Main Stream Media Now admitting Ron Paul will be on the Ballot in Tampa

[Samwell Seed Well]

winning
[video=youtube;La61eoIvW4Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La61eoIvW4Q&feature=player_embedded[/video]

 

[InCognition]

are you ever going to explain how i took anything at all out of context?

i mean, i posted the full bill and the relevant section. if it were simply about funding, it would prohibit funding to any institution which dictates what type of lifestyle is acceptable.

as it is written, ron paul only finds gays unworthy of funding, straight he has no problem with. that's the full context.

you're just too brainwashed by the fabulous dr. paul to admit it. you'd have to be dumb not to see how that is discriminatory and bigoted.

i mean, c'mon. homosexuality is not an acceptable lifestyle? is that an attitude you hold as well? is that an attitude which, if you held it, you would try to legislate onto the population as a whole, imposing your bigoted belief?

ron paul defended the racist newsletters as his writings in 1996, this is incontrovertible fact. it was reported on in a half a dozen papers. old ronnie says he lied about it, but that just throws his credibility into question.

if he's willing to lie about that for political gain, what else won't he lie about for political gain?

old ronald, the bigoted liar. and you just fucking love him. dumbass.

You take it out of context because you fail to realize that it ultimately has nothing to do with homosexuality. You can't see under anything, you apparently just look at the surface, which will always lead to ignorance regardless of the subject.

You're also out of context when you try to proclaim that RP is imposing discrimination of any sort upon society. People who believe in true freedom do not force or impose discrimination, and in fact they do the exact opposite.

So that leaves you left with trying to explain how Ron Paul is not actually about true individual freedom. Being that he is about true individual freedom, you've obviously been confused that his personal morality as an individual, is some how a form of discrimination. You are sadly unable to decypher morality and discrimination apparently. If you are able to decypher the two, well that that just demonstrates that you blatantly manipulate the two words in order to convey your bigoted dislike towards him.

 

[InCognition]

Did you research that from a crystal ball or a time machine?

He gets his research off the top link of google after typing in a biased subject line, regarding anti Ron Paul fallacies. Then he tells you how many voice recordings and videos he has of his so called "findings", and stamps it as proof.

When you ask for all his research, it mysteriously doesn't get posted, or differs from the claims of the evidence he saw, even though he links you to the evidence he saw.

 

[UncleBuck]

You take it out of context because you fail to realize that it ultimately has nothing to do with homosexuality.

wait a second here.

are you trying to tell me that a bill which prohibits federal funding to any entity that even suggests that homosexuality can be acceptable "has nothing to do with homosexuality"?

bizarro world stuff, dude. if it had nothing to do with homosexuality, it wouldn't mention homosexuality. i would think a genius with a big brain like yourself would see that.

You're also out of context when you try to proclaim that RP is imposing discrimination of any sort upon society.

again, let me see if i have this straight.

ron paul writes a bill that prohibits federal funding to any entity which suggests that homosexuality can be acceptable. he makes no such specification for entities that suggest heterosexuality can be acceptable.

so, by definition, he is discriminating against gays. by turning this into legislation and trying to get it passed into law for our society to abide by, he is trying to impose his discrimination upon the society as a whole. that is by definition. that is fact.

a genius with a big brain such as yourself should know that.

People who believe in true freedom do not force or impose discrimination, and in fact they do the exact opposite.

ergo ron paul does not support true freedom, he supports discrimination against gays and imposing his bigotry on society.

what don't you get about this?

 

[UncleBuck]

He gets his research off the top link of google after typing in a biased subject line, regarding anti Ron Paul fallacies. Then he tells you how many voice recordings and videos he has of his so called "findings", and stamps it as proof.

When you ask for all his research, it mysteriously doesn't get posted, or differs from the claims of the evidence he saw, even though he links you to the evidence he saw.

dude, i posted for you a clip of ron paul referring to a texas monthly article called "dr. no". in that article which ron paul references, ron paul explains that he defended the newsletters as his own writings in 1996, but that he was not telling the truth.

go read the article. it's available online for free.

...I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn’t come from me directly, but they [campaign aides] said that’s too confusing. ‘It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it.’”

there you go. ron paul stating that he followed his aides' advice to lie about the newsletters for political gain in the 1996 congressional race. he claims he didn't write them, but he defended them as his own writings. he blames it on his campaign people. he's just a liar who can't accept responsibility for his actions in life. a loser. much like your grow - a loser.

 

[abandonconflict]

