Naacp President Ron Not Racist

[Annie]

YES! That's quite a dangerous thing to spread about someone, when it's only going on your opinion based on some links you've visited that don't even prove anything.

IT's irresponsible, because no matter WHAT YOU might think when you make those allegations and suggestions, in OTHER people's minds, it may create a completely different perception.

The bottom line is, if you don't think he's racist, then why keep going with it? Why should ANY candidate denounce potential voters? Why should any American that is legal to vote, be alienated from voting in a country where it's free to speak and express?

Why should it be RP's fault that WN's have taken to his campaign, and why should he tell them not to support him, when they have just as much of a right to choose a candidate as anyone else?

I mean, I don't think Giuliani is affiliated with the Mafia, but there are questionable and UNPROVEN links regarding him and some shady business deals with members of the mob. But you don't see me spreading rumors, and trying to tarnish his image, do you? I mean, I COULD do that, and just say "well, I don't personally think he's affiliated, but you might want to ponder THIS for a minute..."

I just don't understand the agenda here.

Prove Paul isn't racist. Prove that most of his backers aren't, (please note, I didn't say ALL.) I didn't say Paul was or wasn't racist, I said he was not a good candidate IMO because of the company he kept, (and in actuality either hired or worse via those newsletters.) From 'the beginning' I was uncomfortable for you, really only became a problem when the MSM picked up on it, though there were those minute dribbles and drabs like the Black deal, but that NEVER was covered by the MSM.

It never was 'irresponsible' quite the contrary. As Jillian tried to give you an analogy to Barak, what if it were someone with less than desirable traits? That was and is my fear of the candidacy of Ron Paul. It's not where I started out, but it's where I ended up, quickly.

As for Guiliani, post what you like. Others can argue for or against. Hopefully they will be able to defend better than you have been able, though in all honesty, I don't think that was your fault, not by a long shot. It was the guy.

 

[eots]

Prove Paul isn't racist. Prove that most of his backers aren't, (please note, I didn't say ALL.)

prove that none of the other candidates have supporters that are racsist...prove your not racsist...your argument is..stupid

 

[Paulie]

Prove Paul isn't racist. Prove that most of his backers aren't, (please note, I didn't say ALL.)

Prove a negative... That's weak debating Kathianne. Prove he is. You ARE the one making the allegations, afterall.

 

[Gunny]

YES! That's quite a dangerous thing to spread about someone, when it's only going on your opinion based on some links you've visited that don't even prove anything.

IT's irresponsible, because no matter WHAT YOU might think when you make those allegations and suggestions, in OTHER people's minds, it may create a completely different perception.

The bottom line is, if you don't think he's racist, then why keep going with it? Why should ANY candidate denounce potential voters? Why should any American that is legal to vote, be alienated from voting in a country where it's free to speak and express?

Why should it be RP's fault that WN's have taken to his campaign, and why should he tell them not to support him, when they have just as much of a right to choose a candidate as anyone else? I say it's because of Ron's principles that he doesn't do that, and then I get the "yeah, sure, principles" routine from Kathianne.

I mean, I don't think Giuliani is affiliated with the Mafia, but there are questionable and UNPROVEN links regarding him and some shady business deals with members of the mob. But you don't see me spreading rumors, and trying to tarnish his image, do you? I mean, I COULD do that, and just say "well, I don't personally think he's affiliated, but you might want to ponder THIS for a minute..."

I just don't understand the agenda here.

Simple. If Ron Paul is being supported by racists during his campaign, the assumption is he's going to return the backscratch down the line. Whether or not HE is racist, if he is beholden to racists, he's compromised his integrity.

 

[jillian]

Simple. If Ron Paul is being supported by racists during his campaign, the assumption is he's going to return the backscratch down the line. Whether or not HE is racist, if he is beholden to racists, he's compromised his integrity.

Absolutely... not to mention the fact that if racists support him, there's a reason. It's because the policies he supports are racist, if not in intent, then in actual effect.

 

[eots]

Simple. If Ron Paul is being supported by racists during his campaign, the assumption is he's going to return the backscratch down the line. Whether or not HE is racist, if he is beholden to racists, he's compromised his integrity.

what a conspiracy theroy he takes no corperate donations but he will sell his soul for a 1000 bucks from stormfront and turn his back on those that rasied millions in a day..shut up..lol

 

[Annie]

Simple. If Ron Paul is being supported by racists during his campaign, the assumption is he's going to return the backscratch down the line. Whether or not HE is racist, if he is beholden to racists, he's compromised his integrity.

