So, Sound Politics commenter "pudge" has a video up on YouTube with a little diddy on the upcoming GOP YouTube debate. The video sits on the front page as I type so is racking up "views" by the tens of thousands. Of note, pudge tells me he's getting emails from the Paultards complaining that Ron Paul isn't included in his song. Except if you listen to the song Paul most clearly is (hint: he's between Mitt and Fred).
pudge's resulting theory: "Paulines WANT to be marginalized." That may be about right.
On a related note to where the Paulites are coming from (besides Oz), check out the internals of the CNN/WMUR poll [pdf warning] released today. Among Republicans planning to vote in the Republican primary Paul draws 4%. Among Independents planning to vote in the Republican primary Paul draws 27%.
Translation: Paul's main attraction is non-affiliated voters who otherwise wouldn't vote in a Republican primary, or perhaps any at all. That's precisely why I haven't been including Ron Paul - despite the protestations of the Paulites - in my recent summaries of the GOP race other than to note where his campaign might be causing others grief. His is not a Republican base and these are Republican primaries we're talking about.
Posted by Eric Earling at November 19, 2007 06:16 PM | Email ThisRonPaul2008.com
Posted by: Nate C on November 19, 2007 07:06 PMRon Paul is about to lose his House seat.
http://thehill.com/david-hill/ron-paul-trouble-back-home-2007-11-14.html
Posted by: cliff on November 19, 2007 07:12 PMhttp://truthalert.net/Republican%20Presidential%20Candidate%20Rankings.htm
Posted by: Mike on November 19, 2007 07:14 PMBut the country publicans (say that real fast several times) hold all the money in this state, and the D's will go untouched again.
Posted by: Independent Voter on November 19, 2007 07:16 PMActaully in the third quarter Ron Paul had the most contributions of any GOP candidate in Washington State. This quarter I am guessing he has extended his margin over other GOP candidates.
Posted by: Travis Pahl on November 19, 2007 07:38 PMHAHA! You said credibility! They have none. So I imagine it doesn't hurt it either.
"His is not a Republican base"
This base you talk of, it doesn't exist. It is a fantasy you and a few others have made up, in order to convince yourself your not insane. Hurry, go hide, the islamofascists are gonna get you.... BOO!
Posted by: Rich on November 19, 2007 08:26 PMYay, Ron Paul! :)
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 19, 2007 08:36 PMDon't you wish we "little Paulies" would just give up. That would save you a lot of trouble. Well we are not giving up, certainly not that easily. This movement is so full of passion, with so much hope, that it will not just go away because you ask us to sit down and keep on taking it. I have never been as excited about a political candidate. Join us! It's great!
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 19, 2007 09:42 PMFirst off labeling such as Paultards, Fredheads, blacks, whites etc, is simply polarization. A way to seperate and denegrate. I would suggest getting off that kick unless it somehow makes you feel better about yourself.
Even though there are some over ripe Ron Paul supporters it is just a by-product of running a campaign that stands for something and doesn't pull punches. In this light it is doubtful that you wouldn't attract some colorful folk. With that said, they are in the MINORITY in the extreme. The majority are honest, decent, intelligent individuals who, instead standing around while their kids future get put on the auction block, get up off their derriers and do something about it. Much in contrast to those who prefer to hide behind their bunkers of cynicism and take pot shots from the sidelines.
I never buy into the whisper campaigns of the itty bitty granny committee and the gossip mill.
I just try to push them out of the way so the real men can tackle the problems that we face.
Perhaps you can answer the following questions, not labeling your candidate:
1. Has he answered Michael Medved's open letter to him?
a. If not, does he plan to?
b. If he doesn't plan to answer Medved, why not?
2. Has he answered the questions posed to him by Lonestar about a possible David Duke connection?
a. Does he plan to answer Lonestar?
b. If he doesn't plan to answer them, why not?
3. There are theories that a substantial portion of his support comes from Nazis, David Duke supporters and Christian Identity groups. Are you denying that?
4. As for fundraising totals, we, in Washington state, have the example of a candidate for senate who loaned their campaign a substantial amount of money in order to appear credible, those funds were later returned fro their personal use, more like a shell game. All perfectly legal, I might add.