[h=2]Good luck Ron Paul

[url]http://www.newseyeview.com/?p=1

American Idol vs. American Presidential Election[/URL][/h] Uncategorized
Last week American Idol racked up 97 million votes for the two finalists. Enthusiasts were thrilled. Cynics pointed out how sad our civilization has become when American Idol gets more votes than a presidential election. I became an Idol enthusiast this year when they showed the repeats from last season on cable. But I am also cynical. So I decided to look up the numbers.
You don’t have to register to vote for American Idol. And the phrase ‘Vote early and vote often’ took on special meaning a few weeks ago when my wife and I decided that Syesha was going to be eliminated after what we thought was a stellar performance, despite a mediocre performance by David Cook, the eventual winner. My wife picked up the phone and dialed the Syesha number, hung up, hit redial, and kept going for seven or eight votes until the futility of it all sank in. If our experience was normal — if everybody voted eight times, then only 12.1 million or so people really voted last week.
I checked out the Nielson ratings for the two final shows. The Wednesday American Idol finale scored 30 million viewers, up by half a million from last year. But you don’t vote after that show — it is the final performance show on Tuesday that you vote on. And only 19.34 million viewers watched on Tuesday. Doing the math, if every single Tuesday viewer voted 5.02 times you get 97 million votes. If you figure that a lot of people don’t vote — we never voted except that one time, the week before the finale — our eight votes are probably a decent average. 97M/8 = 12,125,000 voters. Give or take a few hundred thousand.
Before looking at the presidential election numbers, here is a quick comparison of the two events:
Time Span
American Idol lasts about three months. The presidential election will have lasted almost three years by the time we vote next November. In my opinion American Idol gets it right on this one. They show us everything we need to know in a reasonable amount of time, eliminating candidates on a regular and predictable basis. I’m fairly sick of the presidential candidates’ antics already, and the general election campaigning hasn’t even started!
Music
American Idol wins hands down on music. While I love a patriotic marching band number as much as the next guy, the performances on American Idol were real toe tappers. None of the musical performances (including the candidates playing instruments on late night television) had the excitement or skill of the Idol performances. You just wouldn’t see Paula Abdul standing up and swaying to ‘The Star Spangled Banner.’ And none inspired me to critique the performances — ooh that Sousa march was a little pitchy… Nope.
Talking Heads
This one goes to the presidential election. Idol only has four: Randy, Paula, Simon, and Ryan (who is just supposed to be an announcer, but injects his opinions — mostly of Simon — anyway). Put the news casters have their stars, too. Who doesn’t love it when Fox’s Washington news chief Brit Hume disagrees with NPR’s Juan Williams, intoning ‘Juan, Juan, Juan!’ in a disappointed chant? Or CNN’s Wolf Blitzer — you’ve got to love any guy with a name like Wolf Blitzer. Or NBC’s Tim Russert with his bulldog style of interviewing and his famous white board tallying of votes. Sure, there are a lot of duds on network news, but the good ones are amazing, entertaining, enlightening, and get your juices flowing.
While I love Idol’s judges, they tend to be repetitive, then shine with seminal moments (like when Paula reviewed a performance that hadn’t yet taken place, or when Simon Cowell told Brook White that she was like a hamburger without the bun).
Production Values
American Idol, by a hair. And that’s not saying much, because despite the glitz their production values aren’t so hot. Their new set is worse than their old set, if that’s possible. It is ugly and distracting, and whose idea was it to put the band out of sight on high platforms? On a music show???!!! However, the presidential election sets seem to only have three colors — red, white, and blue (is white technically a color?) and Fox in particular seems hell-bent on making those colors look as ugly as possible. What a relief it was to see John McCain standing in front of a white and green backdrop on Earth Day!
I’ve only seen two seasons of Idol. Last year’s direction, camera work, and choreography was really terrible. I was shocked that a show that rakes in so much money couldn’t spend some of it on decent production staff. This year they seemed to have realized that, and production values were somewhat better. Presidential election camera work isn’t artsy, but it does the job very nicely. But direction is static and predictable, and choreography is nearly nonexistent.
Speeches
The presidential candidates win hands down. While there is nothing more charming than David Archuleta’s self-depreciating mumbles about how great all the other contestants are, this year’s presidential candidates have done something we haven’t seen in a long, long time in politics: they are talking about the issues in a somewhat substantive and interesting way. I’ve rooted for McCain and Obama from the beginning because I thought that if they were the candidates in the general election we’d actually have an intelligent public discussion of the things that are important to Americans, rather than just the same ol’, same ol’ political strategies and dirty tricks. It looks like we may actually get that, and in the meantime we’re hearing distinct points of view about interesting and influential topics. Wow!
Relevance
Idol must be relevant to a lot of Americans or it wouldn’t get such high ratings, and sell so many songs on iTunes and at record stores. But even when Americans don’t think presidential candidates are relevant, they do have more tangible effect on Americans’ lives than Idols do. For example a president who is strong on the economy can create an atmosphere in which you can afford all the CDs the Idols churn out.
In terms of the overall experience I like Idol better, but I spend more time paying attention to the presidential election. It is just the nature of the beast — every four years it’s the election you love to hate.
Now for the stats from the last presidential election: of about 215.69 million eligible voters, about 142.07 registered to vote. That’s 65.9%. 125.7 million voted, 58.3% of eligible voters. So the adage is untrue. Many more people vote in the presidential election than vote for an American Idol. And while the Idol voters may be more passionate as evidenced by their multiple votes (some presidential voters cast more than one vote, too, but the majority only cast one), 3/5s of the American public are doing their duty when it comes to voting for the most powerful leader in the world.
There were 28.7 million more votes for president in 2004 than there were for American Idol in 2008. And almost every single one of those presidential votes represented a single voter. So while John McCain or Barack Obama may not sell as many CDs as David Cook eventually will, they will get more votes and influence more lives. That’s good for our country. The system works. People are engaged. Phew!



dveaner @ May 30, 2008

 

[deprave]

wait a second here.

are you trying to tell me that a bill which prohibits federal funding to any entity that even suggests that homosexuality can be acceptable "has nothing to do with homosexuality"?

bizarro world stuff, dude. if it had nothing to do with homosexuality, it wouldn't mention homosexuality. i would think a genius with a big brain like yourself would see that.



again, let me see if i have this straight.

ron paul writes a bill that prohibits federal funding to any entity which suggests that homosexuality can be acceptable. he makes no such specification for entities that suggest heterosexuality can be acceptable.

so, by definition, he is discriminating against gays. by turning this into legislation and trying to get it passed into law for our society to abide by, he is trying to impose his discrimination upon the society as a whole. that is by definition. that is fact.

a genius with a big brain such as yourself should know that.



ergo ron paul does not support true freedom, he supports discrimination against gays and imposing his bigotry on society.

what don't you get about this?

