Do you agree with him? What's your opinion?Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
Printable View
Do you agree with him? What's your opinion?Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
Orchard Dweller:
What are Ron Paul's positions on:
Thank you sincerely,
- Gay marriage.
- Homosexuality.
- Gay rights.
- Gay or Lesbian couples adopting a child.
Edward
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
Ron Paul on Jay Leno 01/07/08
part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-fwEAf6M1U&e
part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLOGak7mYxE&e
Orchard Dweller, please answer the question: What is Ron Paul's position on gay rights???
I'm sorry to say that I watched those two videos you posted but there was nothing there concerning gay issues.
Edward
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
The subject has already been covered on this thread, and this link was posted earlier for his views on collectivism in general:Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Valley Oak:
https://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/racism/
Also, this link has been posted numerous times: https://www.ronpaullibrary.org/
You can go there to find out about Ron Paul's views on issues.
There. Now you don't have to sit around and wait for me anymore to give you information on Ron Paul.
The definitive documentation on Ron Paul's racism and homophobia:
https://www.tnr.com/politics/story.h...5-4532a7da84ca
Turns out that the person doing the most smearing of Ron Paul is... Ron Paul.
SM
Dear Sonomamark,Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Sonomamark:
If a story about what Ron Paul may have said and may or may not have been aware of is all you can come up with, you must be really frustrated.
[quote=purplepig;46836]Dear Sonomamark,
If a story about what Ron Paul may have said and may or may not have been aware of is all you can come up with, you must be really frustrated.quote]
You actually believe this story Mark??? Even the "intellectually challenged" anti-Ron Paul people on another forum recognized this as a weak smear piece. Didn't you find it odd that the writer didn't scan the newsletters which he claims he found and post them all over the internet?Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Sonomamark:
Here is a TV interview with the writer Jamie Kirchick (who released the story on the day of the NH Primaries btw):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnkYpviuX8M
When questioned whether he has actually ever heard Dr. Paul make any racist comments, Kirchick replies, "No. But, he DID attend a conference on secession in 1995." Well, here's an article by an attendee to that conference which Kirchick claims was attended by "the neo-confederate community" (?) to whom Dr. Paul speaks to "in code" (!):
https://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lew...es/018418.html
A book was published as a result of this conference, which was sponsored by The Mises Institute, and was held after the collapse of the Soviet Union following 11 secessions within the USSR. Here is a link to that book at the Mises Institute website. Doesn't seem racist to me. Maybe it's in code.
https://www.mises.org/store/Product1.aspx?Product_Id=88
Have you ever heard of the term "useful idiot"? It's a term used by the elite to describe members of the public who naively help spread their propaganda. Are you a "useful idiot" Mark?
Orchard Dweller and Purple Pig:
Ron Paul is homophobic (that also means he's obviously against gay rights). He thinks that gays and lesbians are perverts who will burn in christian hell forever (this means R.P. is a religious, bigoted asshole).
Ron Paul is AGAINST ABORTION. In Paul's own words: "Abortion is killing." What else do you want? (Unless, of course, you yourself are against abortion) Maybe that's what's going on here. You are not courageous, honest, and open enough to state the fact that you and most (if not all) Ron Paul supporters are against abortion?
So anyone who is against Ron Paul is, as you say, "intellectually challenged?" Two can play at that silly game. I can say that anyone who supports Ron Paul is intellectually challenged. As a matter of fact, that is probably pretty accurate.
Edward
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
It's interesting to read the commentaries and opinions from New Republic website. I particularly enjoyed the below. sw
Well, as a black American, I admit that I found this a little bit disturbing at first. However, the timing of this piece is highly suspect. And given the recent exclusion of Ron Paul (the GOP candidate with the most fund-raising totals from the Fox debate, for which no legitimate reason was provided) it has become pretty blatantly obvious to me that Ron Paul is absolutely terrifying the people who control this country, and the Establishment.
