Ron Paul

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
75
Eagle Creek
Why should we take him any less seriously than we do anyone else who has opinions that interest us? Whether he is polling high nationally or not means nothing to me. I like what he has to say about small government and more power placed in state hands - lots less red tape on that last move. I also like his position on the US backing off from involvement in foreign conflicts. If he ever decided to take on Monsanto, the Agriculture lobby and mountain top coal extraction, I would have to think about moving to the US so I could vote for him. :smile:

I happened to catch a couple of excerpts from an interview he did with a CNN reporter today. I almost wanted to applaud him out loud.

Why is it that some reporters believe that the same question can possibly elicit any answer other than the first one they received, simply by changing a couple of words?? This has puzzled me for a long time but I digress, Ron Paul was not about to put up with any of that and came right back at her with a few choice words, obviously hitting his mark as they set that reporter back on her heels for a bit. He then proceeded to take off his mike and leave the room and the reporter scurrying in his wake to finish the interview. Right on, Ron Paul.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
I've been talking to a lot of RP supporters on youtube lately and the reoccurring theme I see among them is that:

- 9/11 was an "inside job".

- RP is actually leading the polls, but the media is "lying" because of its "secret agenda against him".

- no other Republican candidate will make a reasonable President because they are all "puppets" being "secretly controlled" by conspirators. It's RP or nothing.

- "connect the dots now" ... there's worldwide conspiracy to bring in a one world government.

And of course RP's changing story about racist literature produced under his name doesn't phase them. "It wasn't the real Ron Paul!"

Right. :roll:

I can agree with RP on a few things, but the bulk of his supporters seem to be very young, have know-it-all attitudes, and see conspiracies all around them.

LOL, maybe or just the yahoo's that hand around on YouTube.

Why should we take him any less seriously than we do anyone else who has opinions that interest us? Whether he is polling high nationally or not means nothing to me. I like what he has to say about small government and more power placed in state hands - lots less red tape on that last move. I also like his position on the US backing off from involvement in foreign conflicts. If he ever decided to take on Monsanto, the Agriculture lobby and mountain top coal extraction, I would have to think about moving to the US so I could vote for him. :smile:

I happened to catch a couple of excerpts from an interview he did with a CNN reporter today. I almost wanted to applaud him out loud.

Why is it that some reporters believe that the same question can possibly elicit any answer other than the first one they received, simply by changing a couple of words?? This has puzzled me for a long time but I digress, Ron Paul was not about to put up with any of that and came right back at her with a few choice words, obviously hitting his mark as they set that reporter back on her heels for a bit. He then proceeded to take off his mike and leave the room and the reporter scurrying in his wake to finish the interview. Right on, Ron Paul.

I really don't follow U.S. politics all that much. However, I'm finding he does tend to come off as a not your typical, seen it all before, let's listen to him tell us the same old same old rhetoric kind of politician. And if nothing else, that is at least refreshing.
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Ron Paul has been accused of being Racist - this writer reveals the truth
by Stephen Wood
(libertarian)
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Look at these two photos and decide whether you believe there is an eery similarity between Thomas Jefferson and Don Imus the radio personality who made racist statements against the Rutgers women's basketball team last year. I find the similarities staggering.
Some in the media would argue that this proves that Thomas Jefferson was a racist.

The measure of a man is not in his facial features, it is in the color of his character. Some in the media have taken a new approach to try and stop Ron Paul and his supporters. They have taken to ignoring the man and his message, which by the way is backed by a 20+ year public record of voting consistently to honor civil rights of all individuals, regardless of ethnic origin, religious heritage or sexual orientation.
When it looked like a good tactic, these same media personalities kept asking Dr. Paul why he was running in the Republican Party when he was clearly a Libertarian. If they knew anything at all about the Libertarian outlook on life, they would realize that Libertarians look at all people equally under the Constitution.
So by definition, he couldn't be racist. Now on the other hand, it was at the least, poor judgement on Ron Paul's part 20 years ago to allow a newsletter, bearing his name to be published without controlling it's content.
Did he know what was being said in the paper? We'll never know! Since this is being brought up during a presidential race, it is fair to bring up what everyone else was saying, lending their name too and doing 20 years ago.
Has anyone made a big deal about Barak Obamas frequent experiences with illegal drug use 20 years ago? Has anyone found out how the 1000+ convicted felons that Huckabee pardoned are doing in society? Has anyone interviewed the Fire Departments and Police Departments in New York to see why they hate Rudy so much?
Has anyone been showing the video footage of Mitt Romney just 8 years ago, trying to prove he is not a Republican when debating Ted Kennedy?
If Ron Paul has no chance of winning, why attack him at all? I don't know what his chances of winning are, given the current media bias against him, but I do know that they are attacking him and I believe I know why.
He is like the father who is lecturing his kids on integrity, honor, abstinence and self-control as his sons are secretly planning to steal some liquor, go get some girls drunk to take advantage of them and they don't like hearing this because they don't want to feel guilty about what they WANT to do.
It is a proven fact that all of the candidates running for the office of the President of the United States, have a history of great accomplishments, mis-steps and bad decisions. The question you need to ask is which one of them has shown the wisdom, the discipline and courage to do the one thing that cannot be an option for our next President, to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic?
Only one candidate has made this the benchmark of his political career.