Yes. The point Pauli missed was that it's not my 'opinion' that I think some of his backers are racists, etc., Paul himself admits it. Refused to return monies he was aware came from such. He also refused to repudiate their beliefs, saying, 'I am not like that, I can't stop them from saying what they will.' That's true, to a point. He can however severely reprimand their ideas, while acknowledging their right to be idiots. He didn't.

 

[Annie]

Prove a negative... That's weak debating Kathianne. Prove he is. You ARE the one making the allegations, afterall.

Yet that is what you said I should do. F off.

 

[Gunny]

what a conspiracy theroy he takes no corperate donations but he will sell his soul for a 1000 bucks from stormfront and turn his back on those that rasied millions in a day..shut up..lol

1. Learn to spell.

2. Fuck off.

3. There's a difference between a fruitloop like you, and someone speculating a logical conclusion.

4. Fuck off.

 

[eots]

Yes. The point Pauli missed was that it's not my 'opinion' that I think some of his backers are racists, etc., Paul himself admits it. Refused to return monies he was aware came from such. He also refused to repudiate their beliefs, saying, 'I am not like that, I can't stop them from saying what they will.' That's true, to a point. He can however severely reprimand their ideas, while acknowledging their right to be idiots. He didn't.

bullshit he clearly denounced racism but correctly acknowledge their right to free speech

 

[Paulie]

Simple. If Ron Paul is being supported by racists during his campaign, the assumption is he's going to return the backscratch down the line. Whether or not HE is racist, if he is beholden to racists, he's compromised his integrity.

Assumptions are ridiculous. If your own assumptions cause you to stay away from a certain candidate, so be it. But there's nothing in Ron Paul's political history that even remotely assumes he'd be scratching the backs of ANYONE, let alone racists. His political record is virtually spotless, as far as that goes.

You have to understand WHY racists support him to understand this whole situation. William Joyce said in another thread that he believes WN's support RP because of his foreign policy, and that they feel comfortable with it, because he wouldn't be babysitting Israel. But when you look only a little bit further, his policy is to not babysit ANYONE. He'd be cutting aid to the Israel's enemies as well, which receive 10X the amount Israel does.

That's what it's about.

I'm not a WN, I'm not an anti-semite, and I'm not a racist period. But I still agree with RP. For every racist that supports RP, there's plenty of others that aren't racist, who support him for the same reasons.

Alienating racists from the democratic process of America because you might not like them is no better than the attitude of the racists themselves. That's a wrong in my book, and 2 wrongs do not make a right.

 

[Paulie]

Yes. The point Pauli missed was that it's not my 'opinion' that I think some of his backers are racists, etc., Paul himself admits it. Refused to return monies he was aware came from such. He also refused to repudiate their beliefs, saying, 'I am not like that, I can't stop them from saying what they will.' That's true, to a point. He can however severely reprimand their ideas, while acknowledging their right to be idiots. He didn't.

He most certainly did Kathianne. Apparently just not to YOUR satisfaction. Thankfully, you don't get to singlehandedly decide this election.

F off.

Well look who's testy NOW.

 

[Gunny]

Yes. The point Pauli missed was that it's not my 'opinion' that I think some of his backers are racists, etc., Paul himself admits it. Refused to return monies he was aware came from such. He also refused to repudiate their beliefs, saying, 'I am not like that, I can't stop them from saying what they will.' That's true, to a point. He can however severely reprimand their ideas, while acknowledging their right to be idiots. He didn't.

If racist organizations support him, then I have to see what his involvement with those organizations is before I make a decision. Donations don't always come from people you agree with.

At the same time, it DOES beg for extra scrutiny of Paul to ensure his connection is no more than that, IMO.

 

[Annie]

Assumptions are ridiculous. If your own assumptions cause you to stay away from a certain candidate, so be it. But there's nothing in Ron Paul's political history that even remotely assumes he'd be scratching the backs of ANYONE, let alone racists. His political record is virtually spotless, as far as that goes.

You have to understand WHY racists support him to understand this whole situation. William Joyce said in another thread that he believes WN's support RP because of his foreign policy, and that they feel comfortable with it, because he wouldn't be babysitting Israel. But when you look only a little bit further, his policy is to not babysit ANYONE. He'd be cutting aid to the Israel's enemies as well, which receive 10X the amount Israel does.

That's what it's about.

I'm not a WN, I'm not an anti-semite, and I'm not a racist period. But I still agree with RP. For every racist that supports RP, there's plenty of others that aren't racist, who support him for the same reasons.