I am simply asking some questions of you and your candidate. Until I get some facts, he is Ron Paul/Hugo Chavez/Robert Mugabe. Trying to deflect without answering tough questions from a variety of credible sources does nothing for your cause.
Oh, this isn't a whisper campaign, the questions are there shouting at you.
I understand the fear that a repbulican may actual be a closet facist. Especially from a cnadidate that you are not familiar with since the press has not covered him that much. If you or Medved are concerned that he might be a facist, you are welcome to look at his 20 year voting record in congress. It will show you that in fact he has a wonder record supporting individual rights, small government, and a peaceful foriegn policy.
If there is a specific area you are interested in his stance I would be happy to help you understand Dr Pauls position. If there is a particular vote that dr paul made that troubles you and makes you think he may be a facist or racist, perhaps you can point us to it and we can look deeper into it?
Are you just unfamiliar with Dr Paul or is there a particualar position of his that makes you unconfortable and think he is a facist?
Posted by: Travis on November 19, 2007 11:58 PMOr perhaps it is all the military personal at our states military bases. Dr. Paul has more support from troops than any other candidate (from either party). That seems more likely than a bunch of anti war hippies from evergreen college donating any signifigant amount of money.
Posted by: Travis Pahl on November 20, 2007 12:06 AMI think you are an earnest person, but misguided. I am a researcher. I have read plenty by Paul, I don't share your fascination.
You said that he hasn't answered Medved's question. Well, Michael Medved is one of the most prominent conservatives in the country. He does happen to be Jewish. If a campaign can't take the time to answer one of the most prominent conservatives in the country, well at minimum that campaign is not run well and is not professional, don't you think.
The issue is that Dr. Paul is at minimum, insensitive to issues of religion and race. Others argue that he is an anti-semite and bigot.
The reason that responding to Medved is key is that no response does nothing to dispel the anti-semite label. When other prominent republicans have received interest from those that are anti-semetic or bigots, they have disavowed that support. The questions posed by Lonestar address that issue.
No. Travis, I've probably done more research than most, that is what I do. If Paul can't respond to one of the most prominent conservatives in the country because he is Jewish, that is all I need to know.
Posted by: WVH on November 20, 2007 12:12 AMAs for not answering Medveds question... I suppose you could make a case that all candidates need to answer every question he poses because he is jewish. I do not share your view on that, but I guess it has merit. I guess his campaign is purely run as you suggest since he has not answered it, but I think it would be rushing to judgement to say that Paul is racist because his campaign staff has not notified him that he needs to answer Medveds question.
Travis Pahl
Travis Pahl
Posted by: Travis Pahl on November 20, 2007 12:28 AMAs for not answering Medveds question... I suppose you could make a case that all candidates need to answer every question he poses because he is jewish. I do not share your view on that, but I guess it has merit. I guess his campaign is poorly run as you suggest since he has not answered it, but I think it would be rushing to judgement to say that Paul is racist because his campaign staff has not notified him that he needs to answer Medveds question.
Travis Pahl
Travis Pahl
Posted by: Travis Pahl on November 20, 2007 12:29 AMWhat, Ron Paul is up to maybe $60,000 in support from the military? Heck, if Hillary wanted to look like that she could throw her blue-plate supporters at the problem and appear to have even more support in no time flat. Your information is based on just a few people who were kind enough to report their employer and donated $200 or more.
Once again, based on the same information this is, Ron Paul is also the only receipient so far of contributions from actual CIRCUS CLOWNS.
Posted by: Doug on November 20, 2007 12:37 AMHere is one blog posting:
"Ron Paul's Race Problem
Posted by Ryan Sager
Wed, 16 May 2007 at 5:00 PM
updated 5:03 PM
For all those getting really excited about anti-war, libertarian Republican Ron Paul, it's worth noting that he's pretty racist and also an anti-Semite.
The Houston Chronicle story linked above contains quotes from a newsletter Mr. Paul put out in the 1980s and 1990s. It includes quotes referring to blacks as crime-prone and "fleet-footed."
Mr. Paul also wrote that "By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government" and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism.
