I, for one, am shocked! SHOCKED, I say!
In news unsurprising to anyone with two brain cells to rub together, The Washington Post reports that Ron Paul knew about those newsletters and that he’s been lying about it for years. SURPRISE!
The Republican presidential candidate has denied writing inflammatory passages in the pamphlets from the 1990s and said recently that he did not read them at the time or for years afterward. Numerous colleagues said he does not hold racist views.
But 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 and a supporter of the Texas congressman.
~snip~
A person involved in Paul’s businesses, who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid criticizing a former employer, said Paul and his associates decided in the late 1980s to try to increase sales by making the newsletters more provocative. They discussed adding controversial material, including racial statements, to help the business, the person said.
“It was playing on a growing racial tension, economic tension, fear of government,’’ said the person, who supports Paul’s economic policies but is not backing him for president. “I’m not saying Ron believed this stuff. It was good copy. Ron Paul is a shrewd businessman.’’
The articles included racial, anti-Semitic and anti-gay content. They claimed, for example, that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. “seduced underage girls and boys’’; they ridiculed black activists by suggesting that New York be named “Zooville” or “Lazyopolis”; and they said the 1992 Los Angeles riots ended “when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.’’ The June 1990 edition of the Ron Paul Political Report included the statement: “Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.”
Ron Paul is no different than Newt Gingrich, or Rick Santorum or any of the various Republican clowns who exploit racial tension and resentment for political gain. He found a market of hateful and angry people and decided to tailor his newsletter to those folks and stoke the flames of hate and bigotry.
Does he believe the vitriol that was published in his name? WHO CARES. That’s exactly not the point.
But, you know — he would end aid to Israel and “stop the wars,” so we all better listen to what the racist and homophobic coot has to say lest we be charged with partisan loyalty or some such nonsense.
[via WaPo]
If you lie down with dogs, you wind up with fleas. Ron Paul’s have white hoods.
i knew it all along.
Of course i have 2 brain-cells to rub together unlike his clueless paul-bots.
Can you believe they are STILL running around the internet telling people to “do their research” (directing them to #PaulBot Youtubers of course) & “think for themselves” & to not be “brain-washed”.
it almost makes me want to climb a tower. *sigh* almost.
Obama/Biden 2012
Ron Paul = Giant phony. But if you were paying attention, you already knew that.
Of course he’s a giant phony. I have close personal contact with a member of his target market. Paul knows how his target audience thinks and he caters to that. He’s no absent-minded, too-busy-to-manage-his-businesses innocent who suffered the misfortune of having putrid crap written as if it were done by him personally, published, and distributed (magically?) to the very type of people who actively look for that kind of shit.
But since the newsletter stories first surfaced, I’ve never liked his responses when confronted with them. How would you react if you found out that something hateful and potentially dangerous was published with your name on it? You don’t have to tell me, because I already know — you would be mortified, you would be effusive and unhesitating in expressing regret over it. Moreover, you would do stuff like acknowledge how your negligence helped enable some hateful and potentially dangerous social/political thought in the American public, you would acknowledge that you profited from it and perhaps donate the amount of that profit to an organization like the SPLC. Because that’s how a decent person who gives a shit would feel and react if they found themselves in such an awful situation due to their negligence. It’s entirely subjective, but I never saw Ron Paul’s remorse as appropriate or proportional to his responsibility for the newsletters. That’s why it was enough reason for me to write the guy off completely. He may seem kindly and soft-spoken, but I think he’s evil. The more that’s revealed about the guy just reaffirms my opinion.
Well I am Canadian and have followed this man for years. I do not have a white hood. But what I do look at is what he respresents now and what he tried to accomplish for the individual ..(all races)
I am curious why people do not look at that. Where (besides these newsletters) do you see racism in what he represents?
“Where (besides these newsletters) do you see racism in what he represents?”
This falls into the category of “Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?”
PS: I’m Canadian too.
Well, there’s the massive confederate flag he had that speech in front of recently, for starters. You know, the one that symbolizes to Americans “States Rights” (also known as: “Treason In the Defense of Slavery”).
And let’s not forget the photo ops with Stormfront Klansmen at the 2007 Values Voter Summit:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28353
P.S. Ron Paul just happened to win the Values Voter Summit straw poll this year. His full VV speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wnj-5z9NJoY
Oh, and I forgot to mention this:
“Ron Paul’s White Supremacist Radio Connections”
http://newsone.com/nation/casey-gane-mccalla/ron-pauls-white-supremacist-radio-connections/
You’re welcome.
See also: Ron Paul’s collection of major white supremacist friends:
http://newsone.com/nation/casey-gane-mccalla/top-10-racist-ron-paul-friends-supporters/?fb_ref=homepage
He says he would have voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He has repeatedly defended that, promoting the rights of individuals and the states to deny equality under the law to citizens on the basis of race.
He insists that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery.
And, oh yeah, he published, under his name, for years, vile, disgusting, carefully targeted newsletters spewing filth about blacks, gays and Jews.
I don’t understand how you can look at those newsletters and say, “Well, anything else?” The man has made his beliefs very, very clear. They are in stark opposition to mine, and to those of people who are not racists and homophobes.
What exactly do you imagine this scumbag is offering that is good enough to rise shining above the dunghill of what he actually says?
I’m shocked, shocked to discover gambling…oops, wrong movie!
ROFL!
I SAW OBAMA HELPING REVERAND WRIGHT MAKE HIS RACIST SPEECHES!! GUYS FOR REAL I WAS THERE WHEN OBAMA WAS WORKING WITH WRIGHT ON HIS GOD DAMN WHITE PEOPLE AND AMERICA SPEECH!! OBAMA IS A RACIST I SAW HIM SO IT IS A FACT!
Really jaja? You SAW him? Tell us, when, where, and how did you witness Obama helping Wright?
the line between snark and crazy gets blurrier every day.
What? Is he being snarky? If so, excuse me.
i honestly can’t tell.
The problem with Poe’s Law is that you really can’t tell satire/snark from the real thing.
It’s a little disturbing.
Beauzeaux ,
Actually I was not refering to what you said. What I was meaning or asking is if a man spends his life defending individual rights and has a very good record could there not be some truth in the fact that yes he did not check what was being written properly and is guilty however he is not racist.
in a word? No.
Wait, we are talking about Ron Paul, correct? Because Ron Paul definitely has not spent his life defending individual rights, and I’m sick of reading defenses based on people staring at him through rose-colored glasses with the wrong prescription at a distance of a thousand yards.
Me too, Anonymous37. Truth is, Ron Paul doesn’t feel responsible for taking action to help people in trouble. The genesis of his policy positions can be traced back to his belief that government should only be strong enough to protect his privilege (it’s nunna my bidness if people get addicted to drugs and society goes to hell…it’s nunna my bidness is bad stuff is happening to people in other countries), but not strong enough to address problems with established social/political/economic standards that, upon investigation, contribute to and perpetuate very bad conditions for anybody who is not privileged under the established system. It’s just coincidental when Paul ends up with policy positions that temporarily match those of liberal humanitarians’.