The bill also prohibits federal funding of insitutions which promot heterosexual realtions and federal funding from anything else you can possible imagine. This bill was written in 1979 and the quote "unacceptable" that is used is NOT substantiated BECAUSE the bill was from so long ago it is not submitted on the official record because it did not pass. The source you would quote would be thomas.gov. I am well aware we have been over this is merely a SUMMARY. (Hence taking that out of context 10 fold)

 

[deprave]

dude, i posted for you a clip of ron paul referring to a texas monthly article called "dr. no". in that article which ron paul references, ron paul explains that he defended the newsletters as his own writings in 1996, but that he was not telling the truth.

go read the article. it's available online for free.



there you go. ron paul stating that he followed his aides' advice to lie about the newsletters for political gain in the 1996 congressional race. he claims he didn't write them, but he defended them as his own writings. he blames it on his campaign people. he's just a liar who can't accept responsibility for his actions in life. a loser. much like your grow - a loser.

The question asked in a generalized and very broad question and not specifically did he write those quotes but an entirely different question really. (hence taking that out of context)

Quite the coincidence the ties these gentlemen have which I have laid out before, ties to war profiteers. It is war profiteers, big pharma, the GOP, and many others that have continually smeared Dr Paul in their political interest. At the time of the newsletters were released by a Mr Kirchick and al written by conviently enough the same man Mr Roland, a man who no one at the paper even recognized, even more interesting MR Roland and Kirchick are directly linked with a arms dealers and lobyists, Dr Paul was practicing medicine and not even involved in politics.

Further Mrs. Gloria Borger of CNN who continued to press Dr Paul on these issues is the wife of said war lobbyist...Interestingly enough....its even more interesting how all the newsletters were discovered and released at the same time....Interestingly enough.... when Dr Paul started getting back into politics..It is questionable if they were even actually ever published by the Newsletter and thats just where the questions start off in a quick rant for you...I have neatly and proffesionally linked the sources here at least over a dozen time but you conviently ignore it each time and go on to trolling another poster.

Interestingly Enough (Yes I said it again)...This can all be traced neatly though this little insider GOP/BIG PHARMA/MILITARY INSIDER POSSE HERE:

http://www.dailypaul.com/196169/news...ts-to-gingrich
__________________________________________________ ___________________

So here we go.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by donnay

James Kirchick is said to have released the newsletter cache.

James Kirchick is connected with Newt Gingrich in a think-tank group called Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD).
Sources:
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/20...-ron-paul.html
http://www.infowars.com/gingrich-lin...on-paul-smear/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/76404243/S...ul-Newsletters'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, Here is the CNN interview about the newsletters.
cut:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP6Xh...eature=related
uncut:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLonnC_ZWQ0

The interview was done by Gloria Borger, CNN senior analyist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Borger
http://nndb.com/people/113/000123741/

Gloria Borger's Husband is Lance Morgan.

Lance Morgan
Works for Powell-Tate as Chief communications strategist.
He is essentially a lobbyist for the military industrial complex. He's also all caught up in the whole Iran-Contra cover-up, Wall Street, Big Pharma, Big Agra, and Biotech.

http://www.powelltate.com/about-us/o.../lance_morgan/
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/11/19/wo...up-effort.html

------------------------------
Important Info:

Powell Tate = Powell Tate/Weber Shandwick (they merged)
Before Powell Tate merged with Weber Shandwick, it was part of Cassidy and Associates

Shandwick International is one of the largest PR companies in the nation.

Cassidy & Associates and The Rhoads Group are Powell-Tate/Weber Shandwick's "sister government relations agencies"

http://www.webershandwick.com/Defaul.../PublicAffairs
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Powell_Tate
-----------------------------

People associated with Powell-Tate:

Christina Martin
The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA), Executive Vice President March 2009 – Present
Powell Tate/Weber Shandwick, Executive Vice President 2004 – 2005 (1 year)
Press Secretary for Newt Gingrich, 1997 – 1999 (2 years)
Press Secretary for Bob Dole, 1995 – 1996 (1 year)
Press Secretary to Governor Terry Branstad, January 1994 – December 1995 (2 years)
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/christina-martin/3/a79/b66
http://www.iop.harvard.edu/Programs/...ristina_Martin

Suzanne Wilson-Houck
Ripple Communications (Intelligence and National Security Alliance), September 2010 – Present
Account Executive, Cassidy & Associates, January 1994 – January 1996 (2 years 1 month)
Assistant to Newt Gingrich, January 1992 – January 1994 (2 years 1 month)
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/suzanne-...ouck/0/a33/146
http://www.security-innovation.org/b...=600&width=500

Christy Evans
Vice President of Cassidy and Associates
Former Assistant to Newt Gingrich
Former Policy Coordinator for Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)
Registered lobbyist for Tiffany's!
http://www.cassidy.com/team/32/
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/new...t-at-tiffanys/

Peter Carson
Powell-Tate, Exec. Vice President
Chief of Staff for Rep. Christopher Shays, 1995 – July 2000 (5 years 7 months)
http://fairfieldcountylook.com/album...rol-Fedele.jpg

Here is a picture of Newt Gingrich w/ Rep. Christopher Shays
http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Christo...rn/WEe30AnM1wd

