Breaking News - Proof that Ron Paul is racist!

[jimnyc]

Now that we've determined that Youtube is a legit news source, here is your proof that Ron Paul is a racist homophobe who solicits people from the mailing list of his racist newsletters! It's right there in the video, ladies and gentlemen, irrefutable proof! :coffee:


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ofvp2QX9omY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[revelarts]

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8Rv0Z5SNrF4?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8Rv0Z5SNrF4?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>

[Gunny]

Now that we've determined that Youtube is a legit news source, here is your proof that Ron Paul is a racist homophobe who solicits people from the mailing list of his racist newsletters! It's right there in the video, ladies and gentlemen, irrefutable proof! :coffee:


<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ofvp2QX9omY" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="560"></iframe>

Not that it's a surprise, but it looks as if Rev doesn't get you're spoofing him.:laugh:

[jimnyc]

A billion youtube videos and speeches from Ron Paul AFTER he resumed his political career - WILL DO NOTHING - to negate what he did and said while he was "retired" and not in office in the late 80's and early 90's. Funny how shit comes back to haunt you. But one shouldn't address issues by obfuscation and trying to show other things, one should simply address the issues - which he still won't explain the details.

WHO wrote the newsletters?
Did he identify this person IMMEDIATELY?
Did he FIRE this person IMMEDIATELY?
WHEN did he know about these newsletters? Was it in 1995 when he discussed them, or in 2001 when he claimed to have first had knowledge of them? WHY the discrepancy?
WHY won't he address the MILLION PLUS DOLLARS he made from the RACISM?

Too many question and too many refusals for honest answers. He ONLY answered when back running for office and pinned in the corner. Maybe YOU can answer these questions, Rev? I have MORE if you're willing, but if RP can't answer them, I doubt you have the answers either. And without answers, he stinks to high heaven of a racist old man covering his tracks.

[jimnyc]

Not that it's a surprise, but it looks as if Rev doesn't get you're spoofing him.:laugh:

Yep, and it's a double whammy, it's spoofing him, but also does contain the truth! :laugh2:

[Gunny]

A billion youtube videos and speeches from Ron Paul AFTER he resumed his political career - WILL DO NOTHING - to negate what he did and said while he was "retired" and not in office in the late 80's and early 90's. Funny how shit comes back to haunt you. But one shouldn't address issues by obfuscation and trying to show other things, one should simply address the issues - which he still won't explain the details.

WHO wrote the newsletters?
Did he identify this person IMMEDIATELY?
Did he FIRE this person IMMEDIATELY?
WHEN did he know about these newsletters? Was it in 1995 when he discussed them, or in 2001 when he claimed to have first had knowledge of them? WHY the discrepancy?
WHY won't he address the MILLION PLUS DOLLARS he made from the RACISM?

Too many question and too many refusals for honest answers. He ONLY answered when back running for office and pinned in the corner. Maybe YOU can answer these questions, Rev? I have MORE if you're willing, but if RP can't answer them, I doubt you have the answers either. And without answers, he stinks to high heaven of a racist old man covering his tracks.

I find Rev's fixation with Ron Paul to be what's funny here.

[jimnyc]

I find Rev's fixation with Ron Paul to be what's funny here.

I dare you to go and read a few of the more popular Ron Paul forums. Some people seem normal, but for the most part it's filled with kooks and truthers.

[Shadow]

I find Rev's fixation with Ron Paul to be what's funny here.

Not necessarily Rev...but this is exactly the issue I have with a lot of Ron Paul supporters and why I think they are obnoxious. They are almost like a cult. Always reading from their script and never going off message. Rarely take any criticism about him well...and much like Obots were during the last elections...they get in your face and will argue to the death.

[Gunny]

I dare you to go and read a few of the more popular Ron Paul forums. Some people seem normal, but for the most part it's filled with kooks and truthers.

Ron Paul isn't ALL bad. However, we live in a world that is global. He couldn't accomplish, much less carry out his 19th century isolationist policies if he tried.

[jimnyc]

Ron Paul isn't ALL bad. However, we live in a world that is global. He couldn't accomplish, much less carry out his 19th century isolationist policies if he tried.

I've said many times that he has some good points and stances - he just isn't presidential material, not by a longshot. His refusal to answer the tough questions, which IMO is lying by avoiding, and his laughable foreign policy, make him unelectable. And his crop of nutcases that Shadow points out only serve to make him look like more of a kook than he already is.

[Gunny]

I've said many times that he has some good points and stances - he just isn't presidential material, not by a longshot. His refusal to answer the tough questions, which IMO is lying by avoiding, and his laughable foreign policy, make him unelectable. And his crop of nutcases that Shadow points out only serve to make him look like more of a kook than he already is.

IMO, his detachment from reality via his foreign policy makes him unelectable. And as I previously stated to Rev (which he studiously avoided), how many times has Ron Paul run for President only to drop out even before the primaries are over? When he finally gets that he's holding the bronze at best, he'll drop out of the GOP race and run as an independent, and when his money runs out, he drops out of the race. I see nothing new this time. Neither from Paul, nor the way he polls high in some places only to take 3rd place at best.

[jimnyc]

IMO, his detachment from reality via his foreign policy makes him unelectable. And as I previously stated to Rev (which he studiously avoided), how many times has Ron Paul run for President only to drop out even before the primaries are over? When he finally gets that he's holding the bronze at best, he'll drop out of the GOP race and run as an independent, and when his money runs out, he drops out of the race. I see nothing new this time. Neither from Paul, nor the way he polls high in some places only to take 3rd place at best.

Rev has a LONG history of outright ignoring questions he can't answer or doesn't like.

[Abbey Marie]

Does anyone doubt that when RP isn't the nominee, he will go third party? He doesn't care one whit about the Republican party.

[Gunny]

Does anyone doubt that when RP isn't the nominee, he will go third party? He doesn't care one whit about the Republican party.

Paul is a conservative libertarian. And to be fair, it WAS the conservatives in this nation that were isolationists right up to WWII. He may try to go third party. He has before. IIRC, last time, he was out of money and just plain dropped out of the primaries from running as a Republican and didn't bother with the third party thing.