Alienating racists from the democratic process of America because you might not like them is no better than the attitude of the racists themselves. That's a wrong in my book, and 2 wrongs do not make a right.

And in my book, when there are clear warning signs available, it's the duty of each of us to make those clear, through whatever venues we have available. I have. I also got lucky that the media picked up, since my posts were looking a bit obsessive. Jillian noted so, more than once. Then the damn broke, which confirmed my shakey belief that eventually even the media gets things right.

 

[Annie]

If racist organizations support him, then I have to see what his involvement with those organizations is before I make a decision. Donations don't always come from people you agree with.

At the same time, it DOES beg for extra scrutiny of Paul to ensure his connection is no more than that, IMO.

Fair enough, that's your choice. We both know and respect someone that is all for RP. I think he's way off, but we all get to vote.

 

[Annie]

He most certainly did Kathianne. Apparently just not to YOUR satisfaction. Thankfully, you don't get to singlehandedly decide this election.



Well look who's testy NOW.

Nice combining of two posts.

 

[Gunny]

Assumptions are ridiculous. If your own assumptions cause you to stay away from a certain candidate, so be it. But there's nothing in Ron Paul's political history that even remotely assumes he'd be scratching the backs of ANYONE, let alone racists. His political record is virtually spotless, as far as that goes.

You have to understand WHY racists support him to understand this whole situation. William Joyce said in another thread that he believes WN's support RP because of his foreign policy, and that they feel comfortable with it, because he wouldn't be babysitting Israel. But when you look only a little bit further, his policy is to not babysit ANYONE. He'd be cutting aid to the Israel's enemies as well, which receive 10X the amount Israel does.

That's what it's about.

I'm not a WN, I'm not an anti-semite, and I'm not a racist period. But I still agree with RP. For every racist that supports RP, there's plenty of others that aren't racist, who support him for the same reasons.

Alienating racists from the democratic process of America because you might not like them is no better than the attitude of the racists themselves. That's a wrong in my book, and 2 wrongs do not make a right.

Assumptions are only ridiculous when they don't suit the cause. Pre-thinking possible logical conclusions prepares one for more than one outcome and just makes all kinds of sense.

Let's take your argument for example. You say assumptions are ridiculous, but is it not YOU who is assuming anyone questioning racist organizations supporting RP is calling RP a racist?

 

[jillian]

Assumptions are ridiculous. If your own assumptions cause you to stay away from a certain candidate, so be it. But there's nothing in Ron Paul's political history that even remotely assumes he'd be scratching the backs of ANYONE, let alone racists. His political record is virtually spotless, as far as that goes.

You have to understand WHY racists support him to understand this whole situation. William Joyce said in another thread that he believes WN's support RP because of his foreign policy, and that they feel comfortable with it, because he wouldn't be babysitting Israel. But when you look only a little bit further, his policy is to not babysit ANYONE. He'd be cutting aid to the Israel's enemies as well, which receive 10X the amount Israel does.

That's what it's about.

I'm not a WN, I'm not an anti-semite, and I'm not a racist period. But I still agree with RP. For every racist that supports RP, there's plenty of others that aren't racist, who support him for the same reasons.

Alienating racists from the democratic process of America because you might not like them is no better than the attitude of the racists themselves. That's a wrong in my book, and 2 wrongs do not make a right.

How many Arab countries are there? Even if the U.S. cut off all aid, they have oil wealth. There's one Jewish State... do you think the Arab countries are going to sing Kumbaya and hold hands with Israel along the Red Sea?

Ask yourself what the EFFECT of his policies are realistically... not what you wish they would be.

I woudn't alienate racists from the democratic process... but I refuse to join any club that would have them as members.

 

[eots]

1. Learn to spell.
(ooo I made a typo THAT INVALIDATES MY OPINION )
{ I Will be sure to hi-lite you next one, it wont take long]

2. Fuck off.
(sure sign of someone with nothing to say)

3. There's a difference between a fruitloop like you, and someone speculating a logical conclusion.

tinfoil...helecopters..closet Nazis

4. Fuck off.

OK now your getting repetitive

 

[Gunny]

Fair enough, that's your choice. We both know and respect someone that is all for RP. I think he's way off, but we all get to vote.

My post is based on the fact that I have not really looked at who is supporting RP, or why. So I am not saying he is racist or he isn't at this point.

I just wanted to know why Paulitics is assuming anyone questioning RP's connection with racists/racist organizations is calling RP a racist. Clearly, two different things.