"Gingrich was in Washington to give support to House Republicans who are calling on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to reconvene the chamber and vote on the American Energy Act, a Republican bill designed to address America's dependence on foreign oil. "

----------------------------------------------------
Submitted by HOLLYWOOD
Connecting the dots: the Shays/Gingrich Connection

Christopher Shays has listed former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich as his political inspiration, saying "Newt Gingrich is my hero."[7]
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/28/ma...pagewanted=all

^ Shays does know the details, and he admits that "there's a part of me that wonders if it's as well thought out as I'd like it to be." But, he adds, "I'll take almost any alternative over what we've got now." And on the day the measure passed the House, Shays was standing at Gingrich's side, paying homage with the familiar phrases. "What I had to wrestle with was, in my heart I thought I was a caring person," he said. "But I realized I was a caretaking person. And today, what we have shown is that we are a caring country." And then the unlikely convert concluded with the least likely words: "Newt Gingrich is my hero." Rant, Listen, Exploit, Learn, Scare, Help, Manipulate, Lead, The New York Times, January 28, 1996, Sunday, Late Edition — Final, Newt Gingrich, Section 6; Page 34; Column 1; Magazine Desk, 7786 words, By Jason DeParle New York Yimes

Shays background: http://www.videosblogdelnarco.nightc...her_Shays.html

----------------------------------------------------

lets go back to Christina Martin for a sec, she is the V.P. of The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) <--- Ethanol Lobbying Group
They support Newt Gingrich.

http://domesticfuel.com/2011/01/25/n...wa-rfa-summit/

Organized in 1981, RFA serves as the voice of the ethanol industry, providing advocacy, authoritative analysis, and important industry data to its members, Congress, federal and state government agencies, strategic partners, the media and other opinion-leader audiences.

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/pages/philosophy


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by Daddy Warbucks
Newt Gingrich, like Lance Morgan, has ties to Iran-Contra:

Is it a coincidence then that Newt Gingrich has hired Robert McFarlane as part of his advisory team on National Security? Who's Robert McFarlane?

"Robert McFarlane, one might recall, was National Security Adviser to Ronald Reagan when the Iran/Contra scandal brokeand became famous as the man who went to Iran with a cake in the shape of a key, and a Bible. McFarlane ended up pleading guilty to four misdemeanor charges related to withholding information from Congress. "

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gin...unces-foreign-......

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by BOOGAFACE
More on Gingrich/Powell-Tate

Electric Boat, whose PR is--again-- handled by Powell-Tate, was run by John Rowland, who helped Newt Gingrich get his first position in Congress http://articles.dailypress.com/1995-.../9506250066_1_...

Years later, [John Rowland] heavily lobbied then-Speaker Newt Gingrich to support the purchase of a 1.5 Billion dollar Seawolf submarine
http://articles.courant.com/1995-05-...05200201_1_sea...

The US purchased the submarine
http://articles.courant.com/1996-07-...07040077_1_sea...

The Billion dollar submarine had several leaks, but we bought it anyway
http://articles.courant.com/1994-05-...05040344_1_sea...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Carson, Powell-Tate Exec. VP

Peter Carson was Chief of Staff for Rep. Christopher Shays from January 1995 &#8211; July 2000 (5 years 7 months)

http://www.powelltate.com/what-we-do...ublic_affairs/

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/peter-carson/8/702/500

http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/indus.php?id=18312

House Rep. Shays
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...5/5f/Chris_Sha...

Check out the pic of Newt Gingrich w/ Rep. Shays in the background.
http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Christo.../Newt+Gingrich

and remember... this all leads back to Gloria Borger, CNN political analyst.​

GEE WHY WOULD WAR PROFITEERS WANT TO SMEAR RON PAUL?!?!?? DERP!


I know you won't even respond properly to this post UB, you never do, you will simply ignore it or maybe even spam a bit to make sure it gets bumped out of sight. This is at least the 30th time I have posted this information only to be ignored. So this ladies and gentlemen is why I just rant at UB and tell him to fuck off because we have been through this for over a year now and Id rather not waste my time, but I would like to make sure some of the new people look over this and research it for themselves. I will gladly repost all the other research I did and all the other times I pwoned Ron Paul Haters if anyone is interested because we had over 1,000 pages on this Ron Paul debate and the opposition really has nothing...Thanks

​

 

[UncleBuck]

The bill also prohibits federal funding of insitutions which promot heterosexual realtions...

liar.

show me in the bill the verbiage.

 

[UncleBuck]

GEE WHY WOULD WAR PROFITEERS WANT TO SMEAR RON PAUL?!?!?? DERP!​

I know you won't even respond properly to this post UB, you never do, you will simply ignore it or maybe even spam a bit to make sure it gets bumped out of sight. This is at least the 30th time I have posted this information only to be ignored. So this ladies and gentlemen is why I just rant at UB and tell him to fuck off because we have been through this for over a year now and Id rather not waste my time, but I would like to make sure some of the new people look over this and research it for themselves. I will gladly repost all the other research I did and all the other times I pwoned Ron Paul Haters if anyone is interested because we had over 1,000 pages on this Ron Paul debate and the opposition really has nothing...Thanks

​

ron paul published racist newsletters under his name, profited off them, defended them as his writing, and then said he was just lying and blamed his campaign aides.

 

[InCognition]

ron paul published racist newsletters under his name, profited off them, defended them as his writing, and then said he was just lying and blamed his campaign aides.

That's what you fail to spend 10 seconds researching. He didn't actually write them. They did however go out under his name.

