Just remember Ron Paul 2012! Your Vote can help save our counrty!
- Thread starter Budist
- Start date
a.k.a. Alf
Member
starred
Alf
Alf
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
these come from the rawn pawl newsletters, authored in first person by rawn pawl, defended personally by rawn pawl as his own writings (before racism went out of style).
Budist
Well-Known Member
Any links? sources? Anything? Remember from High School when you had to source your work? That's all I am looking for I'm not calling you a liar.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
source: the rawn pawl newsletters
Beginning in 1978, for more than two decades Paul and his associates published a number of political and investment-oriented newsletters bearing his name (Dr. Ron Paul's Freedom Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report, the Ron Paul Investment Letter, and the Ron Paul Political Report).[SUP][164][/SUP] By 1993, a business through which Paul was publishing the newsletters was earning in excess of $900,000 per year.[SUP][164][/SUP]
A number of the newsletters, particularly in the period between 1988 and 1994 when Paul was no longer in Congress, contained material that later proved highly controversial, dwelling on conspiracy theories, praising anti-government militia movements, and warning of coming race wars.[SUP][164][/SUP][SUP][165][/SUP] During Paul's 1996 congressional election campaign, and his 2008 and 2012 presidential primary campaigns, critics charged that some of the passages reflected racist, anti-Semitic, and homophobic bigotry.[SUP][166][/SUP][SUP][167][/SUP][SUP][168][/SUP][SUP][169][/SUP][SUP][170][/SUP][SUP][171][/SUP][SUP][172][/SUP]
The newsletters included statements such as:
- "... I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in [Washington, DC] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."[SUP][167][/SUP]
- "Boy, it sure burns me to have a national holiday for that pro-communist philanderer, Martin Luther King. I voted against this outrage time and time again as a congressman. What an infamy that Ronald Reagan approved it! We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day!"[SUP][164][/SUP][SUP][173][/SUP]
- "An ex-cop I know advises that if you have to use a gun on a youth [to defend yourself against armed robbery], you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible.... I frankly don't know what to make of such advice, but even in my little town of Lake Jackson, Texas, I've urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming."[SUP][164][/SUP][SUP][174][/SUP]
- I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities. They could also not be as promiscuous. Is it any coincidence that the AIDS epidemic developed after they came 'out of the closet,' and started hyper-promiscuous sodomy? I don't believe so, medically or morally.[SUP][175][/SUP][SUP][176][/SUP]
- [Magic] Johnson may be a sports star, but he is dying [of AIDS] because he violated moral laws.[SUP][165][/SUP][SUP][177][/SUP]
- [T]he criminal Justice Department wants to force dentists to treat these Darth Vader types [people with AIDS] under the vicious Americans With Disabilities Act;" and [W]e all have the right to discriminate, which is what freedom of association is all about, especially against killers [AIDS patients].[SUP][165][/SUP][SUP][178][/SUP]
When criticism of the newsletters was leveled against Paul during his 1996 congressional election, he did not deny writing the newsletters, but instead defended them and said that the material had been taken out of context.[SUP][166][/SUP][SUP][168][/SUP][SUP][167]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul[/SUP]
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
TheWiseInfidel
Active Member
bro......not to say i agree with those statements......but theres fucking truth to it and he sticks to his guns not like obama team switching ass. on the black males in society.......its EXACTLY like that. as soon as you hang with the nigga on the block that has a piece on him, you liableand in the cities, its half criminals half good citizens. and just by association the 50% of good citizens become 90% and i believe you've taken that statement completely out of context. something right wing nutjobs like you do to distort the entire meaning of a certain statement. when he said about the gays in the fifties, did you think that he was talking about the integration of homosexuality and being somewhat forced on the youth without proper knowledge and why that leads to the reason it should be in your own privacy. and watch his words, he said NOT TO SPEAK FOR THE REST OF SOCIETY, call it close-minded to think like that about 1 issue out of millions you disagree with and that makes him a bigot. that makes absolutely no sense. don't even dare i'm homophobic either cuz that would be dumb. i'm 22, who gives a fuck.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
When criticism of the newsletters was leveled against Paul during his 1996 congressional election, he did not deny writing the newsletters, but instead defended them and said that the material had been taken out of context.[SUP][166][/SUP][SUP][168][/SUP][SUP][167][/SUP]
In later years, Paul said that the controversial material had been ghostwritten by members of a team that included 6 or 8 others and that, as publisher, not editor, he had not even been aware of the content of the controversial articles until years after they had been published.[SUP][168][/SUP][SUP][179][/SUP]
He eventually disavowed those passages, and stated that in 1996 his campaign advisers had thought denying authorship would be too confusing and that he had to live with the material published under his name.[SUP][168][/SUP][SUP][179][/SUP]
Some political commentators made note of the changing nature of the explanations he had provided over the years about his involvement with the newsletters.[SUP][180][/SUP][SUP][181][/SUP][SUP][182][/SUP]
>nineties
ummmmm, wut?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
actually, rawn the pawl said "not to speak OF the rest of society".
he was saying that homosexuals were better off being forced into the closet, and that the rest of society was better off as well.
the best part is that you accussed ME of taking shit out of context. you don't even know how to read for comprehension though.
thenotsowiseinfidel.
Budist
Well-Known Member
When criticism of the newsletters was leveled against Paul during his 1996 congressional election, he did not deny writing the newsletters, but instead defended them and said that the material had been taken out of context.[SUP][166][/SUP][SUP][168][/SUP][SUP][167][/SUP]
In later years, Paul said that the controversial material had been ghostwritten by members of a team that included 6 or 8 others and that, as publisher, not editor, he had not even been aware of the content of the controversial articles until years after they had been published.[SUP][168][/SUP][SUP][179][/SUP]
He eventually disavowed those passages, and stated that in 1996 his campaign advisers had thought denying authorship would be too confusing and that he had to live with the material published under his name.[SUP][168][/SUP][SUP][179][/SUP]
Some political commentators made note of the changing nature of the explanations he had provided over the years about his involvement with the newsletters.[SUP][180][/SUP][SUP][181][/SUP][SUP][182][/SUP]
>nineties
ummmmm, wut?
You did kinda just told him with your copy and paste.. but he defended what was said and kept it under his name.. so you told yourself too. This could get dumb real quick
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
that's effective campaigning there: "either support my candidate or you are stupid!" is the message you are sending.
do you see how that might be insulting?
i understand him fully, i do not support him, and i am far from an idiot. i just don't live in the false dichotomy world you live in.
with an insulting message like that, is it any wonder that his "revolutions" have all failed so miserably?
TheWiseInfidel
Active Member
well......vote for a better candidate my friend.