(via Wonkette)
Below are two more news clips making reference to the racist statements in Mr. Paul's newsletter. These problems have clearly been out there since the mid-1990s, but Mr. Paul has been below the radar until now. If he's really going to stay in the debates, perhaps the moderators can deal with this...
Candidate Had Newsletter With Controversial Stance On Blacks
196 words
24 May 1996
CongressDaily/A.M.
English
Copyright (c) 1996 National Journal Inc.
A 1992 political newsletter by former Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, included portrayals of African-Americans as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about political issues, the Houston Chronicle reported Thursday. Paul, a former Libertarian Party presidential candidate who defeated Democratic-turned-Republican Rep. Greg Laughlin in the March primary, in November will face Democratic attorney Charles (Lefty) Morris, whose campaign is distributing Paul's writings. Under the headline "Terrorist Update," Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and wrote, "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be." About blacks in Washington, D.C., Paul wrote, "I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." Paul said Wednesday that his comments came in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time," and that he opposes racism.
In later newsletters, Paul wrote that lobbying groups who seek special favors are evil, and that "by far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government."
***
Texas
Newsletter by Paul attacked
Associated Press
329 words
24 May 1996
San Antonio Express-News
English
(Copyright 1996)
A 1992 newsletter by Republican congressional candidate Ron Paul highlighted portrayals of blacks as criminally inclined and lacking sense about top political issues.
Reporting on gang crime in Los Angeles, Paul commented: "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."
Paul, a Surfside obstetrician who won the GOP nomination in the 14th District runoff by defeating incumbent Rep. Greg Laughlin, said Wednesday he opposed racism.
He said his written commentaries about blacks came in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time."
Paul's Democratic opponent, Charles "Lefty" Morris, said many of Paul's views were "out there on the fringe" and that this fall voters would judge his commentaries.
Morris' campaign distributed selected writings by Paul this week.
Paul, a former congressman and one-time Libertarian presidential nominee, said allegations about his writings amounted to name-calling by the Democrats.
He said he'd produced the newsletter since 1985 and distributes it to an estimated 7,000 to 8,000 subscribers...."
http://www.latestpolitics.com/blog/2007/05/ron-pauls.html
Oh, and his refusal to deal with Medved.
Posted by: WVH on November 20, 2007 12:42 AMSalty, let's give Stefan a little time off. He has been going full blast on this site for 4 years (or more); it just has to take a toll. He has riled up the socialists in Seattle, who have taken great pleasure in attacking him personally, though the attacks seem to not bother him. It ain't easy or glamorous to be in his position.
I say we need him back by about March for the congressional elections or January for the legislative session. Let's hope he is rejuvenated.
You say something about Ron Paul and they come out of the wood work like crazy.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on November 20, 2007 07:40 AMBut, you are just noticing the cultism of the Paulites? It is a truly amazing phenomenon. Something like Dean in '04.
Posted by: swatter on November 20, 2007 08:48 AMThese so-called "likely GOP primary voters" make up about 1.2% (my estimate) of the voting public. It seems this handful of misguided Americans are supposed to guide US in our decision making for the future leader of the free world. Excuse me as I have a laugh with myself! Ooooh boy, it also comes to mind that all these punks talking about Dr. Paul "hardly registers in the polls" aren't referring to straw polls, post-debate polls, phone-in polls, or even online polls. Seems these 1.2% are the king makers according to the pundits. Ohhhh, it's gonna be a doozy to help the good doctor take this country back for the other 98.8% of us!
Posted by: TheWhatNow? on November 20, 2007 01:12 PMYour Anti Constitution Stand Shows Just How Mentally Minuscule You Are.
Socialism Sucks !!!
You Berate But Have No Constructive Alternative.
Fools And Their Rights Are Soon Parted.
Posted by: Brad on November 20, 2007 03:37 PMPut the coffee down. Yeah things could be much better, but when you RP supporters show up.
You guys go nuts on a website.
Doesn't really help your cause at all!
Sorry but people are asking questions about RP. If you can't answer them and it looks like he won't won't, what do you expect.
But this foolish world order gets you guys no respect.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on November 20, 2007 04:10 PMFor the record, "Pauline" was a term of endearment. I used it because I thought the connection between Ron Paul and the Apostle Paul struck my funny bone, and in college we referred to something related to the Apostle Paul with the adjective "Pauline."
