You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Paul finally gave up his principles
- Thread starter STAGE 2
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Oh, lordy. You don't want a candidate with principles. You want the slick, unassailable professional used car salesman who determines his opinion by polls. Moreover, you deserve him.
Excellent,after 30 years of PC we need someone who simply does not perform as the media and left wing promote and trust me on this anyone who does fit not their mold will be labeled a nut.
America is in deep trouble, free trade that is not free to working Americans, outsourcing,importing of millions of poor under educated people for slave labor while at the same time shipping manufacturings jobs to the third world.
Our military used as world policemen spending trillions of taxpayers money and enslaving us to the likes of China. While the top of the ladder grows richer the bottom sinks down.
I have been a long time Republican supporter however in the past 7 years my opinions have changed a great deal and I view nothing in either party for America it is in deed time for change.
That's the kind of criticism you have to drag out of the hat now? That Ron Paul took money from a kook?
You bet. I want a candidate with some conviction. I'm not one of those people who will vote for anybody as long as he is politically favorable to me. I would rather haev someone of integrity that I disagree with than someone with none that scratches my back.
I certianly dont want someone who thinks its perfectly fine taking money from people who think the nazis were just swell or people who think ovens are for more than just turkey dinners. Then again I shouldn't have to explain this to YOU of all people should I.
Oh, lordy. You don't want a candidate with principles. You want the slick, unassailable professional used car salesman who determines his opinion by polls. Moreover, you deserve him.
No, I want someone who first and foremost 1) will defend this nation, 2) that will follow the constitution, and 3) knows the difference between right and wrong. Paul strike out on one because of his ideas and world view. I sometimes question him on 2 and with this he's demonstrated that hes out of the running for 3.
Marko Kloos
Inactive
Blood diamonds are "tainted money". Drug profits are "tainted money". Sweatshop proceeds are "tainted money". Political donations out of the personal pocket of a kooky racist are not "tainted money".
Do you only do business with someone after you thoroughly examine their political point of view? Do you only take a paycheck from people with whom you agree politically and philosophically?
Your "tainted money" claim in regards to Ron Paul is a.) bogus, and b.) just a grasping at a very brittle straw trying to paint Ron Paul as some sort of unprincipled KKK sympathizer.
Give me a break. Vote for the guy, or don't, but don't try and make mountains out of molehills. If he's as whacko and irrelevant as you claim, then you don't have to keep trying to convince people not to vote for him.
Do you only do business with someone after you thoroughly examine their political point of view? Do you only take a paycheck from people with whom you agree politically and philosophically?
Your "tainted money" claim in regards to Ron Paul is a.) bogus, and b.) just a grasping at a very brittle straw trying to paint Ron Paul as some sort of unprincipled KKK sympathizer.
Give me a break. Vote for the guy, or don't, but don't try and make mountains out of molehills. If he's as whacko and irrelevant as you claim, then you don't have to keep trying to convince people not to vote for him.
rampage841512
New member
I've always believe in keeping idiots money. They don't need it.
Blood diamonds are "tainted money". Drug profits are "tainted money". Sweatshop proceeds are "tainted money". Political donations out of the personal pocket of a kooky racist are not "tainted money".
Like I said Marko, I should have to say this to you of all people, but taking money from nazis is tainted money. It hasnt been that long since members of my family went over to europe. If you cant figure out why Paul should't take this money then your moral compass is so out of whack that any conversation here isn't going to change it.
Do you only do business with someone after you thoroughly examine their political point of view? Do you only take a paycheck from people with whom you agree politically and philosophically?
Ironically, yes. The job I took was almost exclusively for ideological reasons. As far as my dealing with private people, no I dont usually inquire into what they do or who they are. However, when something is so glaringly obvious and so in conflict with what I believe, I have refused to deal with them. They are free to live their life as they choose and I'm free to reject it if I choose. Thats how this works.
Your "tainted money" claim in regards to Ron Paul is a.) bogus
If you're fine about him taking money from a nazi sympathizer thats fine. However that returns us to the argument about your moral compass. You spend 5 minutes over at stormfront with some of Black's buddies and tell me how benign he is.
