Ron Paul 2012!!! Your thoughts on who we should pick for our "Cause"?

[Hash Zeppelin]

I like Dag and Disco. Both good dudes in my opinion.

 

[HUGE]

Yes I know my enemies,
Their the teachers who told me to fight me,
Compromise,conformity, assimilation, ignorance, hipocracy.
All of which are American dreams.

Wake up.

 

[GP73LPC]

i like em too, but they need to get a room every once in a while...

 

[stonedstoner]

how do you guys know that the whole fucking thing isn't a conspiracy? they just put a guy in there that cares about liberities and shit, because they want you to still have faith in this system. but they know he's not going to win so they are not worried about it. not that i really believe that, but ron paul fans are conspiracy theorists, so it shouldn't be a stretch to them. don't you guys believe that everything is controlled by a few people? and republicans, democrats, doesn 't matter its all the same. maybe ron paul too. maybe he's part of it. just kidding anyways.


but about alex jones. i watched that movie the obama something or another. the one that talks hella shit about obama. it's all conspiracy nonsense. anyways ron paul is in it. this guy alex jones is fucking ridiculous though. i don't think anything that guy says is legit.

and does anyone remember that retarded ass movie called zeitgeist? that shit was a bunch of nonsense. ron paul was in that too. yea, go ahead and stop paying your income tax, you'll be alright because it's unconsititional.

 

[HUGE]

Lulz. Hopefully one day you will grow up. I really feel sorry for you.

how do you guys know that the whole fucking thing isn't a conspiracy? they just put a guy in there that cares about liberities and shit, because they want you to still have faith in this system. but they know he's not going to win so they are not worried about it. not that i really believe that, but ron paul fans are conspiracy theorists, so it shouldn't be a stretch to them. don't you guys believe that everything is controlled by a few people? and republicans, democrats, doesn 't matter its all the same. maybe ron paul too. maybe he's part of it. just kidding anyways.


but about alex jones. i watched that movie the obama something or another. the one that talks hella shit about obama. it's all conspiracy nonsense. anyways ron paul is in it. this guy alex jones is fucking ridiculous though. i don't think anything that guy says is legit.

and does anyone remember that retarded ass movie called zeitgeist? that shit was a bunch of nonsense. ron paul was in that too. yea, go ahead and stop paying your income tax, you'll be alright because it's unconsititional.

 

[stonedstoner]

i say disco for president!

 

[gingerale]

Yeah, I love how in the year 2012 there are some people who doubt the fact that our country is corrupt from the top all the way to the very bottom. It's a fact. Sorry for those who can't see it.

 

[stonedstoner]

what gov't isn't corrupt? power corrupts.

 

[stonedstoner]

there isn't anything we can do to change it.

 

[dagnabit]

there isn't anything we can do to change it.

The strongest enemy of liberty.....
apathy

 

[HUGE]

there isn't anything we can do to change it.

you are either the worlds greatest troll. if so i applaud you.

or

you are sadder than i thought. now i understand why you think ron paul, alex jones, and zeitgeist are "stupid". its because your problably just now finishing puberty and you are having a heard time dealing with reality because its scary. you are weak and scared to face the truth. you must look the fear in the face and start doing some reading of real history and real current events. please dont take comfort in the fascist propaganda spewing from your television, it will only help drive you farther into the abyss. these are real issues at a real turning point in history, pretending the monster isnt real doesnt make it go away.

 

[stonedstoner]

i'm usually not a troll. only on paul threads do i troll.

 

[dagnabit]

A trolls a troll.....

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

please dont take comfort in the fascist propaganda spewing from your television, it will only help drive you farther into the abyss.

What's your thoughts on the disparaging newsletters? Ron appears to be incurious over who wrote them. Back in the 90s, Ron appeared to defend the inflammatory statements, saying they were taken out of context.

Now he separates himself completely, saying he doesn't know who wrote the stuff. I've yet to see whether Ron blamed his volunteer but he did mention the guy along the way.

Apparently the volunteer is no longer working with Ron. I read he's now one of Ron's staunchest critics. But the former volunteer did say (that they recognized) that the more inflammatory the newsletter became, the more money rolled into the office.

Is there a rift over the fallout of irresponsible money raising tactics? If Ron didn't write the stuff yet allowed it to be published in his newsletter - in first-person - like it's him saying it - wouldn't that make a difference?

What if it's neither Ron nor his newsletter volunteer? What if Ron allowed another/others to write bad stuff for money? Ron's incurious nature isn't helping this go away.

If he stays in the spotlight long enough, they're gonna bring out the klieg lights and tell Ron to spread em and cough just like every other top candidate. It's already been mentioned that Trump will never be president because he gets too cranky when asked of the less than flattering details. Might the same thing happen to Ron?

For lack of clarity, lets just assume Ron isn't the messenger. More clear is the appearance that Ron took no steps to mitigate the inflammatory newsletters.

Is the argument that he didn't vet his own ghostwriter? enough to placate general election voters? Right now, there's considerable focus on Ron's incurious nature.

That's why I came to this thread, trying to learn why Ron appears incurious over the potential fallout from his economic strategy. Now he's incurious over the newsletters. I don't have to lean either direction to know this is poor political calculus.