There is a very big difference between the two, and that's something you just don't want to acknowledge. Sad, yet true.

 

[InCognition]

The bill also prohibits federal funding of insitutions which promot heterosexual realtions and federal funding from anything else you can possible imagine. This bill was written in 1979 and the quote "unacceptable" that is used is NOT substantiated BECAUSE the bill was from so long ago it is not submitted on the official record because it did not pass. The source you would quote would be thomas.gov. I am well aware we have been over this is merely a SUMMARY. (Hence taking that out of context 10 fold)

lol UB just got OWNED.

 

[InCognition]

dude, i posted for you a clip of ron paul referring to a texas monthly article called "dr. no". in that article which ron paul references, ron paul explains that he defended the newsletters as his own writings in 1996, but that he was not telling the truth.

go read the article. it's available online for free.

• ...I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn&#8217;t come from me directly, but they [campaign aides] said that&#8217;s too confusing. &#8216;It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it.&#8217;&#8221;
  
  
  ​

  
  
  ​

^Really good proof, LOL. Once again, your "quote" of proof mysteriously states something different than your original claim. Now that is an LOL.

Slow down there before I have file assault charges on you, you're really making me laugh my ass off now.

 

[UncleBuck]

That's what you fail to spend 10 seconds researching. He didn't actually write them. They did however go out under his name.

There is a very big difference between the two, and that's something you just don't want to acknowledge. Sad, yet true.

when did i ever claim he wrote them?

if you can find where i said that he wrote them, i will send you a free ounce of top shelf homegrown (and i didn't even have to spend several years to grow it, like it would take you).

 

[UncleBuck]

^Really good proof, LOL. Once again, your "quote" of proof mysteriously states something different than your original claim. Now that is an LOL.

Slow down there before I have file assault charges on you, you're really making me laugh my ass off now.

here is my original claim.

• as far as the newsletters go, in what sense do you mean they have been debunked? because i can produce a video of paul talking to hannity, referring hannity to an article in texas monthly where he tells the person interviewing him that he lied about the newsletters during the 1996 congressional campaign. of course, you being a little kid and all, you probably have not bothered to look this up. you're too busy smoking all that 3-5 grams of pot you just grew yourself and bandying about ron paul with your friends as if it made you some cool political hipster. "ugh, politicians are so mainstream. i liked ron paul before he was cool".​

  
  
  ​

and i produced exactly that.

face the facts: ron paul published racist newsletters under his name, profited off them, defended them as his writings in 1996, then said he was just lying at the time, and blamed his campaign aides for him telling lies.

this is all indisputable fact.

 

[UncleBuck]

The bill also prohibits federal funding of insitutions which promot heterosexual realtions

lol UB just got OWNED.

not until you can cite this non-existent claim that deprave makes.

show me where in this bill it prohibits federal funding to institutions that promote heterosexuality. i beg you, please show me.

here is the bill. show me how deprave is right and is not just telling a complete and utter lie.

Family Protection Act - States as the purpose of this Act the abolition of Federal governmental policies which interfere with the freedom of the American family.Title I: Education - Abolishes the Department of Education and nullifies all regulations, contracts, licenses, or privileges issued by such Department prior to the effective date of this Act. Directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to provide for the orderly termination of the affairs of such Department.Forbids any court of the United States from requiring the attendance at a particular school of any student because of race, color, creed, or sex.Prohibits the Secretary of the Treasury from issuing in final form the "Proposed Revenue Procedure on Private Tax-Exempt Schools", which sets forth guidelines for determining whether a private school has forfeited its tax-exempt status by the adoption of racially discriminatory policies.Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) allow an income tax credit for 100 percent of the amount of tuition paid for the elementary, secondary, or higher education of the taxpayer, spouse, or dependents; (2) allow an income tax deduction for amounts paid into an education savings account established to pay the educational expenses of a dependent child of a taxpayer; and (3) grant tax-exempt status to schools which are controlled by the parents of the children who attend them (parental schools).Title II: Social Security and Retirement - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow individual taxpayers who support an elderly (age 60 or older) dependent a $1,000 income tax credit or a $5,000 income tax deduction.Repeals provisions of Title II (Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance) of the Social Security Act which require the reduction of benefits under such title if the benefit recipient has regular employment.Amends the Internal Revenue Code to permit individuals and married couples to claim the income tax deduction for contributions to an individual retirement account even if such individuals or couples are participants in tax qualified pension, profitsharing, or stock bonus plans under the Internal Revenue Code.Specifies that social security benefits are exempt from taxation.Treats married individuals who receive no compensation or less compensation than their spouses as having received compensation equal to that of their spouses for purposes of computing the maximum allowable income tax deduction for contributions to an individual retirement account.Allows an income tax deduction from gross income for the payment of social security taxes by employees and self-employed individuals.Title III: Constitutional Guarantees - Prohibits the Federal Government from imposing any obligation or conditions upon any child care center, orphanage, foster home, emergency shelter for abused children or spouses, school, juvenile delinquency or drug abuse treatment center or home, or similar program which is operated by a church or religious institution.Amends provisions of the United States Code relating to judicial procedure to establish a legal presumption in favor of an expansive interpretation of a parent's role in supervising and determining the religious or moral formation of his or her child, in cases involving such issue.Repeals the Selective Service Act of 1967.Denies jurisdiction to the Supreme Court of the United States to review any State statute or regulation which relates to abortion. Extends such denial of jurisdiction to Federal district courts.Title IV: Taxation - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to permit married individuals to be taxed separately on their income under the same rates as are applicable to unmarried individuals.Allows an income tax deduction for adoption expenses.Allows an income tax deduction for contributions paid to a tax-exempt trust fund established for the care of a taxpayer's parents or handicapped relative.Repeals the estate tax, the gift tax, and the tax on generated-skipping transfers.Increases the amount of the personal tax exemption for dependents from $1,000 to $3,000.Provides for the establishment of tax-deferred rollover savings accounts for the exclusive benefit of the taxpayer or beneficiaries.Title V: Domestic Relations - Prohibits Federal preemption of State laws relating to child or spousal abuse, or juvenile delinquency. Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds for the operation of any programs dealing with such problems.Defines "child abuse" as physical maltreatment, and psychological or emotional neglect. Excludes from such definition discipline or corporal punishment applied by a responsible parent or an individual authorized to act in the place of such parent.Grants tax-exempt status to organizations which provide care and treatment for victims of child or spousal abuse and to organizations which care for runaway children.Requires federally-funded abortion and venereal disease treatment centers to notify parents of unmarried minors that such minors have requested an abortion, contraceptives, or are undergoing treatment for a venereal disease.Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds to any organization which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style.Title VI: Miscellaneous - Grants jurisdiction to U.S. district courts to hear any cases arising under this Act. Prohibits the removal of any case arising under this Act from a State court of competent jurisdiction to a Federal court unless a Federal official or employee in an official capacity is a party. Provides for a six-year statute of limitation for cases arising under this Act.Provides a civil penalty for persons violating any provision or regulation promulgated pursuant to this Act.Requires the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress on the administration of this Act and the progress of the States in effectuating its provisions.​

