Hannity about to go on attack

[specsaregood]

No, it's almost certainly Lew. Please read this article and tell me you still don't think Lew wrote them: http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/who-wrote-ron-pauls-newsletter

Right, the reason crowd using an anonymous source. lol. Like I said the people that would love for Dr. Paul to lose. Rockwell said he didn't, are you going to call him a liar without any evidence?
You trust those hacks over Paul and Rockwell?

My anonymous source says you wrote them, how about that?

 

[Fredom101]

Right, the reason crowd using an anonymous source. lol. Like I said the people that would love for Dr. Paul to lose. Rockwell said he didn't, are you going to call him a liar without any evidence?
You trust those hacks over Paul and Rockwell?

My anonymous source says you wrote them, how about that?

You didn't read it. There was evidence all over that article. It's almost certainly Lew. If it's not Lew, who could it be?

 

[coastie]

Right, the reason crowd using an anonymous source. lol. Like I said the people that would love for Dr. Paul to lose. Rockwell said he didn't, are you going to call him a liar without any evidence?
You trust those hacks over Paul and Rockwell?

My anonymous source says you wrote them, how about that?

I agree-any research into it leads to some obscure entry somewhere where someone mentions it might have been Lew.

Funny how some people use the same tactics the government we are trying to rid of, i.e. conviction without any evidence whatsoever.

 

[Fredom101]

I agree-any research into it leads to some obscure entry somewhere where someone mentions it might have been Lew.

Funny how some people use the same tactics the government we are trying to rid of, i.e. conviction without any evidence whatsoever.

That's not what they did. They talked to sources close to Lew and the newsletters. They used the evidence of Lew's "Paleo-libertarian" campaign, where he was actively trying to recruit conservatives who aligned with the likes of David Duke. Lew admits this, and was writing for Ron back then....yet, somehow, he isn't the one who wrote them? I'm not buying Lew's innocence here.

 

[Steppenwolf6]

..God...MEDIA SPIN!
Out of here.
Is it really so difficult to understand why?
Enough with giving so much undue importance to these clowns.
We already knew what the msm and the political establishment are( and they have'nt even begun,it will get worse believe me,much worse)
here,now let's find ways to expand the revolution further,without those clowns and promote good news

 

[heavenlyboy34]

I'm just sad that Lew would come up with such a bad idea, and that in 2008 and now he's chosen to remain silent about his involvement with the newsletters.

Zuh? The newsletters were written some 30 odd years ago. They aren't as bad as RP haters are making them out to be. Lew has talked about them in his blog a bit, IIRC. But I can see why he doesn't bring unnecessary attention to it. It's a distraction from relevant issues.

This is supposedly an excerpt from one of the newsletters: hxxp://bloggingblue.com/2011/12/06/will-ron-paul-be-able-to-walk-this-back/

 

[heavenlyboy34]

That's not what they did. They talked to sources close to Lew and the newsletters. They used the evidence of Lew's "Paleo-libertarian" campaign, where he was actively trying to recruit conservatives who aligned with the likes of David Duke. Lew admits this, and was writing for Ron back then....yet, somehow, he isn't the one who wrote them? I'm not buying Lew's innocence here.

Then prove his guilt. The onus of proof is on the one making a positive assertion.

 

[angelatc]

Hannity's guest also played the truther card. These talking points have been out there for 4 years. I hope the campaign has a coherent, persuasive response ready, and I hope that Ron's ready for the attacks during the debate.

If I thought anybody would believe me, I'd tell everybody I wrote the newsletters to take the heat away from Ron Paul.

 

[Fredom101]

Zuh? The newsletters were written some 30 odd years ago. They aren't as bad as RP haters are making them out to be. Lew has talked about them in his blog a bit, IIRC. But I can see why he doesn't bring unnecessary attention to it. It's a distraction from relevant issues.

This is supposedly an excerpt from one of the newsletters: hxxp://bloggingblue.com/2011/12/06/will-ron-paul-be-able-to-walk-this-back/

Yes, I know they were 30 years ago. Just read that article I posted. Hard to imagine it not being Lew with all that evidence. At the very least, Lew was well aware of the writings at the time and did nothing. I'm just saying he should come out and take full responsibility, and say how stupid it was but that Ron had nothing to do with it. Period.

