Ron Paul

[Annie]

YOU MEAN CONSPIRACY FACTS...THE CFR ,TRI LATERAL COMMISSION AND THE BILDERBURGS AND THEIR STATED AGENDAS ARE FACT , THE FAILURE OF THE 911 COMMISSION AND ITS OMISSIONS IN TESTIMONY AND THE ISSUES OF WTC 7 IS FACT...WHATS A CRAZY CONSPIRACY THEORY IS THAT RON PAUL HAS A RACIST, FASCIST, AGENDA....IDIOT

Gee, Jillian must have hit a nerve. All caps, it makes it so much more real. NOT!

 

[eots]

Gee, Jillian must have hit a nerve. All caps, it makes it so much more real. NOT!

I love the way you some stupid line from Wayne's world.. and the way you address formate over content..please all caps or not can you explain to me the role the cfr, the tri lateral commission and the bildeburgs play in American foreign and domestic policy?

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

OK, I saw the good doctor on Meet the Press.

He's against government spending, except when it comes to earmarks for his district.

If I remember correctly, earmarks are assigned after the total amount of spending is determined. If that's the case, then it would only make sense to get back as much money as you can.

At any rate, you will not find any member of congress with higher ratings from taxpayer watchdog groups. To find a national politician that's anywhere near Ron Paul's record, you'd have to go all the way back to Grover Cleveland.

Hang the poor out to dry, take away the safety net for our old.

If it wasn't for SS deductions, I could double my 401k contributions. My salary is very average. Take away all my paycheck deductions, and I could triple it, with plenty of money left over. Stop running deficits and devaluing the dollar, and I might just be able to retire by the age of 50.

There would be no prohibition against the states running their own programs, nor any reason why private charities can't help the truly needy. Charity isn't something that was invented by government, and people would be able to donate a lot more if 1/4 of their paycheck didn't disappear before they even cash their check. Not to mention that fewer people would need charity to begin with if they got to keep their entire check.

At any rate, Ron Paul has repeatedly said that he would not repeal the welfare state overnight, but rather phase it out, letting younger workers opt out of SS and so forth.

And he's a dangerous SOB.... citizenship not by birth?!?!?!?! Gee... how much Jew blood will a "citizen" be allowed to have with good ole Ronnie?

He's a "constitutionalist" who wants to amend the constitution to divest people of their citizenship.

No wonder the white supremacists love him.

Yes, many constitutionalists would actually like to amend the constitution. It's not a perfect document. Instead of simply declaring that it's a "living document", which it was never meant to be, they want to follow the formal process of amending it.

And the birthright citizenship thing. A child born to an american parent would still be an american automatically. What RP wants to eliminate is the legal quirk which allows a non-citizen to illegally enter the US, give birth, and then their child is automatically a citizen. Once that happens, they are eligible for a whole range of benefits, they get priority for citizenship, etc.

The problem is, this encourages illegal immigration, and combined with the federal mandates to provide a long list of freebies, many hospitals in border states are going bankrupt. There is nothing racist about this; you can't do the reverse and demand that the mexican government cover all your hospital bills and such. They'd laugh their asses off and promptly boot you out of the country.

We are in agreement, though the 'scares them shitless' has more to do with fascism than anything else.

The man has spent his whole life speaking out against all forms of collectivism, from left-wing collectivism (communism) to right-wing collectivism (fascism).

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but you've typed out many, many posts defending the actions of this administration--the pre-emptive war, the torturing, the warrantless wire-tapping, the imprisonments without trials, etc. For you of all people to accuse the #1 opponent of all this of being a fascist, because he kept a $500 donation from a racist, is absolutely astounding.

 

[eots]

its not as astounding if you take it for what it really is...spin..because ron paul does not swear his blind allegiance to Israel...how much JEW BLOOD will you be able to have? THE PRUDENT GET KILLED ? what a freak !

 

[Annie]

The man has spent his whole life speaking out against all forms of collectivism, from left-wing collectivism (communism) to right-wing collectivism (fascism).

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but you've typed out many, many posts defending the actions of this administration--the pre-emptive war, the torturing, the warrantless wire-tapping, the imprisonments without trials, etc. For you of all people to accuse the #1 opponent of all this of being a fascist, because he kept a $500 donation from a racist, is absolutely astounding.

