• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

The official Ron Paul thread

Migrated topic.
SnozzleBerry said:
what a nutjob :roll:

Paul wrote about sexual harassment in the workplace, “Why don’t they quit once the so-called harassment starts? Obviously the morals of the harasser cannot be defended, but how can the harassee escape some responsibility for the problem?’’

In another passage, Paul wrote, “The individual suffering from AIDS certainly is a victim - frequently a victim of his own lifestyle - but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing them to pay for his care.”
Click to expand...

Oh yea...and he's a racist...and he's a misogynist...just who I want at the forefront of my country :lol:
Click to expand...

Try to get some information from some unbiased media and not msm:
www.fox19.com

Reality Check: The story behind the Ron Paul newsletters

The talk of Ron Paul's racist newsletters has been all over the news for the past few weeks and seem to dominate all of the Congressman's interviews. So what about these newsletters is true and what is the rest of the media not telling you?
www.fox19.com www.fox19.com
 
Did you really just tell me to get unbiased news and then present me with a link to Fox News???

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

easyrider, the vast preponderance of harassment cases are brought against men by women, I'll gladly get you the US statistics if you so require. As to AIDS, coming from Washington DC, where the HIV/AIDS rate is 3% (yes, that's three times the percentage to be considered an epidemic) in large part as a result of the government blocking programs that would end this (if you want evidence again, just let me know, this is old news where I come from...we live under the heel of congressional riders). I take serious offense at your remark as to it being the result of lifestyle choice...people don't choose to live in systemic poverty and ignorance, it's inherent to the system...you're getting awful close to victim blaming.

Finally, as to disavowing the racial remarks, he's given various stories as to his relation to those comments over the past two decades, so let's pretend like it's so cut and dry when it's clearly not...in at least one news conference he expressed awareness of said comments but claimed they were merely "taken out of context" :roll:

Look at his campaign finances, look at his rhetoric...this man is a hypocritical crackpot...sure he's got some good ideas, you just have to sort through his entire loony bin to get to them. If you'd like to talk about the horrors of slashing government before slashing big business, in the vein of his "libertarian values", I'd be glad to discuss this as well and explain why it's utter insanity (just look at the way even medium sized corporations push around state legislatures if you want to get an inkling of the type of absurdity we would see on a national scale).
 
I think we have to be realistic here.

Many health problems like smoking, obesity, HIV, meth-addiction, etc. are also a lifestyle issue. There is a huge group of people who´re just incapable of taking any responsibility. They will never get a job because most of them isn´t even capable of filling in a simple form or showing-up on time and unfortunately many of these people also get pregnant at 15 and thus these problems pass on from one generation to the next.

Society has failed here. Both the left and the right have failed to help these people and thus society. Both democrats and republicans don´t have an answer.

Not giving wellfare does make things worse, because people then will resort to crime. Just giving wellfare does not work either because these problems then simply pass on from one generation to the next.

Only a broad spectrum of measures taken simultaneously, will work: organise good public eductation and make attending it obligatory...if people don´t sent their childeren to school, and let them hang on the streets, dealing or smoking crack, their childeren should be taken from them and send to foster homes. There has to be a good social security safety-net, but at the same time there should be a sufficiant police force on the street and people should face tough sentences if they repeatedly commit serious offences...etc.

These are all things, both left and right wing politicians don´t want because it doesn´t fit their conservative or liberal ideology. But with just being tough or just being very liberal and friendly, you don´t solve these problems. These problems need to be seriously dealth with and there needs to be tough measures as well as good social programs. A one-sided aproach will always fail, because of how deeply rooted these problems are.
 
polytrip said:
Many health problems like smoking, obesity, HIV, meth-addiction, etc. are also a lifestyle issue. There is a huge group of people who´re just incapable of taking any responsibility. They will never get a job because most of them isn´t even capable of filling in a simple form or showing-up on time and unfortunately many of these people also get pregnant at 15 and thus these problems pass on from one generation to the next.
Click to expand...
We can be realistic...we should be realistic...