Bottom line? It doesn’t matter if Paul says or does anything that’s demonstrably racist — what matters is that he thinks it’s improper for government to do anything about ameliorating the lives of Americans who suffer the effects of racism. Whatever allows him to say “It ain’t my problem” is what Paul is going to pursue.
The genesis of his policy positions can be traced back to his belief that government should only be strong enough to protect his privilege (it’s nunna my bidness if people get addicted to drugs and society goes to hell…it’s nunna my bidness is bad stuff is happening to people in other countries), but not strong enough to address problems with established social/political/economic standards that, upon investigation, contribute to and perpetuate very bad conditions for anybody who is not privileged under the established system.
Yes — this. But even leaving aside his unwillingness to support basic civil rights legislation, he simply is not a libertarian in any sense of the word. He is not opposed to U.S. military invention abroad in any sense that’s either consistent with a concern for the rights and lives of others (I have no idea why telling mercs that you’ll give them money if they kill terrorists makes you a pacifist) or even consistent with his own rhetoric (he voted for the AUMF, for crying out loud). He won’t actually stop the war on drugs, and has never, as far as I can tell, spoken out about local and state abuse of human rights by police. He advocated rolling back the most basic privacy rights when he openly opposed the Supreme Court’s striking down of sodomy laws.
About his actions being inconsistent with his own rhetoric — INORITE??? For fuck’s sake, people are praising him for his stated (not demonstrated in any meaningful way) positions and his rhetoric, without giving him the hard dings he surely deserves for actions that are in conflict with the way he’s portrayed (either by Paul himself or by his admirers).
Jesus, we have way too many stupid, manipulative, dishonest assholes getting credit for being intellectuals in our “professional Left.” You know who I’m talking about. They’re just embarrassing.
This is why I’ve always said that Ron Paul is a fake libertarnian. As a former libertarnian myself – I can easily tell. He’s basically a typical hard-right Republican dressed in libertarnian clothing.
It’s not just his stances on military power and civil liberties that are troubling. He’s too much of a social conservative to be libertarnian. He’s anti-choice and anti-gay rights. And he seems to have no problem with imposing specific religious views on others. And I’ve learned the hard way that there’s no sense in trying to talk to his supporters. They refuse to see this man for what he is.
This. What are Ron Paul’s actual accomplishment’s, O Paulistas?
Not what he’s gonna do, someday, when he’s King of America. What has this man DONE to better the world that makes you think he’s such a sweetie?
Ron Paul is a Christian Reconstructionist and has no interest in individual rights.
Wow! Isn’t it wonderful to see Ron Paul supporters doing what they have accused us of doing for 3 years with Obama? Making excuses for Paul, being apologetic on Paul’s behalf and so forth.
Now, Ron Paul may not be racist, but racists sure are crazy about him. Why? it’s because for years, Paul and other Republicans have been exploiting racism for money and political gain.
White folks, who barely have a pot to piss in (accoring to my mother) would rather support someone who is willing to put Obama “in his place” than to support someone who is going to look out for their interests.
If you ever read any Ayn Rand, listen to the Alex Jones Show, followed the Goldwater Campaign of the 60′s or know anything about the John Birch Society – you pretty much know what kind of race-baiting, anti-Semitic that Ron Paul bases his philosophy upon. So why are we shocked that he authored bigoted, Anti-Semitic screeds?
Oh shit….Ronulans decloaking off starboard………
raise shields
ROFL!²
Cappadona..Ayn Rand..really and the Birch Society(forget Alex Joens)
Please enlighten me.
Ron Paul was 24 in 1960 hardley behind Goldwater.
ArrogantDemon and Iris Boyd :Maybe no one can read here. I am a Canadian , so I can not support Ron Paul in voting.
“Now, Ron Paul may not be racist, but racists sure are crazy about him” Great statement.
and I am sure Obama has no one who follows him who is racist.
America’s in big trouble and Obama signing the NDAA would not be my favorite canadiate or extending the patriot act, but hey it’s your country and fear based it is.
Just my 2 cents.
Diggy diggy hole?
Perfectly done! LOLSHIWMP
But Ron Paul is himself without sin, like for instance, voting for the AUMF and liking the fact that we were using mercenaries in the front.
Lets cut the false equivalency shit, it doesnt even compare.
And we can go over how the NDAA started in Congress, with more then enough votes to override his veto, and would screw up the pay of the military, and the signing statement saying he wont use the feature of detaining American citizens, so unless you’re a terrorist who is declaring war on America, we cool, but you dont care for that, right?
Ron Paul knew about the shit that was in “The Ron Paul Newsletter”, and he lied about the shit after it became a problem for him, but was all too happy to take their money, and was happy to take campaign money from the founder of Stormfront, but he’s just the same as Barack Obama, right?
Listen, how about you guys, no disrespect, deal with Steven Harper, and we’ll try and keep America from slipping into chaos, fair enough?
Terry, I wasn’t talking about you specifically. As a matter of fact, I didn’t have you in mind when I made my post. But since you mentioned my name I will say this: on the surface Ron Paul’s platform may sound like a great idea to some of you but when you look beneath the surface of Paul’s libertarian shit, you will find that it will be a disaster for my country, probably your country and other countries as well. More so than NDAA.
Just my 2 cents..
Oh one more thing, it’s true, racists are really crazy about Ron Paul.
Canadian, eh? So you’re one of the libertarian theocrats helping to dismantle the Canadian health care system in favor of health care prayer, I presume?
*Note to sane people who will probably do a mental double take on “libertarian theocrat” (sounds oxymoronic, I know). Google “theocratic libertarianism” (Political Research Associates has an enlightening overview).
Oops… off point. Yes, Ron Paul is a big ‘ol racist. He says so himself in his own newsletter. Unfortunate that when you set shit down in print it has a way of coming back to bite you in the arse.
That was @Terry
Kfreed,
I hate to inform you but it has been dismantling for years. Have your Obamacare. And I too like Ron Paul was around when there was no government healthcare.
You can think what you like about him being racist that is your opinion but he will change the way the GOP thinks their issues.
It’s your country and nobody wants real change..why because it is a real scarey proposition. We and I say both our countries want the governments to take care of us. Well guess what, we to don’t have enough money in our government pensions and we are alot smaller than you.
So keep you’re big government,miliary spending, wars and aid to forgeign countries and forget about the people who live in America. Go further in to debt to be downgraded again by the world banks.
And by the way if Ron Paul was here I sure would vote for him.
Just maybe the younger generation(which is not me by a long shot) sees the future and knows that if something isn’t done soon..they will have no future!
And we’re suppose to dismantle the social contract we have with people?
No, thats not going to do.
Having corporations and the super wealthy not p[ay their fair share of taxes wasnt the problem, it was all those social programs, right?