It doesn't matter how many posts I've typed for or against the administration, the war, global warming or the price of stamps, none of those have anything to do with the racist/anti-semitic backers of Ron Paul. It has little to do with $500, though likely much more, but again, that's besides the point.

You spoke about his tax rating being so high, he also has 100% rating from the John Birch Society. Here he speaks out against the UN, something I'm often posting about, but at the John Birch Society? Once again Baron, show me who your friends are...

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/n6ciz4WYd3g&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/n6ciz4WYd3g&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

[eots]

the john birch society ? what as opposed what to bilderburg meetings ?
speaking in front of the cfr ? how much time have you spent in regards to where other candidates funds have come from or who they may have spoken in front of ...your a lunatic

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

It doesn't matter how many posts I've typed for or against the administration, the war, global warming or the price of stamps, none of those have anything to do with the racist/anti-semitic backers of Ron Paul. It has little to do with $500, though likely much more, but again, that's besides the point.

It's perfectly relevant. My central point is that you're jumping to conclusions not because there's a whole lot of evidence, but because you disagree with the man's views. You basically accuse him of fascism on the flimsiest of evidence, while excusing your guy's adoption of policies which are classic hallmarks of fascism. Remove the beam from your eye before you start squawking about an imaginary bit of sawdust in RP's eye.

You spoke about his tax rating being so high, he also has 100% rating from the John Birch Society. Here he speaks out against the UN, something I'm often posting about, but at the John Birch Society? Once again Baron, show me who your friends are...

He speaks at all sorts of groups, that doesn't mean he endorses all of their views. Guess what, he's spoken at primarily marxist anti-war rallies in San Francisco too. I guess he's a conspiracist far-righter, but a marxist at the same time?

Also, was this John Birch thing meant to demonstrate his anti-semitism? Or was it meant to demonstrate that he believes in conspiracy theories?

 

[trobinett]

Kathianne, your over the top on this one.

I agree, Ron Paul is a kook, but he isn't any of the things that your alluding to, not a racist, and doesn't subscribe to John Birch doctrine.

Come on Kathianne, your just pulling our leg, right?

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Justin Raimondo of antiwar.com has this to say about the Ron Paul smears in his latest post:

=================================

To begin with, who the heck is Bill White? Here's what the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith has to say about him: "Along with his media savvy," they aver, "White is known for spreading propaganda and lies about his perceived enemies." Go here for his extensive criminal record. White started his career as a dingbat of renown with the founding of the Utopian Anarchist Party when he was just a lad. The UAP's 15 minutes of fame occurred after the Columbine High School shootings, when White or one of his wacked-out confreres issued a statement praising the shooters. This guy loooooves attention, and he got plenty of it when, after his evolution into a Sieg-Heiling, uniform-wearing neo-Nazi, he published the addresses and home phone numbers of the Jena Six. His "career" as a major nut reached its zenith with his leadership in the National Socialist Movement, which at one time claimed to be the biggest collection of losers and criminal misfits since George Lincoln Rockwell and his gang first blighted this country with their presence. But that outfit blew apart, mostly on account of White's penchant for factional manipulation, and this effort to derail the Paul campaign is this would-be mini-Hitler's latest claim to fame.

Secondly, the man who organized the dinner meetings "Commander" White refers to, Peter Gemma, has this to say:

"I ran those dinners &#8211; Ron Paul was never there&#8230; If Bill White ever came to the meetings, he didn't use his real name &#8211; he doesn't even get the name of the restaurant correctly."

...

The hate just jumps off the screen and comes right at you. In this sense, Vancier reminds me of&#8230; Bill White! They both have a penchant for stormtrooper-semi-military drag, violent hyperbole, and the sort of hectoring, wide-eyed hysteria and outright viciousness that repels any ordinary human being but attracts fellow miscreants and social rejects. In short, they're both crazy, and in practically identical ways. But that's not all they have in common: both hold ideological grudges against Paul and his fellow libertarians. Vancier hates Paul's foreign policy views, which he sees as a threat to Israel. White, who has attacked libertarians &#8211; and myself in particular &#8211; resents Paul's success because the good Dr. No has a non-racist, nonviolent, anti-collectivist explanation and solution for what White and his fellow Nazi nutsos attribute to a nonexistent "Jewish conspiracy" &#8211; the Federal Reserve, bank credit expansion, and subsequent waves of bankruptcies and foreclosures. Paul offers his growing audience of politically and often economically disenfranchised voters a rational explanation in the insight of the Austrian economists and the works of Ludwig von Mises, while White and his tiny cadre of National Socialist Workers look to the discredited pages of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

...

