

Ron Paul Direct Mail Warned Of ?Race War,? ?Federal-Homosexual Cover-up On AIDS?

First it was the racist newsletters. Now it's the direct mail advertising them. In a signed appeal to potential subscribers in 1993, Ron Paul urged people to read his publications in order to prepare for a "race war," military rule, and a conspiracy to use a new $100 bill to track Americans.

The eight-page mailer obtained by Reuters via Jamie Kirchick, who unearthed Paul's newsletter archives in 2008, is mostly focused on a rambling conspiracy theory about changes to the dollar. But Paul tries to bolster his credibility on the issue by noting that his newsletters have also "laid bare the the coming race war in our big cities" as well as the "federal-homosexual coverup on AIDS," adding that "my training as a physician helps me see through this one." He also condemns the "demonic fraternity" Skull and Bones, a Yale secret society that "includes George Bush and leftist Senator John Kerry, Congress's Mr. New Money," and "the Israeli lobby that plays Congress like a cheap harmonica."

Given that the most shocking racist and homophobic content from his actual newsletters is reprinted in the span of just one eight-page mailer, it offers a stark picture of just how focused the publication was on these conspiracy theories. You can read the full letter here.

READ: Ron Paul Fundraising Letter

In the letter, Paul warns that the federal government is planning to put chemical tracking agents in new currency as part of a broader authoritarian plot and that he had personally witnessed future designs for currency while serving in Congress.

"The totalitarian bills were tinted pink and blue and brown, and blighted with holograms, diffraction gratings, metal and plastic threads, and chemical alarms," he writes. "It was a portable inquisition, a paper ?third degree,' to allow the feds to keep track of American cash, and American citizens."

He goes on to warn the "New Money" will "steal our freedom and prosperity" and "accelerate the transfer wealth and power [sic] from the people to the government and its friends."

Paul's Iowa chairman, Drew Ivers, told Reuters that Paul - who now claims he had no knowledge of his newsletters' incendiary content - does not deny having written anything that carries his signature, such as the direct mail piece. However, Ivers said he didn't believe Paul actually subscribes to all the theories outlined in the letter.

"I don't think he embraces that," Ivers said when asked about the "federal-homosexual" conspiracy to cover up AIDS. He characterized Paul's newsletters as "a public service, helping people understand and equip them to avoid an unsound monetary policy."

If he authored the material, why does he not "embrace" his old views and when did he change his thinking on some of these issues? If he didn't author the letter or his newsletters, who did? And how did he end up employing a group of writers with racist, anti-gay, and extremist views to ghostwrite his own publication?

Ron Paul stands as an enemy to freedom, liberty and the constitution. His rhetoric says freedom and liberty but his practical application of said ideals, would allow for full on oppression of the minorities. Ron Paul is a racist, fascist, liar, scumbag and liberty charlatan. His toolbox is a box of lies and his supporters spread those lies. Ron Paul and his followers would destroy America and ruin liberty and freedom as we know it.

Make no mistake about it, Ron Paul would stand up for the right of a state to lynch a black man, simply because he?s black. In Ron Paul?s book states rights trump human rights. This isn?t hyperbole or exaggerated rhetoric. We?re only one generation removed from a culture that lynched and oppressed black people. If given the power, those policies could and would be legal again in parts of our country and Ron Paul would let it happen. Ron Paul IS dangerous and would destroy our liberties.

Ron Paul's decades long racist fear-mongering fundraising scams are finally catching up with him.

Funny to watch Ron Paul now disavow the methods and philosophy that he used to build his base and raise money, while trying to hoodwink the public now by acting completely innocent. Meanwhile his apologists try to paint Ron Paul as a victim of the media, completely ignoring that it is his own organization's writings and reprehensible racist and bigoted philosophy that are the real issue here.

ADG

[dyna mo]

ron paul flip flops on being an anti-semitic, homophobic, racist:

Paul, who leads polls in Iowa leading up to the caucuses there on Jan. 3, published a series of newsletters while he was out of Congress in the 1980s and 1990s called The Ron Paul Political Report, Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report and The Ron Paul Investment Letter.

Some issues of the newsletters included racist, anti-Israel or anti-gay comments, including a 1992 newsletter in which he said 95% of black men in Washington “are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”

In 1996, Paul told The Dallas Morning News that his comment about black men in Washington came while writing about a 1992 study by the National Center on Incarceration and Alternatives, a criminal justice think tank in Virginia.

