Putting an END to the 'Ron Paul is racist' claims right here and now. Who will challenge me?

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by neo96

 

World really must be coming to an end!!

noooooooooo, i'm not done yet! lol
no world ending please.

reply to post by Navieko


Rubbish eh

The attacks on fellow republicans lying about Bahcmann and Gingrich and everyone else inconsistences like the 30 year politician named Paul Who if he had any character or principles would have done something a hell of alot sooner.

Paul opponent is Obama

Character the fundamental lack of it is a non issue for Paul supporters your no better than those who Voted and supported for Obama and who follow them blindly.

Originally posted by undo
hmm. interesting point. i'd like to understand why he would support a person who broke the law.

Do you really need to ask? I think anyone with a right mind would believe Bradley Manning to be a hero for what he did and the sacrifices he made. If Ron Paul did in fact say those things about him, my respect for him grew even higher.

Bradley Manning: An American Hero

reply to post by undo


Wikileaks broke the law, Bradely Manning broke the law no man is above the law says Paul nor this nations Government but people are free to do whatever the hell they want to when they disagree with it.

Ron Paul Bachmann hates muslim among the numerous other attack ads running in Iowa

Is Paul a racist the claim is he didnt right that but turns around recently to say Bachman hates muslims.

Sounds Racist Is it?

You be the judge.

reply to post by neo96

Paul's "opponent" is ANYONE that stands in the way of him getting elected as POTUS. To say Obama is the only one he should be focusing on is just idiotic. Right now his main goal is to get the general election, and to get there he's up against the other GOP contenders. Obama isn't even in the picture yet.

The rest of your post is all gibberish and you haven't answered my questions.

reply to post by neo96


i havent watched your video yet, i will after i post this.
but i must respond to thing about bachman. i saw the debate where she said we must
go to iran. and i was thinking....."why must we go to iran?" it just smacked me upside the head one day.
yeah just why are we going around the world, beating up people? err killing people, their kids, their wives, their grandmoms, their cousins and etc. seems a bit over the top. in fact, it's way over the top. dominionists (if you don't know what that is, look it up) believe that they must make the planet ready for the arrival of jesus by doing his job before he even gets here. i think they need to read the text again.

Originally posted by neo96

 

Ron Paul Bachmann hates muslim among the numerous other attack ads running in Iowa

How do you know he's lying? How do you know he doesn't honestly believe -- after the way Bachmann had been portraying Muslims and her stance on certain issues -- that she really does hate them? I mean she seems to be extremely keen to go over there and kill countless more of them... I'd say he has pretty good reason to believe she does indeed hate Muslims. Of course she won't say that herself, but actions speak louder than words, and at the very least she does not value their lives.

reply to post by Navieko


The idiocy here is people who have nothing negative or even question Pauls actions attacking other people to get a job is acceptable behavior by paul supporters.

Your free to write my posts that way you will get the "answers" you wish and the "proof" is out there for anyone to see.

It's called google but if your here for other people to spoon feed you then move on.

reply to post by Navieko


PROVE TO ME BACHMAN HATES MUSLIMS

PROVE TO ME Gingrich took a dime from anyone.

funny how that works.

This is what kills me. The big 3 "corporate news networks"....Fox, CNN, and MSNBC.....for the last 3 years you would be hard pressed to not find Ron Paul appear at least ONCE on one of these networks each day. They literally helped put him in the position he is in.

He has probably had more airtime than any other politician in all of Washington.....i don't want to hear about how "they have it out for Paul".

All of you know that when someone takes the lead in polls.....the press digs out the trash. Would you rather they not?

Shouldn't ALL PEOPLE have the right to know about the newsletters and all his various stances...including publicly stating he wouldn't vote for the civil rights act? or the desegregation of schools?

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Navieko

 

PROVE TO ME Gingrich took a dime from anyone.

funny how that works.

www.opensecrets.org... looks like he has taken almost $3 million in and his PAC almost 52 million. He by no means is unique in this among all the candidates

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Navieko

 

PROVE TO ME BACHMAN HATES MUSLIMS

PROVE TO ME Gingrich took a dime from anyone.

funny how that works.

watched the video. i agree with you that even if he personally believes that kind of civil disobedience is laudable, that it's really bad form to admit it in a public arena, particularly where it touches on the military, as there are both good and bad and everything in between, in the military as well.

but i do believe, based on what bachman said in the debate, that she couldn't be harboring feelings of good will for iranians at the moment. and although i don't personally agree with islam, i do agree with their rights as human beings, to live, love and prosper, not die, suffer and wither away. but i also agree with our rights to do the same things, as americans, and our various religious or non-religious creeds. pre-emptive strikes on people, many of who are innocent bystanders in these wars, is ...well dare i say it's not going to help the israelis? according to scripture it's god who resolves the attacks, not the usa, unless bowie was right and god is an american.

watch it till the end, he says, "god is an american." lol i dont think he meant that in a good way

Originally posted by neo96

 

PROVE TO ME BACHMAN HATES MUSLIMS

She would -- without hesitating -- start another war in the middle east so as to "protect" Israel. Starting another war, especially in a country like Iran -- for stupendous reasons -- will obviously come with a great number of casualties, as in any war. Men, women and children. Therefore to accept their lives as expendable in the fight for a cause that is completely unnecessary, she is transparently revealing to the world that she does not hold value for their lives. And the difference between them and the people she claims to "protect"? One is Muslim, the other is not.