Your "tainted money" claim in regards to Ron Paul is a.) bogus, and b.) just a grasping at a very brittle straw trying to paint Ron Paul as some sort of unprincipled KKK sympathizer.
I remember when people were saying that paying any attention to Jennifer Flowers was bogus.
There is a lot that I like about Ron Paul, he strikes me as a nice political fantasy. But I am concerned about his ties to racists, it doesn't make him one of them, but he sure hasn't done much to shake off that image.
This is what campaigns are for, a series of hurdles and tests. He failed this one.
Everyone is entitled to their beliefs and they can hate everyone and anyone they want for any reason they want, however ridicules those reasons and that attitude might be to everyone else. What they cannot do is harm the members of the group they hate through violence or unequal treatment in legal or commercial dealings. Ron Paul is the only candidate talking about making government smaller and getting it out of people's lives. It only makes sense that groups who are persecuted for their beliefs would support that type of candidate.
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.- H. L. Mencken
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.- H. L. Mencken
deathshead
New member
It is time to elect a new world leader, and only your vote counts.
Here are the facts about the three leading candidates.
Candidate A -
Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with
astrologists.
He's had two Mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10
martinis a day.
Candidate B -
He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium
in college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.
Candidate C -
He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke,
drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.
Which of these candidates would be your choice?
Here are the facts about the three leading candidates.
Candidate A -
Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with
astrologists.
He's had two Mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10
martinis a day.
Candidate B -
He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium
in college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.
Candidate C -
He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke,
drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.
Which of these candidates would be your choice?
deathshead
New member
Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Candidate B is Winston Churchill.
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler.
Candidate B is Winston Churchill.
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler.
Mainah said:but he sure hasn't done much to shake off that image.
you know, except for the whole...shaking off that image thing that he has done in numerous interviews and statements already.
stage2 said:As an aside, given Don Black's rap sheet and numerous run-ins with the law its not out of the question that this money is actually illegally tainted.
if hes not a felon then it doesnt matter, as i believe felons may not donate. facts are your friend. if he's a felon, it shouldn't be too hard to find out.
stage2 said:Which is yet another reason why you don't associate with these folks.
you use a pretty loose interpretation of "associate". somehow i have a feeling that it would tighten up quite a bit in relation to a candidate you like.
Here what Ron himself has to say about this at 3:28 in the new clip linked to below. His comments at 5:28 are especially good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqPhrqllHzY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqPhrqllHzY
theinvisibleheart
New member
confusion here
I think there is a confusion here. The fact that RP accepted donation from a racist/bigot doesn't mean he supports the ENTIRE position of the donor.
For example, if a racist/bigot donated $500 to RP becuz of RP's support for immigration control and smaller government, then the only significance of that $500 is that both racist/bigot donor and RP shared a common desire for immigration control and smaller government.
BTW, it's practically impossible to find 2 people who share exactly same POV w/o any dissent in this world.
It's also very difficult to find anybody who doesn't carry some form of bias and prejudice.
It's human nature.
--J
I think there is a confusion here. The fact that RP accepted donation from a racist/bigot doesn't mean he supports the ENTIRE position of the donor.
For example, if a racist/bigot donated $500 to RP becuz of RP's support for immigration control and smaller government, then the only significance of that $500 is that both racist/bigot donor and RP shared a common desire for immigration control and smaller government.
BTW, it's practically impossible to find 2 people who share exactly same POV w/o any dissent in this world.
It's also very difficult to find anybody who doesn't carry some form of bias and prejudice.
It's human nature.
--J
+1Okay, just another attempted smear of Ron Paul. Nothing to see here, folks, let's move on.
Way to go "stage2." Way to whip up a bunch of emotion and try to use it as a politically correct crow bar to be the thought police.
The original post is anti 1st amendment in spirit, and is a sickening attempt to elevate himself to thought czar.
The entire premise of the original post is despicable and nauseating.
Stage2, take your anti 1st amendment political correctness somewhere else. We believe in liberty here.
This bit of hostility towards freedom of conscience is really sickening:
A few Edwards/Obama/Hillary supporters are bigots (racial and otherwise). Are you going to allow THEM freedom of conscience stage2? I'm curious.