 

[Fredom101]

Then prove his guilt. The onus of proof is on the one making a positive assertion.

There isn't proof, just like there isn't proof of OJ killing anyone. But, you can look at the evidence stacked up and take an educated guess. Just read that article and tell me you don't think there is at least a strong case against Lew here.

 

[jct74]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjKfL-3ijJo

 

[Paulistinian]

I hate that fucking leprechaun.

 

[WD-NY]

No, it's almost certainly Lew. Please read this article and tell me you still don't think Lew wrote them: http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/who-wrote-ron-pauls-newsletter

Lew Rockwell = Ron Paul's Rev. Wright

 

[heavenlyboy34]

That's not what they did. They talked to sources close to Lew and the newsletters. They used the evidence of Lew's "Paleo-libertarian" campaign, where he was actively trying to recruit conservatives who aligned with the likes of David Duke. Lew admits this, and was writing for Ron back then....yet, somehow, he isn't the one who wrote them? I'm not buying Lew's innocence here.

A distortion. According to the reason article referenced in this thread, it was the populist techniques/rhetorical style that Duke used to successfully recruit right-wingers that Lew sought to emulate.

 

[Fermli]

lol, nice unlisted youtube =)

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Lew Rockwell = Ron Paul's Rev. Wright

Except Lew wasn't intentionally racist in the context of the articles.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

There isn't proof, just like there isn't proof of OJ killing anyone. But, you can look at the evidence stacked up and take an educated guess. Just read that article and tell me you don't think there is at least a strong case against Lew here.

I see proof that he used some inflammatory rhetoric (as he does now). The most we can gather from these articles is that he was being a populist and trying to reach a targeted audience. (an "Outreach to the Rednecks," which would fashion a broad libertarian/paleoconservative coalition by targeting the disaffected working and middle classes." as the article states)

 

[heavenlyboy34]

..God...MEDIA SPIN!
Out of here.
Is it really so difficult to understand why?
Enough with giving so much undue importance to these clowns.
We already knew what the msm and the political establishment are( and they have'nt even begun,it will get worse believe me,much worse)
here,now let's find ways to expand the revolution further,without those clowns and promote good news

This^^

 

[Umad]

Did Sean bring up his own connections with Hal Turner?

 

[cdw]

Two things, then I'll go back to lurking:

1. The campaign doesn't need to acknowledge shit from a shill like Hannity and his handler Levin. Their reach is overstated, their audience not as passionate, informed, nor as numerous. Any acknowledgement from the campaign just adds unneeded and unfounded questions/concerns about the associations/judgement of the good Doctor, and most importantly, props up the ego for Hannity and Levin. They are not just throwing these accusations out to bring down Dr. Paul, but also to maintain the last remnants of influence they think they have over the electorate. Do not feed into it, we are too close to victory to anchor ourselves with this rubberish. I am with the person who said that the campaign should not dignify this with a response. Ignore this until it's no longer ignorable, then attack the accusations with ferocity while using the opportunity to interject real issues. Dr. Paul (or Rand if he has the fortitude) should never step foot on Hannity's show ever again after this ploy by he and Levin. Period.

2. Please stop creating so many threads about this topic in the grassroots section. You are only adding unnecessary attention to a subject matter that thus far is being ignored by every one else in the media. While's it's good to be prepared for anything, making something out to be bigger than it currently is will just make it a self-fulling prophecy in the end. Let Hannity and Levin spin their wheels till the cows come home, as long as the rubberish isn't making news everywhere, then it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. The headlines in the grassroots sections are tweeted and with Dr. Paul's popularity rising right now there are new, impressionable visitors finding these boards more often. Please recognize this and act accordingly. When the morning comes, hopefully the mods, please, move all threads and discussions about these Hannity attacks to the hot topic section where they belong.

With all the positive, uplifting things being said around the country about our candidate, there is no reason to see several topics on the first page of the grassroots about garbage spewed by a neo-con statist like Hannity.