Just got off the phone with HQ

[lbadragan]

Add me to the list of people who are very disappointed with the way Dr. Paul has refused to deal forcefully with the racist allegations. It almost seems like he'd rather ignore the questions rather than be eager to explain himself in detail.

 

[Kilrain]

Add me to the list of people who are very disappointed with the way Dr. Paul has refused to deal forcefully with the racist allegations. It almost seems like he'd rather ignore the questions rather than be eager to explain himself in detail.

Please understand that when someone lies about you, defending yourself too much and too loud only makes you look guilty. What if your neighbor said you were a child murderer, would you hold a neighborhood meeting and show slides proving that you actually love children (not in a weird way)? Defending yourself too much when lies come out is like "feeding the trolls" in real life.

 

[specsaregood]

Now, why Dr. Paul could not find the wherewithal to just come out personally and distance himself from the Don Black donation

Ron Paul handled the Don Black donation PERFECTLY. Did you not see the cavuto interview?Let me prove it with something that happened this past saturday.

We were canvassing a neighborhood. The last house of the day, we rang the doorbell, a black woman answered, we gave her a slimjim and explained who we were. She got EXCITED. Invited us into her house to her computer. She showed us the Interview where they tried to paint Ron Paul as a racist for accepting the money and Ron Paul said, "If they want to throw their money away, that is their decision". SHE LOVED IT! She saw straight through the B.S., she said, "They were trying to say he was a racist for taking the money, but he told the truth and said he was going to keep it to do good with it instead of returning the money so they could do bad things"

She NOW has a Ron Paul sign in her yard and will be voting for Ron Paul in the upcoming primary.

Booya!

 

[Bradley in DC]

Berin responds
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=80943

 

[LukeNM]

What is this crap?

"Let's face it, Dr. Paul likely isnt going to win this election."

Maybe you are not the best person to be talking to HQ? Or maybe your comments are not clearly identified in your post?

 

[areyou4real]

Please understand that when someone lies about you, defending yourself too much and too loud only makes you look guilty. What if your neighbor said you were a child murderer, would you hold a neighborhood meeting and show slides proving that you actually love children (not in a weird way)? Defending yourself too much when lies come out is like "feeding the trolls" in real life.

+1

Dr. Paul has made it obvious that he is not a racist before. He's also made it clear numerous times that he's for equal rights for ALL individuals. A short statement from the campaign should be sufficient for this idiot's article.

Trying too hard to defend yourself from the SAME bogus claims over and over only gives the idiots the attention they seek. It can also look bad like Kilrain said. The real focus needs to be on spreading the message and winning the primary.

 

[Duckman]

Please understand that when someone lies about you, defending yourself too much and too loud only makes you look guilty.

Perhaps, but failing to defend yourself adequately makes you look even more guilty.

I'm not saying that Ron Paul is guilty. But tomorrow, these newsletters will be published. We will then have the quotes taken in-context.

I think Ron Paul needs to directly address these in-context quotes either by demonstrating they are a fraud, or by saying that wasn't reading his newsletter, for which he sincerely apologizes, or by saying that he did know this content was there but couldn't bring himself to get rid of the author because the author was his close personal friend, for which he sincerely apologizes.

I think once in-context quotes reprint elsewhere in the media Ron Paul will have to directly address this issue in one of those ways.

 

[areyou4real]

Ask yourself this. If there were suggestions along with damning evidence being passed around media circles (for years) concerning the possibility of Dr. Paul having beat his wife, for example, do you think he'd treat that topic any differently, like, maybe more pro-actively and aggressively?

No. I think he would address it once with conviction and then he would let it go. IMO, repeatedly responding to the same claim when it's been addressed previously only gives people the impression that you are trying too hard or not confident in your previous statements. It also rewards the trolls with the attention they seek.