 

[deprave]

not until you can cite this non-existent claim that deprave makes.

show me where in this bill it prohibits federal funding to institutions that promote heterosexuality. i beg you, please show me.

here is the bill. show me how deprave is right and is not just telling a complete and utter lie.

Family Protection Act - States as the purpose of this Act the abolition of Federal governmental policies which interfere with the freedom of the American family.Title I: Education - Abolishes the Department of Education and nullifies all regulations, contracts, licenses, or privileges issued by such Department prior to the effective date of this Act. Directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to provide for the orderly termination of the affairs of such Department.Forbids any court of the United States from requiring the attendance at a particular school of any student because of race, color, creed, or sex.Prohibits the Secretary of the Treasury from issuing in final form the "Proposed Revenue Procedure on Private Tax-Exempt Schools", which sets forth guidelines for determining whether a private school has forfeited its tax-exempt status by the adoption of racially discriminatory policies.Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) allow an income tax credit for 100 percent of the amount of tuition paid for the elementary, secondary, or higher education of the taxpayer, spouse, or dependents; (2) allow an income tax deduction for amounts paid into an education savings account established to pay the educational expenses of a dependent child of a taxpayer; and (3) grant tax-exempt status to schools which are controlled by the parents of the children who attend them (parental schools).Title II: Social Security and Retirement - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow individual taxpayers who support an elderly (age 60 or older) dependent a $1,000 income tax credit or a $5,000 income tax deduction.Repeals provisions of Title II (Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance) of the Social Security Act which require the reduction of benefits under such title if the benefit recipient has regular employment.Amends the Internal Revenue Code to permit individuals and married couples to claim the income tax deduction for contributions to an individual retirement account even if such individuals or couples are participants in tax qualified pension, profitsharing, or stock bonus plans under the Internal Revenue Code.Specifies that social security benefits are exempt from taxation.Treats married individuals who receive no compensation or less compensation than their spouses as having received compensation equal to that of their spouses for purposes of computing the maximum allowable income tax deduction for contributions to an individual retirement account.Allows an income tax deduction from gross income for the payment of social security taxes by employees and self-employed individuals.Title III: Constitutional Guarantees - Prohibits the Federal Government from imposing any obligation or conditions upon any child care center, orphanage, foster home, emergency shelter for abused children or spouses, school, juvenile delinquency or drug abuse treatment center or home, or similar program which is operated by a church or religious institution.Amends provisions of the United States Code relating to judicial procedure to establish a legal presumption in favor of an expansive interpretation of a parent's role in supervising and determining the religious or moral formation of his or her child, in cases involving such issue.Repeals the Selective Service Act of 1967.Denies jurisdiction to the Supreme Court of the United States to review any State statute or regulation which relates to abortion. Extends such denial of jurisdiction to Federal district courts.Title IV: Taxation - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to permit married individuals to be taxed separately on their income under the same rates as are applicable to unmarried individuals.Allows an income tax deduction for adoption expenses.Allows an income tax deduction for contributions paid to a tax-exempt trust fund established for the care of a taxpayer's parents or handicapped relative.Repeals the estate tax, the gift tax, and the tax on generated-skipping transfers.Increases the amount of the personal tax exemption for dependents from $1,000 to $3,000.Provides for the establishment of tax-deferred rollover savings accounts for the exclusive benefit of the taxpayer or beneficiaries.Title V: Domestic Relations - Prohibits Federal preemption of State laws relating to child or spousal abuse, or juvenile delinquency. Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds for the operation of any programs dealing with such problems.Defines "child abuse" as physical maltreatment, and psychological or emotional neglect. Excludes from such definition discipline or corporal punishment applied by a responsible parent or an individual authorized to act in the place of such parent.Grants tax-exempt status to organizations which provide care and treatment for victims of child or spousal abuse and to organizations which care for runaway children.Requires federally-funded abortion and venereal disease treatment centers to notify parents of unmarried minors that such minors have requested an abortion, contraceptives, or are undergoing treatment for a venereal disease.Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds to any organization which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style.Title VI: Miscellaneous - Grants jurisdiction to U.S. district courts to hear any cases arising under this Act. Prohibits the removal of any case arising under this Act from a State court of competent jurisdiction to a Federal court unless a Federal official or employee in an official capacity is a party. Provides for a six-year statute of limitation for cases arising under this Act.Provides a civil penalty for persons violating any provision or regulation promulgated pursuant to this Act.Requires the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress on the administration of this Act and the progress of the States in effectuating its provisions.​

