Shocka: Ron Paul volunteer, who doesn’t “have swastikas on,” fired for links to Ku Klux Klan

posted at 6:39 pm on January 31, 2008 by Allahpundit

“I think people when they think of the KKK they blow it out of proportion about what it’s all about.”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Wait. Ron Paul still has a campaign?

lorien1973 on January 31, 2008 at 6:42 PM

The blimp tries to gain altitude before the crash.

infidel on January 31, 2008 at 6:43 PM

I’m shocked! SHOCKED, I say.

HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 6:44 PM

“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal” - Ron Paul

“we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.” - Ron Paul

Randy Gray wasn’t fired for being in the KKK. He was fired because he’s not as devoutly racist as Ron Paul seems to be.

CABE on January 31, 2008 at 6:46 PM

ha who woulda thunk it, i mean he only published a racist newsletter for how many years?

trailortrash on January 31, 2008 at 6:47 PM

Randy Gray wasn’t fired for being in the KKK. He was fired because he’s not as devoutly racist as Ron Paul seems to be.

An example of not giving credit where credit is due.

Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 6:47 PM

In August, Gray posted a notice on an American Socialist Workers Party Web log announcing his involvement in the campaign. The political party is a white supremacist group.

heh, Socialist attracted to a paleo-libertarian.

jp on January 31, 2008 at 6:49 PM

Yes, but can you actually prove it’s a Ron Paul supporter. I mean, how do we know this isn’t actually a Mitt Romney supporter, pretending to be a Ron Paul supporter to smear Dr. Paul’s good name?

amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 6:53 PM

The blimp tries to gain altitude before the crash.

infidel on January 31, 2008 at 6:43 PM

Awww, I came in to say the Goof Zeppelin was dropping some ballast…

doubleplusundead on January 31, 2008 at 6:57 PM

Ron Paul and ‘good name’ don’t belong in the same sentence, period.

NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 6:58 PM

Yet another story about Ron Paul that doesnt attack his policies, but instead attacks what one of his supporters says or does. Its pretty dumb.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 6:59 PM

Ron Paul’s policies were attacked and dismantled by day three. But maybe you’re talking about his ‘newly revealed’ policies in those newsletters, do we need to spend more time discussing why Dr. Paul thinks that 95% of black men are criminals?

NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 7:00 PM

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 6:59 PM

His policies have been sufficiently attacked. Many of us having been doing it for months. And the fact that the man had racist newsletters, has Neo-Nazi backers and supporters and had a man with links to the Ku Klux Klan with his campaign is pretty notable.

amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:01 PM

Yet another story about Ron Paul that doesnt attack his policies, but instead attacks what one of his supporters says or does. Its pretty dumb.

muyoso, the man has no policies besides isolationism and the gold standard. He’s a two-trick pony and, judging by the newsletters written in his name, a bigot.

HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 7:03 PM

@ amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:01 PM

Its notable for those who dont ilke him or dont like his policies. No where has he shown that anything written in those newsletters, or anything any of his supporters says has ANY influence on any of his policies. For someone with a conservative leaning who doesnt like this whole Iraq debacle, who else are you supposed to support? The guy who wants us in Iraq forever or the guy who wants to steal all of the nations guns away from people? If there was a true conservative running, it would be a different story.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:04 PM

@ HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 7:03 PM

You have spent a total of zero minutes reading about his policies or his decades of work in congress. You know nothing about his policies.

Fine me a candidate which is:

anti gun control
very strict border control
no amnesty
no tax increases
no government expansion
complete supporter of constitution
against patriot act and CFR

I wont even mention the Iraq issue. Find me a candidate that holds those CORE conservative principles. I found one.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:07 PM

No where has he shown that anything written in those newsletters, or anything any of his supporters says has ANY influence on any of his policies.

I assume by ‘those newsletters’ you mean the OFFICIAL RON PAUL newsletters?

I’m starting to think that all the Paulinites have reading disorders.

NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 7:07 PM

muyoso, the man has no policies besides isolationism and the gold standard. He’s a two-trick pony and, judging by the newsletters written in his name, a bigot.

HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 7:03 PM

And not even a Silky two-trick pony!

ihasurnominashun on January 31, 2008 at 7:08 PM

No where has he shown that anything written in those newsletters, or anything any of his supporters says has ANY influence on any of his policies. For someone with a conservative leaning who doesnt like this whole Iraq debacle, who else are you supposed to support? The guy who wants us in Iraq forever or the guy who wants to steal all of the nations guns away from people? If there was a true conservative running, it would be a different story.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:04 PM

Who do you vote for? The less of the evils. The racist, conspiracy-theorist loon isn’t the one.

His newsletters were racist and bigoted. Bottom line. You don’t align with David Duke because he’s got a great line about Iraq or the gold standard.

(By the way, I believe DD is a supporter of RP)

amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:08 PM

@ NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 7:07 PM

Yes, the official Ron Paul newsletters that he didnt write. Of course you leave that part out, because omitting facts is convenient when you want to prove a point.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:09 PM

Yes, the official Ron Paul newsletters that he didnt write. Of course you leave that part out, because omitting facts is convenient when you want to prove a point.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:09 PM

Right. The official Ron Paul newsletters written under his name, that he knew existed, that contained personal messages and he profited from.

amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:10 PM

So you want a man in charge who doesn’t read his own OFFICIAL newsletter? He’s either incompetent or a racist. Either way, there’s a reason he’s sitting in Galveston instead of the White House.

NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 7:10 PM

I take it back, he could be a liar, too. So there’s three to choose from.

NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 7:10 PM

@ amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:08 PM

I dont care who David Duke is a supporter of. If you are voting to be in a popular crowd, please turn in your registration card. If he wrote those newsletters, that would be one thing. But since he didnt, its another thing altogether. I will vote for the lesser of the evils. Even if all of the things posted on HA were true about RP, I find it hard to vote for a republican nominee that wants amnesty, or a republican nominee who wants to take my guns away. The fact that its come to this calls for desperate measures. If there isnt a conservative running for a third party by the time of my primary, i will vote for RP.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:12 PM

muyoso is playing off Derbyshire’s spin on all this.

jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:13 PM

I’m starting to think that all the Paulinites have reading disorders.

NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 7:07 PM

Dyslexics for Nor Laup

Apology in advance to Dyslexics everywhere

tmitsss on January 31, 2008 at 7:13 PM

Man,
Every little negative news item about Paul, no matter how inane, gets blared on Hotair. And out comes all the same characters. The NYT has a damning article of Hill and Bill,
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html?ei=5065&en=6a843530898e147a&ex=1202446800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
and not a peep. Welcome to 2008 y’all. You’re worried about KKK advocates who support Paul while turning a blind eye to the next “missile technology giveaways”

sweeper on January 31, 2008 at 7:14 PM

Yes, the official Ron Paul newsletters that he didnt write. Of course you leave that part out, because omitting facts is convenient when you want to prove a point.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:09 PM

Omitting facts is the one thing that Paulnuts excel at. Hit the the road, jack.

Andy in Agoura Hills on January 31, 2008 at 7:14 PM

@ NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 7:10 PM

Remember, the newsletter was started when he was in office. Then he went back to his medical profession. That is when those newsletters came out, when he wasnt in politics at all. You can take his word that he has no clue, or you can assume he did and allowed people to write things under his name which he, through his policies, obviously doesnt believe. Its up to you since no one was there to witness it.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:15 PM

The fact that its come to this calls for desperate measures. If there isnt a conservative running for a third party by the time of my primary, i will vote for RP.

You can justify it however you like, but you’re openly supporting a racist. And you won’t ever be able to convince anyone otherwise. That’s the nice thing that makes these little comment back and forth games fun. You’re scrambling to make excuses for a disgusting racist. That’s one of the many reasons why you aren’t taken seriously.

NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 7:15 PM

@ jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:13 PM

Who is Derbyshire?

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:15 PM

sweeper on January 31, 2008 at 7:14 PM

One small difference though. The Clintons are not white racists.