Actions speak louder than words.

PROVE TO ME Gingrich took a dime from anyone.

Now that's just common knowledge. The question is, how naive and gullible are you to believe his "defense"?

Gingrich, who now is near the top in polling on the GOP race, said he didn't remember exactly how much he was paid, but a person familiar with the hiring said it was at least $1.6 million for consulting contracts stretching from 1999 to early 2008.

Newt Gingrich Defends Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Payments

reply to post by Navieko


Here is the breakdown of contributors of his PAC

www.opensecrets.org...

reply to post by FredT


That was in reference to his years after his speakership about Fanny and Freddy not about politicial campaign contributions.

During his time in the "private" sector the point being Paul supporters take his word about anything as "truth".

Newt stole money from the public they beleive it
Bachman hates muslims and they beleive it.
Cain was a Fed shill they beleive it.
His support of OWS and they do not question it.
His support of wikileaks and Manning and they say nothing.
His rant on torture when he has been a sitting us Congressman for 30 years when it has been used during that entire time it only became and issue during the last decade.

They do not question anything.

The biggest success of the media has been to avert attention from true issues and politicians' stances on said issues to their 'character,' their 'history,' etc. The job of a President is to uphold the Constitution and serve the American people. Ron Paul will do that. I can say such a thing with confidence because I can easily review his voting record. I have yet to see a single vote of his that is unconstitutional or inconsistent. So, hypothetically let's say he actually is a racist. Let's say he just downright hates blacks, jews, mexicans, etc. So what? As Americans, we are supposed to be FREE. Free to believe whatever the heck we want to believe, whether it's logical, moral, irrational, or downright idiotic. What we CANNOT do as Americans is disobey Constitutional Laws (without repercussions, at least). Has Ron Paul acted in any discriminatory way whatsoever toward any minority? I certainly haven't seen any evidence of that. So why is this so important? Isn't the whole point of a President to be on Our - The American People - side? Isn't that exactly what Paul has shown over the years?

*Side note: racism is when a person acts differently toward another person simply because of that person's race, religion, etc. What Ron Paul is being accused of is not racism, it is prejudice. I have never met a non-prejudiced person in my entire life (not an over-exaggeration). Everybody has their own particular prejudices, but they don't usually act on those prejudices. Thus, they are not racist.

reply to post by Navieko


Wheres the proof?

Passing off "Common knowledge" is a trait of Liberals Facts do not mater only what a supporter says is fact.

Newt was in the private sector people do get paid for services rendered just like how paul took Medicare payments when he was a doctor.

Just like how Paul took a Government check for being in the military.

Whats the difference?

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Navieko

 

Wheres the proof?

Passing off "Common knowledge" is a trait of Liberals Facts do not mater only what a supporter says is fact.

Newt was in the private sector people do get paid for services rendered just like how paul took Medicare payments when he was a doctor.

Just like how Paul took a Government check for being in the military.

Whats the difference?

False, Ron Paul refused to take government medicare, he took cash or bartered his services for other services or goods like food. If his patients had no money, he did not hesitate to give them free service. He also made it a stipulation to doctors he hired for his medical practice to agree not to take government backed insurance because he believed so strongly that it was those government benefits that inflated the prices of medical care.

reply to post by neo96


This is what I love about the anti-Pauls, it isn't even about racism, prejudice or discrimination. It is PAUL, nothing he does can be right to you but everything can be wrong.

So if a new issue pops up and you see it as a weapon to use against Paul, you will step over your own mother to put him down.

Face it, Paul is the best candidate, the cleanest candidate running for president. His voting record and protection of the Constitution speaks for itself.

Neo96, if you really cared about discrimination at all, you wouldn't try to bring in any of this other BS, same goes for the rest of the anti-Pauls.

I think Benevolent Heretic is one of the only ones that genuinely cares whether Paul made those discriminatory remarks or not.

reply to post by eLPresidente


he's got a few flaws, but that's certainly not one of them! it's so easy to like him, it's rather scary lol

i keep checking my rearview for signs of impending horribleness with him but so far, he's looking spiffy!