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

Post Reply New Topic

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

The New Republic has made available a collection of Ron Paul’s ugliest newsletters, and if you haven’t seen how bad this stuff is yet, you may be shocked.

I think it’s amazing and sad that this hasn’t been a political problem for Ron Paul before now. The content of these newsletters is so extreme and hateful, it’s disturbing indeed that a politician can rise to a very high national office and even run for President with views like these — and it’s obvious that Ron Paul could not possibly have been unaware of what was in the newsletters, published under his name.

And now there’s still more evidence of Ron Paul’s connections to the white supremacist far right.

According to a contemporaneous blog post by a Ron Paul supporter, Ron Paul appeared on the nation's most popular white supremacist radio program, The Political Cesspool. That program is associated with the Council of Conservative Citizens (formerly known as the White Citizens Councils) and had been supportive of David Duke and others of that ilk. It's sponsors include the Institute for Historical Review, the nation's largest organization devoted to Holocaust denial.

I've found conflicting evidence concerning whether Ron Paul appeared on the Political Cesspool show. First, confirmation that he was scheduled to appear on the program has been found in a notice written by the program's host posted on the neo-Nazi Stormfront website. A screenshot of the notice can be seen below. For those who want to see the original, click here.

We have also confirmed an interview with U.S. Congressman Ron Paul (R - TX), which will take place next week. Stay tuned to The Political Cesspool for more information as we continue to fight to put America First with no retreat, no surrender and no apologies!

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.

Is Obama guilty of defrauding the American people? Why do you support a murderer?

President Reagan, as governor of California, had a line-item veto and virtually never used it. As President he has failed to exercise his constitutional responsibility to veto spending. Instead, he has encouraged it.

Monetary policy has been disastrous as well. The five Reagan appointees to the Federal Reserve Board have advocated even faster monetary inflation than Chairman Volcker, and this is the fourth straight year of double-digit increases. The chickens have yet to come home to roost, but they will, and America will suffer from a Reaganomics that is nothing but warmed-over Keynesianism.

Candidate Reagan in 1980 correctly opposed draft registration. Yet when he had the chance to abolish it, he reneged, as he did on his pledge to abolish the Departments of Education and Energy, or to work against abortion.

Under the guise of attacking drug use and money laundering, the Republican Administration has systematically attacked personal and financial privacy. The effect has been to victimize innocent Americans who wish to conduct their private lives without government snooping. (Should people really be put on a suspected drug dealer list because they transfer $3,000 at one time?) Reagan’s urine testing of Americans without probable cause is a clear violation of our civil liberties, as are his proposals for extensive “lie detector” tests.

Under Reagan, the IRS has grown bigger, richer, more powerful, and more arrogant. In the words of the founders of our country, our government has “sent hither swarms” of tax gatherers “to harass our people and eat out their substance.” His officers jailed the innocent George Hansen, with the President refusing to pardon a great American whose only crime was to defend the Constitution. Reagan’s new tax “reform” gives even more power to the IRS. Far from making taxes fairer or simpler, it deceitfully raises more revenue for the government to waste.

Knowing this administration’s record, I wasn’t surprised by its Libyan disinformation campaign, Israeli-Iranian arms-for-hostages swap, or illegal funding of the Contras. All this has contributed to my disenchantment with the Republican Party, and helped me make up my mind.

What explanation do you need besides he didn't write them, he didn't know what was being written at the time, and that he completely disavows those views?
.

This explanation does suggest fraud: people were paying quite a lot of money for these newsletters, he did make money from the newsletters, and most of the subscribers didn't know that Ron Paul not only didn't know what was being written in the newsletters, but he was completely against them.

Do you think that one was forged? Here are some samples of his signature

3: Ron Paul is a clever manipulator who knows how to get crazy rednecks to vote for him and give him money.

4: Ron Paul is a presidential candidate with a track record of not really caring what his staffers do in his name.

Why he picked option 4 is beyond my understanding. I don't see how it is better than any of the above.

Is Obama guilty of defrauding the American people? Why do you support a murderer?

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/tuquoque.html

Jacoby, stop derailing this thread. We're talking about RON PAUL and his colossal negligence in mailing out various newsletters full of batsh*t material, which give the impression that they're HIS personal opinions, when really he has an army of lunatic minions write them and then stamps his signature on them.

And, strictly speaking, I've never seen Pandabear write "I endorse Obama for President". Most of his posts are criticisms of Republican dumbassitude, which isn't logically equal to "I'm endorsing Obama".

When the subject of competency and trustworthiness to be president comes up, I think it's perfectly legitimate to question the other candidates especially when I believe the questions posed about Paul on these letters have already been thoroughly answered.

Honestly, some members of the American Anti-War left devolved into a blinkered, single-issue stupidity in embracing Ron Paul. I recall on different Web Forum, back in 2007, there was some left-progressive who regularly stridently advocated for pro-choice positions, in very moralistic terms. Then, one day, she starts shilling for Ron Paul - apparently unable to comprehend his pledge to veto any bill that respects women's reproductive rights when it comes to terminating pregnancies.