Ron Paul is a Racist, his best time is 49 seconds flat!
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
I saw that interview and was amazed that a man with Paul's years of experience and seeming intelligence came across as so completely naive. On a few issues he came across quite intelligently, but as soon as he started talking social issues it was clear that he was completely out of his depth. The America of Ron Paul would probably turn out to be a very cold, hard place.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Ron Paul may have had suffered a episode of "foot in mouth" disease. But so far it has not become a major issue for him, not that it won't somewhere between now and election day.


“Just remember, immediately after 9/11 we removed the base from Saudi Arabia. So there is a connection. That doesn’t do the whole full explanation, but our policies definitely had an influence,” the Texas congressman said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Ron Paul is more of a pacifist than President Obama, and that is what concerns me. President Obama is not by any stretch of the imagination a pacifist.






Correction: Ron Paul is not a pacifist. In fact, there are a few videos of him discussing his idea of a just war. That is why I used the word "pacific" earlier rather than "pacifist". "Pacifist" generally means total opposition to war no matter what along with a belief in abolishing the military. Ron Paul does not go that far.


I've been talking to a lot of RP supporters on youtube lately and the reoccurring theme I see among them is that:

- 9/11 was an "inside job".

- RP is actually leading the polls, but the media is "lying" because of its "secret agenda against him".

- no other Republican candidate will make a reasonable President because they are all "puppets" being "secretly controlled" by conspirators. It's RP or nothing.

- "connect the dots now" ... there's worldwide conspiracy to bring in a one world government.

And of course RP's changing story about racist literature produced under his name doesn't phase them. "It wasn't the real Ron Paul!"

Right. :roll:

I can agree with RP on a few things, but the bulk of his supporters seem to be very young, have know-it-all attitudes, and see conspiracies all around them.

Don't blaime RP for the actions and words of his supporters.

And as for the recist letter, I don't know the truth behind it, but either way seeing how open he is to free trade and, at least in principle, to more open immigration, it obviously has not affected his policy positions.

Anyone calling for LESS govt is somebody who knows what they are doing.

up to a certain point.

I saw that interview and was amazed that a man with Paul's years of experience and seeming intelligence came across as so completely naive. On a few issues he came across quite intelligently, but as soon as he started talking social issues it was clear that he was completely out of his depth. The America of Ron Paul would probably turn out to be a very cold, hard place.

Of course I don't agree with Ron Paul on everything. But if you compare him to any other current candidate, he still outshines them all, sadly enough. And on the bright side, even if he did win the presidency, there would still be the House and Senate to keep him in check. looking at it that way, he'd simply provide a healthy counterbalance to the others.
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Correction: Ron Paul is not a pacifist. In fact, there are a few videos of him discussing his idea of a just war. That is why I used the word "pacific" earlier rather than "pacifist". "Pacifist" generally means total opposition to war no matter what along with a belief in abolishing the military. Ron Paul does not go that far.
[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT]



Don't blaime RP for the actions and words of his supporters.

And as for the recist letter, I don't know the truth behind it, but either way seeing how open he is to free trade and, at least in principle, to more open immigration, it obviously has not affected his policy positions.



up to a certain point.



Of course I don't agree with Ron Paul on everything. But if you compare him to any other current candidate, he still outshines them all, sadly enough. And on the bright side, even if he did win the presidency, there would still be the House and Senate to keep him in check. looking at it that way, he'd simply provide a healthy counterbalance to the others.

For the most part, it doesn't really matter who win's the Presidency, as you mentioned it is the House and Senate that ultimately control the country and the President. Life will just plod along, :)
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
More info. It seems he also made a ton of money as well.