The reality is, the system in which we live dictates these so-called "lifestyle choices" through a number of different venues. We can say "those poor black people won't stop smoking crack so they deserve what they get." Except, when we look at the stats, we see that blacks and whites use drugs at about the same rate and yet, black people are incarcerated at insanely higher levels than whites. We can say that those underage kids choosing to have unprotected sex are choosing to engage in risky activities, but when their school offers either no sex-ed due to funding or abstinence only sex-ed due to politics, the children are clearly not to blame.

When congress overrides DC's voter-approved and voter-raised funding for needle-exchange programs to staunch the AIDS rate and subsidies for abortions for low-income would-be mothers, it's not the users, the mothers or the voters at fault, it's the system, specifically congress, stripping the people of their rights, their voices and their power. This is what systemic abuse looks like. The victims of systemic problems may carry some of the weight of their actions, but it can hardly be said to be their responsibility...to put the full onus of these problems on them is not only ignorant and shortsighted, it prevents ever actually addressing the systemic root causes.
 
You can say it's put to rest all you want...that doesn't make it so.

My point was not whether or not that he wrote them, but that he supported them and gave his name to the newsletters in which they appeared. If I call something the Snozz Post and someone writes racist articles for it, it's on me to make sure that racist or other unwanted and inappropriate stuff doesn't appear there. If it does appear there, I assume that as my name is on the publication, I will be held accountable for whatever is present in said newsletter. This is like when you own a building; just because someone else brings drugs into a building you own, doesn't mean they will be held responsible for the drugs if LEO finds them in your building. In fact, according to the letter of the law, you are responsible for them, as it's your property.

When pressed about the passages, Paul didn't say they were disgusting or inappropriate...he said they "were taken out of context"...that's called being a racist.

Finally, this video claims that the racist passages aren't "racist per se, but could be interpreted as racist"...in other words, the people giving this presentation are apologists for racists and that of and by itself makes their position not only untenable, but also despicable.

Regardless, even if we pretend like his name isn't in the title of the documents and he has no ties to racism, you've ignored the numerous other salient points I've raised with this clown that make him entirely unsuitable for office.
 
SnozzleBerry said:
You can say it's put to rest all you want...that doesn't make it so.

My point was not whether or not that he wrote them, but that he supported them and gave his name to the newsletters in which they appeared. If I call something the Snozz Post and someone writes racist articles for it, it's on me to make sure that racist or other unwanted and inappropriate stuff doesn't appear there. If it does appear there, I assume that as my name is on the publication, I will be held accountable for whatever is present in said newsletter. This is like when you own a building; just because someone else brings drugs into a building you own, doesn't mean they will be held responsible for the drugs if LEO finds them in your building. In fact, according to the letter of the law, you are responsible for them, as it's your property.

When pressed about the passages, Paul didn't say they were disgusting or inappropriate...he said they "were taken out of context"...that's called being a racist.

Finally, this video claims that the racist passages aren't "racist per se, but could be interpreted as racist"...in other words, the people giving this presentation are apologists for racists and that of and by itself makes their position not only untenable, but also despicable.

Regardless, even if we pretend like his name isn't in the title of the documents and he has no ties to racism, you've ignored the numerous other salient points I've raised with this clown that make him entirely unsuitable for office.
Click to expand...
Please show me where he said it was taken out of context. I think what you are referring to is his book about another subject and not racism. please show me this "taken out of context" statement. Racism is bombing a country without declaration of war. Racism is massacring thousands of people without thought and provocation. THAT IS despicable! Supporting any other candidate is a crime against humanity. You have voted for death of thousands if not millions of innocent people. We can not have another pro-war president. No politician is perfect, no human is perfect. At least he is not promoting death. Ron Paul 2012! Thx
 
SnozzleBerry said:
polytrip said:
Many health problems like smoking, obesity, HIV, meth-addiction, etc. are also a lifestyle issue. There is a huge group of people who´re just incapable of taking any responsibility. They will never get a job because most of them isn´t even capable of filling in a simple form or showing-up on time and unfortunately many of these people also get pregnant at 15 and thus these problems pass on from one generation to the next.
Click to expand...
We can be realistic...we should be realistic...