Andy in Agoura Hills on January 31, 2008 at 7:15 PM

Yes, the official Ron Paul newsletters that he didnt write.

in 1996 he admitted to writing them. Which would make sense that over a 17 year period, with many passages giving personal details, that Paul, gasp, wrote the ROn Paul Political Report newsletters.

He also profited nearly $1 Million off them and paid himself, his WIFE and his DAUGHTER. Bringing them into this and something he claims to have no “knowledge of”.

he can easily be torn to shreds in the PR arena with this. He’s lucky he’s a sideshow, insignificant candidate at this point.

jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:16 PM

If he wrote those newsletters, that would be one thing. But since he didnt, its another thing altogether.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:12 PM

Did he not know the racism and conspiracy theories were being written under his name? If what you’re saying is true, he either advocated them or was too incompetent not to know.

amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:17 PM

Leslie Roszman, Michigan campaign coordinator for Paul, said Gray was sent a code of conduct for campaign workers. Gray said that he didn’t receive it until “much later.”

Darn, if only Paul had put it in his newsletter, Gray would have seen it in a timely manner.

Dusty on January 31, 2008 at 7:18 PM

who is this person that wants to take away our guns you are speaking of?

trailortrash on January 31, 2008 at 7:18 PM

@ NeoconNews.com on January 31, 2008 at 7:15 PM

No, I am not openly supporting a racist. I frankly dont care what you think, nor anyone else. You want to accuse people of racism, whom you dont know, and whom you have never met, fine. You live with that. Frankly, I consider the charge of calling someone a racist as serious and I wouldnt just throw that around. Apparently though, the meaning of “racist” has evolved recently from thinking whites or some other group is superior to others due to their skin color, to simply saying something about a race, true or untrue, which people dont like.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:18 PM

You can justify it however you like, but you’re openly supporting a racist.

more than a racist, a Conspiratorial nutjob as well:

http://www.tnr.com/downloads/solicitation.pdf

jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:19 PM

@ trailortrash on January 31, 2008 at 7:18 PM

Romney. Read his stance on gun rights. The GOP ran several candidates this year which actively support gun control, and I find that unacceptable.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:19 PM

One small difference though. The Clintons are not white racists.

Andy in Agoura Hills on January 31, 2008 at 7:15 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._William_Fulbright

You sure about that?

sweeper on January 31, 2008 at 7:21 PM

And yet Juan McLame puts Juan Hernandez into a prime seat at his campaign.
Hmmmmm can somebody explain to me why one gets fired and one gets a high level job????

Mojack420 on January 31, 2008 at 7:23 PM

Dr. Paul denied suggestions that he was a racist and said he was not evoking stereotypes when he wrote the columns. He said they should be read and quoted in their entirety to avoid misrepresentation.

Dallas Morning News report on the newsletters during Paul’s 1996 Congressional campaign (May 22, 1996

jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:23 PM

And let’s not forget this racist, either.

NTWR on January 31, 2008 at 7:24 PM

Ron Paul volunteer, who doesn’t “have swastikas on,” fired for links to Ku Klux Klan

Is that akin to working for the competition in the same market or something?

thirteen28 on January 31, 2008 at 7:24 PM

@ Mojack420 on January 31, 2008 at 7:23 PM

Remember, its important if a longshot candidate might somehow be associated with a person who is a racist, but if a candidate hires, in a paid position, someone who wants to open our borders and transform our nation, drastically changing policy, drastically destroying our economy, its no big deal.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:25 PM

You have spent a total of zero minutes reading about his policies or his decades of work in congress. You know nothing about his policies.

I know what he says at the debates, and it always comes back to those two issues I mentioned: isolationism and the gold standard. He. Is. A. Broken. Record.

Yes, the official Ron Paul newsletters that he didnt write.

Bwaaahahahahaha! So he didn’t write the newsletter that bore his name? And he didn’t know anything about the content therein? Damn, you Paulbots are gullible!

You can take his word that he has no clue, or you can assume he did and allowed people to write things under his name which he, through his policies, obviously doesnt believe..