Paul cited the study and wrote: “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.”

“These aren’t my figures,” Paul told the Morning News. “That is the assumption you can gather from the report.”

Nor did Paul dispute in 1996 his 1992 newsletter statement that said,”If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be.”



Paul said on CNN Wednesday. “I didn’t write them. I disavow them. That’s it.”





in its entirety here

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/1...icitation2.pdf



just for fun, an actual ron paul money bomb advertisment from 1998

[glamourmodels]

you guys can post all the photocopies you want. no one is denying the things were said and that they could be construed as racist. what you fail to mention when you say he put out this racist newsletter for years is simply not true. he put out the newsletter for years but most all the quotes were from a handful of individual articles 1/1,000th of the actual newsletter issues he put out. i suppose hugh hefner is responsible for every dumb racist redneck on gfy then by that same logic right? moreover, anything the guy has ever said publicly is totally to the contrary and most importantly his policies would be more helpful to minorities than any other candidate including obama.

[acrylix]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

ron paul flip flops

dyna mo, your last "flip flop" accusation was proven to be 100% bogus: https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1032142

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by glamourmodels

you guys can post all the photocopies you want. no one is denying the things were said and that they could be construed as racist. what you fail to mention when you say he put out this racist newsletter for years is simply not true. he put out the newsletter for years but most all the quotes were from a handful of individual articles 1/1,000th of the actual newsletter issues he put out. i suppose hugh hefner is responsible for every dumb racist redneck on gfy then by that same logic right? moreover, anything the guy has ever said publicly is totally to the contrary and most importantly his policies would be more helpful to minorities than any other candidate including obama.

let dr paul release the back issues and let the people decide for themselves. it is almost like he is hiding something.

[glamourmodels]

where have I seen that photo before? oh yeah, thats right, I remember-

Originally Posted by dyna mo

just for fun, an actual ron paul money bomb advertisment from 1998

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by DWB

He told her more than once that he didn't read them, didn't write them, and doesn't support them, and that was all there was to it. What answer should he have given?

You either didn't watch the video or are just trolling, because he answered her multiple times.

well she didn't believe him because he most likely is lying. so she kept pressing.

no one outside of the paulbots believes him, thus why it keeps coming back.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by glamourmodels

you guys can post all the photocopies you want. no one is denying the things were said and that they could be construed as racist. what you fail to mention when you say he put out this racist newsletter for years is simply not true. he put out the newsletter for years but most all the quotes were from a handful of individual articles 1/1,000th of the actual newsletter issues he put out. i suppose hugh hefner is responsible for every dumb racist redneck on gfy then by that same logic right? moreover, anything the guy has ever said publicly is totally to the contrary and most importantly his policies would be more helpful to minorities than any other candidate including obama.

i know it's hard for you to grasp, but a message board is different from a magazine and newsletter.

if hugh hefner ran articles on how to kill black people and get away with it he would have been ran out of town.

another question is why does ron paul populate his staff with people who hate blacks, hate gays and thinks jews are sinister?

[acrylix]

Originally Posted by porno jew

she kept asking because he was being evasive, it stretches credulity that he didn't know.

Only for tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists who've devoted their lives to stalking Ron Paul on internet forums.

[dyna mo]

at least with other candidate's supporters they can admit their candidate has flaws but no matter what anyone says or more importantly PROVES about ron paul, paul supporters defend, dodge and deflect. not unlike 9/11 truthers and conspiracy minded people.


and what's worse, they all REQUIRE that you see things their way. that's the sad part. you are a government controlled sheep otherwise with no ability to think for yourself and well, fuck you then because i tried to get you to see and agree to my way you will get what you deserve when ron paul does not get elected. i will be fine, because i am ron paulenlightened.


maybe those contrails and black helicopters in that official ron paul money bomb advertisement were dead on eh.

[DaddyHalbucks]

A lying mainstream media?







NO!

[glamourmodels]

does your idiocy know no bounds? lol seriously... that is a serious question. the newsletters are archived at many places freely available. I think james kirchpatrick, the hack that RE-INTRODUCED them this election cycle after he initially did a hit piece about them in 2008 got them from the university of wisconsin I believe.

jesus you are stoopid, how do you dress yourself in the morning? pitiful

Originally Posted by porno jew

let dr paul release the back issues and let the people decide for themselves. it is almost like he is hiding something.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by glamourmodels

the newsletters are archived at many places freely available.

post a link then. must be easy to do, right? enlightened genius?