I also have to consider the source and examine the motives of the New Republic journalist. This gives me pause for concern: https://gays-for-ron.blogspot.com/20...n-paul-is.html ------- I emailed Jamie the next day to engage him further and to ask just what he found so offensive. His response: Hi Berin, Thanks for writing; and I'm glad you enjoyed by [sic] piece in the Boston Globe. I'll try and make the [DC Log Cabin Republicans] party tonight, though [LCR President] Patrick Sammon isn't particularly happy with me after I wrote this piece [attacking LCR for not endorsing Giuliani, whom Kirchick calls "the most pro-gay Republican White House contender in history"] https://www.advocate.com/exclusive_d...ektid50709.asp Anyways, I don't think Ron Paul is a homophobe; I'm just cynical and enjoy getting supporters of political candidates riled up. If you were a Giuliani guy I'd have called him a fascist. But I must say, the Ron Paul supporters are the most enthusiastic of the bunch! [Emphasis added.] Best, Jamie -------
Hmmm. It's pretty obvious from this that the journalist (Kirchik) is a Rudy supporter, or at least admires Rudy. He himself admits that he doesn't think Ron Paul is a homophobe, so why did he go through with this article? He says himself that he simply loves to get people riled up by hurling barbs at their favorite political candidate, so why should I take this person seriously. I don't like it when the media tries to use race as a wedge against people who want to radically change the status quo.
I'm 26 years old, but from what I've read in my studies, this is very similar to what the media did to Barry Goldwater (saying he was a racist), when in reality Barry Goldwater was a member of the NAACP. I see this happening again, and I don't like it. It makes me wonder if the media's accusations of a person's alleged racism increase in proportion to their opposition to the Federal Reserve. Makes you wonder.
Also, I have a hard time believing that Ron Paul is racist when he has stated publicly that he would consider Walter Williams as his running mate: https://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleu...abies_pro.html "Sleuth: If you were to defy the polls and the odds and win the nomination, who would be your running mate? Paul: Well, I don't know, but if I won, you know, I'd want a recount. You know, lets be certain about what's going on here. But a running mate. Somebody like Walter Williams. Walter Williams is a very good economist. John Stossel, John Stossel would be good."
Walter Williams is a well-known black American economist. I have to wonder: how many other GOP candidates have mentioned a black American as a possible VP pick? My guess is none of them. The media is in a tough spot here. Because FOX was so blatant about it, a lot of people are aware that the media has an obvious agenda to keep Ron Paul's message out of the debates and off the air. People are not stupid and can see this. This story has been literally been around for months before this, so the fact that TNR's article happens to coincide with the NH primary is further proof that Ron Paul has someone scrambling. Something stinks here, and I'm not buying it.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Sonomamark:
Ron Paul Is A RACIST??
https://img.youtube.com/vi/4ItmcIxe5Fs/default.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ItmcIxe5Fs
Recent Update:
Pt. 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3z8nVaMkuw
Pt. 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTU4IKqMZdg
Pt. 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvA8lLZCX4A
Ron Paul also didn't receive money from his survivalist-friends?
AKA KKK????
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
Are you talking about the one donation he received from someone connected to Stormfront, a racist website? If so, this was already discussed in these posts:Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by MsTerry:
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
and
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
Ron Paul Responds to racism allegations on CNN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u39z38xjraw
.
After being excluded from the last debate, and surviving yet another attempt to smear him, Ron Paul returned to win in the Fox SC debate last night, despite the attempts to trip him.
Fox News SC Republican debate 01-10-08 (Ron Paul responses)
Question 1 "Economy" -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piUEmriwY3Q
Question 2 "911 Truthers and Conservatism" -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10wwz3vlGf4
Question 3 "Iranian speed boats" -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKvCfZWHaNw
Question 4 "Israel" (including attack/rebuttal) -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rI3rNc_Faz0
Question 5 "Electability" -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mffpkCH-PJw
Question 6 "Immigration" -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJU5S2rJGtM
Dennis Kucinich chooses Ron Paul as running mate!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py8cXlLyX18
NAACP President: Ron Paul Is Not A Racist
Linder says Paul being smeared because he is a threat to the establishment
https://www.prisonplanet.com/article...not_racist.htm
https://www.dynw.com/ronpaulisracist/pic1.jpg
Above is Dr. Paul during his career as a physician/obgyn.