Or I can logically conclude that Ron Paul did in fact have a hand in writing the newsletters bearing his name and therefore assume he is, in fact, a bigot.

The GOP ran several candidates this year which actively support gun control, and I find that unacceptable.

How dare a GOP candidate disappoint muyoso by not believing exactly what he believes! Shenanigans!

HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 7:26 PM

@ jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:23 PM

Yes, we get it, you trot out these same links and quotes whenever a RP article comes up on Hotair. I really dont understand why you even post in the RP stories. You obviously hate the guy, and you never listen to reason when some of the things you post are patently wrong or blatantly misquoted. WE GET IT.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:27 PM

Man,
Every little negative news item about Paul, no matter how inane, gets blared on Hotair. And out comes all the same characters. The NYT has a damning article of Hill and Bill,
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html?ei=5065&en=6a843530898e147a&ex=1202446800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
and not a peep. Welcome to 2008 y’all. You’re worried about KKK advocates who support Paul while turning a blind eye to the next “missile technology giveaways”

sweeper on January 31, 2008 at 7:14 PM

This sums it up. Pathetic if you ask me.

Fields on January 31, 2008 at 7:28 PM

I’ll ask again: Did he advocate the statements written under his name or was he too incompetent not to know?

amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:29 PM

You obviously hate the guy, and you never listen to reason when some of the things you post are patently wrong or blatantly misquoted.

So are you going to deny that The Dallas Morning News sought Ron Paul’s comment on the content of the newsletters and, in the process, verified that he in fact wrote them?

You’re out there, man.

HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 7:30 PM

@ HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 7:26 PM

Do you have proof he wrote the newsletters? I would like to see it. And you assumption is so stupid that it baffles the mind. You think a politician would allow a newsletter to go out to followers with racist crap in it, when he plans to run for congress again?

And I am sorry, you are obviously of the new breed of republicans who could care less about the core beliefs of conservatives, but rather only needs a candidate to support god, hate the gays, and hate abortion. The conservative party I know and love supports gun ownership, supports smaller government, supports reducing taxes and supports national security (border control). Anything past that is icing on the cake. Apparenty to you, there is to cake, only icing.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:30 PM

Remember, its (not) important if a longshot candidate might somehow be associated with a person who is a racist, but and if a candidate hires, in a paid position, someone who wants to open our borders and transform our nation, drastically changing policy, drastically destroying our economy, its no big deal.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:25 PM

I dunno, it’s been 8 years, maybe he’s changed his tune but I doubt it.

NTWR on January 31, 2008 at 7:32 PM

@ HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 7:30 PM

I am not going over this again. This conversation is months old, and you are trying to jump in way late. Go read about the entire newsletters controversy, including RP’s responses. After you have done that, then come back and discuss it. He has addressed that specific interview as well. We discussed this months ago.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:32 PM

jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:19 PM

Thank you for that awesome link. Got any more?

SouthernDem on January 31, 2008 at 7:32 PM

@ NTWR on January 31, 2008 at 7:32 PM

You guys who “fix” quotes, are so boring and are never original.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:33 PM

(Blows onto keyboard)

Is this thing on? Did he advocate the statements written under his name or was he too incompetent not to know?

No answers?

amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:35 PM

@ amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:29 PM

First, i dont think those are the only two options, and I dont know. I am not going to sit here and claim I know things like the rest of the people on this board. I dont claim to know if he is a racist or not, I dont claim to know if he wrote the newsletters or not. I wasnt there, I am not going to claim I know things I dont. Thinking about the entire thing rationally, if that is possible, its hard to see how he could have known about them and allowed them to continue, and looking at his voting record, there doesnt seem to be anything to suggest he is a racist. Frankly, either way, I support his policies.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:35 PM

@ amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:35 PM

Calm down there, answers come to those who wait.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:36 PM

You guys who “fix” quotes, are so boring and are never original.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:33 PM

Dude, that’s why I try not to do it. But I’m actually on your side this time, you’d notice if you followed the link I provided…

NTWR on January 31, 2008 at 7:36 PM

Thank you for that awesome link. Got any more?