The Canadians have a system they like and has been working, but to hell what most people want, we have to dismantle it because the few of us know better then the many, I mean, c’mon man
I notice you’re also overlooking Ron Paul’s economic theories: He wants to return to the gold standard, and issue money only if it’s backed by gold or silver. Do you know what every economist in the world calls that? “Insane” is the mildest of the words they use. His overall political policies can be summed up like this: “Back to 1787!”
I was planning to vote for Obama so hard the ballot bounced, but actually, I’m wondering if it would almost be worth it to put Paul into office, just so these loons can fall apart in disbelief as their hero proves unable to wave his hand and make the world just, and rather as it was on Leave It To Beaver by imperial fiat.
(This is sarcasm. I feel I must mention this.)
Well he could not be any worse than what you have had in the last 2 decades no sarcasim intended.
Oh, you’re serious?
This makes me fear for Canada.
ABL~ EXCELLENT POST!!
I am so sick of the “Blame Obama First” Crowd who are now supporting Ron Paul! I just cannot believe that all my supposed like-minded friends on FB are falling for Paul’s Bullshit! (not all my FB Friends, but a good chunk of them).
To KFreed~ I thank you for all the links you put into the comments! I used every single one of them in my FB Post. I hope you don’t mind. I’m really so disgusted with these people who will not open their eyes to the reality of Ron (the racist pig) Paul!! I’m sure it will be a lively thread on the post today, to say the least. When these Paulbot’s have nothing to defend Paul, except that he is the greatest, HA!, then they resort to accusing OUR President of starting wars & murderous tendencies!! I’m de-friending more people on FB lately, my patience is just worn too damn thin.
Thank You BOTH~ for the Great Post and the Great Links!!
Don’t feel you have to defend President Obama against these cultists. Just ask them to explain specifically and in detail how a President Paul would be able to enact ANY of his policy agenda with a Congress where his ideas are almost universally opposed by Republicans as well as Democrats. Then sit back and laugh as they avoid your question or demonstrate their total ignorance of how our system of governance works. Rinse and repeat until they give up and go away.
Since I can not vote for any candidates, please anyone here tell me why and what Obama has done to help you. And please don’t say it was handed a mess so he could not do anything. I have heard constant bashing of Ron Paul yet no really seems to say why Obama would be best.
You all talk about lies, just a question if the Georgia court ruling goes through, what will you say then on lies?
http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
Not like you care – if it’s not done by The Holy Golden King, you don’t give two squirts of pony piss about it.
And I do care, We have problems here. You hink that it can work that is fine. Ontario is far smaller than the US. There is a waiting list up to 3 years here. Shortages on needed crucial programs.
Try reading a few problems about it.
http://fumento.com/government/obamacare.html
However, Terry…
I have yet to find a Canadian who would trade their health care system for ours. Do you know that there are even Canadians living here in the States who will not give up their Canadian citizenship due to health care issues?
Look, every system is going to have problems. It’s a question of minimizing them. And trust me when I say this, but the U.S. health care system is messed up. When you’ve got American senior citizens taking bus rides to Canada for cheaper drugs – then you know you have problems.
I challenge to come here to the States and deal with our system. You don’t think we have long waits here in America? The only difference is instead of the government being responsible for the delays – its the private insurance companies behind the problem. And what’s even more ironic is that Medicare (which our government medical plan for seniors) is less expensive and more efficient than private insurance companies.
We will probably never have a system like Canada’s, but something needs to be done. And Paul’s suggestion of relying on the kindness of strangers and churches for help with medical costs just ain’t going to do it.
Wow, a Paulbot and a Birther! But, let me guess, you have black friends, right? The shoeshine boy, the doorman, Uncle Ruckus…
But if you want a serious answer, Obama’s passed health care reform, ended DADT, passed Lilly Ledbetter, put a bullet in Bin Laden, held firm to getting out of Iraq, and made racist asshats like yourself whine and cry like there’s no tomorrow. I’d say mission fucking accomplished, but we’ve still got four more years to go.
Lilly Ledbetter did not do much for the advancement of women with fair pay. But I guess it’s a start.
The Georgia court can’t force anyone off the ballot, that decision rests with the GA Secretary of State. Please go educate yourself about basic facts if you’re going to participate here. We don’t have time to bring ignorant ass Paulbots who have no vote in the United States up to speed.
I really hope that by “Georgia court ruling” you mean something other than the hundred and forty seventh attempt by Orly Taitz to prove that Obama is somehow not a U.S. citizen?
PLEASE tell me you’re talking about Kendrell Bell or something.
The Sheriff’s A Ni
“Wow, a Paulbot and a Birther! But, let me guess, you have black friends, right? The shoeshine boy, the doorman, Uncle Ruckus…”
Nice answer, especially when you know nothing about who I am but I am affraid it is typical. Do you scream racist when anyone disagrees with you. You are no better than what you call a Paullbot.
Allen, It is not about the Georgia court not having him on the ballot, it is about finding the truth.
I brought that up because everyone here is whinning about Paul being a liar.
If the facts that were presented at the court are lies..dispute them not ignore them.
People are entitled to their opinion, and calling someone ignorant because you do not agree is brilliant.
You and paulbots suffer from the same thing. You are no different. Take a look in the mirror.
It has been a pleasure being on this site .
It is all about bashing with sarcastic remarks.
And to the person who said your affraid of Canada..don’t be we don’t police the world!
You’re a Paulbot Birther, there’s everything anyone with more than two neurons firing needs to know.
And to “The Sheriff’s A Ni” Educate yourself that all blacks do not think Ron Paul is racist either:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ej5_rZof7MA
I dare you….to watch
It’s been interesting.
Ron Paul has a black friend? Well that changes everything.
Ooh, you’re daring me? Well I triple-dog dare you to ride into the middle of an African-American community sportin’ the Stars ‘n Bars ‘n shouting about states’ rights ‘n Birtherism and see where that gets you.
And grow up “The Sheriff’s A Ni”.
Coming from a person using the teenage pothead Paulbot mindset, that means very little. Also, learn how to use the fucking reply link.
Thank you for telling me how to use the reply link. I am 60 and do not use pot, and I am also pro-choice. And of course being black and supporting Ron Paul means nothing either.
That really you, Uncle Ruckus?
You first.
Allan it seems you are a Robot. Nice to be able to intelligently converse. You are the one that states he is racist maybe other people too do not agree with you. What a shame. But no mention of what that Georgia courts and what it represents.
Please no more rhetoric of Paulbots.
Please, no more (mediocre) rhetoric fromPaulbots.
You see that is the beauty of it. I can look at all candidates and can choose. It is my point of view. I am not a Paulbot. But you might find there is a whole lot of support for this man outside the US too. But hey but we don’t know anything right.
Lets continue this discussion in 5 years from now. I will be ready to retire, but the generations behind me will have NO money in the government pension fund. But you all know better because you look maybe from day to day and not what is ahead in the future.
Lets get what we can now, will not help the future generations to come.
I have listened to many intelligent young voters and maybe , just maybe they have a better grip on the situation of what lies ahead. And actually
they don’t knock the other candidates. They speak clearing about what needs to be done.