In the 90s, Ron spoke of the pros and cons of the gold standard. It's all pro now, kinda like the guy had a epiphany or realized the "cons" aren't as effective on the stump.

When it comes to all this radical stuff, how much of it is stump?

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Does Ron really want to end federal automobile and airline safety regulations? Wouldn't these regulations fall within the "promote the general welfare" part of the Constitution?

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

[youtubeif]3qojv1bR-S0[/youtubeif]

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

[YOUTUBEIF]PQTM6aBWBHQ[/YOUTUBEIF]

 

[stonedstoner]

so if paul is so popular and electable...why wouldn't he just run as an independent? why is he running as a republican?

 

[GP73LPC]

ron paul is not electable. he is not in with the "IN" crowd. big money doesn't trust him...

our elections are about who SPENDS the most money.... And if BIG MONEY backs you, your in...

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Ex-Ron Paul Aide Disputes Paul on Newsletters

By Jeffrey Lord on 12.20.11 @ 11:07AM

Did Ron Paul look Sean Hannity in the eye after the Sioux City debate on Fox News -- and play fast and loose with the facts of his newsletter?

In this video of Hannity interviewing Paul, at the 5:00 marker Hannity begins asking Paul about the newsletters. Paul flatly denies writing them. But never once mentions that he approved them. Instead, he directs Hannity to an article in the Texas Monthly that Paul says deals with the issue.

The Texas Monthly aricle requires registration for readers. But unfortunately for Mr. Paul, over at the site of the Capital Free Press (here) reporter Patrick McEwen registered and reports on what he found. And what he found directly contradicts what former aide Eric Dondero has said in The American Spectator. In the Texas Monthly, Paul steadfastly denies writing the newsletters. But never once hints that he personally approved them -- the charge Dondero is making.

Now, Dondero, in recent Comments posted (scroll down) on The American Spectator, challenges the truth of the notion that Congressman Paul somehow was unaware of the content of his controversial newsletters. He does confirm that Paul associates wrote the newsletters (including Lew Rockwell, the controversial ex-Paul chief of staff) but insists Paul himself was fully involved in the approval process. With Hannity sitting inches away on national television, Paul never admits that in fact he himself approved the newsletters… as Dondero now asserts… "every line of them."

The newsletters, which surfaced in the last presidential campaign, have re-emerged in a year in which other GOP presidential candidates have had their pasts re-opened for vetting. Old allegations about Newt Gingrich's marital infidelities, Mitt Romney's Bain Capital and Mormonism, and Herman Cain's problem with sexual misconduct allegations (all still unproven and flatly denied by Mr. Cain) have dominated the airwaves and the Internet. All have been grilled by Hannity on each allegation -- at length.

Says Dondero of the newsletter (full text below*), Ron Paul "did read them, every line of them, off his fax machine at his Clute office before they were published. He would typically sign them at the bottom of the last page giving his okay, and refax them to Jean to go to the printer." There is not a word of this in the Texas Monthly article that Paul uses to deflect Hannity.

On another occasion, Paul slips and slides through a 2008 interview with Wolf Blitzer on the same subject. Paul repudiates what was written, but very carefully limits himself to saying he never wrote these things.

Here's the problem.

Ron Paul doesn't seem like a racist. He has in fact spoken out saying -- correctly -- that racism is in fact collectivism. He says this is simply not part of his character -- and his supporters insist this is so. Yet the newsletter content, publicized several years back by the New Republic, seriously opened the issue in documented fashion.

But the issue seems to be sliding, in light of former Paul aide Dondero's assertions that Dondero appears to have witnessed. The issue is moving slightly but critically from race -- to truth telling.

Simply put: did Ron Paul "read them, every line of them" and then sign off on them? Or not?
If Dondero is telling the truth, then Ron Paul looked Sean Hannity straight in the eye the other night -- and deliberately evaded the truth.

Four years ago he appears to have done the same thing to Wolf Blitzer.

For a candidate whose supporters routinely accuse George W. Bush of having lied about the Iraq War, the idea that Paul himself is repeatedly less than truthful -- with a specific accusation from a former aide -- is big trouble.

*Dondero's post to The American Spectator is reprinted below, verbatim:

Eric Dondero| 12.18.11 @ 8:24AM
Lew Rockwell and Jeff Tucker wrote the Newsletters (with major input from Murray Rothbard and Marc Thornton). Jean McCiver edited them for clarity and grammar out of the Houston office on Nasa Blvd. Ron was merely a figurhead.

But he did read them, every line of them, off his fax machine at his Clute office before they were published. He would typically sign them at the bottom of the last page giving his okay, and re-fax them to Jean to go to the printer.

Eric Dondero, Personal Asst./Travel Aide
Ron Paul, Libertarian for President, 1987/88
Crdtr. Ron Paul for President Exploratory Comm. 1991
Campaign Coordinator, Ron Paul for Congress, 1995/96
Senior Aide, US Cong. Ron Paul, 1997-2003
​

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/12/20/ex-ron-paul-aide-disputes-paul

.
​