Paul, however, refuses to return the Black donation, and rightly so: after all, he's not spending the $500 to advance, say, Holocaust denial or any objectives that could even remotely be connected to neo-Nazism. He's spending it on promoting his own program of economic freedom, individual liberty, and a non-interventionist foreign policy. Anyway, who put the anti-Paulistas in charge of vetting each and every contribution to the Paul campaign &#8211; and why should Ron concede that role to them? Over 70,000 people gave this quarter &#8211; is the campaign supposed to comb through each and every one of those names and vet them for political correctness?

Naturally, the Paul-haters would answer "Yes" &#8211; they'd love to see the campaign consumed with policing itself according to their strictures.

(They'd also like to see Ron Paul go on TV every time he returns a donation and explain why he's not a nazi. That way, an association between the two begins to form in the minds of the public--Baron)

What's even more ludicrous is the accusation of "anti-Semitism." Let's be clear about this: no libertarian, particularly of the Rothbardian variety, of which Paul is one, could possibly entertain the idea of becoming an anti-Semite. In order to do so Paul would have to repudiate his two primary intellectual mentors and guiding lights: Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises, both of whom were Jewish. Indeed, this is what led White to attack Antiwar.com and libertarians in general in a screed that described us as a "Jewish think tank" &#8211; because our webmaster and several employees are Jewish. Oh, and I am supposedly "one quarter Jewish," which White should tell my Sicilian grandparents.

"Commander" White is just the kind of tar baby the War Party would love to stick Ron Paul with, and it's a role he's played in the past. Who can forget Stephen Schwartz's crazed piece in Frontpagemag.com describing me as a "fascist" and linking me to&#8230; yes, that's right, our old "friend" Bill White. Schwartz wrote of "Raimondo's prominent association with the Russian Jew-baiting website, Pravda.ru, and its American contributor, the neo-Nazi Bill White," but the reality is that there was never any association, prominent or otherwise. Schwartz points to articles by me posted on the Pravda Web site, where White's diatribes &#8211; sometimes attacking me &#8211; also appeared. Yet I never gave my permission to Pravda to post my work on their site, and the moment I saw that my columns were appearing next to White's diatribes, I demanded that Pravda cease and desist, which, to their credit, they did.

...

The sheer breadth of the anti-Paul Popular Front is an astonishing sight to behold, extending all the way from avowed Nazis to radical Zionists, from Noam Chomsky to Glenn Beck. Both Fox News and the International Socialist Organization are out for Paul's scalp &#8211; and you can tell an awful lot about people by their enemies. What this tells me about Ron Paul is that he's just what many people on both sides of the political spectrum have been waiting and hoping for.

 

[eots]

It's perfectly relevant. My central point is that you're jumping to conclusions not because there's a whole lot of evidence, but because you disagree with the man's views. You basically accuse him of fascism on the flimsiest of evidence, while excusing your guy's adoption of policies which are classic hallmarks of fascism. Remove the beam from your eye before you start squawking about an imaginary bit of sawdust in RP's eye.



He speaks at all sorts of groups, that doesn't mean he endorses all of their views. Guess what, he's spoken at primarily marxist anti-war rallies in San Francisco too. I guess he's a conspiracist far-righter, but a marxist at the same time?

Also, was this John Birch thing meant to demonstrate his anti-semitism? Or was it meant to demonstrate that he believes in conspiracy theories?

god how I hate how people have been programed with this term conspiracy theory if you have a group of individuals involved in a plot that is kept secret you have a conspiracy. people are charged with conspiring regularly , a policemen or investigator always begins with a theory based on logic and what evidence is available and theorizes,,,but through the media the term has come to indicate something unfounded ,illogical, imagined , and groups very real issues such as the failure of the 911 commission ,NAFTA ,the cfr and bilderburg influence on American foreign and domestic policy's right along side Bigfoot and alien elvisis....and then to top it all off this attitude comes from people that theorize that Ron Paul's secret agenda is to kill the Jews and the prudent....maddness

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

About Justin Raimondo--he is the editor of antiwar.com, and a gay man living in San Francisco. He doesn't talk much about social issues, but I imagine that he would support gay marriage.