Watch the walk on Washington February 20 by the veterans. But I guess they don’t know what’s going on either.But my guess it won’t even be filmed by the media.
“But hey but we don’t know anything right.”
The stopped clock reveals itself.
Ron Paul has no answers. How will his gold-standard advocacy help matters? How will eliminating the Federal Reserve help?
All his supposed libertarianism really stands for is pulling up the ladder. If it doesn’t affect him personally he has no interest in it. That’s what libertarianism is, full stop.
It’s really kind of a polite word for sociopath. Good company you’ve chosen, Terry.
Just out of curiousity why mention the gold standards, many are actually talking about that now, not just Ron Paul. Was it not him that wanted the Federal Reserve investigated and what about commenting on the military who gives him strong support. Does that not mean anything?
The only people talking about this are the nutjobs and conspiracy theorists.
Terry, Orly Taitz has nothing. The Birthers have been trying to convince the rest of the world that this is really real for real since 2008, and they have absolutely nothing to show for it, except a copy of the President’s birth certificate, and a lot of egg on their faces.
That’s because Barack Obama was born in the United States of America, to a mother who was a U.S. citizen, making him a natural-born citizen of the United States.
If you have any questions about this simple fact, please let us know. I know more about this matter than I ever hoped to, and I’m sure that’s true of many people here.
It was my understanding that both parents had to be US citizen and that is what is being disputed.
That is incorrect. The definition of ‘natural born’ does not require even one parent to be a citizen. A child born in the United States, unless to foreign diplomats serving here, is a natural born citizen.
Furthermore, Orly Taitz appears to now be claiming that Obama was born in Indonesia. She has previously claimed he was born in Kenya. Her goal is not to learn the truth, it is, clearly, to find some way to disqualify Obama from the presidency.
Actually for the president it is different You do have to have parent(or what is being disputed)both parents born in the US to become president.
You have demonstrable proof of this, then? As in, not just someone asserting it with no basis in fact or law?
This a joke..right. Why don’t you read what a citizen is and a natural born one is. It is both parents that is being disputed.
I am trying to convince anyone to vote Ron Paul.
But its been fun talking to Americans that don’t even know their laws but try to convince people they do.
Not one intelligent reply about pensions , where the economy is going or the future.
Don’t try to convince anyone of your debating skills. There is none
You know what I find ironic is that you all say Ron Paul lies about his letters but if anyone dares to bring up a questioning point about Obama all hell breaks lose.
Why don’t you provide some citation? You’re the one making the claims, where’s your evidence?
And no, right-wing monomanaical, Orly-Taitz-worshipping sites do…not…count. Show me a direct citation in US law, as nothing else will suffice.
Failure to do so equates to your conceding the point.
“Why don’t you read what a citizen is and a natural born one is. It is both parents that is being disputed.”
Because that matters? Here’s the problem: I did read. And when you actually read what the law says, you’ll find that this parental issue is functionally irrelevant to the person actually born in the United States. In short: it doesn’t matter about the parents, but about whether the person is a citizen of the United States; and to confuse that with side issues in other areas is astoundingly false.
And here’s the thing: it’s been in our Constitution since it was ratified in 17-damned-87:
Article I, Sec. 2, Paragraph 2—House:
Article I, Sec. 3, Paragraph 3—Senate:
Article II, Sec. 1, Paragraph 5–President
Notice: nowhere in this text does it say the parents of the person shall be eligible for any of these offices. This entire stretch of logic you introduced about parents is invalidated by what is actually in the text of the Constitution. That has nothing to do with State elections, but specifically with elections to Federal legislative office.
Given these facts; it doesn’t hold that a person who was elected to the Senate—a Federal office with the specific qualification that no one is eligible for that office unless they are 30 years old, and have been a Citizen of the United States for 9 years—would suddenly be ineligible because one of their parents may not have been. That’s a reach. And it appears you seem to have this confused with provisions contained within Canadian birthright citizenship:
As such, the 14th Amendment is clear enough on who is and is not a citizen—just as Articles I and II are clear on who qualifies for Federal office–and it mentions nothing of the citizen’s parents. Just because they do it one way in Canada, doesn’t mean you can spin it into the U.S. doing the same. Nor can you confuse this with current issues on immigration–it’s not the same issue. Try that lie again.
“Just because they do it one way in Canada, doesn’t mean you can spin it into the U.S. doing the same. ”
I’ve made the same mistake but in reverse. Although Canada and the U.S. are extremely close allies, their systems of government are very different. And in many cases, so are their laws.
You are welcome to continue wasting your time posting uninformed drivel in this thread, until and unless you write something offensive enough for the site operators to ban you.
However, engaging with you is a waste of time. You can’t persuade me or the other readers of this blog to support your tiny wizened Messiah for any elected office, and none of us can persuade you that your brain is damaged beyond the capacity to self-diagnose your own profound mental illness. Have a nice life in Canada.
Well Canada seems to be a bit better off then you at this present time. And you can not convince me either of your choice. That was never how this thread started. I have been called a racist, ignorant and god knows what else. You for the most part convinced me that I would never want you on my side of the fence. And that is one of the reason you are so loved by other countries.
And you have a wonderful time getting a job and a house in the US.
“Well Canada seems to be a bit better off then you at this present time. ”
And have you honestly asked yourself why that is? Because if you did, you may find it ironic that Ron Paul would be opposed to those very things that may put Canada at an advantage. I challenge you to come here to the States and see just how well you fare with our health care system. Canada was also fortunate in that it didn’t experience the full impact of the financial crisis as we did. No bank closed in Canada because the financial regulations prohibited the activities that harmed Wall Street. And guess what, Jerry, Ron Paul opposes similiar financial regulations!
You are enjoying the benefits of your government, but have no idea where they came from. And you are further clueless that Ron Paul opposes most of what you’ve come to enjoy. But that’s typical of Paul supporters here in the States, too. Yet, honestly, you are even more clueless. A lot more. You may not be a racist, but you are definitely clueless.
What I was refering to was the court date which a judge did subpoena Obama.
I will give a link to the case. There are many links however this was the first one I got on the net. I got my information through an e-mail.
http://www.independentamericanparty.org/2012/01/obama-eligibility-court-caseblow-by-blow/
Already addressed and dismissed right here on this very blog. http://www.angryblacklady.com/2012/01/23/the-birther-nonsense-has-hit-a-new-low-my-inner-obama-anger-translator/
Terry is very slow on the uptake. And from what we’ve all seen here, not really very good at distinguishing fact from assertion.
Also, he’s perhaps a bit more reading-comprehension-challenged than he’d like to admit.
All in all, not a particularly fearful adversary.
Get a hair cut
Feel like trying it, there, Sparky? Do ya?
Going for bad on this site is not going to end well for you.
I am a woman not a man, and do really think I care about what you say after all you remarks. You need to get a grip.
You obviously care enough to reply.
And I care enough to be unwilling to let nonsensical assertions such as yours go unaddressed, because my commitment is to the truth, as shown with evidence, not the baseless assertions
you seem so incredibly partial to.