The reality is, the system in which we live dictates these so-called "lifestyle choices" through a number of different venues. We can say "those poor black people won't stop smoking crack so they deserve what they get." Except, when we look at the stats, we see that blacks and whites use drugs at about the same rate and yet, black people are incarcerated at insanely higher levels than whites. We can say that those underage kids choosing to have unprotected sex are choosing to engage in risky activities, but when their school offers either no sex-ed due to funding or abstinence only sex-ed due to politics, the children are clearly not to blame.

When congress overrides DC's voter-approved and voter-raised funding for needle-exchange programs to staunch the AIDS rate and subsidies for abortions for low-income would-be mothers, it's not the users, the mothers or the voters at fault, it's the system, specifically congress, stripping the people of their rights, their voices and their power. This is what systemic abuse looks like. The victims of systemic problems may carry some of the weight of their actions, but it can hardly be said to be their responsibility...to put the full onus of these problems on them is not only ignorant and shortsighted, it prevents ever actually addressing the systemic root causes.
Click to expand...
I think there should be more attention to childeren in problematic situations. If childeren who´re basically just being neglected by their parents...wich is probably the most occuring form of child abuse, would be either taken away from their parents and send to foster homes or guided by a group of social workers (with the threat that they´d be taken away and send to foster homes if the parents don´t coõperate). If parents would get serious penalties if they don´t send their childeren to school, etc. Then i´m convinced that many problems like meth-addiction and HIV would simply diminish radically.

There are whole generations of people at the bottom of society who´re just basically lost, but when society starts taking care of the next generations, maybe in a few decades time, a lot of these problems will eventually vanish for the most part.

True, it won´t get anybody re-elected...because it takes more than 4 years to solve.

But a lot of these problems have been effectively dealth with in the past, in many society´s. In 19th century europe and america, these problems where actually a lot worse. It was 'dickens' everywhere.

So the circle where problems are passed from one generation to the other, cán be broken.
 
I hear you poly...part of the reason it used to be worse was because of the working conditions/hours that existed. Many children of poverty are left alone because their parents make up the "working poor" or people who work multiple jobs and still ive in poverty. There are children who are left at home and neglected not because their parents want to neglect them, but because that's the only way they can attempt to secure the three essentials:

Food
Clothes
Shelter

No one needs a job...they just need these three things...everything else is icing on the cake. We live in a society that does not, on the whole, make sure that these things are available to everyone to a reasonably comparable degree. In fact, I would posit the very nature of capitalism makes sure these things are not available to everyone to a comparable degree. This is why, imo, no matter how we can tweak or work within the system, real change will not come until we move beyond this system.

Post-capitalism party ftw
 
River of Thoughts said:
Please show me where he said it was taken out of context. I think what you are referring to is his book about another subject and not racism. please show me this "taken out of context" statement.
Click to expand...
"Morris also accused Paul of authoring questionable statements in past newsletters, some of which were characterized as racially charged. Paul's congressional campaign countered the statements were taken out of context"...article

River of Thoughts said:
Supporting any other candidate is a crime against humanity. You have voted for death of thousands if not millions of innocent people.
Click to expand...
You do realize that Ron Paul takes in thousands upon thousands of dollars from GE (among other military and non-military related corporations), right? Know how many deaths they've caused? So much for that moral highground. :lol: Newsflash...all of our politicians are complicit in mass-slaughter and exploitation...you're deluding yourself if you really believe that somehow Ron Paul is the exception.