Dr. Paul would not accept medicaid/medicare and instead helped poor and needy patients at a reduced rate or free of charge.
Saving the American Health Care System
Introduction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-gSLt_qKBo
part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=287IQ_7Qj_0
part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4woPtYzDEG8
part 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoazzRDALYw
part 4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSBWVDukUuw
Notice: The powers that be are making it difficult to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries. If you are a Democrat or Independent, you will have to register Republican in order to vote for Ron Paul in the California primary (you can switch back right after you vote). The deadline to do this is Tuesday January 22.
Info here:
https://www.ronpaul2008.com/states/
https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_vr.htm
I don't recommend registering to vote online. After you fill in your data, the registrar's office will mail you a hard copy for your signature which must be mailed back. This could result in a missed deadline!Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
Instead, go to your nearest post office and complete a readily available Voter Registration Form and mail it right there - postage paid. That alone is a 41 cent savings!
To double-check that you are registered Republican, call your local registrar's office. See the list on Ron Paul's website of their numbers:
https://www.ronpaul2008.com/states/c...ion-officials/
The U.N, although imperfect, is a truly great and noble institution that promotes peace and prosperity around the world. It is elements like Ron Paul, the Bush dynasty and other reactionaries and conservatives that continue to handicap its ability to further its mission.
Edward
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by OrchardDweller:
Edward,Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Valley Oak:
You might find that taking a closer look at the actions of the united nations from sources you are more likely to trust would be helpful. Unless you also find PBS offensive, go to PBS.ORG and watch 'The triumph of evil'.
Dear Pig,
I am well informed enough to assert what I'm saying. Perhaps you need to reexamine a little further your own attitudes towards the U.N.
Like it or not, the U.N. is necessary, not just because it's a very good thing to have around, even though it is indeed far from perfect, like American society certainly is. I might understand your negative opinion of the U.N. if you delineated more clearly what you have to say instead of taking the "Ron Paul" approach and simply posting URL's and videos. And also if you talked more concretely about what you would like to see changed in the U.N. or if you would like to replace it with something else or simply eliminate it altogether without another thought. Can you do this, please?
Please have some guts and express your own opinions. I'm not going to waste my time going to see your 'references' every single time. I've already made that mistake too often and know better than to waste my time listening to some dubious source regurgitate propaganda. When I post links and references in my messages to this board, I do so ONLY to support what I'm saying. Simply posting a URL is a chicken shit way of communicating. It's really not even a forum or a debate. It's like saying, 'I won't debate you because you disagree with me so I'm simply going to do a very lame and lazy thing by letting an online video of very questionable origins do the talking for me because I don't know very well how to speak for myself." Very pathetic.
Thank you,
Edward
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by purplepig:
Smear Campaign
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jZTd9j6_yg
.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Valley Oak:
Hello Edward,
My reference to PBS and "The triumph of evil"was made only to make the following point, as that documentary had nothing to do with the United Nations. The point here is that you would assume that it did, thus labeling PBS as "some dubious source regurgitate propaganda" and "an online video of very questionable origins" PBS and KQED have a reasonably good reputation as I recall. This is the same manner in which you attack Ron Paul. It is very easy to attack blindly. Your government is good at it. As I see it, we all tend to operate on assumptions of what another’s position is and respond quickly without consideration of content. Perspective has an ability to become a narrowing influence, eliminating reason, annihilating all facts in it’s path and further grounding one in his or her own established beliefs. This is how wars start. Belief, I believe, is the enemy of an open mind. I can say this because I am diverse, I celebrate hypocrisy. This, of course, is only my opinion as is almost everything else I have to say. Had you actually gone to and watched "Triumph of evil" you would get a taste of what we are going to get when Hillary becomes the next genocidal maniac in power. She will be focusing a little closer to home.
