Ron Paul knowingly keeps campaign contribution given by a White Supremacist.

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Siddhartha

Originally posted by: Drift3r
Now maybe I am crazy but wouldn't the correct move be to give it back if you disagree with the guy? His reply was very dubious at best IMHO. He is either a liar or extremely desperate for cash.

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.

Don Black, of West Palm Beach, recently made the donation, according to campaign filings. He runs a Web site called Stormfront with the motto, "White Pride World Wide." The site welcomes postings to the "Stormfront White Nationalist Community."

"Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said. "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom."

"And that's $500 less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does," Benton added.

Black said he supports Paul's stance on ending the war in Iraq, securing U.S. borders and his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants.

"We know that he's not a white nationalist. He says he isn't and we believe him, but on the issues, there's only one choice," Black said Wednesday.

"We like his stand on tight borders and opposition to a police state," Black told The Palm Beach Post earlier.

On his Web site, Black says he has been involved in "the White patriot movement for 30 years."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22331091/

http://www.startribune.com/politics/12635086.html

Two things:

1. If it came out that Ms Clinton received a donation from a white supremacist, the Republicans and their boosters would be roasting her ovaries on an open fire even if she returned the money. Picture the Pabster or Profjohn thread....

2. If Paul takes money doesn't that mean he owes something to the giver?

You are missing the real problem. The problem isn't Joe Blow who donates $500 and happens to hate whites. The problem is big corporations donating multi-millions to a candidate in order to gain favor for their interests.

 

[Capitalizt]

All of the other candidates are promising to do MORE with government...more subsidies...more regulations, more interference in our lives. People who donate to Giuliani or Clinton have a reasonable expectation of getting a return on their investment, because those candidates have no problem robbing the taxpayers and redistributing wealth to groups they favor. Ron Paul on the other hand is the only candidate promising to do LESS with government. He is promising NOT to favor one group over the other...not to try and manage our lives, manage the economy, or manage the world... His goals are to promote LIBERTY...to restore personal freedom, to protect personal privacy, and to expose the secrecy of government.

It's no wonder corporations hate him. 100% of his donations are coming from individual contributors. It's incredible when you think about it. I read an article a while back that summed it up nicely: "The amazing truth is that Ron Paul is no longer running for President. His campaign has been hijacked, and it is now the PEOPLE of America who are running for President, through Ron Paul!"

So true.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Siddhartha

Originally posted by: Drift3r
Now maybe I am crazy but wouldn't the correct move be to give it back if you disagree with the guy? His reply was very dubious at best IMHO. He is either a liar or extremely desperate for cash.

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.

Don Black, of West Palm Beach, recently made the donation, according to campaign filings. He runs a Web site called Stormfront with the motto, "White Pride World Wide." The site welcomes postings to the "Stormfront White Nationalist Community."

"Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said. "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom."

"And that's $500 less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does," Benton added.

Black said he supports Paul's stance on ending the war in Iraq, securing U.S. borders and his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants.

"We know that he's not a white nationalist. He says he isn't and we believe him, but on the issues, there's only one choice," Black said Wednesday.

"We like his stand on tight borders and opposition to a police state," Black told The Palm Beach Post earlier.

On his Web site, Black says he has been involved in "the White patriot movement for 30 years."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22331091/

http://www.startribune.com/politics/12635086.html

Two things:

1. If it came out that Ms Clinton received a donation from a white supremacist, the Republicans and their boosters would be roasting her ovaries on an open fire even if she returned the money. Picture the Pabster or Profjohn thread....

2. If Paul takes money doesn't that mean he owes something to the giver?

That rings totally true to me.

The lengths Ron Paul supporters go to to rationalize and justify whatever he does/says reminds me the diehard Bush supporters and frankly I find that dsturbing.

In this particular scenario their excuse is that the end justifies the means. Sounds familar, no?

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Siddhartha

Originally posted by: Drift3r
Now maybe I am crazy but wouldn't the correct move be to give it back if you disagree with the guy? His reply was very dubious at best IMHO. He is either a liar or extremely desperate for cash.

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.

Don Black, of West Palm Beach, recently made the donation, according to campaign filings. He runs a Web site called Stormfront with the motto, "White Pride World Wide." The site welcomes postings to the "Stormfront White Nationalist Community."

"Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said. "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom."

"And that's $500 less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does," Benton added.

Black said he supports Paul's stance on ending the war in Iraq, securing U.S. borders and his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants.