[DaddyHalbucks]

In theory, how would the Washington DC establishment react to an honest guy who rode into town and threatened the two party free for all?

I submit Dr. Paul.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by acrylix

Only for tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists who've devoted their lives to stalking Ron Paul on internet forums.

idiocy and blind lemming cult like behavior bothers me yes. right now it's the paulbots who are in the spotlight. who knows what it will be next week.

[acrylix]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

paul supporters defend, dodge and deflect.

So says the master of dodging and deflecting, who showed us how it's done in this thread: https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1032142

1. Make a false accusation
2. Viciously insult anyone who proves you wrong
3. Ramble off-topic to distract from the fact you are wrong

Does that about sum it up dyna mo? I'm still waiting for you to prove your previous "flip flop" allegation.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by acrylix

So says the master of dodging and deflecting, who showed us how it's done in this thread: https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1032142

1. Make a false accusation
2. Viciously insult anyone who proves you wrong
3. Ramble off-topic to distract from the fact you are wrong

Does that about sum it up dyna mo? I'm still waiting for you to prove your previous "flip flop" allegation.

i'm going to explain it one more time for you:

i could not give 2 shits what you think about ron paul or what you think i think about ron paul but most importantly what you think i think you think about ron paul.

be confident enough in your own views to let others have and express theirs. maybe then, they won't have to resort to verbally beating the shit out of you.

[dyna mo]

now i must get back to family and this holiday.

happy holidays!

[acrylix]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

i'm going to explain it one more time for you:

i could not give 2 shits what you think about ron paul or what you think i think about ron paul but most importantly what you think i think you think about ron paul.

be confident enough in your own views to let others have and express theirs. maybe then, they won't have to resort to verbally beating the shit out of you.

Excellent utilization of technique #3:

3. Ramble off-topic to distract from the fact you are wrong

Bravo. It's always a pleasure to watch the maestro of shuckin' and jivin' in action. Pity you couldn't stick around to verbally beat the shit out of me. Guess that will have to wait until after "family time."

Happy Holidays!

[Robbie]

I just watched that uncut clip. He answered her over and over and over. And he even pointed out to her that he had answered it TWICE the day before on CNN and asked her why she didn't just watch that interview that her own company had done the day before! lol

And then she asked him to "give the money back" that he made on his newsletter.

LOL!

From what I can see of that interview and his answers...She looked like she was doing everything she could to make him look bad. And he looked like he couldn't believe the stupidity of her line of questioning.

I think the press wants THEIR answer. And when he didn't say what they want him to say (which would screw himself), they just keep asking it over and over and over.

I suppose the theory is that either he will screw up and say something that differs from what he said the first thousand times they asked the question...or he will tell them how stupid it is that they keep asking him and he keeps answering and they will call it "evasive"

Either way it's a lose/lose for Ron Paul. Looks like CNN (who are in love with Obama) are looking to make up America's mind for them by taking as many Republican candidates OUT of the primaries before voters have a chance to vote for their IDEAS in the election.

Apparently the fact that our country and the world is totally screwed economically, that we are using our military all over the world, and that our govt. is taking away all of our rights aren't important.
The only things that the media wants us to concentrate on are: Did Herman Cain ass grab some women 10 years ago? Did a writer on Ron Paul's newsletter 22 years ago write something that the media calls "racist"? Did Newt Gingrich make a lot of money in Washington D.C.?

Who cares about their IDEAS or debating those. Let's just ask them stupid questions about things that won't affect the real problems in our world.

[glamourmodels]

right back at ya

Originally Posted by dyna mo

you are a government controlled sheep otherwise with no ability to think for yourself and well, fuck you then because i tried to get you to see and agree to my way you will get what you deserve when ron paul does not get elected.

[glamourmodels]

why put the impetus on me? do your own research lazy fuck

Originally Posted by porno jew

post a link then. must be easy to do, right? enlightened genius?

[JFK]

I find the theory on the new type of currency rather interersting. Seeing as how Canada has just introduced a new type of $100 bill that reeks of the type Paul's talking about.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/canada/...l-hits-streets

Could we be the new testing ground for our Big Bro , south of the border ?

