After reading this, I'm convinced that Ron Paul is....

Post Reply New Topic

I'd like to hear from actual black people that think Ron Paul is a racist. The only guy that I've heard say that he is is Al Sharpton. I don't hear about it from any black people in my day-to-day life. I wonder if more white people think he's racist than black people. I really think it's going to be a non-issue, and it will probably backfire on any candidate that tries to smear him with the claim.

Ahh, then we agree! Ron Paul is a fool.

It does look like Ron Paul still has a decent shot at Iowa, given that he enjoys a rather fanatical base of supporters, who are going to show up at the caucuses no matter what.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... wsletters/

Still, if he wants to convince other potential voters, then he does need to provide a better explanation for his newsletters, and he needs to do it now. Other than that a vast conspiracy of mainstream media, freedom haters and spammers are trying to take him down. That explanation reeks of desperation. His newsletters were apparently loaded with cockamamie conspiracy theories, too.

Stop trolling.

This is ridiculous to accuse me of not watching the video, and also to accuse me of "trolling" my own thread. Those of you who are accusing me of "trolling" are trolls yourselves, so cut it out, or I'll tell a moderator on you, and you'll be in really big trouble!! !

At around 1:55 in the video from 1995, Mr. Paul admits to having "put out a political type of business investment newsletter that sort of covered all these areas. And it covered a lot about what was going on in Washington, and financial events, and especially some of the monetary events. Since I had been especially interested in monetary policy, had been on the banking committee, and still very interested in, in that subject, that this newsletter dealt with it. This had to do with the value of the dollar, the pros and cons of the gold standard, and of course the disadvantages of all the high taxes and spending that our government seems to continue to do." He does not state that his newsletter also promoted bigotry and inane conspiracy theories.

Here is a collection of some of his more incendiary statements in the newsletters:

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/988 ... -exclusive

Last edited by pandabear on 24 Dec 2011, 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

http://news.yahoo.com/ad-newsletter-ron ... 03908.html

They got him! More proof that Paul didn't know of everything published in the newsletters.

There were up to 5 monthly newsletters being published at the time with his name. The vast majority of what was published in them was pretty benign stuff like gold stocks and monetary policy, there are only few offending comments over the course of like 20 years. The chief editor and ghostwriter was Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard supposedly also wrote occasionally in it too according to Reason Magazine. I imagine there were tons of other ghostwriters as well. After Ron left Congress in 1985 and his presidential campaign in 1988 ended, he returned home to his family and his medical practice and distanced himself from the publishing of these newsletters. Coincidentally, pretty much all of the offensive comments came between 90-94.

Here is Ron Paul's present take

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LywD6gXBudc[/youtube]

If people have been "pestering" him about this for 20 years, then how could he have been "probably unaware" of it for the first 10 years?

And, here is his final answer to the question:



These newsletters, which were entitled "Ron Paul's Freedom Project," the "Ron Paul Political Report," the "Ron Paul Survival Report" and the "Ron Paul Investment Letter", listed Mr. Paul as the publisher. People did pay a lot of money for these newsletters, and in the letter that I originally posted, Mr. Paul even claimed that their subscriptions might be "tax deductible."

His subscribers must have believed that Mr. Paul had written these reports, or at the very least, that Mr. Paul had endorsed the contents. Mr. Paul was making money off of the reports. Now, Mr. Paul says that he didn't write them, didn't read them, and, on top of that, completely disavows them. Which makes him guilty of having perpetrated a fraud.

I'm sorry, but I am through taking Mr. Paul at all seriously. The trouble is, none of the other Republican candidates are really any better.

Not only that, but the people claimed to have really written them are people that he has personal and business relationships with.

And that FAQ was interesting right at the point where it asks "So, he totally sued someone over this, right?" and answers "No, he certainly did not."

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Paaj8IFtWP8[/youtube]

watch the full interview, there is a reason why the didn't air the whole thing. Gloria Borger came off as desperate and unprofessional.

If Ron is guilty of anything, he is guilty of being to trusting of people he thought supported him. We all make mistakes, the difference here is the actual real world effect these mistakes have. Obama's "mistakes" have resulted in the deaths of the thousands of innocent people in places like Pakistan and the like, Obama's mistakes have resulted in trillions of dollars of new debt. How can you take Obama seriously?

So, he is a poor judge of character?

Are you implying that you ever took Ron Paul seriously?

I never took Obama seriously; but if I had, that would have promptly ended when he said "it's a good thing when we redistribute the wealth."

As I have said, Ron has always worked with people from both sides of the aisle that shared a common belief or goal that he may not be in complete agreement with. Three guys he worked with in the last few years were Dennis Kucinich, Alan Grayson, and Barney Frank. That's also why he has associated with fringe people like Alex Jones or Jesse Ventura. Part of the reason for this is because up until very recently, Ron's views were considering to be on the fringe of American politics but now everybody talks about things like the Federal Reserve, monetary policy, non-interventionism, etc.

Is that a poor judge of character? Maybe but certainly no where close to poor judge of character people displayed by trusting someone like Barack Obama who reneged on almost everything he supposedly stood for.

yeah but he didn't employ those people or authorize them to put his name and signature on publications.

Mr. Paul comes off a desperate and unprofessional. And, as very sensitive about the issue, as if he is trying hide something.



He is guilty of fraud. He made money off of selling high-priced subscriptions to people who thought that they were reading Mr. Paul's material, when they were reading material that he was totally against.