The dispute is the meaning of “natural born” and whether both parents have to be citizens for the presidency.
The constitutional requirement for the President of the United States to be a natural-born citizen had one purpose according to St. George Tucker:
That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence, which, wherever it is capable of being exerted, is to he dreaded more than the plague. The admission of foreigners into our councils, consequently, cannot be too much guarded against; their total exclusion from a station to which foreign nations have been accustomed to, attach ideas of sovereign power, sacredness of character, and hereditary right, is a measure of the most consummate policy and wisdom. …The title of king, prince, emperor, or czar, without the smallest addition to his powers, would have rendered him a member of the fraternity of crowned heads: their common cause has more than once threatened the desolation of Europe. To have added a member to this sacred family in America, would have invited and perpetuated among us all the evils of Pandora’s Box.
That’s nice. But so what?
President Obama was born in the US. He therefore meets the constitutional requirements to be our president. I don’t need some wingnut from another country to tell me different.
Good answer but maybe you should read what is being disputed. I personally could not care where he was born, but that is not what I was talking about. He being challenged on whether both parents have to be US citizens because when the law was drafted it was the father who carried the citizenship for his son and his father was not an American citizen.
At least I read a little.
Don’t know why I can’t reply to the ensuing comment. But its author should read this:
From Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition: “Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.”
As you can see, parentage is utterly irrelevant to eligibility for the presidency.
I mean, irrelevant when the individual in question was born in the US.
And St. George Tucker is, in this…what, exactly? Certainly not the last word on this or anything else.
Is his comment, which is what that statement certainly is, not trumped by this?
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
=========================
Do you find in that any ambiguity of any sort whatsoever? Note, also, that the 14th was passed post-Tucker, meaning even had his assertion the force of law, which it did not, the subsequent amendment would have superseded it.
You fail. You fail most amusingly, in fact.
Might I suggest a few lessons in reading comprehension before you try taking this issue up again? Especially given your comment below about “…read(ing) a little”, since you seem to fall short on the understanding of what it is you have read.
Mr Pony Tail do you really think that all the dispute that is going on is for no reason. The Natual Born clause is till being disputed because it was never clear and still isn’t. Until it is made clear the disputes will continue like it or not.
This ginned-up “dispute” is clearly going on for no GOOD reason. The language of the 14th amendment is delightfully unambiguous. There is not one thing that can reasonably disputed.
But then, this isn’t about reason, is it?
I think you need to dig a little deeper than Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition: If that was the case nothing would be disputed.
The guy with the ponytail dug to the 14th amendment of our constitution, from which the passage in Black’s Law Dictionary is clearly drawn. There is nothing to dispute, no matter how much you might wish there to be.
Actually, no.
The US system allows for much dispute, even on established points of law (something you are extremely weak at citing).
Count that as still another point of ignorance among the many You are displayng.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
The words “born or naturalized” are joined with the conjunction “or,” and logically an or implies either of the two are equal. What they are equal in is being a citizen. Not “a natural born citizen.” This expressly negates the idea that simple birth of a person who is “subject to the jurisdiction” confers the coveted “natural born” status. If the term “citizen” did in fact convey a “natural born” status, then who were naturalized would be considered “natural born.”
Obviously, this is not the case, as it would mean that people like Kissinger, Albright and Schwarzenegger could run for office. Clearly, the Fourteenth Amendment is not conferring “natural born” status on anyone, it only confers simple citizenship and the universal rights given to all citizens, “native born” and naturalized. In fact, several Supreme Court Cases since the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment restrict citizenship claims based on being born geographically within the United States, and bestows the coveted “natural born citizen” title to the children of citizens, while affirming simple citizenship to the children born to aliens.
Irrelevant. Kissinger, Albright and Schwarzenegger were not born in the US. President Obama was. Cite something that shows being born in the US is insufficient to be eligible to be president – and you can’t, because it is – or slink away in disgrace.
Citation?
Sorry. Ark Wong Kim shows the exact opposite of what you’re so ignorantly saying.
You really are quite ignorant.
Ark Wong Kim, no matter how interpreted, is irrelevent. The President was born on U.S. soil, and his parents are not needed to confer ‘natural born’ status on him.
what the frak? PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS BORN IN HAWAII.
END OF STORY.
go sell crazy someplace else. we’re all stocked up here.
no. don’t start typing. whatever you type will not change the fact that PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS BORN IN HAWAII.
christ on a biscuit, you people are stark raving mad.
Um.. no. Wong Kim Ark is the precedent case. It very clearly states that if you’re born in the US, you’re a “natural born citizen.” It doesn’t matter if your parents were citizens or not. There’s a string of court decisions since then upholding that, like Perkin v Elg. Most recently Ankeny v McDaniel, in which Indiana, citing Wong Kim Ark stated that then-candidate Obama was a “natural born citizen.”
So basically, you’re blowing in here saying your opinion without backing it up with any court cases – particularly Supreme Court cases – and expecting us to buy it. Takes real gall to do that on a blog whose owner is a lawyer. Oh, IANAL, but I do participate in the anti-birther blogs, so I know you’re pulling your justification out of your ass, and expecting us to believe it’s not shit.
I could go on but whats the point. You clearly do not see why all this is being disputed.
Putting up the Forth Ammendant would mean something if all aspects were clarified but they are not and that is what the disputes have been about.
If you can not see this what is the point. This has nothing to do about me liking Obama or not. It is why there is controversy in the court.
Until it is settled, it will go on.
Your whole argument appears to hinge on that “or”, followed by the truly ludicrous premise that “born” does not equate to “natural born”. There is nothing to dispute, no matter what semantic somersaults you or Orly Taitz or any other such lunatic undertakes.
Please, go back to trying to turn your own country into a libertarian nightmare failed state. Leave us alone.
Ark Wong Kim.
Idiot.
There is no controversy. There is a disgrace of a lawyer who will do anything to try to make Obama ineligible.
Lady. What don’t you understand about “a person born in the United States is eligible to be president.”
Who the hell cares about his parents? It doesn’t matter!
yes, we clearly do not see why all this is being disputed, and with word salad like the following –
–
who could blame us?
but seriously, though — i’m quite sure you don’t know what you’re talking about. the Fourth Amendment guards against unreasonable search and seizure. that’s relevant how? the answer is “it’s not.”
nothing you have said makes any sense — like, at all.
I think she means the Fourteenth Amendment. Which makes slightly more sense, but doesn’t stop the President from being, you know, BORN IN HAWAII.
I’ll say this, you’re persistent.
Dumb as a bag of fucking hammers (with abject apologies, of course, to the hand tool industry as a whole), true, still, you’re persistent.
Unfortunately, you are persisting in being wrong, and that’s the real crux of your problem.
Look, speaking as one human being to one lower life form, there’s nothing wrong with being wrong. The problem arises when you’re shown to be wrong and yet persist despite the evidence.