He also wrote a biography of austrian economist Murray Rothbard:

The foreword to the book was written by none other than Pat Buchanan. Justin also endorsed Pat when he ran for president.

Welp, I guess that settles it. Pat is unmistakeably associated with a San Franciscan queer, case closed. I guess that means that Pat endorses gay marriage!

 

[steeliniraq]

hey he has a big budget from the millions he has received from individual contributers including the most donations from ACTIVE TROOPS plus millions more coming from the tea party ...whats a few bucks spent on a blimp to get some press

Ummm can you provide a link showing that ACTIVE TROOPS are giving this guy money? As a ACTIVE TROOP I along with my friends aren't voting for this guy and I was interested in where you heard this. I can't see many ACTIVE TROOPS voting for this man. Any links would be great!

 

[jillian]

It's perfectly relevant. My central point is that you're jumping to conclusions not because there's a whole lot of evidence, but because you disagree with the man's views. You basically accuse him of fascism on the flimsiest of evidence, while excusing your guy's adoption of policies which are classic hallmarks of fascism. Remove the beam from your eye before you start squawking about an imaginary bit of sawdust in RP's eye.

Facsims is the joinder of corporations with government. I don't think that's what Kathianne is saying at all. White supremacy/anti-semitism are not fascistic, though they were incorporated into the National Socialist version of it that was followed by the nazis.

He speaks at all sorts of groups, that doesn't mean he endorses all of their views. Guess what, he's spoken at primarily marxist anti-war rallies in San Francisco too. I guess he's a conspiracist far-righter, but a marxist at the same time?

Also, was this John Birch thing meant to demonstrate his anti-semitism? Or was it meant to demonstrate that he believes in conspiracy theories?

The groups a politician addresses is done so because there is a comity between the politician and the group. One doesn't, during a presidential election, address unfriendly groups.

And we can absolutely choose who our friends are.

My point, and I think Kathianne's as well, though I'm certain she'll correct me if I misspeak on her behalf, is that the policies adopted by the good doctor are far too capable of moving this country toward a racist agenda -- which is why he has the support of the groups he does. It's not that he's their spokesman; it's not that he's the ultimate representative of their pov; it's that his policies give them license to move closer to their goals.

Citizenship based on blood ties, not birth... again, I know exactly what that means and how it's been used, even if it's only intended (for now) to appeal to the "illegal aliens shouldn't be allowed to make their kids citizens through birth" crowd.

 

[Annie]

Facsims is the joinder of corporations with government. I don't think that's what Kathianne is saying at all. White supremacy/anti-semitism are not fascistic, though they were incorporated into the National Socialist version of it that was followed by the nazis.



The groups a politician addresses is done so because there is a comity between the politician and the group. One doesn't, during a presidential election, address unfriendly groups.

And we can absolutely choose who our friends are.

My point, and I think Kathianne's as well, though I'm certain she'll correct me if I misspeak on her behalf, is that the policies adopted by the good doctor are far too capable of moving this country toward a racist agenda -- which is why he has the support of the groups he does. It's not that he's their spokesman; it's not that he's the ultimate representative of their pov; it's that his policies give them license to move closer to their goals.

Citizenship based on blood ties, not birth... again, I know exactly what that means and how it's been used, even if it's only intended (for now) to appeal to the "illegal aliens shouldn't be allowed to make their kids citizens through birth" crowd.

You did a fine job Jillian. Let's not forget that both Baron and Paulitics haven't a problem about bringing up Rothsbard and Von Mies as 'friends' that prove he's the truthful doctor. So 'friends' are fine when defending; it's only when there are hundreds of not such great ones that it's wrong.

Jillian, did you know that Iran hasn't an army or navy? So said the good doctor to Tim Russert on Sunday. Who was it that kidnapped those British sailors? Who was it that fought that long war with Iraq? This is whom these folks think should be President.

They should come clean, they don't care about his qualifications, knowledge, earmarks, highly questionable affiliations with hate groups. They like his xenophobia, his pronouncements on taxes, and proposed legalization of drugs.