That's all.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTJmOWM2ZGQzNzAzOTQwYWJlMDg4YjJiMjE4MWRlZTY
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 21, 2007 03:04 PM23. bgodley:
Perhaps you can answer the following questions, not labeling your candidate:
1. Has he answered Michael Medved's open letter to him?
a. If not, does he plan to?
b. If he doesn't plan to answer Medved, why not?
2. Has he answered the questions posed to him by Lonestar about a possible David Duke connection?
a. Does he plan to answer Lonestar?
b. If he doesn't plan to answer them, why not?
3. There are theories that a substantial portion of his support comes from Nazis, David Duke supporters and Christian Identity groups. Are you denying that?
Army Medic/Vet was doing follow-up. Just as Paul/Chavez/Mugabe doesn't want to deal with Jews, Bruce G hasn't got the cojones to deal with people not like him. Bet, that hertitage makes you a bit nervous, eh, Bruce G.?
Happy Thanksgiving all.
Posted by: WVH on November 21, 2007 03:54 PMI wish WVH had the "ovaries" to apologies for her past personal attacks. If she did, I might consider responding to that tiny fraction of her comments that are not ad hominem or obviously irrational. Until then, responding to her would only encourage her incivility. Conservatives are usually so much better than that.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 21, 2007 04:55 PMYou'll never get an apology from me. I still think you are a dickinsonian weasel because your contempt for your fellow travelor along life's highways is breathtaking. I believe the correct analogy is vagina. You won't respond and neither will Paul/Chavez/Mugabe respomd to Medved or Jewish journalists because if you disavow the Nazis and anti-semites they stop giving Paul/Chavez/Mugabe money. So, you pretend to be outraged to avoid answering issues. Oh, by the way that was one of the tactics of Goebels. You remember Goebels, or did you conveniently forget that little espisode as well. Now, regarding Paul/Chavez/Mugabe's fundraising is this actual money or a pass through like a certain senate campaign? Anyhow, there is plenty of time to spar after the holiday. To you and yours the best of Thanksgivings and I'll be commenting on Paul/Chavez/Mugabe soon.
Posted by: WVH on November 21, 2007 09:25 PMWilde, "cohones" are testicles in Spanish.
The best analogy in your case is ovaries, as I said above. Just a free lesson, from one Seattle U. teaching student to another.
My understanding is that true Christians don't call people names. WWJD?
As long as you keep using personal attacks, ad hominem arguments, guilt by association, wild inflamatory inuendo and name-calling, I have no reason to respond to you. Until you apologize and repent, it is not in my interest to dignify your writings with a response. I probably shouldn't even have written this.
Your posts just make you look bad. I should counsel you to stop, and if I really care about you I should, but your posts keep making me look good in contrast. So I amambivalent.
Lots of people are reading what you write, and coming to their own conclusions about your character. But then, perhaps this is why you lack the ovaries to post under your full name. Shall I expose you? No, I think not. That would be cruel and unchristian. Your secret is safe with me.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 22, 2007 03:00 PM"to prepare ethical and reflective professionals
for quality service in diverse communities"
That statement excludes no religion, race, or creed. So, why does Paul/Chavez/Mugabe fail to answer questions from Jewish journalists? Certainly that is not what you are being taught?
The analogy is not name calling because truth is the defense. Also, my specific comments directed at you seem to hit the mark, don't they? Do you or can Paul/Chavez/Mugabe categorically deny that a substantial number of the contributions are from Nazis, Anti-Semite organizations and Christian Identity groups? Does Paul/Chavez/Mugabe clearly disassociate himself from those groups and return contributions? Does he disawow their support?
Now, since you are an atheist, you don't know about the Christian concept of "Just War." that allows one to fight against Nazis and people like you who are sympathizers and colaborators.