Give it up, Terry. You’re gaining no traction, and all your birfer idols are accomplishing is wasting a lot of people’s time and money on fool’s errands.
The truly sad part of this is that I could append it to just about any of your comments here and it would relate; in fact, you’re giving being deliberately obtuse a bad name.
Holy crap! What the hell’s going on in here??
Look, Terry:
First, I don’t know what race relations look like in Canadian society, but in the U.S., anybody who’s interested, not living in a cave, and not in denial can see that Ron Paul is an obvious bigot.
Second, you’ve been tricked by sideshow freaks (a la Orly Taitz) into believing there’s a chance President Barack Obama is not a “natural born” citizen and therefore illegitimately holding office as U. S. President. Taitz is in this for the attention and money. You — well, all you will get for the energy you spend on this is looking like an utter fool. And for God’s sake, please don’t send folks like Taitz any of your money!
I disagree. I want Terry to cash out her life savings and put it in a cardboard box and leave it under a park bench there in Canada so that freedumb loving Orly Taitz can claim it and spend it on peroxide.
And you should really look up the benefits of peroxide. You might be surprised
The only people who thought he would be the nominee are delusional and racists just like him. Good riddance.
CW in LA, that made me L out loud.
To all of you, I so happy to have been on this site and see the true american spirit. Courteous, friendly, able to debate a subject without name calling. Willing to look at another perspective.
Yes that is what you enthuse. A brighter side of America. A strong America I am sure you all have good jobs, work hard and treat your neighbour as you would be wanted to be treated.
You definetly are not like Paulbots. You are all kind and respectful. I am sure you volunteer and help others. I am sure most of you have probably fought in the numerous wars for you’re country. And I am also sure that who ever you support you are out there euthusiastically calling on doors and waving signs and doing whatever you can to help.
I can see you are all well educated and conduct your comments that reflects your deep wisdom and knowledge of the your country.
Yes it has been a real good perspective to another side of the American people.
Wishing you all your freedoms and all the liberty you deserve.
And you’re the worst fucking thing that has been farted into the Earth’s atmosphere and unfortunately your stench will last a million years. No one needs to be smelling your shit. They should be flushing you down the fucking toilet with great anger.
Sounds an awful lot like a Bible-beater saying “I’ll pray for you”, don’t it? Just another tick-turd Paulite cultist proving it’s a cult of personality with their Holy Golden King at the center.
Don’t let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya.
Seriously, Terry, you come in here spouting Paulist stuff and then switch to birtherism and expect a warm, loving reception? Did you even bother to look at the blog title? And if you did, what were you thinking?
I’m an Angry Black Boring Middle-Aged White Guy myself, who yes, has satisfying work that pays well enough, gets on well enough with a very diverse crowd of neighbors, does more with my education than you apparently do with the lack of reading comprehension you’ve displayed here more than once, and in parting, has only this left to say:
When your assertions are shown over and over again to be baseless and yet you persist in them, we’re really left with only one conclusion to draw. You’re either unable or unwilling to accept that the facts don’t support you. If you’re unable, well, then maybe you’re more to be pitied. Somehow, I think it’s more a case of being unwilling.
That leaves us to speculate on your motivation. It’s speculation, true, still, what could it be?
Is it some strange form of performance art? (Probably not.)
Are you, like the above-described God-botherers, trying to save us from ourselves? (Here in the US most of us call that delusional.)
Or are you simply being overtly hostile and unnecessarily contrary for reasons most of the birther crowd carry? That’s the most likely, and least favorable, of all explanations. That’s called racism. There’s just no way to put a favorable spin on that.
Your arguments about “natural born” citizenship are what the birther crowd shops around on a constant basis. And even if they find a local judge willing to accept the filing fee, it always gets knocked back in their faces once it begins. (Much like what would happen to me on my best basketball day ever if I tried driving on Kevin Love on one of his very average days, I suspect.) So..no traction above the local level, persistence to the point of hostility in being wrong, shifting gears as soon as you were refuted, motivations that at best are rather suspect, just exactly what sort of reception were you expecting?
Hasta la motherfuckin’ vista!
You still haven’t actually offered a coherent discussion of anything Ron Paul has done or realistically might do in the future, plus you turned out to be a passive-aggressive birther, so it was a little hard to know how to engage you except by mockery.
Actually, passive-aggressive pretty much summed up your whole argument, such as it was.
Fuck off already, you canadian twat.
Keep up the good work all of you. You did not disappoint me. And by the way you did not prove anything about the law, you are all just kidding yourself. I am not a birther or a Paulbot. Why don’t you all go back to the original question I posed.
Not one person answered anything on the military support, pensions or had anything to imput.
All you can do is agrue aout one point. I never said Obama was not born in America. I said the dispute is caused from ambiguity of the 14th ammendment.
My movivation was to have an intellgent conversation about the difference in our thoughts.
But that is not going to happen when people are obbessed with their own agendas.
And you have the balls to call me a paulbot. Just scroll and see how wise your answers are. Give me a break. It is a total joke.
I asked you all what you liked obama for.
The answer was a amasing;
1. http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
2. DADT, passed Lilly Ledbetter, put a bullet in Bin Laden, held firm to getting out of Iraq, and made racist asshats like yourself whine and cry like there’s no tomorrow. I’d say mission fucking accomplished, but we’ve still got four more years to go.
Ponytail you amuse me. Twisting the hostility story is a great
“Or are you simply being overtly hostile and unnecessarily contrary for reasons most of the birther crowd carry? That’s the most likely, and least favorable, of all explanations. That’s called racism. There’s just no way to put a favorable spin on that.” I have found that people who reverse the situation, mirror themselves.
“Seriously, Terry, you come in here spouting Paulist stuff and then switch to birtherism and expect a warm, loving reception? Did you even bother to look at the blog title? And if you did, what were you thinking?”
Yes I can see clearly how you “get on well enough with a very diverse crowd of neighbors”
You have proved nothing.
My last post stands You have all still proven it.
And if I did come on the site to make a decision of who I should vote for, I definately would looking at an alternative or at least people who could answer questions with intelligent answers.
Maybe you should learn how to discuss Obama’s positions instead of throwing shit at people. You would benefit him a whole lot more.
You just hit every single idiot troll point there, didn’t you, you knuckle-dragging Paulcultist? Go swallow a box of cornstarch and have a miserable day. You aren’t worth giving a real answer to.
Seriously, is there any troll trope he didn’t drag his sorry ass through – “you just proved my point”, “you’re all group-thinkers”, “how dare you label me, you idiots”… all of them.
All the while coming off as someone who never really made it past high-school psychology.
Arrested development, I think they call it.
Did you even read the link I put up about the problems with Obama Care.
You will pay big for it. Of course everyone wants healthcare, I agree but looking how it will effect the people long term is important.
The Military support Ron Paul. I do have a problem on the way they shot Bin Laden. A body would be nice instead of throwing it over board. That might good for you but not for many. I don’t by into why they decided not to show him dead.
I did not say Obama did nothing. Don’t ask don’t tell is good. Lilly Ledbetter helped but not women.
