It is obvious however, after hearing that audio, that there ARE present those that DO associate with them.
Well start naming names Bruxley.
You've been egging this on.
Lets hear the names of those Paul supporters who are associates of Stormfront.
It is obvious however, after hearing that audio, that there ARE present those that DO associate with them.
The accusations of Anti-Semitism and racism directed towards Ron Paul are baseless. He has portraits of Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard on the walls in his office, and his platform is strongly influenced by their ideas. He has listed Martin Luther King Jr, Mahatma Ghandi, and Rosa Parks as his heroes. He has spoken out against racism, calling it "an ugly form of collectivism". He has also said that "someone like Walter Williams" should be his running mate.
They can't dig up any real dirt on Ron Paul because his record is almost impeccable, so his detractors are resorting to these accusations by either taking things he has said out of context, or falsely attributing racist comments to him.
This interview is a perfect example. Wolf Blitzer tries to make Ron Paul look bad by bringing up his vote on the Rosa Parks medal. Ron Paul defuses it simply by being honest: http://youtube.com/watch?v=rVwuYKGIn38 He actually offered to put in $100 of his own money if other representatives would do the same, but they declined. He also voted against giving a medal to Reagan, by the way.
Another example is the racist remarks that were printed in a newsletter and falsely attributed to him.
There are also the people who claim he is racist because he's getting a lot of support from the KKK/White Nationalist types. Certain parts of his platform (ending aid to Israel, 2nd Amendment rights, etc.) attract more of those types of people. However, nothing about his platform is inherently anti-Semitic or racist.
SteelCore: we agree more than not on this topic, but this would be one exception. I happen to know a bit on the subject, and everything that I know points to the fact: Palestinians live in poverty not because of Israel. Israel would be happy to leave all occupied lands if this would've bought them peace. Problem is - it wouldn't, and that was demonstrated on numerous occasions. If all US and UN money donated to Palestinians would've been converted into infrastructure and transfered to the people, each one would've been able to afford a house with a golden roof. Instead, they still rely on Israel for electricity and supply chains, and pay back with missiles. But hey - late Yasser Arafat left about 10 billion dollars in a network of accounts.Obviously I don't want to see Jews exterminated or oppressed. But neither do I want to see the Palestinians or other Arabs live in poverty, misery, and torment because Israel insists on occupying their lands, shooting missiles into populated areas, and punishing millions of refugees for the actions of a few terrorists...
Some junior commanders encouraged the brutality and even endorsed it. "After two months in Rafah a [new] commanding officer arrived ... So we do a first patrol with him. It's 6 A.M., Rafah is under curfew, there isn't so much as a dog in the streets. Only a little boy of four playing in the sand. He is building a castle in his yard. He [the officer] suddenly starts running and we all run with him. He was from the combat engineers. We all run with him. He grabbed the boy. Nufar, I am a degenerate if I am not telling you the truth. He broke his hand here at the wrist. Broke his hand at the wrist, broke his leg here. And started to stomp on his stomach, three times, and left. We are all there, jaws dropping, looking at him in shock ... The next day I go out with him on another patrol, and the soldiers are already starting to do the same thing."
Not any more. It used to be one side - the Palestinian side - up until fairly recently.It's just that we only hear one side of the story in this country
It isn't going to hold water because Paul's detractors don't want it to.Well, well, well… I wonder how the Paulies are going to explain this one?? And just for the record, ‘Ron Paul didn’t know what Black was’ isn’t going to hold water…
Bruxley said:I don't think anyone has made any such allegation of being a Nazi or neo-nazi .
Redneckrepairs said:I do nont support any white suppremisit including Dr paul
WildassumptionAlaska said:That begs the issue as to why the Doc would even be seen associating with such trash, would allow himself to be seen photographed with such trash, etc.....
I can only conclude that Doc Paul thinks like such trash.
Bruxley said:-The 'neocon' boogey man that is conspiring to bring about the defeat of Paul and the US
-The 'a vote for anyone but Paul is unpatriotic'
-Sanity insists Paul be supported
-If Paul doesn't get the nomination the Republican party should be torn down
-No 'pro-jew' wars
-Make the Republican party know they will be attacked without our (Paul supporters) support under the 'no more lesser of two evils' logic. No Republican vote until they put up a 'patriot'.
-recruit others to the 'cause' using those arguments to garner 'outside' numbers.
-virulent opposition of McCain (I don't know why McCain is singled out)
-Glorification of Thomas Jefferson as he 'recognized' the inferiority of blacks and the mandate of liberty. He 'understood'. (Apparently he wrote about such an ideology)
-Lincoln was THE scourge to liberty and the most unpatriotic President.
Of course just one of those perspectives wouldn't automatically put someone as associating with them, but when their overall message is also someone else's overall message it is very hard to deny association.
Bruxley said:But the similarities are far from incidental. And direct association does reflect at least a tacit sympathy of perspective unless of course that association is overtly rejected.