 

[courtney]

specsaregood,
Stories like that are an inspiration to me. However, it appears that most of us here have been hoodwinked on the issue. I've known about Dr. Paul for years. However, I had no clue that these things as reported by TNR were not only printed in Dr. Paul's various newsletters, but that they were written perhaps under his name, and/or written as if to suggest that he himself was the one writing the trash.

Apparently, this went on for years and years too. It doesn't appear to be one lone paranoid racist idiot abusing the "good" Dr's name either....

In politics, one is guilty until proven innocent. I, however, will give Dr. Paul a chance to thoroughly proffer up a valid explanation for this latest bunch of bricks to fall on the campaign. I don't want hear it from Jesse Benton either -- and I'm already sick of Rockwell over there attempting a weak-assed counter-punch, when what is needed is a effing explanation, not more more BS from him.

In the end, if I am not satisfied with yet another pitiful response from Ron Paul himself, I will once again request my money back. Perhaps even a sign burning party to follow....

 

[Vaughn]

specsaregood,
Stories like that are an inspiration to me. However, it appears that most of us here have been hoodwinked on the issue. I've known about Dr. Paul for years. However, I had no clue that these things as reported by TNR were not only printed in Dr. Paul's various newsletters, but that they were written perhaps under his name, and/or written as if to suggest that he himself was the one writing the trash.

Apparently, this went on for years and years too. It doesn't appear to be one lone paranoid racist idiot abusing the "good" Dr's name either....

In politics, one is guilty until proven innocent. I, however, will give Dr. Paul a chance to thoroughly proffer up a valid explanation for this latest bunch of bricks to fall on the campaign. I don't want hear it from Jesse Benton either -- and I'm already sick of Rockwell over there attempting a weak-assed counter-punch, when what is needed is a effing explanation, not more more BS from him.

In the end, if I am not satisfied with yet another pitiful response from Ron Paul himself, I will once again request my money back. Perhaps even a sign burning party to follow....

This is what the attackers were hoping for. The campaign better provide a counter-attack...

 

[courtney]

No. I think he would address it once with conviction and then he would let it go. IMO, repeatedly responding to the same claim when it's been addressed previously only gives people the impression that you are trying too hard or not confident in your previous statements. It also rewards the trolls with the attention they seek.

A while back I started a thread called To White Nationalists. It's now locked up, and hidden away in the Hot Topics forum. However, Don Black of Stormfront fame posted on that thread, along with Rockwell (who had some very interesting things to say about the intelligence, or lack thereof, of Black folks).

Anyway, so Don Black had this rather prescient quote:

I am perhaps smarter than you think, as is perhaps the voting population. I gather most here have never been in the middle of a hot political campaign. Politics is a rough business, even for the "approved" candidates. If the Ron Paul campaign continues its momentum, things will get really nasty. Some of you will be wishing the media would spend more time talking about Don Black and his $500.]

He also had this to say about Jesse Benton's response to media attention given to Black's donation of $500.00 to the campaign:

Regarding Jesse Benton's statement today that I contributed to the campaign for publicity, I've appeared on countless national television and radio talk shows, news features and documentaries in past decades. I've declined all such interviews in the post five years, tired of the same old bias and catchwords, and since we're now our own media. "MSM" coverage doesn't have any noticeable impact on our traffic. But I'd know how to get it if I cared.

Paul needs to find a spokesman who's not just another scared rabbit.

Notice how Black calls Jesse Benton (the communications director) a "scared rabbit" and not Dr. Paul. You'd have thunk it was Jesse Benton running for President and not Paul.

It's a subtle distinction that apparently bears more meaning now more than ever....

 

[Cardinal Red]

specsaregood,
Apparently, this went on for years and years too. It doesn't appear to be one lone paranoid racist idiot abusing the "good" Dr's name either....

In politics, one is guilty until proven innocent. I, however, will give Dr. Paul a chance to thoroughly proffer up a valid explanation for this latest bunch of bricks to fall on the campaign. I don't want hear it from Jesse Benton either -- and I'm already sick of Rockwell over there attempting a weak-assed counter-punch, when what is needed is a effing explanation, not more more BS from him.