So now that it's been shown that he did claim those statements were taken out of context and that he's just as complicit in American atrocities as any other politician...I think we can all say:

Death to Capitalism
Long live the People
Post-Capitalism Party 2012
 
SnozzleBerry said:
easyrider, the vast preponderance of harassment cases are brought against men by women, I'll gladly get you the US statistics if you so require. As to AIDS, coming from Washington DC, where the HIV/AIDS rate is 3% (yes, that's three times the percentage to be considered an epidemic) in large part as a result of the government blocking programs that would end this (if you want evidence again, just let me know, this is old news where I come from...we live under the heel of congressional riders). I take serious offense at your remark as to it being the result of lifestyle choice...people don't choose to live in systemic poverty and ignorance, it's inherent to the system...you're getting awful close to victim blaming.

Finally, as to disavowing the racial remarks, he's given various stories as to his relation to those comments over the past two decades, so let's pretend like it's so cut and dry when it's clearly not...in at least one news conference he expressed awareness of said comments but claimed they were merely "taken out of context" Rolling eyes

Look at his campaign finances, look at his rhetoric...this man is a hypocritical crackpot...sure he's got some good ideas, you just have to sort through his entire loony bin to get to them. If you'd like to talk about the horrors of slashing government before slashing big business, in the vein of his "libertarian values", I'd be glad to discuss this as well and explain why it's utter insanity (just look at the way even medium sized corporations push around state legislatures if you want to get an inkling of the type of absurdity we would see on a national scale).
Click to expand...

I guess, in Ron Paul's capitalistic view, women who cease to work for establishments where sexual harassment takes place (and even go as far as to boycott them) would take a toll on the profit margin of those establishments. A similar example of his is that an establishment, such as a diner, which disallowed minorities, would be eliminated in the free market, as other establishments without such policy would gain much greater profit. In regard to HIV proliferation, I'm sorry, but I seriously doubt people in America are still so ignorant as to not know what contraception is, or the consequences of sexual activity without it. Even people on the streets know this, who have seldom frequented educational facilities.

To my knowledge, Ron Paul has repetitively displayed disavowal for the racial remarks in the newsletters, and has even acknowledged that it is legitimate to criticize his own neglect in supervising the newsletters -- his reasoning being that he was practicing medicine full-time back then, with little time to review the newsletters. Concerning his economic ideology, I believe his form of capitalism, under a Paul presidency, would still be only minimally less worse than the crony capitalism we have now. That's why I'm not voting for him or anyone for that matter; I don't believe in compromising my anti-capitalist stance just because he believes in civil liberties, a decent foreign policy, and an end to the drug war. One has to admit, though, that the establishment abhors Ron Paul:
.
 
easyrider said:
I guess, in Ron Paul's capitalistic view, women who cease to work for establishments where sexual harassment takes place (and even go as far as to boycott them) would take a toll on the profit margin of those establishments.
Click to expand...
This is victim blaming pure and simple...someone shouldn't have to leave their office because someone else is making it an unsuitable working space. If I work at a cubicle next to you and make death threats to you all day long, I would expect to be fired. If I threatened violence towards you at all, I would expect to be fired. If I threatened to rape you, I would expect to be fired. How is creating an environment where women fear for their physical safety any different? Harassment (be it sexual or otherwise) is, by definition, a disturbance or upsetting of an individual's well-being. We live in a rape culture...I get it...it doesn't mean it's acceptable and it doesn't mean Paul has any moral ground from which to make such comments.

easyrider said:
In regard to HIV proliferation, I'm sorry, but I seriously doubt people in America are still so ignorant as to not know what contraception is, or the consequences of sexual activity without it. Even people on the streets know this, who have seldom frequented educational facilities.
Click to expand...
This is also victim blaming (and ignorant). Come home with me...see the city I grew up in. See the abject poverty, the lack of education, the people who believe all sorts of myths about contraception and disease prevention (you can't get pregnant in the shower, you can't get pregnant if you're on top, you can't get pregnant if you're on your period, the list goes on and on). See the AIDS rate that has been acknowledged to have been perpetuated and increased by congress.