Well that would be the parts having to do with marriage taxation and funding of abortion etc....regardless...That is not THE BILL , that is a summary, the BILL NEVER PASSED and is not recorded in full. Also I want to add It was written in 1979 when everyone was a homophob, before scientific evidence regarding homosexuality came to light.

 

[deprave]

here is my original claim.

• as far as the newsletters go, in what sense do you mean they have been debunked? because i can produce a video of paul talking to hannity, referring hannity to an article in texas monthly where he tells the person interviewing him that he lied about the newsletters during the 1996 congressional campaign. of course, you being a little kid and all, you probably have not bothered to look this up. you're too busy smoking all that 3-5 grams of pot you just grew yourself and bandying about ron paul with your friends as if it made you some cool political hipster. "ugh, politicians are so mainstream. i liked ron paul before he was cool".​

  
  
  ​

and i produced exactly that.

face the facts: ron paul published racist newsletters under his name, profited off them, defended them as his writings in 1996, then said he was just lying at the time, and blamed his campaign aides for him telling lies.

this is all indisputable fact.

Sure when you word it like that you deceitfull peice of shit, he didn't write racist remarks or take credit for racist remarks and he did not write those letters or even know about them and thats the bottom line.

The question asked in a generalized and very broad question and not specifically did he write those quotes but an entirely different question really. (hence taking that out of context)

Quite the coincidence the ties these gentlemen have which I have laid out before, ties to war profiteers. It is war profiteers, big pharma, the GOP, and many others that have continually smeared Dr Paul in their political interest. At the time of the newsletters were released by a Mr Kirchick and al written by conviently enough the same man Mr Roland, a man who no one at the paper even recognized, even more interesting MR Roland and Kirchick are directly linked with a arms dealers and lobyists, Dr Paul was practicing medicine and not even involved in politics.

Further Mrs. Gloria Borger of CNN who continued to press Dr Paul on these issues is the wife of said war lobbyist...Interestingly enough....its even more interesting how all the newsletters were discovered and released at the same time....Interestingly enough.... when Dr Paul started getting back into politics..It is questionable if they were even actually ever published by the Newsletter and thats just where the questions start off in a quick rant for you...I have neatly and proffesionally linked the sources here at least over a dozen time but you conviently ignore it each time and go on to trolling another poster.

Interestingly Enough (Yes I said it again)...This can all be traced neatly though this little insider GOP/BIG PHARMA/MILITARY INSIDER POSSE HERE:

http://www.dailypaul.com/196169/news...ts-to-gingrich
__________________________________________________ ___________________

So here we go.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by donnay

James Kirchick is said to have released the newsletter cache.

James Kirchick is connected with Newt Gingrich in a think-tank group called Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD).
Sources:
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/20...-ron-paul.html
http://www.infowars.com/gingrich-lin...on-paul-smear/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/76404243/S...ul-Newsletters'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, Here is the CNN interview about the newsletters.
cut:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP6Xh...eature=related
uncut:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLonnC_ZWQ0

The interview was done by Gloria Borger, CNN senior analyist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Borger
http://nndb.com/people/113/000123741/

Gloria Borger's Husband is Lance Morgan.

Lance Morgan
Works for Powell-Tate as Chief communications strategist.
He is essentially a lobbyist for the military industrial complex. He's also all caught up in the whole Iran-Contra cover-up, Wall Street, Big Pharma, Big Agra, and Biotech.

http://www.powelltate.com/about-us/o.../lance_morgan/
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/11/19/wo...up-effort.html

------------------------------
Important Info:

Powell Tate = Powell Tate/Weber Shandwick (they merged)
Before Powell Tate merged with Weber Shandwick, it was part of Cassidy and Associates

Shandwick International is one of the largest PR companies in the nation.

Cassidy & Associates and The Rhoads Group are Powell-Tate/Weber Shandwick's "sister government relations agencies"

http://www.webershandwick.com/Defaul.../PublicAffairs
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Powell_Tate
-----------------------------

People associated with Powell-Tate:

Christina Martin
The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA), Executive Vice President March 2009 &#8211; Present
Powell Tate/Weber Shandwick, Executive Vice President 2004 &#8211; 2005 (1 year)
Press Secretary for Newt Gingrich, 1997 &#8211; 1999 (2 years)
Press Secretary for Bob Dole, 1995 &#8211; 1996 (1 year)
Press Secretary to Governor Terry Branstad, January 1994 &#8211; December 1995 (2 years)
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/christina-martin/3/a79/b66
http://www.iop.harvard.edu/Programs/...ristina_Martin

Suzanne Wilson-Houck
Ripple Communications (Intelligence and National Security Alliance), September 2010 &#8211; Present
Account Executive, Cassidy & Associates, January 1994 &#8211; January 1996 (2 years 1 month)
Assistant to Newt Gingrich, January 1992 &#8211; January 1994 (2 years 1 month)
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/suzanne-...ouck/0/a33/146
http://www.security-innovation.org/b...=600&width=500