"We know that he's not a white nationalist. He says he isn't and we believe him, but on the issues, there's only one choice," Black said Wednesday.

"We like his stand on tight borders and opposition to a police state," Black told The Palm Beach Post earlier.

On his Web site, Black says he has been involved in "the White patriot movement for 30 years."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22331091/

http://www.startribune.com/politics/12635086.html

Two things:

1. If it came out that Ms Clinton received a donation from a white supremacist, the Republicans and their boosters would be roasting her ovaries on an open fire even if she returned the money. Picture the Pabster or Profjohn thread....

2. If Paul takes money doesn't that mean he owes something to the giver?

That rings totally true to me.

The lengths Ron Paul supporters go to to rationalize and justify whatever he does/says reminds me the diehard Bush supporters and frankly I find that dsturbing.

In this particular scenario their excuse is that the end justifies the means. Sounds familar, no?

Its not even close.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
That rings totally true to me.

The lengths Ron Paul supporters go to to rationalize and justify whatever he does/says reminds me the diehard Bush supporters and frankly I find that dsturbing.

In this particular scenario their excuse is that the end justifies the means. Sounds familar, no?

I'm no rabid RP supporter - the guy's got some common sense ideas, but doesn't have a snowball's chance - but his response to that Cavuto jackass was pretty much spot on.

You get millions upon millions of dollars from tens of thousands of supporters, and you actually expect him to research and evaluate the political and idealogical beliefs behind each and every dollar bill? And once he discovers them, he's expected to carefully weigh their entire belief system against every one of his campaign platform issues, and if any don't match 100%, then he should refuse and refund their donations?

That may be on of the most moronic things I've heard on this forum in a while.

Congrats, you're securing a place right up there with the Pabsters, heartsurgeons, and Harveys of the forum. Forget common sense, just stick your fingers in your ears, go on the attack against things you might not believe it, and never, ever stop singing, "La, la, la, la!" That's it, now! Don't let anyone's sound reasoning affect your self-delusional view-points!

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
That rings totally true to me.

The lengths Ron Paul supporters go to to rationalize and justify whatever he does/says reminds me the diehard Bush supporters and frankly I find that dsturbing.

In this particular scenario their excuse is that the end justifies the means. Sounds familar, no?

I'm no rabid RP supporter - the guy's got some common sense ideas, but doesn't have a snowball's chance - but his response to that Cavuto jackass was pretty much spot on.

You get millions upon millions of dollars from tens of thousands of supporters, and you actually expect him to research and evaluate the political and idealogical beliefs behind each and every dollar bill? And once he discovers them, he's expected to carefully weigh their entire belief system against every one of his campaign platform issues, and if any don't match 100%, then he should refuse and refund their donations?

That may be on of the most moronic things I've heard on this forum in a while.

Congrats, you're securing a place right up there with the Pabsters, heartsurgeons, and Harveys of the forum. Forget common sense, just stick your fingers in your ears, go on the attack against things you might not believe it, and never, ever stop singing, "La, la, la, la!" That's it, now! Don't let anyone's sound reasoning affect your self-delusional view-points!

Riggghhhtt!! So your claim is your not for Ron Paul, your just rabid?

 

[clamum]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: morkinva
Here's a great response by Ron which leaves Cavuto with his tail between his legs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrRtZaG63o8

:thumbsup:

Yeah I just watched that. Instead of the immediate knee-jerk reaction of "OH NOES PAUL IS TAKING MONEY FROM RACISTS HE'S A RACIST", take a bit of time to think about it logically. Cavuto gets owned. Chalk up another win for Paul.

 

[Nitemare]

that is $500 less that that retard has to propogate his lies and hate...

would keep it as well.

I might use it as toilet paper, but he wouldn't be getting it back.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: bamacre
If a White Supremacist sent me $500, I wouldn't give it back either.

If you are running on your own deeply held values you would. Then again if you have no values then I can see why.

If a person with ties to the communist party in China sends Paul money should he return it?

You don't see the difference between someone with ties to a foreign government and a US citizen? :roll:

So a US citizen with ties to a terrorist/hate group is okay in your book? What about a US citizen with ties to organize crime?

What is Al Sharpton but a black supremecist and hate monger? And you will see him invited to the democratic convention. We wont see the star and sickle write an article about it asking questions. Instead they'd write an article praising whatever democrat invites Sharpton.