Go ahead and disclose my name if you fight like that. I fight Nazis and KKK at every turn and initials are used for safety not for any other purpose. After all, you and plenty of others know my identity. I still won't disclose your heritage even thought I find it curious you can support a Jew Hater. Oh, I won't back down and I will be around to answer you and the Nazis every thread. The threat didn't work Brucie. Oh, by the way that was another tactic of Goebbels, expose people and put them in harms way and then when they turned up missing, well that was just the evil Jews who did it. I'm sure some Paul/Chavez/Mugabe loons would be more than happy to do your dirty work, you don't have the cojones to kill someone, do you? You've learned well from Goebbels. I don't scare and I do have the ovaries to fight you and your ilk. As they say, Never again.
Posted by: WVH on November 22, 2007 04:37 PM1. You are correct on the ovaries.
2. You said:
"Just a free lesson, from one Seattle U. teaching student to another."
Correction, I graduated with a doctorate, I believe you are currently in the Masters program.
Here is some free advice for you, don't make threats you don't plan to carry out.
I hope that a lot of people are reading the posts and are now asking themselves why you or Paul/Chavez/Mugabe will not answer direct questions from Michael Medved, a Jewish conservative or other Jewish journalists?
Why you feel the need to signal the loons and subtlely send a message using Goebbels tactics that we will come after folks that stand in our way. Yes, I hope plenty of people are reading these posts.
I ate too much, I guess that is your problem as well.
You said:
"I will bet 100 dollars that the Democratic candidate and beat the Republican candidate."
Did you mean to say that the Democratic candidate will beat the republican. If so, I agree with you. I believe that Hillary will win and I believe that Hill and Bill along with Nazis, Duke supporters and Christian Identity folks are funding Paul. Why the strange bedfellows, no poke at Bubba- the anyone but Hill vote is huge and they need some serious peeloff from republicans.
All my dough goes to kids, if you want to do some good, donate to a children's charity.
You said:
"I am sick and tired of being sick and tired of you far righters bashing the fiscal conservatives on this site."
The problem with lumping people into groups is that many times the lines are drawn incorrectly.
Many social conservatives of which I am one support accountability in government. Spending has actually increased under Bush and I don't support that. The Pork in Congress is so huge that every American could have a pig on every table. I support reponsible spending for necessaries and accountability.
The best welfare system in the world is a job that allows one to be reponsible for their family and take care of their own. I support education and programs that support a two-parent family. I believe that a heterosexual two-parent family is the optimum institutional structure for raising children.
I think we both agree, however, that government needs to be responsible in its spending and support politices that promote job creation and families.
I live in King County and I am an indie. I do support a strong two party system because one party rule leads to corruption. I have said many times that pubbies have to tailor their message to each locale. In King County, that means that moderates will have to run. I don't know about Sno or Pierce County. In order to be viable, a party has to win elections, otherwise they are just a social club.
Give your $100 to a program such as Childhaven, Union Gospel Mission or the Salvation Army Women and Children's programs. All are run well and the money goes to the mission of the organization.
Posted by: WVH on November 22, 2007 08:06 PMBrock Brock Brock is unintelligable. I speak English, is that some sort of alien language?
Posted by: WVH on November 22, 2007 08:52 PMhttp://www.ronpaul2008.com/contact/
I copied this from the Ron Paul 2008 website:
"A nation that once prided itself on a sense of rugged individualism has become uncomfortably obsessed with racial group identities.
The collectivist mindset is at the heart of racism.
Government as an institution is particularly ill-suited to combat bigotry. Bigotry at its essence is a problem of the heart, and we cannot change people's hearts by passing more laws and regulations.
It is the federal government that most divides us by race, class, religion, and gender. Through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, government plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails. Government "benevolence" crowds out genuine goodwill by institutionalizing group thinking, thus making each group suspicious that others are receiving more of the government loot. This leads to resentment and hostility among us.
Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism.
The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence - not skin color, gender, or ethnicity.
In a free society, every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty."
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/racism/
Doesn't sound like a racist to me. Sounds like a Republican.
Ron Paul writes the following:
"Statement of Faith
by Ron Paul, Dr.
I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do. I know, as you do, that our freedoms come not from man, but from God. My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator.
[ Read more ] "
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/87/statement-of-faith/
If you read the whole thing, Ron Paul addresses your issue of the "just war." Iraq is not one.