 

[jillian]

You did a fine job Jillian. Let's not forget that both Baron and Paulitics haven't a problem about bringing up Rothsbard and Von Mies as 'friends' that prove he's the truthful doctor. So 'friends' are fine when defending; it's only when there are hundreds of not such great ones that it's wrong.

I noticed that, too.

Jillian, did you know that Iran hasn't an army or navy? So said the good doctor to Tim Russert on Sunday. Who was it that kidnapped those British sailors? Who was it that fought that long war with Iraq? This is whom these folks think should be President.

I saw that, too. I particularly liked the part where he said that Israel and all the Arab countries would get along just peachy keen if the U.S. stayed out of the way. *rolls eyes*

They should come clean, they don't care about his qualifications, knowledge, earmarks, highly questionable affiliations with hate groups. They like his xenophobia, his pronouncements on taxes, and proposed legalization of drugs.

Yeppers.

 

[eots]

Ummm can you provide a link showing that ACTIVE TROOPS are giving this guy money? As a ACTIVE TROOP I along with my friends aren't voting for this guy and I was interested in where you heard this. I can't see many ACTIVE TROOPS voting for this man. Any links would be great!

thats probably because your not in iraq...so..Ummmm ya heres some links

q2/ -Ron Paul Leads Military Donations Race » Outside The Beltway | OTBRon Paul is leading all candidates in donations from "current military employees ... of President Bush’s decision this year to increase U.S. troops in Iraq. ...
www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/10/ron_paul_leads_military_donations_race/ - 51k

Military and Veterans for Ron Paul 2008Paul's active duty service took him to countries such as South Korea, ... Paul takes in more military donations than any other 08 Presidential candidate ...
www.militaryforpaul.com/ - 4k

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

My point, and I think Kathianne's as well, though I'm certain she'll correct me if I misspeak on her behalf, is that the policies adopted by the good doctor are far too capable of moving this country toward a racist agenda -- which is why he has the support of the groups he does. It's not that he's their spokesman; it's not that he's the ultimate representative of their pov; it's that his policies give them license to move closer to their goals.

Really? And how is that? Ron Paul is all about freedom and property rights. You think he's going to vote to re-institute segregation or deport the jews or something?

Citizenship based on blood ties, not birth... again, I know exactly what that means and how it's been used, even if it's only intended (for now) to appeal to the "illegal aliens shouldn't be allowed to make their kids citizens through birth" crowd.

Ah, the slippery slope fallacy. He supports an amendment that would close the birth loophole for entire families of illegals cutting in the citizenship line. If this passes, then it's inevitable that another amendment would be proposed and passed which...what? Makes the child of an american parent not automatically a citizen? How does B logically follow A?

You did a fine job Jillian. Let's not forget that both Baron and Paulitics haven't a problem about bringing up Rothsbard and Von Mies as 'friends' that prove he's the truthful doctor. So 'friends' are fine when defending; it's only when there are hundreds of not such great ones that it's wrong.

I'm still waiting to hear which of his friends/mentors are anti-semites. The photo with Bill White has been debunked, the nonsense about meeting with nazis to coordinate plans has been debunked, and...we're back to the $500 donation.

He's good friends with Kucinich; whoopde-doo, he doesn't endorse *all* the man's views. Same for Rothbard, he was an open-borders anarcho-capitalist and RP is not. He speaks to the John Birchers, because he shares *some* of their views, about the UN and the special interests influencing our government. He speaks to marxist anti-war groups because he shares *some* of their views. If he limited himself to just speaking to people with identical views to his, he'd be limited to libertarian groups, preaching to the choir, and not making any converts. And even they don't always agree with him, on immigration and abortion and such.

Jillian, did you know that Iran hasn't an army or navy? So said the good doctor to Tim Russert on Sunday. Who was it that kidnapped those British sailors? Who was it that fought that long war with Iraq? This is whom these folks think should be President.

Oh god. Yes, he's aware that Iran has *some* boats. The point is, it's a pretty pitiful navy and not even remotely capable of projecting force halfway around the world. Iran is not a threat to us. Maybe they're a threat to Israel's monopoly on nuclear weapons, but even that's a stretch.