And only one person responded to what he has done.
“The military support Ron Paul.”
Jesus wept. Who told you that? There is no candidate that ‘the military support’.
Good answer , I am sure as I said earlier you are well educated. Probably a University degrre from Harvard.. I can tell by your post on the 14th ammendment. When I graduated from grade 13(something you probably could not understand) I had 3 jobs and worked and went back to school part time. You see at that time education was not what it is today. If you were smart and had a bussiness sense you could be successful.I Don’t have any degree in psychology but do in marketing and bussiness. I don’t think we had high school psychology back then. Maybe that is a good thing because most university grads now taking it can not gets jobs.
Too bad your “marketing and bussiness” “degrre” didn’t include grammar or spelling. You’d likely have gone a bit farther in life.
It is further my friend, not farther, if we need to nit pick a typo.
You by far the most entertaining person on here.
Thank you for proving my point. No intelligent answer. All this has become pure amusement. And of course Im not worth giving an answer to because you are unable to give clear answers.
http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
Very good link.
Go back to school and learn how to debate. Or better still try using the golden rule.
It is truly amasing what you say about being a Paul troll. Educate yourself. Countries all over the world are researching this man. Why because he makes sense.
But definatley not to people who want war, that do not care about the education system going down the toilet. Who are afraid that everyone is out to get them. Think that it is their job to rule the world. Want the Patriot act NDAA.
People are sick and tired of your bullying. ( which you seem to be perfect at fitting the description.)
You need to wake up and smell the roses my dear. You are not a loved country. So that is why Ron Paul makes sense to so many countries out there. And he will change the GOP even if he does not get elected.
You made a comment on me being a pothead. Why don’t you do a little research on pot. Wow just think of the money it could bring in to the states. But , no the medical instituation don’t use it. It is bad stuff. You have more problems dealing with prescription drugs that you ever will with pot.
When I travel to the states the majority of people are friendly and courteous and actuallyconverse. You display the opposite of that model.
As far as I am concerned you are a part of the States that people do not want to know.
Now reply back with your ususal swearing, name calling and everything else you represent.
oh and yes…did you ant me to say “God Bless”
Terry, you got several serious answers about Obama’s appeal, which is frankly more than you deserved, given your entrance and whining approach.
I’m sorry if you do not feel that effectively promoting equality in the military and the workplace, moving the U.S. forward on providing affordable and functioning healthcare and sending men to shoot Osama Bin Laden’s ass stone-cold dead are not good reasons to like a candidate, but they are, in fact, real reasons for most of us here.
You appeared unable to grasp that these were serious answers, nor did you appear to be able to offer anything in favor of your apparent preferred candidate, except for vague references to ‘changing the way the GOP thinks about issues’.
Now you have the nerve to act as though WE were changing the subject? Good God.
Then, speaking of changing the subject, she drops a big steaming birther turd on the discussion.
Anyway, is there something in the Paulbot bylaws that requires its members be long-winded and incoherent?
Lol, I did not see anybody discussing anything when I arrived. All you were doing was putting down Ron Paul stating that everyone who like him where’s a white hood. That is why I got into this discussion. My sister is black, so get a life all of you!
Weren’t you claiming to be leaving quite a bit upthread?
One quick note. Thank you to “Gwangung” who understood what I was refering to that none of these other’s have a clue about.
And pony tail get a hair cut as I said before or by a pink ribbon sweety pie!
We understand what you’re referring to, you’re just, well, unfortunately and horrendously wrong.
I guess we’ll see you later when Mitt wins the nomination, and the birthers start insisting that he’s not qualified because his father was born in Mexico.
Quicker note: be gone, swamp queen.
Terry, you said you were going to leave earlier on. LEAVE! And don’t forget to stick the flounce!
Freedom of speech my dear and this site has become very amusing. I”ll leave when I am good and ready, not by some loud mouth idot telling me to that has not got the guts to put her or his real name up.
And Pony, keep up you’re writting , you are good. I am not refering to you’re writting on this site.
I have sat here a good long while, trying to see how all the hatred has transposed itself on this blog. If I had not entered the blog, I am sure it would have died after the first few posts.
Everyone wants to be right on their position, when in fact there is no right or wrong. It is about the choices we make. It is about sharing opinions and trying to figure out what is best for all people.
I will admit that the first time in along time my back was up. Not because I believe Ron Paul is best but because there are issues that concern me about Obama. I can clearly see that many of you are educated. I have even read some of your work.
The comment that I first replied to was related to “white hoods” and it escalated from there. My sister was for Obama in the last election but has changed her mind. They were legitimate questions I asked. I could plaster links about Ron Paul over the site and argue points but that was not my intention.
I do not feel very good about some of the things I said even though I was angry at the comments that were posted and felt they were uncalled for when trying to discuss an issue.
I do feel everyone is entitled to their own opinion and what works best for them.
“…when in fact there is no right or wrong.”
Birtherism is wrong, factually and morally. If you can’t see where your lobbing that particular turd into the punch bowl caused things to turn sour, I don’t see much hope for you.
Hi, Terry. Thanks for this comment. May I call you Terry? Good.
Here’s the deal. This post is about the emergence of proof that Ron Paul himself personally read and reviewed all the offensive, racist, homophobic, misogynistic and anti-Semitic conspiracy-mongering content that appeared for years in his newsletter above his own signature.
He has repeatedly lied and dissembled when asked about this, and is now exposed as not only someone who is, if not himself a racist, homophobic, misogynistic anti-Semite, perfectly willing to use such material to attract some of America’s most repulsive and dangerous citizens to give him money and support his misguided and dangerous personal crusades.
Now that he is definitively exposed, you read an article about that, and decide to derail the conversation by introducing other issues, unrelated to Dr. Paul, that are some of the most toxic and damaging efforts in US history to delegitimize our duly elected President.
Throughout your time on this site, you have used derailing techniques to distract readers from the simple truth that, if it wasn’t clear already, Dr. Paul is unfit to hold elected office in this country.
If you actually wanted to discuss the “birther” nonsense, there are, as I have pointed out to you, other posts on this site in which those issues are also discussed.
So just like Dr. Paul, you have revealed yourself to any reader as someone who is willing to traffic in despicable lies, then when called on it, you retreat and dissemble just like the disgusting liar Ron Paul.
It is for these reasons that decent, educated, patriotic Americans are expressing their well-earned righteous indignation at your relentless, exhausting trolling.
It is my conclusion that you have absolutely nothing of value to add to any discussion of US politics and current events. Further, if our readers at ABLC were to draw any conclusions about the people of Canada based on your lying, dissembling, and conspiracy-theorizing, we would rightly determine that we should build a giant wall between our nations and keep your diseased, racist, lying asses out of our nation.
But we’re better than that. You, on the other hand are not. You would do the world an immense favor if you would cancel your internet access and refrain from polluting the world with your filth.