In the end, if I am not satisfied with yet another pitiful response from Ron Paul himself, I will once again request my money back. Perhaps even a sign burning party to follow....

Courtney, I sadly must agree with you here as well. At some point, the fact that Ron Paul's attackers have their own unpleasant agenda becomes irrelevant. When it was one or two newsletters, I could have overlooked it as carelessness on Ron Paul's part. When it is many newsletters, I need to hear something forceful from Dr. Paul in terms of both denunciation and explanation. The statement by the campaign today was a good start (better than anything we've gotten before) but ultimately it is not suffficient.

We need to understand who wrote the letters (or at least have it established definitively that Ron Paul did not write them) and be given a sincere and plausible explanation from Ron Paul about how so many of these comments could have gone out without his knowlege. I do not deny that such a good explanation exists, I only say that I need to hear it.

For now, I need to take a break from the campaign and these forums.

 

[tamor]

bump

 

[mosquitobite]

The Campaign will be soon coming out with a press release addressing all of this.

We need to GOTV and forget about this; this was designed to hurt our cause, and we can't let them. Let's face it, Dr. Paul likely isnt going to win this election. However, even if we don't prevail, we must gain momentum and viability to lay crucial groundwork for a libertarian revolution in the near future. (perhaps in the 2012 elections) Moreover, in the grand scheme of things, this isn't about Ron Paul, but his ideas, remember. The Dr. Paul we know and love is no racist, but it's not significant in the scheme of things.

I hope like hell the campaign does NOT send out a message like that!

 

[TonySutton]

Please take a look at the campaigns response

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080108/20080108006395.html?.v=1

This is old news, TNR did a hatchet job plain and simple, but this is old news. Get up to date on the facts and be prepared to discuss this issue if confronted. There is no doubt it will continue to be mentioned but a quick rebuttal with facts will quickly set it aside again.

 

[courtney]

Please take a look at the campaigns response

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080108/20080108006395.html?.v=1

This is old news, TNR did a hatchet job plain and simple, but this is old news. Get up to date on the facts and be prepared to discuss this issue if confronted. There is no doubt it will continue to be mentioned but a quick rebuttal with facts will quickly set it aside again.

This is not old news, Tony. This is brand-spanking new News for me, and many others. In fact, none other than Nick Gillespie is "stunned". So was apparently Tucker Carlson -- to the point where the campaign even "apologized" to him over this crap, according to Tucker (Tucker's been a longtime supporter of Paul's, having voted for him during Paul's first run for the Presidency in '88, according to Tucker on one of his recent shows).

Ask yourself, why did the campaign apologize to Tucker in a phone call to him? Well, perhaps Tucker, as others (like myself), felt betrayed by what can only be described as a Fraud. Perhaps Tucker contacted the campaign and requested an explanation. Whatever the case, he received an apology nonetheless....

Then, we have this from Outside The Beltway:

...the best case scenario would seem to be that Paul has been marketing a “Ron Paul Newsletter” for years that is anything but. Which, by my reckoning, would make him a fraud.

Yet, worse is this from the (Gawd, I really think I'm gonna Puke now) The Weekly Standard:

...there is no plausible explanation that might insulate Paul from the fallout. Kirchick and others attacked Paul a few months back over his failure to return a $500 check from a prominent white supremacist. At the time, Paul had explained that he couldn't possibly screen ever donor. Of course he couldn't, but the media had screened this one for him, and he refused to give back the money anyway. Now we know why. He's been speaking in code to the dregs of American society this whole time. And he had no intention of alienating his base of support.

Well, there's a first time for everything: I now agree with the (cough cough ) Weekly Standard.....

These old Ron Paul publications in question were NOT the result of that elusive Ron Paul Spammer, let's clarify that up right now. No, these publications were published under Paul's name for decades. One can only conclude that he, like Rockwell, Empathizes deeply with White Nationalists, and at the very least.