Guess he had that good old racism buried in the woodpile.

Storm builds over Ron Paul newsletters

WASHINGTON . Ron Paul, the fringe Republican candidate who is hoping to pull off an upset victory in Iowa, was engulfed in a political storm Friday after the emergence of newsletters in which Martin Luther King was described as a pedophile, most black men were said to be criminals, and there was speculation Israel was behind a terrorist attack on the United States.

The wild claims were made in a series of newsletters the Texas congressman began producing in the late 1980s, where he offered paid subscribers advice on how to survive "the coming race war" and protect themselves from tax collectors armed with machine guns.

Asked about the newsletters on CNN this week, Mr. Paul, 76, refused to respond to the questions and stormed out of the studio.

In later explanations, the Texas representative said he did not write the letters himself, did not read them and "disavowed" their message, but was under growing pressure to explain how he could be unaware of dozens of inflammatory messages that were produced over more than a decade.

On Friday, Newt Gingrich, a rival in the Republican race, said, "I think that Congressman Paul has to explain his own situation and how he could have had a decade of newsletters that had his name on it that he apparently wasn't aware of.

"I think that somebody should say to him 'OK, how much money did you make from the newsletters?' These things are really nasty, and he didn't know about it? Wasn't aware of it? But he's sufficiently ready to be president? It strikes me it raises some fundamental questions about him."

In one undated letter with Mr. Paul's signature, he writes, "I've been told not to talk, but these stooges don't scare me. Threats or no threats, I've laid bare the coming race war in our big cities."

Another from December 1990 describes how Rev. King "was not only a world-class adulterer, he also seduced underage girls and boys," while one written after the 1992 Los Angeles riots said order was only restored "when it came time for blacks to pick up their welfare cheques."

In 1992, another newsletter commented, "Given the inefficiencies of what [Washington] DC laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

A 1993 letter speculates then president Bill Clinton may have fathered illegitimate children with a black woman and refers to them as "woods colts." After a car bomb exploded in the basement of the World Trade Center in 1993, one letter suggests the attack may have been "a set-up by the Israeli Mossad".

The reports were promoted as a guide for Americans to protect their families and their property from apocalyptic visions of social breakdown and a tyrannical federal government. They were not paid for out of public funds but were often signed "Congressman Ron Paul."

Mr. Paul has not denied he made money from the publications and at least one signed letter ends with a request for the reader to send a cheque or money order over the phone by calling 1-800-RON-PAUL.

In an interview with CNN's Gloria Borger Wednesday, Mr. Paul said of the newsletter's articles, "I didn't write them. I didn't read them at the time and I disavow them."

When Ms. Borger continued to pursue the subject, Mr. Paul removed his microphone and walked out of the interview.

Drew Ivers, his Iowa campaign chairman, said, "It is ridiculous to imply that Ron Paul is a bigot, racist, or unethical." However, he added Mr. Paul does not deny or retract material he has written under his own signature, such as the letter promoting the newsletters.

When asked whether that meant Mr. Paul believed there was a government conspiracy to cover up the impact of AIDS, Mr. Ivers said, "I don't think he embraces that."

The newsletters first surfaced during Mr. Paul's unsuccessful 2008 presidential bid, but have come under fresh scrutiny as the libertarian has overtaken rivals Mr. Gingrich and Mitt Romney in the polls in the crucial early voting state of Iowa.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Again, I don't know about the newsletter, but seeing he's pro-immigration in principle would suggest one of three possibilities:

1. His personal racism does not affect his political beliefs in any way,

2. He no longer holds those views, or

3. he's telling the truth about those letters.

I don't see how any of these 3 scenarios are likely to affect his judgement as President.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
In 1996 he defended the letters that bore his name by claiming they were "accurate but taken out of context". Now he claims he never wrote them, so he was either lying in 1996 or he's lying now.

If he is lying about it, he'll certainly pay the price.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
Of course I don't agree with Ron Paul on everything. But if you compare him to any other current candidate, he still outshines them all, sadly enough. And on the bright side, even if he did win the presidency, there would still be the House and Senate to keep him in check. looking at it that way, he'd simply provide a healthy counterbalance to the others.

Actually I find that of the entire bunch Huntsman seems to be the most knowledgeable. As former ambassador to China and a reasonably well educated man he at least seems to understand how the world works. Problem is he should be a Democrat, not a Republican.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
113,721
12,938
113
Low Earth Orbit
A poll released Tuesday found that in head-to-head election match-ups between President Barack Obama and various Republican presidential candidates, Texas Rep. Ron Paul fared best among non-white voters.