P.S. The Iran/Iraq war was mostly fought on land.

And let's keep in mind GWB's well-known disdain for reading, and the fact that Rudy Giuliani apparently hadn't even read the 9/11 commission report, or heard of the concept of blowback. Somehow that doesn't seem to bother you at all. Again, remove the redwood timber stuck in your eye before you go off talking about the speck of sawdust in RP's eye.

They should come clean, they don't care about his qualifications, knowledge, earmarks, highly questionable affiliations with hate groups. They like his xenophobia, his pronouncements on taxes, and proposed legalization of drugs.

I do very much like his pronouncements on getting rid of the IRS, legalizing drugs at the federal level, and staying out of other nation's affairs while maintaining free trade with them. If you don't like these, by all means, free free to argue against them, as other people here do.

Qualifications? He's been a congressman since the late 70's, with a few years break in the middle. As opposed to Rudy Giuliani's qualifications? A mayor who failed to provide working radios, and who put emergency HQ at ground zero, in a building that had seen terrorist attacks before?

Knowledge? He rattled off a long list of books for Giuliani to read. He's probably the most literate and well-read candidate on the republican side.

Earmarks? This has been debunked. Thoroughly. Are you even reading the thread? Of all the criticisms, this one is the most laughable. Trying to pin RP as a big-government porker, hahaha.

Affiliations with hate groups? How many times are you going to repeat something that has been debunked? Repeating a lie does not, in fact, make it the truth.

 

[jillian]

Really? And how is that? Ron Paul is all about freedom and property rights. You think he's going to vote to re-institute segregation or deport the jews or something?

I only know what laws requiring sanguinity for citizenship have been used for in the past. Or should we not learn from the past and make the same mistakes over and over? Expecting a different result in such circumstances -- isn't that the definition of insanity? Why do you think the white supremacists love him so much?

Ah, the slippery slope fallacy. He supports an amendment that would close the birth loophole for entire families of illegals cutting in the citizenship line. If this passes, then it's inevitable that another amendment would be proposed and passed which...what? Makes the child of an american parent not automatically a citizen? How does B logically follow A?

See above. Other than racism, I still haven't figured out why we have a problem with people coming here to make money. Mexicans work hard and do jobs people born here won't ever do. If they commit a crime, toss their butts out. If not, I'm sorry, it's really a non-issue for me, particularly given that rates of illegal immigration really haven't changed in ... well, forever.

I'm still waiting to hear which of his friends/mentors are anti-semites. The photo with Bill White has been debunked, the nonsense about meeting with nazis to coordinate plans has been debunked, and...we're back to the $500 donation.

You say it's been debunked... I'd say Ron Paul should pick his friends more carefully.

He's good friends with Kucinich; whoopde-doo, he doesn't endorse *all* the man's views. Same for Rothbard, he was an open-borders anarcho-capitalist and RP is not. He speaks to the John Birchers, because he shares *some* of their views, about the UN and the special interests influencing our government. He speaks to marxist anti-war groups because he shares *some* of their views. If he limited himself to just speaking to people with identical views to his, he'd be limited to libertarian groups, preaching to the choir, and not making any converts. And even they don't always agree with him, on immigration and abortion and such.

That's bull... why do you think Repub candidates take heat for going to Bob Jones U? It's because they're pandering to that particular audience. Same here... Paulies don't like it, maybe, again, he should choose better people to pander to.

Oh god. Yes, he's aware that Iran has *some* boats. The point is, it's a pretty pitiful navy and not even remotely capable of projecting force halfway around the world. Iran is not a threat to us. Maybe they're a threat to Israel's monopoly on nuclear weapons, but even that's a stretch.

P.S. The Iran/Iraq war was mostly fought on land.

And you don't think it was sheer stupidity for him to say that the Arab nations will just make such good buddies with Israel if we bow out of the region and cut off all foreign aid? You don't think it's stupid to ignore the fact that we live in a global economy? That all we are now is a service economy and we NEED other nations? Ignorance.... naivete.... xenophobia...

And let's keep in mind GWB's well-known disdain for reading, and the fact that Rudy Giuliani apparently hadn't even read the 9/11 commission report, or heard of the concept of blowback. Somehow that doesn't seem to bother you at all. Again, remove the redwood timber stuck in your eye before you go off talking about the speck of sawdust in RP's eye.