Dear Allan, as you being formal blogger on this site and with a site of you’re own I would care to challenge you on the lies that I told. There was no derailing on purpose. I asked questions and someone asked me to post on what I was refering to I did which was clarified by someone as the “Ak Wong Kim
” just like Dr. Paul, you have revealed yourself to any reader as someone who is willing to traffic in despicable lies, then when called on it, you retreat and dissemble just like the disgusting liar Ron Paul.
And I did not retreat, I realized that the hatred on this site is venomous.Anything asked about your pensions, healthcare system or anything else for that matter would not in a debate mode.
Yes I am guilty of coming on here and a mentioning a different topic.
I myself succummed to the way you talk to people and I did not feel that good about it.
I liar, I am not. You seem fit to call people racist when they do not agree with you.
I am also guilty of allowing myself to speak to inviduals as they did not matter. All individual matter Allen.
Allen a retreat it was not is was a bold realization of what hatred does.
Terry: Blogging while drunk or stoned is not a good thing. Why don’t you go somewhere and sober up, and come back when you’re coherent.
I know I’m a “little late to the party” so to speak, but I’ve had my own frustrating arguments with Paul supporters.
What it boils down to is this…Terry.
You and other Paulites will never accept anything that counters your image of the man…even if it’s based on fact. You can’t be reasoned with because you’re not basing your support for Paul on reason. It’s purely emotional.
You can’t accept the fact that the man wrote racist newsletters. You can’t accept that fact that his record on civil liberties is dismal or that he’s not even a true libertarnian. And if you were to find out (as I have) that Ron Paul is knee deep in earmarks to his district back in Texas, you wouldn’t accept that either. The mere fact that this man has been a politician serving in DC for 20 years also undermines his image as an “outsider.” He’s not an outsider. His stated positions on certain issues may make it seem as if he is, but he has been working the system in DC for 2 decades.
You have the luxury of admiring this man from the other side of the U.S.-Canadian border with no idea that he opposes much of what you’ve come to expect from your government. You’ve taken a larger leap of logic than U.S. Paul supporters. You may think that you being a Canadian gives you an unique perspective on this, but it doesn’t. It makes you look even more gullible and clueless. Your country has a health care system that does a better job of providing coverage to its citizen, but you support a man who believes in no government intervention in this area. Some of your fellow countrymen living here will not give up their citizenship due to the dismal state of our system. And your country provided better financial regulations and was spare many of the difficulties we’ve experienced here, but yet you support a man who would do away with all of those regulations.
Sorry, Terry, but you’re out of your depth here. Besides, this is a lost cause. Paul is in his ’70s and he’s on his way out. He probably knows this, but his supporters still hold on. How sad.
There is in fact right and wrong. It’s called truth, it is objective, and you are not now and have not in your time here been on the proper side of that line other than by pure accident.
You have no reason to feel good about what you’ve said, and our anger and intensity were and remain justified when you keep repeating things that are demonstrably false borderline incitements. As I said earlier, upthread, you have shown yourself either unable or unwilling to accept verified facts, preferring to repeat your lies (and those of others), change the subject, misdirect, and the like.
As for being entitled to an opinion, yes, you are. Take the time to ground it in truth and accept the fact that coming in and being deliberately antagonistic is likely to earn you a response in kind.
Would you be so welcoming to anyone coming into your living room and setting your furniture on fire?
Missed an HTML tag, I think. And edit is broken, so I couldn’t fix it.
Someone upstairs?
FTFY.
I think the problem here is that someone does not know that HAWAII is a state! LOL!
“in fact there is no right or wrong.”
This is the core conceit of the ostensibly independent but actually rabidly right-wing or shallow “left-wing” individual. It’s been built up over decades, this idea that it’s all people’s opinions and there is no grounding of these things in concepts like empirical reality or a shared morality.
It is this that enables people to ignore the predations of a person like Ron Paul in favor of the insignificant statements he makes that appear to agree with their preconceived notions. A moral framework would demand an examination of WHY and HOW Paul will do the things he says he wants to do, and that examination leads inexorably to the unsatisfying conclusion that you can’t have your magic unity pony- that the world is complicated, and politicians pander.
All that, of course, presumes the presence of a good faith criticism and disappointment with the President. Something, I note, not in evidence in Terry’s dissembling and incoherence.
The more sense Ron Paul makes, the more nonsense the Establishment lapdog media tries to throw at him. If you watch the whole interview (not just the slice-and-dice edits) you will see Ron Paul repudiating the outlandish ‘racism’ charges that Matthews and others try to slam him with. The irony is that Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate that presents a truly color-blind view of government, and the race-baiters and corporatist-controlled media try to slam him with phony ‘racism’ charges, so that people of color will dismiss him out of hand- instead of actually researching his ideas on their own. That’s because Dr. Paul’s common-sense ideas are so foreign to the tortured pseudo ideologies of both the progressive left AND the neo-con right!
Individual liberty and freedom is anathema to the corporatist bankster-controlled and bureaucrat-implemented power structure that this Demopublican/Republicrat duopoly in America uses to divide, conquer and vassalize the American people in neo-feudal technological serfdom. If implemented, Ron Paul’s programs and ideas would revitalize our country economically, socially and morally. It’s real simple- take responsibility for your own actions, don’t infringe on the rights of individuals and allow people to succeed on their own merits. Instead, we get too many who want the government to do all the heavy lifting, and exchange their personal liberty for a false sense of security and a dependency-creating handout. This equally applies to the government-dependent individual AND the corporate-welfare leeches in the Military-Industrial International Bankster Complex. If we cut out ALL government subsidies to both individuals AND mega-corporations, then the average individual, the small and medium business and the truly moral big corporations would all thrive. The only ones who thrive under the present system are those individuals and groups that game the system to their own advantage- living off of the productivity of others while contributing nothing.
Nothing new from the Ronbot. Every word of that is the same crap every other Paulite idiot ever has posted to defend him and distract from the facts. The same “freedom small business you’re-just-establishment” crap. Not one bit of it is new to any of us. I know that’s shocking to you.
He’s a racist, and now we know he meets directly with neo-Nazi racist organizations thanks to Anonymous. You are an enabler of racism. The facts don’t lie, and you can’t write them off no matter how much distractionary shit you post.
In the simplest terms, I would not be saddened if you, realizing the futility of your positions and how much time you’ve wasted on your Holy Golden King, were to end your life without fanfare once he fails to become Mighty Gold-Standard Dictator of Freedomdonia yet again.
This is exactly how the media plays its games. No different than they did with Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW3qbibh8Mk
Your link means nothing.
Translation: “LA LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU!!1″ Typical Ronnie Cultist.
By the way, trolls, douchecanoes, and other assorted lesser nuisances: LEARN TO USE THE REPLY LINK. IT’S RIGHT THERE.
Right! I am glad you can see the point being made. Anonymous is exactly that
“Anonymous”.
Ron Paul is a racist. Thinks white race is superior to black race in Newsletters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Z5mdY_uUYg&context=C3e1a789ADOEgsToPDskIp5uZjTRceFz9d00jGGDGl