In a hypothetical contest against the president, the CNN/Opinion Research poll found Paul with 25 percent of the non-white vote.

Romney received 20 percent of that demographic against Obama, Texas Gov. Rick Perry 17 percent, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann 18 percent, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich 15 percent.

Paul campaign press secretary Gary Howard, who is himself an African American, told The Daily Caller that his candidate’s opposition to the War on Drugs has helped him win support from minorities.

“The figures in this poll show that voters are looking at Congressman Paul’s decades-long history of fighting for the individual liberties of all Americans,” said Howard.

“He has the strongest record of any candidate in this presidential race of standing up for civil liberties, and is also a staunch advocate of ending the drug war and fixing our biased court system which unfairly punishes minorities,” he said.

Paul has made direct appeals to non-white voters, saying that he believes the criminal justice system and the War on Drugs have disproportionately affected African-Americans, as have foreign military campaigns.

He also opposes the federal government’s use of the death penalty because, he says, it has been “unjustly” applied to the poor and minorities.

Paul’s strong showing among minority voters is bound to be fodder for his supporters, as his rising poll numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire attract attacks from rivals.



Ron Paul | Minority Voters | Newsletters | The Daily Caller
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
75
Eagle Creek
More info. It seems he also made a ton of money as well.

Guess he had that good old racism buried in the woodpile.

Storm builds over Ron Paul newsletters

WASHINGTON . Ron Paul, the fringe Republican candidate who is hoping to pull off an upset victory in Iowa, was engulfed in a political storm Friday after the emergence of newsletters in which Martin Luther King was described as a pedophile, most black men were said to be criminals, and there was speculation Israel was behind a terrorist attack on the United States.

The wild claims were made in a series of newsletters the Texas congressman began producing in the late 1980s, where he offered paid subscribers advice on how to survive "the coming race war" and protect themselves from tax collectors armed with machine guns.

Asked about the newsletters on CNN this week, Mr. Paul, 76, refused to respond to the questions and stormed out of the studio.

In later explanations, the Texas representative said he did not write the letters himself, did not read them and "disavowed" their message, but was under growing pressure to explain how he could be unaware of dozens of inflammatory messages that were produced over more than a decade.

On Friday, Newt Gingrich, a rival in the Republican race, said, "I think that Congressman Paul has to explain his own situation and how he could have had a decade of newsletters that had his name on it that he apparently wasn't aware of.

"I think that somebody should say to him 'OK, how much money did you make from the newsletters?' These things are really nasty, and he didn't know about it? Wasn't aware of it? But he's sufficiently ready to be president? It strikes me it raises some fundamental questions about him."

In one undated letter with Mr. Paul's signature, he writes, "I've been told not to talk, but these stooges don't scare me. Threats or no threats, I've laid bare the coming race war in our big cities."

Another from December 1990 describes how Rev. King "was not only a world-class adulterer, he also seduced underage girls and boys," while one written after the 1992 Los Angeles riots said order was only restored "when it came time for blacks to pick up their welfare cheques."

In 1992, another newsletter commented, "Given the inefficiencies of what [Washington] DC laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

A 1993 letter speculates then president Bill Clinton may have fathered illegitimate children with a black woman and refers to them as "woods colts." After a car bomb exploded in the basement of the World Trade Center in 1993, one letter suggests the attack may have been "a set-up by the Israeli Mossad".

The reports were promoted as a guide for Americans to protect their families and their property from apocalyptic visions of social breakdown and a tyrannical federal government. They were not paid for out of public funds but were often signed "Congressman Ron Paul."

Mr. Paul has not denied he made money from the publications and at least one signed letter ends with a request for the reader to send a cheque or money order over the phone by calling 1-800-RON-PAUL.

In an interview with CNN's Gloria Borger Wednesday, Mr. Paul said of the newsletter's articles, "I didn't write them. I didn't read them at the time and I disavow them."

When Ms. Borger continued to pursue the subject, Mr. Paul removed his microphone and walked out of the interview.

Drew Ivers, his Iowa campaign chairman, said, "It is ridiculous to imply that Ron Paul is a bigot, racist, or unethical." However, he added Mr. Paul does not deny or retract material he has written under his own signature, such as the letter promoting the newsletters.

When asked whether that meant Mr. Paul believed there was a government conspiracy to cover up the impact of AIDS, Mr. Ivers said, "I don't think he embraces that."