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/1...icitation2.pdf

[glamourmodels]

right out of the playbook-

Originally Posted by acrylix

So says the master of dodging and deflecting, who showed us how it's done in this thread: https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1032142

1. Make a false accusation
2. Viciously insult anyone who proves you wrong
3. Ramble off-topic to distract from the fact you are wrong

Does that about sum it up dyna mo? I'm still waiting for you to prove your previous "flip flop" allegation.

[dyna mo]

ron paul's biggest liability is not the fact that he's a flip flopping, anti-semitic, homophobic racist.


and no, ron paul's biggest liability is not the fact that he is an opportunist that uses fear to capitalize on and make money from anti-semitic, homophobic racist letters he writes, lke the one posted above, designed to sell newsletters.


no, ron paul's biggest liability are his blind-faith supporters, like the ones in this thread. they turn away more potential ron pal supporters than ron paul does.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by acrylix

dyna mo, your last "flip flop" accusation was proven to be 100% bogus: https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1032142

this is not about me, i am not running for pres.

so stop with the dodge and deflect, and
feel free to point out where ron paul is not flip flopping on being an anti-semitic, homophobic racist in the following post with a letter bearing his signature and 2 interviews showing his embracing the letter then disavowing it.

Originally Posted by dyna mo

ron paul flip flops on being an anti-semitic, homophobic, racist:

Paul, who leads polls in Iowa leading up to the caucuses there on Jan. 3, published a series of newsletters while he was out of Congress in the 1980s and 1990s called The Ron Paul Political Report, Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report and The Ron Paul Investment Letter.

Some issues of the newsletters included racist, anti-Israel or anti-gay comments, including a 1992 newsletter in which he said 95% of black men in Washington “are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”

In 1996, Paul told The Dallas Morning News that his comment about black men in Washington came while writing about a 1992 study by the National Center on Incarceration and Alternatives, a criminal justice think tank in Virginia.

Paul cited the study and wrote: “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.”

“These aren’t my figures,” Paul told the Morning News. “That is the assumption you can gather from the report.”

Nor did Paul dispute in 1996 his 1992 newsletter statement that said,”If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be.”



Paul said on CNN Wednesday. “I didn’t write them. I disavow them. That’s it.”





in its entirety here

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/1...icitation2.pdf



just for fun, an actual ron paul money bomb advertisment from 1998

[Phoenix]

sure is a lot of talk about Ron Paul...is anyone else running?

you wouldn't know it

[JFK]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

sure is a lot of talk about Ron Paul...is anyone else running?

you wouldn't know it

never mind about that, check your $100 bill

[dyna mo]

i've got out-of-town family waking up, i've got to hop so i will leave it at this,

at the very least, i conclude that ron paul, as publisher of that nonsense, might not be a homophobic, anti-semitic racist but he did decide to use that sort of writing as a strategy to sell newsletters. that is an incontrovertible fact.

and that is not the sort of strategist i want running the white house and our government.


happy holiday!

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by glamourmodels

why put the impetus on me? do your own research lazy fuck

because they were never posted and you are a liar and idiot, robot.

[CyberHustler]

I like a lot of Ron Pauls views but a simple "I'm not sure if I made money off those, I will investigate it" would have been better than the shenanigans... trust is a big issue.

[tony286]

The thing i find interesting is this belief ron paul is this wash dc outsider.when he is a career politician.

[Joshua G]

idiots. stop attacking each other. you may as well argue whether red is the right color for santa claus to wear.

Ron Paul's position on race is meaningless. no black people are going to vote for him anyway. Only a few bluedogs might consider Paul over obama in the general.

as for repubs. this race issue is at the bottom of reasons repubs back their guy. bible belt repubs will vote for whoever they think jesus would vote for. The wall street repubs will go Romney hands down.

I would like to think Paul has a shot. But he has a shit ton of luggage, & the media will never, ever portray him as anything other then a freakshow. & He REQUIRES winning the majority of delegates to get the nom, because he has no shot in hell in a brokered convention.

but the debate is good entertainment. just dont go away hating each other over an irrelevent issue.

[tony286]

Well said Joshgirls

[seeandsee]

this is just for fun RON PAUL IS NEXT PRESIDENT, AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL SEE THAT