I'm still waiting for an apology. I fear that I will wait forever. Will St. Peter ask you, when you get to the Pearly Gates "why did you use personal attacks so often?"
By the way, just because I am an atheist does not mean that I do not know a lot about Christianity...
And I called us both Seattle U. students. This is correct. You were and I still am.
You still lack the ovaries to post under your full name. I, however, have the cohones to do so. It would be Christian love to leave you to your partial anonymity, since your posts make you look so bad. It amuses me to follow your religious tennets better than you do. I'll keep your name a secret, if you like. Given your comments above and elsewhere, I think anonymity is in your interests.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 22, 2007 09:53 PM1. Has Paul/Chavez/Mugabe answered Medved? Has he answered other Jewish journalists? Why are so many of the Jewish faith questioning his relationship to Jews?
2. As I have said on a prior thread, sorry for your loss. Still, being married to a person a a particular faith or race for that matter doesn't mean that one doesn't have feelings that might not be considered bigoted. I question how one can support a candidate that is quesy around Jews. My questions could be answered immediately when you post the reponse to Medved's open letter.
3. No, my posts don't make me look bad, I make Paul/Chavez/Mugabe look bad by continually asking about funding and supporters. That scares you. I have been posting here for over a year under my moniker of WVH. You will keep my name a secret, Horse Pucky, disclose it if you wish, but if anything happens to me, my estate will sue the hell out of you. People use monikers for safety and you know that. My initials are my name and you know that. Many people know who I am. You are attempting the Goebbels gambit of push us and we will push back. If anything happens, well we were just trying to be open. How Goebbels of you.
Now that you have posted sanitized Paul/Chavez/Mugabe, post his response to Medved and I will read that reponse. Post his reponses to Jewish journalists that have called, e-mailed, and written his campaign with questions. Post his response to whether he gets support from Nazis, Duke supporters and Christian Identity groups. Post his response to whether he disavows that support. Post those reponses, I dare you.
Posted by: WVH on November 22, 2007 10:12 PMNo apology from me until you stop supporting a Jew hating Nazis bigot. Guess that is a standoff.
Oh, I am an indie, albeit, a conservative one.
But then again, you have a history of falsely accusing people of bigotry, and then refusing to admit you were wrong even when you proved incapable of presenting that evidence.
I've called you a liar before, and I am calling you a liar again.
Posted by: pudge on November 24, 2007 10:42 PMI'm calling you a big fat idiot. Brucie and the boys have no defense to Michael Medved's open leter, the article in Lonestar and numerous other articles over the past twenty years detailing paul/Chavez/Mugabe's associaition with Nazis, KKK, and Aryan Nation types and neither do you Pudgie, other than to call me a liar. I am with PublicBulldog on this one. You are not a leader and your party couldn't win its way out of a paper bag in Sno County. How many races did you win there, Pudgie? Being called a liar by a big fat idiot like you with marginal talent as a musician and singer who has no knowlege of the Consitution and laws of this country-I'm supposed to care? Go ahead and support Paul/Chavez/Mugabe and others like him. Luckily, until you jerks answer Medved and others point by point, you won't win any battles. Big fat idiot. Hey, Brucie sometimes its hard to get good help, isn't it?
Posted by: WVH on November 25, 2007 11:25 AMYou are an idiot.
Those who have the law on their side, argue the law, If you don't have the law on your side, then
Those who have the facts on their side, argue the facts, If you don't have the facts on your side, then
Those who have neither, just argue and call others liars.
Any response to Medved's open letter than to call me a liar?
Hey, win any elections in Sno County?
Posted by: WVH on November 25, 2007 06:31 PMYou also are lying by comparing Ron Paul to Chavez or Mugabe.
You also are lying by saying I have no knowledge of the Constitution, at least, compared to you (remember, YOU are the one who didn't even understand the basic principles of the Tenth Amendment).
There are other lies, but you don't bother addressing the ones I've pointed out, so why bother?
The really funny part is that you attack me for calling you a liar, but there's nothing actually wrong with calling someone a liar if they persistently lie; on the other hand, your persistent resort to ad hominems is a pretty obvious logical fallacy.
Posted by: pudge on November 25, 2007 11:55 PMAnswer the following, Paul/Chavez/Mugabe hasn't and neither will Brucie, all you can do is call people liars.