SouthernDem on January 31, 2008 at 7:32 PM

I think this one is a good read:

http://donklephant.com/2008/01/16/ron-pauls-family-drew-income-from-newsletters/

about the Financial side of these things which have cornered Paul into a trap:

So he either lied to the government so he could avoid paying taxes or he lied to all of us about knowing what was going on with the newsletters. And something tells me that he did both. He set his own trap and willingly walked right into it.

jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:37 PM

*yawn*

DwnSouthJukin on January 31, 2008 at 7:37 PM

@ NTWR on January 31, 2008 at 7:36 PM

I will formally apologize now. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Anyone who attacks McCain is a friend to me. I hate that guy.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:38 PM

lol good link NTWR

trailortrash on January 31, 2008 at 7:38 PM

I’m starting to think that all the Paulinites have reading disorders.

Yeah, they think those newsletters were about the country being taken over by gingers.

Jim Treacher on January 31, 2008 at 7:38 PM

You think a politician would allow a newsletter to go out to followers with racist crap in it, when he plans to run for congress again?

Yes. It seems exceedingly likely that he was seeking to expand the libertarian base after his failed 88 run. He appears to have done this by reaching out to neoconfederates, racists, segregationists, and various other highly disturbing communities.

Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 7:39 PM

@ Jim Treacher on January 31, 2008 at 7:38 PM

Who is their Cartman?

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:39 PM

@ Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 7:39 PM

I dont think so lowly of his intelligence, being a doctor, a veteran and a member of congress for 20 years, to think anyone could have a plan so stupid.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:40 PM

Well, he’s smarter than you

Jim Treacher on January 31, 2008 at 7:42 PM

I am done with this thread in 18 minutes so I can watch the royal rumble on CNN. Claims of racism vs claims of misogyny, how can you lose.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:43 PM

@ Jim Treacher on January 31, 2008 at 7:42 PM

He sure is. Smarter than everyone on this board, easily.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:44 PM

Thinking about the entire thing rationally, if that is possible, its hard to see how he could have known about them and allowed them to continue…

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:35 PM

Therein lies my point. He must’ve known about them and what the contents were, yet they did continue for quite a while.

amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:44 PM

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:38 PM

No apologies necessary, you’re getting hostile fire from all sides, I don’t blame you for firing back at everyone.

NTWR on January 31, 2008 at 7:44 PM

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:44 PM

have to agree with this statement, anyone able to stay a congressmen for that long while a racist newsletter bearing his name was being circulated rates some real smarts

trailortrash on January 31, 2008 at 7:45 PM

You see, Paul had only listed himself on the payroll then he could still have some amount of plausible deniability and say, “Hey, I know I drew a salary, but I trusted my surrogates and they ended up doing things unbeknownst to me. I deplore their actions. Blah, blah, blah.” Actually, I think that’s pretty close to what he has said.

But he put his wife and his daughter on the payroll, and I think we can all make a pretty educated guess as to why: tax reasons. That way he could spread the burden between 3 people and he wouldn’t have to give back so much of it. The only problem with that is now he has two other people who are extremely close to him that have to say they didn’t know what was going on either. And if they say that, well, then what were they doing on the payroll besides providing a tax shelter for Dr. No?

jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:46 PM

@ amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 7:44 PM

Or, he could have not known about them at all, since he was a full time doctor. And upon coming back to congress he saw them and was like, WTF. Then he had a choice to throw his friend under the bus, Lew Rockwell, and look stupid for not knowing what was going on with his newsletter, or just take responsibility for what was in them and let the voters decide. he did the latter. This of course is speculation, and frankly is real stupid to even have to speculate about crap like this. I sure wish he didnt have this baggage, or I sure wish the GOP would actually run a goddamn conservative. Of course, neither of those things seemed to have happened.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:49 PM

@ trailortrash on January 31, 2008 at 7:45 PM

Of course that isnt the only measure of his smarts, but I agree 100%.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:50 PM

Paul isn’t conservative, he’s a paleo-libertarian.

jp on January 31, 2008 at 7:51 PM

You think a politician would allow a newsletter to go out to followers with racist crap in it, when he plans to run for congress again?