The original post is anti 1st amendment in spirit, and is a sickening attempt to elevate himself to thought czar.
The entire premise of the original post is despicable and nauseating.
Stage2, take your anti 1st amendment political correctness somewhere else. We believe in liberty here.
This bit of hostility towards freedom of conscience is really sickening:
So if we don't follow your marching orders and "denounce" then we've not done the "right thing?" :barf::barf::barf:Now I'm curious. Are the Paul supporters going to show up here and say that taking money from a bigot is perfectly acceptable, or are they going to do the right thing and denounce this.
A few Edwards/Obama/Hillary supporters are bigots (racial and otherwise). Are you going to allow THEM freedom of conscience stage2? I'm curious.
BoringAccountant
New member
Marko...
I have to disagree with you respectfully on a number of points you brought up.
First,
Reading the above as a blanket statement, then I would say no, but if someone's views were so far away from mine, then I would not do business with them...For example, would I work for someone who buys into the whole social healthcare...yea, I currently do, but that's an issue that while we may not agree on, it doesn't mean that I cannot accept their viewpoint just chose not to agree on it. On the other hand, would I work for someone who is a known, through association, self proclaimed, etc. racist...absolutely not.
My point is, everyone has different morals, but some of those morals and beliefs are so universally unacceptable, i.e. a white supremacist, that to even been associated with them in the same article should make that person sick.
Am I saying that RP is a racist, no, I dont know, I dont think he is, but this does not make him look good.
Second, Everyone on this board including myself and the mods are "average" everyday people, would it matter to you if I did business with someone who you disagree with, no, its my business, but when you are on the political scene, the main stage for a national, PRESIDENTIAL election, then I would care what you did. Since RP is a candidate in the Presidential election, and I think he has a shot of doing well, he should stick to his guns, the entire way through, because after all, he has based most of his candicacy on "I am a consistent voter"
I am still deciding on who to vote for in the primaries, so I am still a swing voter I guess, but this article does matter to me, its not some small issue
I have to disagree with you respectfully on a number of points you brought up.
First,
Do you only do business with someone after you thoroughly examine their political point of view? Do you only take a paycheck from people with whom you agree politically and philosophically?
Reading the above as a blanket statement, then I would say no, but if someone's views were so far away from mine, then I would not do business with them...For example, would I work for someone who buys into the whole social healthcare...yea, I currently do, but that's an issue that while we may not agree on, it doesn't mean that I cannot accept their viewpoint just chose not to agree on it. On the other hand, would I work for someone who is a known, through association, self proclaimed, etc. racist...absolutely not.
My point is, everyone has different morals, but some of those morals and beliefs are so universally unacceptable, i.e. a white supremacist, that to even been associated with them in the same article should make that person sick.
Am I saying that RP is a racist, no, I dont know, I dont think he is, but this does not make him look good.
Second, Everyone on this board including myself and the mods are "average" everyday people, would it matter to you if I did business with someone who you disagree with, no, its my business, but when you are on the political scene, the main stage for a national, PRESIDENTIAL election, then I would care what you did. Since RP is a candidate in the Presidential election, and I think he has a shot of doing well, he should stick to his guns, the entire way through, because after all, he has based most of his candicacy on "I am a consistent voter"
I am still deciding on who to vote for in the primaries, so I am still a swing voter I guess, but this article does matter to me, its not some small issue
BoringAccountant
New member
theinvisibleheart
Agreed. However, I think there is a huge difference between being a white trash hillbilly who you may suspect is a racist because of upbringing, etc. and a known white supremacist who runs a white supremacist website. Sure the website and his views are protected, noone is saying they aren't, but the content of the text, speech, and views are so distasteful to the "average" person, that this alone should be enough to return or donate the donation to something else
it's practically impossible to find 2 people who share exactly same POV w/o any dissent in this world.
Agreed. However, I think there is a huge difference between being a white trash hillbilly who you may suspect is a racist because of upbringing, etc. and a known white supremacist who runs a white supremacist website. Sure the website and his views are protected, noone is saying they aren't, but the content of the text, speech, and views are so distasteful to the "average" person, that this alone should be enough to return or donate the donation to something else
- Status
- Not open for further replies.