I mean, you don't see Ron Paul lending his name to the ACLU, for instance, now do you -- like, "Oh here, write whatever the hell you like, and here's my signature too! Hell, why don't we start an entire newsletter with my name on it too -- write whatever the hell you like, I really could care less! It's only my reputation at stake! WooHoo!"

Unfortunately, it's becoming clearer and clearer that Ron Paul is passively-aggressively involved within the White Nationalist (supremacist) movement. I really can come to no other conclusion. Some will appreciate that fact, I do not.

Finally, here's a quote from Rockwell (from my To White Nationalists thread) that seems to help clarify the waters a bit concerning why White Nationalists are attracted to Ron Paul's campaign:

I did respond to your query and gave you sound reasoning and yet you don't seem to have "gotten it" because you are asking for it again...

...America is the most diverse nation on earth and you seem to think that anyone who doesn't want to be a part of the multicultural festival should be marginalized further? Where's your tolerance, Courtney?

Once more, for clarity, people should be free to believe whatever they like and speak the mind without being disenfranchised as you seem to suggest. The Constitution, as you seem to have forgotten, was written by White Nationalists and so anyone who defends the Constitution would be a logical choice.

For the record, I have never advocated mandatory attendance at any "multicultural festival". I do, however, believe that it is in the best interest of this nation to tolerate others simply because we are all citizens, and we're all different from one another to a degree.

If that entails forcing those (via law) who cannot stand diversity, such as Rockwell, (including the so-called "Ghostwriters" of Ron Paul's newsletters) to Live and Let Live, then so be it. I'll accept that minor infringement on Liberty, for as we learned during the Hundred years post-slavery, a non-interventionist policy leads to unfettered Domestic Terrorism by the tyrannical majority, in this case by White Christian society.

This Country has issues, but allowing the KKK, for instance, to regain it's foothold within society is NOT a solution. The KKK et. al. (White Nationalism in general) had the opportunity for over a hundred years to prove its worth. It failed miserably.

Now, it's time to move on....

 

[Vaughn]

Courtney, I sadly must agree with you here as well. At some point, the fact that Ron Paul's attackers have their own unpleasant agenda becomes irrelevant. When it was one or two newsletters, I could have overlooked it as carelessness on Ron Paul's part. When it is many newsletters, I need to hear something forceful from Dr. Paul in terms of both denunciation and explanation. The statement by the campaign today was a good start (better than anything we've gotten before) but ultimately it is not suffficient.

We need to understand who wrote the letters (or at least have it established definitively that Ron Paul did not write them) and be given a sincere and plausible explanation from Ron Paul about how so many of these comments could have gone out without his knowlege. I do not deny that such a good explanation exists, I only say that I need to hear it.

For now, I need to take a break from the campaign and these forums.

Dido, it is all just too much...

 

[DaronWestbrooke]

Can someone call hq again about the new releas with the scanned, signed copies of the newsletters, we need some new press releases by them. This isn't just a he said she said, this is not good.

 

[courtney]

Can someone call hq again about the new releas with the scanned, signed copies of the newsletters, we need some new press releases by them. This isn't just a he said she said, this is not good.

We need more than a damned ridiculous "uh, I dunno" memo to supporters. We need answers, not ducking and dodges, but straight-up Answers.

Not only that, we need more than Rockwell's lame-assed damage control attempts that's currently going on over there on his Super-Duper, so-called "Libertarian" website of his. Why isn't Rockwell jumping all over this like fly on sh-- anyway? Hmmm?

All I can say is, Hey Thanks for ruining the Libertarian brand once and for all, guys! Libertarian = White Nationalist Brain-Dead Bigot. At least I have a few signs and stuff to memorialize this momentous occasion with....

 

[sean1982]

Not only that, we need more than Rockwell's lame-assed damage control attempts that's currently going on over there on his Super-Duper, so-called "Libertarian" website of his. Why isn't Rockwell jumping all over this like fly on sh-- anyway? Hmmm?

psst






rockwell wrote it