Just because you are a privileged individual does not mean everyone has had the same amount of education as you and the things you take to be common knowledge are not necessarily common knowledge to all. You may find it hard to believe, but that doesn't make it any less real. 3% of the population of the nation's capital has HIV/AIDS...we have an AIDS epidemic in the capital city of the richest country in the world...and you think that's not due to ignorance? You think that's not due to malicious policies laid down by the powers that be? I don't know what to tell you...feel free to think that "people on the streets know this"...but that sounds rather vulgar to me...you got any proof to back up those claims?
 
Snozzleberry said:
This is victim blaming pure and simple...someone shouldn't have to leave their office because someone else is making it an unsuitable working space. If I work at a cubicle next to you and make death threats to you all day long, I would expect to be fired. If I threatened violence towards you at all, I would expect to be fired. If I threatened to rape you, I would expect to be fired. How is creating an environment where women fear for their physical safety any different? Harassment (be it sexual or otherwise) is, by definition, a disturbance or upsetting of an individual's well-being. We live in a rape culture...I get it...it doesn't mean it's acceptable and it doesn't mean Paul has any moral ground from which to make such comments.
Click to expand...

Sir, I don't agree with his position because it's not realistic, but one has to see from his capitalistic perspective, that business owners would take initiative and forcibly diminish sexual harassment through enforced policy in the workplace, if victims of sexual harassment were to cease working for them collectively and boycott the establishments.

SnozzleBerry said:
This is also victim blaming (and ignorant). Come home with me...see the city I grew up in. See the abject poverty, the lack of education, the people who believe all sorts of myths about contraception and disease prevention (you can't get pregnant in the shower, you can't get pregnant if you're on top, you can't get pregnant if you're on your period, the list goes on and on). See the AIDS rate that has been acknowledged to have been perpetuated and increased by congress.

Just because you are a privileged individual does not mean everyone has had the same amount of education as you and the things you take to be common knowledge are not necessarily common knowledge to all. You may find it hard to believe, but that doesn't make it any less real. 3% of the population of the nation's capital has HIV/AIDS...we have an AIDS epidemic in the capital city of the richest country in the world...and you think that's not due to ignorance? You think that's not due to malicious policies laid down by the powers that be? I don't know what to tell you...feel free to think that "people on the streets know this"...but that sounds rather vulgar to me...you got any proof to back up those claims?
Click to expand...

Privileged? Maybe, but are not all Americans so in the grand scheme, in contrast to the circumstances of sub-Saharan Africa? I mean, we're not living in the 18th century where one would have to be born into the gentry in order to have schooling. Just as you have heard ignorance such as "You can't get pregnant if you're on top," I have heard ignorance such as "Yeah, but it feels better going raw." I have friends in impoverished urban areas, and I, too, was raised amongst people who were unfortunate to not have strong family units. This all boils down to the family unit, in my opinion. There has to be a strong family unit with strong, determined leaders of the community in order to transform the dominant, careless lifestyles of the youth. I believe it's unrealistic to believe that this all stems from ignorance of what sexual activity without contraception entails. There is a psychology involved in this phenomenon, and it appears as though the youth just doesn't care due to the pre-existing circumstances of the community.
 
easyrider said:
...but one has to see from his capitalistic perspective, that business owners would take initiative and forcibly diminish sexual harassment through enforced policy in the workplace, if victims of sexual harassment were to cease working for them collectively and boycott the establishments.
Click to expand...
I hear what you're saying, but no amount of justification or semantics changes the fact that this is victim blaming. For me, that invalidates any argument, no matter how well you can explain it. Rape victims should not have to "change their outfits and their demeanors" in response to crimes against them, victims of violence or abuse should not have to "avoid areas where aggressors may lurk and avoid saying things that might potentially upset someone who would unduly exercise violence against them" to prevent further violence against them and victims of harassment should not have to "quit once the so-called harassment starts," it's that simple to me.