And??

I do very much like his pronouncements on getting rid of the IRS, legalizing drugs at the federal level, and staying out of other nation's affairs while maintaining free trade with them. If you don't like these, by all means, free free to argue against them, as other people here do.

Part 1: Read: F**k the elderly, the poor, school kids.... working families....

Part 2: F**k Israel.... F**k South Korea......

Qualifications? He's been a congressman since the late 70's, with a few years break in the middle. As opposed to Rudy Giuliani's qualifications? A mayor who failed to provide working radios, and who put emergency HQ at ground zero, in a building that had seen terrorist attacks before?

Paul's qualifications bother me less than his positions... except for legalization of drugs, which has always made sense.

As for Giuliani, to be fair, it wasn't ground zero when he put emergency HQ at there. And building 7 had never been attacked, the towers were. As for the other stuff, well, Giuliani shouldn't be president either and most of us here in NY know that.

Knowledge? He rattled off a long list of books for Giuliani to read. He's probably the most literate and well-read candidate on the republican side.

You think so? I don't. I suspect Mitt is far more well read. Also, it doesn't matter what you read if you're so far off the mark.

Earmarks? This has been debunked. Thoroughly. Are you even reading the thread? Of all the criticisms, this one is the most laughable. Trying to pin RP as a big-government porker, hahaha.

Actually, that's an outright lie. On Meet the Press on Sunday, Paul acknowledged taking earmarks for his constituency. (He's against them for everyone else, of course, same as term limits... they're for other poor saps, but he'll stay in Congress til the cows come home). He said he sees it as a "tax credit" for his folk and as long as they're around, dammit, he's gonna feed at that trough.

Affiliations with hate groups? How many times are you going to repeat something that has been debunked? Repeating a lie does not, in fact, make it the truth.

Hasn't been debunked at all... you just don't like it.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

I only know what laws requiring sanguinity for citizenship have been used for in the past. Or should we not learn from the past and make the same mistakes over and over? Expecting a different result in such circumstances -- isn't that the definition of insanity? Why do you think the white supremacists love him so much?

There are many, many other nations which do not allow someone to walk across the border, give birth the next day, then declare that the child is a citizen, and then use that kinship as a means of cutting in line for citizenship approval. In fact, that's the norm. You can't do it in Mexico. I'm pretty sure you can't do it in Canada. I guess they are preparing to round up the jews and deport them.

And some of the white supremacists like him because he shares *some* of their views. (Others hate libertarianism with a burning passion, such as Bill White, as I pointed out.) Namely, halting illegal immigration and cutting aid to Israel. There are several candidates who have made immigration an issue, but none who want to cut aid to Israel (he would like to see all foreign aid cut actually). So, Ron Paul is their choice. Two shared views instead of one. Okay, the nazis and Ron Paul believe in the first amendment, so I guess that actually makes *gasp* three issues they agree on.

However, if they are naive enough to believe that he would re-institute Jim Crow laws, they need to read his writings. He's a property rights absolutist. If he were in alive 100 years ago, he'd be fighting against Jim Crow, since it was a state mandate that dictated who you could conduct business with.

You say it's been debunked... I'd say Ron Paul should pick his friends more carefully.

Did you know that some of the opponents of using DDT to clear african swamps of malaria were rabid environmentalists who were afraid that DDT would perform exactly as promised, and reduce the death toll? In other words, they believe the earth is too overpopulated, and actually wanted people to die? So, I guess that means that all environmentalists want mass death in africa. How many examples like this do I have to give?

And you don't think it was sheer stupidity for him to say that the Arab nations will just make such good buddies with Israel if we bow out of the region and cut off all foreign aid? You don't think it's stupid to ignore the fact that we live in a global economy? That all we are now is a service economy and we NEED other nations? Ignorance.... naivete.... xenophobia...

Well funding both sides certainly hasn't helped ease tensions any.

Ron Paul is not ignoring the fact that we live in a global economy, he wants free trade (or perhaps, a uniformly low tariff) with all nations. He is absolutely not a trade sanctions and protectionism guy like Pat Buchanan. He is against thousand-page long trade agreements like NAFTA, which seek to micromanage trade.

