Hannity about to go on attack

[wgadget]

That's pretty good but I don't see an "I'm sorry" in there.

Apologize for something he didn't do?

 

[Inkblots]

That's pretty good but I don't see an "I'm sorry" in there.

Well, I kinda thought taking moral responsibility for something was the whole point of an apology?

 

[JCF]

So since i dont like hannity what is happening now? is hannity attacking Ron Paul on those newsletters? sigh those again? its like there heads are stuck in 08 or something i would know if Ron Paul is on hannity.

He's talking to Romney. Newsletter discussion is probably up next.

 

[airborne373]

Sean Hannity = Rachael Maddow

 

[Give me liberty]

He's talking to Romney. Newsletter discussion is probably up next.

with paul i assume?

 

[Carole]

No, tune in to the Fox debate to hear Ron Paul talk about this.

 

[wgadget]

with paul i assume?

Ron was canceled. Hannity the shill will be talking badly about Ron behind his back.

Did you expect anything less?

 

[JCF]

with paul i assume?

Negative. He's talking about it with someone from the American Spectator.

 

[JamesButabi]

- Talk about what Ron has actually written about racism, things like: "Racism is simply the ugliest form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans only as members of groups and never as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike; as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups."

Its so blatantly obvious that Ron didn't write these newsletter nor is he racist. I think the quoted method is the only way to address it ala Rand and the civil rights nonsense

 

[rgampell]

Disagree with his old CNN answer being good

Apologize for something he didn't do?

It's not just about apologizing; he needs to look and sound ASHAMED of them. And he does not. He should also say that it will certainly cost him some votes, and that it OUGHT to. IMO, his CNN answer in which he pivoted to racism charges sounded an awful lot like "some of my best friends are black."

 

[sailingaway]

That's pretty good but I don't see an "I'm sorry" in there.

you know, that is the kind of thing I hear from those who don't want Ron to win under any circumstances. They just keep raising the bar on what Ron 'has to do to put it to rest'. Apologize using their specific phrases, or give the media a goat for sacrifice in who he might guess wrote them, or something. None of that goes to his quality as a presidential candidate.

 

[JCF]

He's going to keep talking to Romney after the break, but he did say this:

"Later on, Ron Paul, [newsletters] are there things in them that the media hasn't vetted yet?"

Talking to someone with the American Spectator about it.

 

[RonPaulCult]

Who is Jeffery Lord of the American Spectator? That's who they are bringing in to trash Paul.

 

[iamse7en]

Did he say jeffrey lord from AmSpec? Uh oh... here comes the fire and hatred.

 

[gjdavis60]

He's going to have Jeffery Lord on to talk about the newsletters!! The battle lines are drawn.

 

[sailingaway]

It's not just about apologizing; he needs to look and sound ASHAMED of them. And he does not. He should also say that it will certainly cost him some votes, and that it OUGHT to. IMO, his CNN answer in which he pivoted to racism charges sounded an awful lot like "some of my best friends are black."

are you working for some other candidate?

 

[lew]

You guys aren't being consistent here. Don't act like that if there was some Newsletter that went out for 20 years under Romney's or Newt's name, that we wouldn't be clamoring to make commercials about it.

The fact is that these Newsletters exist. They've always been the bane in Ron Paul's possibility to rise in the polls. It doesn't matter what Raimondo thinks about the issue or you or I. What matters is how Paul will respond when the MSM says "So, in your Newsletter that bares your name, what does this mean: “We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational.”"

The Campaign can't be so stupid to think they can just ignore this, refuse to say who the author is, state it's 'ancient history', or any of that mumbo jumbo and expect it to go away. The masses will want some heartfelt apology that the material is downright awful and that he utterly regrets it. Anything less, and the MSM will hammer this. And we will lose. This is the pivotal thorn in his entire campaign.

 

[RonPaulCult]

Apparently this guy is often going after Paul:

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/23/ron-paul-and-the-neoliberal-re

 

[Xchange]

Lord is worse than Levin.


Major league douche bag

 

[Inkblots]

Who is Jeffery Lord of the American Spectator? That's who they are bringing in to trash Paul.

Jeff Lord? Oh geez, not that hack.