Christy Evans
Vice President of Cassidy and Associates
Former Assistant to Newt Gingrich
Former Policy Coordinator for Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)
Registered lobbyist for Tiffany's!
http://www.cassidy.com/team/32/
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/new...t-at-tiffanys/

Peter Carson
Powell-Tate, Exec. Vice President
Chief of Staff for Rep. Christopher Shays, 1995 &#8211; July 2000 (5 years 7 months)
http://fairfieldcountylook.com/album...rol-Fedele.jpg

Here is a picture of Newt Gingrich w/ Rep. Christopher Shays
http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Christo...rn/WEe30AnM1wd

"Gingrich was in Washington to give support to House Republicans who are calling on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to reconvene the chamber and vote on the American Energy Act, a Republican bill designed to address America's dependence on foreign oil. "

----------------------------------------------------
Submitted by HOLLYWOOD
Connecting the dots: the Shays/Gingrich Connection

Christopher Shays has listed former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich as his political inspiration, saying "Newt Gingrich is my hero."[7]
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/28/ma...pagewanted=all

^ Shays does know the details, and he admits that "there's a part of me that wonders if it's as well thought out as I'd like it to be." But, he adds, "I'll take almost any alternative over what we've got now." And on the day the measure passed the House, Shays was standing at Gingrich's side, paying homage with the familiar phrases. "What I had to wrestle with was, in my heart I thought I was a caring person," he said. "But I realized I was a caretaking person. And today, what we have shown is that we are a caring country." And then the unlikely convert concluded with the least likely words: "Newt Gingrich is my hero." Rant, Listen, Exploit, Learn, Scare, Help, Manipulate, Lead, The New York Times, January 28, 1996, Sunday, Late Edition &#8212; Final, Newt Gingrich, Section 6; Page 34; Column 1; Magazine Desk, 7786 words, By Jason DeParle New York Yimes

Shays background: http://www.videosblogdelnarco.nightc...her_Shays.html

----------------------------------------------------

lets go back to Christina Martin for a sec, she is the V.P. of The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) <--- Ethanol Lobbying Group
They support Newt Gingrich.

http://domesticfuel.com/2011/01/25/n...wa-rfa-summit/

Organized in 1981, RFA serves as the voice of the ethanol industry, providing advocacy, authoritative analysis, and important industry data to its members, Congress, federal and state government agencies, strategic partners, the media and other opinion-leader audiences.

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/pages/philosophy


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by Daddy Warbucks
Newt Gingrich, like Lance Morgan, has ties to Iran-Contra:

Is it a coincidence then that Newt Gingrich has hired Robert McFarlane as part of his advisory team on National Security? Who's Robert McFarlane?

"Robert McFarlane, one might recall, was National Security Adviser to Ronald Reagan when the Iran/Contra scandal brokeand became famous as the man who went to Iran with a cake in the shape of a key, and a Bible. McFarlane ended up pleading guilty to four misdemeanor charges related to withholding information from Congress. "

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gin...unces-foreign-......

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by BOOGAFACE
More on Gingrich/Powell-Tate

Electric Boat, whose PR is--again-- handled by Powell-Tate, was run by John Rowland, who helped Newt Gingrich get his first position in Congress http://articles.dailypress.com/1995-.../9506250066_1_...

Years later, [John Rowland] heavily lobbied then-Speaker Newt Gingrich to support the purchase of a 1.5 Billion dollar Seawolf submarine
http://articles.courant.com/1995-05-...05200201_1_sea...

The US purchased the submarine
http://articles.courant.com/1996-07-...07040077_1_sea...

The Billion dollar submarine had several leaks, but we bought it anyway
http://articles.courant.com/1994-05-...05040344_1_sea...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Carson, Powell-Tate Exec. VP

Peter Carson was Chief of Staff for Rep. Christopher Shays from January 1995 &#8211; July 2000 (5 years 7 months)

http://www.powelltate.com/what-we-do...ublic_affairs/

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/peter-carson/8/702/500

http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/indus.php?id=18312

House Rep. Shays
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...5/5f/Chris_Sha...

Check out the pic of Newt Gingrich w/ Rep. Shays in the background.
http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Christo.../Newt+Gingrich

and remember... this all leads back to Gloria Borger, CNN political analyst.
​

 

[UncleBuck]

Well that would be the parts having to do with marriage taxation and funding of abortion etc....regardless...That is not THE BILL , that is a summary, the BILL NEVER PASSED and is not recorded in full. Also I want to add It was written in 1979 when everyone was a homophob, before scientific evidence regarding homosexuality came to light.

lol, you lose.

you made the claim that

• The bill also prohibits federal funding of insitutions which promot heterosexual realtions
  
  
  
  ​

  
  
  ​

when in fact it does no such thing. it only prohibits federal funding to institutions that suggest that homosexuality can be acceptable.

that means you got caught in a lie, kiddo.

also, homosexuality was categorized as normal by the APA in 1973, my little lying friend. it was not the case that everyone was a homophobe in 1980.

your savior is a bigot. deal with it.

 

[UncleBuck]

Sure when you word it like that you deceitfull peice of shit, he didn't write racist remarks or take credit for racist remarks and he did not write those letters or even know about them and thats the bottom line.

you're calling me deceitful after you lied right to my face?

LOL!

he certainly did take credit for them in 1996 for political gain. then he said he was just lying about it at the time and blames his campaign aides for the fact that he lied for political gain.

your savior is a bigot and a liar who can't take responsibility for his own actions. deal with it.