When racists and conspiracy theorists are his core constituents, yes, I do think that.

And I am sorry, you are obviously of the new breed of republicans who could care less about the core beliefs of conservatives, but rather only needs a candidate to support god, hate the gays, and hate abortion.

Except that I:
A) Don’t belive in G-d
B) Strongly oppose a Constitutional Amendment banning abortion
C) Strongly oppose a Constitutional Amendment banning homosexual marriage

But thanks for playing!

He has addressed that specific interview as well.

Oh. You mean he lied to cover up the fact that he’s really a bigot? Got it.

Thinking about the entire thing rationally, if that is possible, its hard to see how he could have known about them and allowed them to continue

Unless, of course, he actually did write them and he holds those exact beliefs. But that would be crazy to assume! Imagine, a newsletter bearing someone’s name yet having absolutely no connection to their positions. I must be nuts.

HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 7:54 PM

He sure is. Smarter than everyone on this board, easily.

Heh. Let’s not go overboard, shall we.

I dont think so lowly of his intelligence, being a doctor, a veteran and a member of congress for 20 years, to think anyone could have a plan so stupid.

His plan (if true) would not have been stupid but unwise. Attracting new members to increase the weight of the political block is standard policy. Speak their language to get them in, then have them check that particular ideology at the door for a bigger one: libertarianism. Unfortunately, as you may note from some of his supporters, it seems that they are able to maintain both collectivism and non-collectivism at the same time. Cognitive dissonance doesn’t seem to be a problem for many of his supporters.

Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 7:57 PM

@ HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 7:54 PM

What do you base your contention that a majority of his supporters are conspiracy theorists and racists? Do you have ANY proof for this, or is that you read a few stories online and didnt have either the honesty to compare those few to the vast majority of even those who donated to his campaign?

OK, so I got your type of conservative wrong, you seem to be much closer to where I am. What type of conservative are you, what issues are important to you, and who do you support?

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 8:01 PM

@ Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 7:57 PM

There just isnt enough of those types to support a movement. Also, that type of support is way too risky to seek when running for public office.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 8:02 PM

BTW, please dont address anymore comments towards me, because I am watching the debate and I will not respond. So I guess if you want to just attack me, go ahead, but I wont be responding or reading it.

Later.

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 8:03 PM

Holy cow. When I lived in Midland in the early 80s I was invited to a klan meeting by a customer at the safeway where I worked. I declined, but I wish I had taken the card she offered me and publicized the time and place of the meeting.

Bad Penny on January 31, 2008 at 8:03 PM

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 8:02 PM

I not sure that he intended to run again at the time of the newsletters. Either way I don’t know enough. So I’m not asserting it as fact, just my take. He certainly has done some things for political expedience.

Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 8:08 PM

What do you base your contention that a majority of his supporters are conspiracy theorists and racists?

How about the fact that Ron Paul has been a regular guest on the Alex Jones radio show? How about the fact that wherever I see Ron Paul For President patrols — like the 3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica, CA — more than 50% of the entourage has a “9/11 is an Inside Job” placard? And how about the fact that at stormfront.org 580,785 the Ron Paul Revolution thread has 580,785 views?

I must be imagining things.

What type of conservative are you, what issues are important to you, and who do you support?

The staunch variety. My top issues for a presidential candidate are illegal immigration, border security, and preemptive action against terror-supporting territories. I support no remaining GOP candidate as they are all phony-baloney jabronis.

HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 8:09 PM

muyoso on January 31, 2008 at 7:25 PM

Thank you i thought it was something silly like
white = racist
brown =empowered

Mojack420 on January 31, 2008 at 8:21 PM

You’ve got to hand it to muyoso, he/she stays remarkably calm and evenhanded while being fired at from all sides.

SouthernDem on January 31, 2008 at 8:24 PM

this is classic, Paul supporters are filing a RICO lawsuit claiming the elections are rigged and their is a mass conspiracy against Dr. Paul…

http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/01/established_media_is_formally.php

LMAO

jp on January 31, 2008 at 8:32 PM

Well met, muyoso!