As far as the UN is concerned, the actions or inactions of the United Nations as a force for good can only be deliberated to an intelligible conclusion if each party in the debate is willing to understand the reasoning behind the others perspective. In my case, my impression of the UN is heavily influenced by my overall outlook of the context in which they participate. The UN is merely part of the whole and I see the whole as very sick. My opinion again, of course.
In any event, thank you for taking the time to articulate your desire for more depth of opinion on the UN but I hope to instead articulate the opinion that my opinion about the UN is of little consequence to me or you in light of a bigger opinion I will now discuss. I will wish for and welcome being made wrong in this opinion, for in that moment I will, being of open mind, correct myself and immediately become right again. I, unfortunately will also in that moment become wrong in someone else’s eyes. On and on goes the world of opinions. Before I go further, let me say that I have no problem with your attacking me personally, if you wish to, simply because I don’t really give a damn what you think. Please don’t take my opinions as a reflection of what any other participant in this discussion stands for. They care.
Early on I indicated that I believed any effort to restore America was fruitless and received a reply which made me think again. What changed my position was the patience of those whom you verbally assault. Their ability to stay focused and on purpose without taking offense has impressed me as nothing has in a long time. I may be wrong, but I feel a genuine concern for our future here, that I truly appreciate. It has caused me to look deeper and see that I am not alone in my concerns, although possibly alone in the depth of my revulsion with America apathy, which I believe has already caused this toilet to flush. Regardless, I will participate in Americas last gasp.
Let’s instead now discuss that which is not opinion. War.
On the chart of causation for ills in the world [we will just have to imagine such a chart], I would say war factors in as the biggest offender. It was one of my jobs in the military to take care of GI’s returning from Vietnam. Of course those returning from Laos and Cambodia went elsewhere for debriefing as those were illegal wars. The stories were always the same. The psychological damage was always the same, played out in different ways. War is an inhuman thing to do to a human being. I would hope that we can agree that it is not an opinion that war kills a lot of innocent people, maims and mutilates even more and destroys much that is sacred to those who have opinions. War fuels greed, hatred, poverty, suffering, anxiety, stress, desperation, misery, despair and our favorite expression..homelessness. War is hell with all the physical and psychological torment and anguish described in the bible. We all know war is big business. The current war is unnecessary yet generating billions in profits. Ron Paul is against this war as should be any sane person. If this war is allowed to escalate, as these things sometimes do, our opinions about the UN will be of little consequence in stopping it.
To me what’s happening today in the realm of the politics of war should be enough to make any one sick. It just doesn’t seem to. Instead we embrace, rationalize or tolerate it as if it doesn’t really matter. It does matter. We bicker about side issues. Issues created and planted for distraction to polarize the nation. It has worked. Did you notice that we went from should we torture to how should we torture, overnight? Do you not see this as strange? It is very easy for the unthinkable to happen in one moment and be accepted as normal the next. Could it get any more outrageous than using mercenaries, white phosphorous and depleted uranium on civilians in Iraq? It can. Do you know where this kind of thing ends up if not stopped now? How on earth anybody could see any viable candidate other than Ron Paul in this campaign is truly amazing to me.
This country will get the government it deserves. One without respect for human life. Your next. Is there another candidate who has the guts to stand against the direction we are headed? Does yours? Do you even care? You really don’t need to be so upset with Ron Paul or his supporters. War will win. Greed and apathy will win. You will win. Americans will continue to feed at the trough of ignorance with arrogance, indifference and self-righteousness while accepting being dumbed down to a subservient drool, with gratitude. They will need not take any responsibility. Instead they will slurp and wallow to their hearts content while pointing the finger at those who might be thinking outside the trough. If one must stand for something in this sewer, I prefer freedom. I will vote for Ron Paul.
That was awesome! Thanks. I just love it when people really say what's on their minds. That's the best way to get a message across. Anything else is pussyfooting around without anyone learning something new.