The newsletters first surfaced during Mr. Paul's unsuccessful 2008 presidential bid, but have come under fresh scrutiny as the libertarian has overtaken rivals Mr. Gingrich and Mitt Romney in the polls in the crucial early voting state of Iowa.

Whatever the truth behind those letters, Ron Paul - by his record alone, seems to have spent the 20 intervening years refuting everything the letters are said to stand for, and that alone is quite remarkable. If those in opposition to Mr Paul have to go back two decades to find some 'dirt', that too says much about the man.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Actually I find that of the entire bunch Huntsman seems to be the most knowledgeable. As former ambassador to China and a reasonably well educated man he at least seems to understand how the world works. Problem is he should be a Democrat, not a Republican.

Ron Paul is a physician by profession. Hardly uneducated.

Actually I find that of the entire bunch Huntsman seems to be the most knowledgeable. As former ambassador to China and a reasonably well educated man he at least seems to understand how the world works. Problem is he should be a Democrat, not a Republican.

It would seem that on fiscal policy he drops the ball. He's been praised for lowering and simplifying taxes, but criticised for raising spending. A fiscal conservative does not promote tax cuts and spending increases at the same time. it has to be one or the other, not both.

Now as for Ron paul, he concerns me on that front too. He wants to cut spending to the bone, but also wants drastic tax cuts immediately. It's fine as long as the tax cuts are sustainable.

Another thing that concerns me with Ron paul is his proposal to cut education funding suddenly and completely. While it's fine to cut spending, you want to ensure the population has the education and skills to find work obviously. You want an educated tax base.

But still, I'm convinced even if Ron paul won the presidency, others would prevent the drastic tax cuts he proposes and would also likely hold the line on education. So while he's not perfect, he could provide a healthy counterweight.

Ron Paul is a physician by profession. Hardly uneducated.



It would seem that on fiscal policy he drops the ball. He's been praised for lowering and simplifying taxes, but criticised for raising spending. A fiscal conservative does not promote tax cuts and spending increases at the same time. it has to be one or the other, not both.

Now as for Ron paul, he concerns me on that front too. He wants to cut spending to the bone, but also wants drastic tax cuts immediately. It's fine as long as the tax cuts are sustainable.

Another thing that concerns me with Ron paul is his proposal to cut education funding suddenly and completely. While it's fine to cut spending, you want to ensure the population has the education and skills to find work obviously. You want an educated tax base.

But still, I'm convinced even if Ron paul won the presidency, others would prevent the drastic tax cuts he proposes and would also likely hold the line on education. So while he's not perfect, he could provide a healthy counterweight.

Another area of difference is that Huntsman is a strong supporter of Isreael, whereas Ron Paul just wants the nations of the world to trade with each other. I think ron Paul is too isolationist (he even wants ou of the UN), but at least he'd butt out of other nations' squables. And again, I'm sure congress would hold him back from implementing his more extreme ideas such as withdrawing from teh UN while still conceding to butting out from other nations' internal affairs. Again, a healthy counterweight that Huntsman is not likely to deliver.

Also, whereas Obama has been slow on teh Guantanamo fiasco, you could be sure Ron paul would apply the Constitution to them pronto.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Whatever the truth behind those letters, Ron Paul - by his record alone, seems to have spent the 20 intervening years refuting everything the letters are said to stand for, and that alone is quite remarkable. If those in opposition to Mr Paul have to go back two decades to find some 'dirt', that too says much about the man.

Look at the time frame where he is clearly racist. Did he just suddenly embrace civil rights and respect for all?
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Look at the time frame where he is clearly racist. Did he just suddenly embrace civil rights and respect for all?

Who knows. Maybe he did. Clearly there is a disconnect between his current beliefs and what is presented in those lettters.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Who knows. Maybe he did. Clearly there is a disconnect between his current beliefs and what is presented in those lettters.

Perhaps the disconnect is he is now in Politics. Just another Liar. Wonder what else is buried.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Perhaps the disconnect is he is now in Politics. Just another Liar. Wonder what else is buried.

He wasn't in politics then? OK. But I can't imagine an extreme racist proposing open borders and freedom for all and applying the Constitution to Guantanamo detainees. One would think an extreme racist might tone his racism down to win votes, such as many who argue against immigration on economic or other gounds, concerns about integrating immigrants, or opposing applying the Cosntitution to Guantanamo detainees on national security grounds, etc.

Ron Paul goes beyond the necessary to just win votes, so lying alone would not explain that kind of disconnect.