I am regularly astounded by your ability to stand your ground against the RPDS here at the Air. Keep the faith! I, too, just want a real conservative.

By the way, ’76, I dare say Paul’s knowledge surpasses all who normally post here, though from what I’ve read of your posts, perhaps you’re not so far behind. I appreciate your level-headed answers and I clearly see your true conservatism shining thru. Who you supporting right now?

y2church on January 31, 2008 at 8:39 PM

Is anyone really surprised by this?

Ryan Gandy on January 31, 2008 at 8:41 PM

Is anyone really surprised by Ryan’s RPDS?

y2church on January 31, 2008 at 8:45 PM

Shame, this jackass is from my home town.

conservnut on January 31, 2008 at 8:47 PM

By the way, ‘76, I dare say Paul’s knowledge surpasses all who normally post here, though from what I’ve read of your posts, perhaps you’re not so far behind.

Bwaaaaaahahahahaha. Awesome. Paulbots are hilarious when they try to defend their Chosen Leader. It’s like Yogi Bear trying to convince Ranger Smith that he has no idea where the pic-a-nic basket he’s eating from came from.

Hey, Boo Boo, I had nothing to do with the newsletters bearing my name.

HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 8:49 PM

If Ron Paul is not a racist, then he’s a fool. I would personally trust the guy more if he embraced his inner bigot as opposed to obfuscating and parsing the issue into shredded carrots.

One does not have to be a bigot to support RP. His platform appeals to a variety of free thinkers. On the other hand, I have never met a Ron Paul supporter who does not fly their freak flag very high.

Ron Paul is to freedom what moonshine is to liquor. You’ll feel good when you’re on it, but you risk blinding yourself.

The Race Card on January 31, 2008 at 9:09 PM

Yes, but can you actually prove it’s a Ron Paul supporter. I mean, how do we know this isn’t actually a Mitt Romney supporter, pretending to be a Ron Paul supporter to smear Dr. Paul’s good name?

amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 6:53 PM

Troof!! (We all know Bush was behind it.) ;-)

gozips on January 31, 2008 at 9:10 PM

If Ronulan #1 can’t even organize his own newsletters he’s not qualified to clean toilets with a brush. Much less be President.

This (A Nazi on staff) doesn’t surprise me. Incompetent lunatic at work.

whiskey_199 on January 31, 2008 at 9:16 PM

On the other hand, I have never met a Ron Paul supporter who does not fly their freak flag very high.

Ron Paul is to freedom what moonshine is to liquor. You’ll feel good when you’re on it, but you risk blinding yourself.

The Race Card on January 31, 2008 at 9:09 PM

Never? You don’t get out much do ya?

sweeper on January 31, 2008 at 9:29 PM

By the way, ‘76, I dare say Paul’s knowledge surpasses all who normally post here, though from what I’ve read of your posts, perhaps you’re not so far behind. I appreciate your level-headed answers and I clearly see your true conservatism shining thru. Who you supporting right now?

I’ve listened to a significant amount of Paul’s message. I think some of it is quite perceptive, but they are several aspects of his message that are either mis-representations of our history, or have been shown to be non-optimal in practice. I don’t desire to rail against him, but I see him more as a political pendulum swing then a stable long-term position. Even taken as the best translation – ie a Jeffersonian revival, Jeffersonian politics had some very negative ramifications. Paul never addresses those.

To answer your question I’m more of an issues voter, than a specific guy voter. But I clearly favor Mitt over McCain. I have no love lost with McCain. I do understand all the 2nd amendment concerns with Mitt, but I think he has tried to reassure voters he has no intent to interfere in that realm.

Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 10:21 PM

Anybody bothered to give the old blowhard Andy Sullivan a call to let him in on the news. I’m sure he’s just “shocked”. “SHOCKED!” He’s such twit. First he backed Paul now he’s over there shilling for McMexico. Some conservative he turned out to be, huh?

Gartrip on January 31, 2008 at 10:34 PM

Comment pages: 1 2