I don't agree with everything you said but I have to think before I respond to your excellent piece.
Edward
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by purplepig:
Actually, purplepig, no, I'm not "really frustrated", because Ron Paul as a topic is about as important as what brand of dishwashing detergent I choose to buy. The man is a footnote. But I think it's important for people to be aware of the company he keeps. If you're a libertarian, well, I understand why you support him. I think you're a delusional idiot, but it makes sense that you would support Ron Paul, who is...well, a libertarian delusional idiot.
But progressives supporting Ron Paul? That's like Jews for Hitler. Makes no sense at all. And people should know it.
SM
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by purplepig:
As dishwashing liquid, the difference between Ron Paul and the other candidates is, he would really clean the dishes. The others would just promise to. Do you really spend this much time deliberating which kind of dishwashing liquid to use? I’m sorry.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Sonomamark:
A footnote. Yes, I agree. That’s all the constitution has become.
The company he keeps? The last time I checked, the rest of the candidates were still embracing the last 40 year status quo policy of reaching down children’s throats, grabbing the base of their spine, pulling them inside out, dipping them in napalm and having them as snacks while chanting "God wants blood not vegetables"
Libertarian? I avoid politics like an open sewer on a warm day. I am just temporarily stopping at this particular circus act to have a look at a guy I heard would actually, if given a chance, do the dishes. Because this tent reeks. I think he would have done them. Too bad he won’t get a chance.
Delusional idiot? We are all delusional idiots.
Progressive? The hair stands up on my neck when I hear that word. The Nazi’s were progressives. When you vote for any one but Ron Paul you are as a Jew voting for Nazis. The metaphor could not be more perfect.
The people should know it? People have searched for and found open fields in which to stand in red coats to shoot at one another in the name of progress. Now progress has brought us to the near unanimous signing of a bill which all but declares that logic is an act of terrorism. We’re really making progress. Your candidate applauds. Not mine. I’m actually glad that one of your vampires will be getting in because there are far too many Lemmings around here anyway.
https://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/paulheart_dees.jpg
Ron Paul: A New Hope (video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG2PUZoukfA
A reminder that Tuesday, Jan 22 is the deadline to register to vote for Ron Paul in the Feb 5 California Primary. Rules had been changed recently requiring voters to be registered as a Republican in order to vote for Dr. Paul (you can switch back after voting). No Democrats, Independents or Decline To State will be allowed to vote for him. You can get the registration form at your local post office.
You can help keep Dr. Paul's message of Peace, Prosperity and Liberty alive by donating to the campaign. Many supporters will be donating today in memory of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. at www.ronpaul2008.com
To have real change, we must act now.
https://drinkingliberally.org/blogs/...20cemetary.jpg
https://www.estherwoodmanor.com/images/i_am_iraq.jpg
Snipping the blather, but THIS ignorant and ugly little meme, surely parroted from neocon Jonah Goldberg's recent round of book tour interviews for his irrational screed "Liberal Fascism"...
...has to be answered.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by purplepig:
The Nazis were not progressives. The Nazis were corporatist, ultra-nationalist reactionaries. They were driven by the interests of the investor class of Germany, as exemplified by Krupp, Seimans, etc. They were the absolute opposite of progressivism. Progressives support diversity, individual civil liberty, protection of the common good and minority right, and the application of appropriate balance to individual rights versus societal good, such as, for example, preventing the guy who lives upstream from you from pouring mercury-laden mine tailings into your water supply.
Ron Paul is a lot closer to the Nazis than to progressives. When he suggests the suspension of all regulation of the marketplace, he talks about this as "free enterprise" and implies that it sets everyone free to make their way in a meritocratic fair fight. But he--like the Republicans-- conveniently doesn't mention that those who already have huge stores of money and power hoarded will be set free to trample and enslave those who do not. Libertarian economic policy is "fair" in the same way it would be "fair" to put me and Mike Tyson in a boxing ring together. We're both allowed to do the same things, but guess who gets done-to, and who does the doing?