easyrider said:
This all boils down to the family unit, in my opinion. There has to be a strong family unit with strong, determined leaders of the community in order to transform the dominant, careless lifestyles of the youth. I believe it's unrealistic to believe that this all stems from ignorance of what sexual activity without contraception entails. There is a psychology involved in this phenomenon, and it appears as though the youth just doesn't care due to the pre-existing circumstances of the community.
Click to expand...
If you acknowledge things like the working poor and the disenfranchised, then you already understand how/why the "family unit" is under attack and thus ill-equipped to bear this burden in impoverished areas. Again, the flaw lies with the system, not the single-mother who works three jobs to barely support her two kids and therefore has no time to engage her family "appropriately."
 
Ron Paul is emerging as the only real contender to Mitt Romney for the republican nomination after a second place finish in new Hampshire. Ron Paul is the only candidate that wants to end the american reign of terror in the middle east.

You can nit pick the guy all you want about lesser issues but hes the only person that wants to stop these atrocities.

You can say ' hes unelectable ' you can say ' the system is rigged and he cant win' you can say whatever you want to justify not making an effort while Ron Paul and all his supporters that want peace are working tirelessly to restore freedom and dignity to your disgraceful country.

So whats it going to be? do you want to make a stand with Ron Paul and the rest of us that say enough is enough or do you want to sit on your hands doing nothing while this madness escalates to world war 3.

The system might be rigged and Ron Paul may not win but I urge you to be on the right side of history and at least TRY to vote someone in that lives in the real world as sees the united states for what it has become.


watch this video
!


The only think needed for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing.
 
Ron Paul takes campaign contributions from companies that are actively funding the terror and atrocities you claim he wants to stop, thus I'm forced to conclude he doesn't actually want these atrocities to stop. It does make for good campaign rhetoric though, doesn't it? I mean look how many people have come out of the woodwork to blindly follow this pied-piper.

If I tell you I don't want to hurt you and want to end your suffering while I watch my buddy assault, batter and rob you and then split the spoils of his mugging with him afterwards, I think it's pretty clear where I stand on the issue. It might be trite, it might be cliche, but actions do speak louder than words.

Ray, you have time and time again, displayed ignorance towards the political processes of my disgraceful country, so please, drop the airs of knowing what is best for us...it's unbecoming.
 
RayOfLight said:
Ron Paul is emerging as the only real contender to Mitt Romney for the republican nomination after a second place finish in new Hampshire.
Click to expand...
Okay, but he doesn't plan to compete in Florida! How in the world can you win the nomination, let alone the general election, without winning FL?

I wish there were more options, Ray, but as Snozz said it's really Corporate Guy A vs. Corporate Guy B. and Ron Paul does not transcend this.

RayOfLight said:
Ron Paul is the only candidate that wants to end the american reign of terror in the middle east.
Click to expand...
Huntsman wants to get out as well.
 
Snozz, do you really think its 'smart' people that get anything done on this planet? its people that believe in themselves that get things done, not people that admit defeat before there is even a fight. As smart as you are you are you don't seem to get that basic fact of reality.

I think its unbecoming to have a candidate that wants peace and have people like you condemn him. Ron Paul cant monitor where all of his campaign contributions come from and besides, I bet if there are any contributions to Ron Paul by these people you say it pales in comparison to what the others are getting. @ a1pha, huntsman might want out of Afghanistan but the main issue here is whats going to happen with Iran. Huntsman probably wants those troops out of Afghanistan so they can go to iran.


Ron Pauls motivation to enter the race was to educate people about freedom and get people engaged, to send a clear message to the establishment that the young people of the country are waking up to whats going on. He probably wont win the nomination but he wins by engaging and waking people up. The Ron Paul supporters are not going away and personally I see good things happening in the future... maybe his son Rand Paul will run on the same principals.
 
Back
Top Bottom