Part 1: Read: F**k the elderly, the poor, school kids.... working families....

Part 2: F**k Israel.... F**k South Korea......

Part 1: First of all, it wouldn't even take a very big spending reduction to pay for eliminating the IRS. We do have other taxes. All we'd have to do is roll back spending to the still-bloated level it was 10 years ago.

School kids scored better when the federal government had zero say in education, that is a statistical fact. The poor would be better off without payroll taxes, a more vigorous economy, and charities would see a tidal wave of donations once people got to keep their full check. Ending social security overnight would be bad, because lots of people contributed to it heavily (and thus had less money for their own private accounts). So, ending it overnight would be a bad thing. Good thing RP doesn't support that.

Part 2: Israel has the best military in the region by far. It's a bad neighborhood to live in, but they chose it. Our support of Israel (and other hated governments in the region) has caused us nothing but trouble.

As for Korea, it's been 50 freaking years. That is way more than enough time. South Korea has developed tremendously and could (probably does) support a perfectly capable military. North Korea is a backwards shithole that has mass famines, because socialism doesn't work. They can't feed their own people much less launch an aggressive war. Honestly, putting pressure on some tinpot dictatorship only strengthens them, because they can use Uncle Sam as a scapegoat for their own failures.

At least you're addressing the issues here though.

As for Giuliani, to be fair, it wasn't ground zero when he put emergency HQ at there. And building 7 had never been attacked, the towers were. As for the other stuff, well, Giuliani shouldn't be president either and most of us here in NY know that.

He put the HQ pretty close to the towers, against the advice of his advisors. That's because they had been attacked in 1993.

Actually, that's an outright lie. On Meet the Press on Sunday, Paul acknowledged taking earmarks for his constituency. (He's against them for everyone else, of course, same as term limits... they're for other poor saps, but he'll stay in Congress til the cows come home). He said he sees it as a "tax credit" for his folk and as long as they're around, dammit, he's gonna feed at that trough.

Ok, we got it...all the taxpayer watchdog groups have got it wrong, they don't look at votes, they look only at speeches.

Once a certain level of spending is determined, it only makes sense to bring home as much as you can.

It turns out, though, that for all his scourging of government excess, Paul never has been much of a crusader against earmarks. As he put it in a floor speech last year, “earmarks . . . are a symptom of the problem, not the cause. The real problem is that the United States government is too big, spends too much, and has too much power.”

Still, why play along by earmarking federal spending? Because a crackdown on earmarks, he says, would only grant the executive branch more control over where the money goes. The total amount of spending wouldn’t change. “There’s nothing wrong with designating where the money goes,” Paul says — so long as the earmark is “up front and everyone knows about it,” rather than having it slipped in at the last minute with no scrutiny.

In an ideal world, Paul says, there wouldn’t be a federal income tax. But since there is, he says, he feels a responsibility to help his constituents recover some of the tax dollars the government has taken from them. “I don’t want them to take it,” he says, “but if they do take it, I’d just as soon help my constituents get it back.”

That’s a pretty reasonable argument. I think the Designated Hitter is an abomination but were I (for some incredibly bizarre reason) suddenly named manager of an American League team, I’d nonetheless use it. One plays the game by the rules as they exist even while working to change the rules. To do otherwise is to shortchange your team or, in this case, constituents.

source

 

[eots]

`


New York Times Retracts Ron Paul Racist Smear

New York Times | December 27, 2007

A post in The Medium that appeared on Monday about the Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul and his purported adoption by white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups contained several errors.

Stormfront, which describes itself as a "white nationalist" Internet community, did not give money to Ron Paul's presidential campaign; according to Jesse Benton, a spokesman for Paul's campaign, it was Don Black, the founder of Stormfront, who donated $500 to Paul.



The original post also repeated a string of assertions by Bill White, the commander of the American National Socialist Workers Party, including the allegation that Paul meets regularly "with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review and others" at a restaurant in Arlington, Va. Paul never attended these dinners, according to Benton, who also says that Paul has never knowingly met Bill White.

Norman Singleton, a congressional aide in Paul's office, says that he met Bill White at a dinner gathering of conservatives several years ago, after which Singleton expressed his indignation at the views espoused by White to the organizer of the dinner. The original post should not have been published with these unverified assertions and without any response from Paul.