1. Does he give contibutions back to Nazis and others that have donated to his campaign?
2. Does he disavow support from extreme elements?
"Saturday, August 18, 2007
Ron Paul: The Radical Right's Man in Washington
from Daily Kos:
posted last May:
THE STRANGE CASE OF LARRY PRATT
In 1996, presidential candidate Pat Buchanan got in hot water when the Center for Public Integrity revealed connections between Buchanan's campaign co-chairman Larry Pratt and Pastor Pete Peters, a leader of the white supremacist Christian Identity movement. Pratt, the executive director of Gun Owners of America, had been a frequent guest at meetings and on radio and television programs hosted by Peters, who inveighed against "Talmudic filth" as Pratt looked on. On February 15, 1996, Pratt took a leave of absence from the Buchanan campaign, so as to avoid causing a "distraction."
The very next day, reported the San Antonio Express-News on February 18, Ron Paul distributed a press release touting Pratt's endorsement of Paul's candidacy for the U.S. Congress. Pratt's endorsement of Paul was anything but pro forma; the February 22, 1996 issue of Roll Call noted that Paul and Mike Gunn, a Republican candidate for Congress in Mississippi who had done some work for David Duke in the latter's 1991 Louisiana gubernatorial campaign, were the only two candidates formally endorsed for office that year by Pratt's organization. Paul's opponent in the Republican primary, Rep. Greg Laughlin, called upon Paul to repudiate Pratt; Paul declined to do so, with his spokesman saying that Paul opposed racism but that "nothing has been proven against Mr. Pratt. He has denied it." (Pratt's enthusiasm for Paul continues to this day, as this quasi-endorsement of Paul's 2008 presidential campaign makes clear.)
THE COMPANY RON PAUL KEEPS
Paul's disinclination to separate himself from the Larry Pratts of the world is part of a pattern that over the last 20 years has seen him snuggling up to some extremely questionable characters on the far right fringe. Like, for example, secessionists, who gathered at a conference in April of 1995 to hear Paul speak about the "once and future Republic of Texas." Or the beady-eyed listeners of The Political Cesspool. It's the unofficial radio program of the Council of Conservative Citizens--you know, the repainted White Citizens Council that got Trent Lott into a bit of trouble a few years ago. (Tune in tonight for their special program on "the disastrous Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education decision, one which ushered in an era of radical leftist ideology upon the American citizenry.") Paul has been a guest on the program; you'll find him listed under P, right above Prussian Blue, the white supremacist teenage singing duo...."
http://adamholland.blogspot.com/2007/08/ron-paul-radical-rights-man-in.html
This is the letter from Michael Medved, what is the response from Mr. Benton and the Paul campaign?
On October 26 nationally syndicated radio talk show host Michael Medved posted an "Open Letter to Rep. Ron Paul" on TownHall.com. It reads:
Dear Congressman Paul:
Your Presidential campaign has drawn the enthusiastic support of an imposing collection of Neo-Nazis, White Supremacists, Holocaust Deniers, 9/11 "Truthers" and other paranoid and discredited conspiracists.
Do you welcome- or repudiate - the support of such factions?
More specifically, your columns have been featured for several years in the American Free Press -a publication of the nation's leading Holocaust Denier and anti-Semitic agitator, Willis Carto. His book club even recommends works that glorify the Nazi SS, and glowingly describe the "comforts and amenities" provided for inmates of Auschwitz.
Have your columns appeared in the American Free Press with your knowledge and approval?
As a Presidential candidate, will you now disassociate yourself, clearly and publicly, from the poisonous propaganda promoted in such publications?
As a guest on my syndicated radio show, you answered my questions directly and fearlessly.
Will you now answer these pressing questions, and eliminate all associations between your campaign and some of the most loathsome fringe groups in American society?
Along with my listeners (and many of your own supporters), I eagerly await your response.
Respectfully, Michael Medved
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html
Please post the reponse for all to see.
Now, you can request that the Paul/Chavez/Mugabe campaign provide you with answers, can't you? I bet Sno County is getting too much riff raff, you probably want to move to Hayden Lake, Idaho.