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: Capitalizt
All of the other candidates are promising to do MORE with government...more subsidies...more regulations, more interference in our lives. People who donate to Giuliani or Clinton have a reasonable expectation of getting a return on their investment, because those candidates have no problem robbing the taxpayers and redistributing wealth to groups they favor. Ron Paul on the other hand is the only candidate promising to do LESS with government. He is promising NOT to favor one group over the other...not to try and manage our lives, manage the economy, or manage the world... His goals are to promote LIBERTY...to restore personal freedom, to protect personal privacy, and to expose the secrecy of government.

It's no wonder corporations hate him. 100% of his donations are coming from individual contributors. It's incredible when you think about it. I read an article a while back that summed it up nicely: "The amazing truth is that Ron Paul is no longer running for President. His campaign has been hijacked, and it is now the PEOPLE of America who are running for President, through Ron Paul!"

So true.

No, corporations/interest groups don't support Paul because putting money on someone who until recently polled within the margin of error is a really stupid decision. Also, when someone wants to completely ruin the economy, it is a good idea not to support him either.
Honestly, at this point Paul could kill a child on camera and the legion of defenders would go "Well, its a single child, but he supports LIBERTY."
By the way, how goes the failure blimp?

 

[jonks]

Requiring or even suggesting candidates must return contributions because he or she discovers the contributor had controversial views is absurd, impracticality aside.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: Capitalizt
All of the other candidates are promising to do MORE with government...more subsidies...more regulations, more interference in our lives. People who donate to Giuliani or Clinton have a reasonable expectation of getting a return on their investment, because those candidates have no problem robbing the taxpayers and redistributing wealth to groups they favor. Ron Paul on the other hand is the only candidate promising to do LESS with government. He is promising NOT to favor one group over the other...not to try and manage our lives, manage the economy, or manage the world... His goals are to promote LIBERTY...to restore personal freedom, to protect personal privacy, and to expose the secrecy of government.

It's no wonder corporations hate him. 100% of his donations are coming from individual contributors. It's incredible when you think about it. I read an article a while back that summed it up nicely: "The amazing truth is that Ron Paul is no longer running for President. His campaign has been hijacked, and it is now the PEOPLE of America who are running for President, through Ron Paul!"

So true.

No, corporations/interest groups don't support Paul because putting money on someone who until recently polled within the margin of error is a really stupid decision. Also, when someone wants to completely ruin the economy, it is a good idea not to support him either.
Honestly, at this point Paul could kill a child on camera and the legion of defenders would go "Well, its a single child, but he supports LIBERTY."
By the way, how goes the failure blimp?

Give me a break. Even if Paul was the leader big business wouldnt touch him. His views are to break the joined at the hip scenario of big business and govt. What does big business get out of that relationship?

 

[clamum]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: Capitalizt
All of the other candidates are promising to do MORE with government...more subsidies...more regulations, more interference in our lives. People who donate to Giuliani or Clinton have a reasonable expectation of getting a return on their investment, because those candidates have no problem robbing the taxpayers and redistributing wealth to groups they favor. Ron Paul on the other hand is the only candidate promising to do LESS with government. He is promising NOT to favor one group over the other...not to try and manage our lives, manage the economy, or manage the world... His goals are to promote LIBERTY...to restore personal freedom, to protect personal privacy, and to expose the secrecy of government.

It's no wonder corporations hate him. 100% of his donations are coming from individual contributors. It's incredible when you think about it. I read an article a while back that summed it up nicely: "The amazing truth is that Ron Paul is no longer running for President. His campaign has been hijacked, and it is now the PEOPLE of America who are running for President, through Ron Paul!"

So true.

Honestly, at this point Paul could kill a child on camera and the legion of defenders would go "Well, its a single child, but he supports LIBERTY."

Are you stoned?

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: clamum

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: Capitalizt
All of the other candidates are promising to do MORE with government...more subsidies...more regulations, more interference in our lives. People who donate to Giuliani or Clinton have a reasonable expectation of getting a return on their investment, because those candidates have no problem robbing the taxpayers and redistributing wealth to groups they favor. Ron Paul on the other hand is the only candidate promising to do LESS with government. He is promising NOT to favor one group over the other...not to try and manage our lives, manage the economy, or manage the world... His goals are to promote LIBERTY...to restore personal freedom, to protect personal privacy, and to expose the secrecy of government.

It's no wonder corporations hate him. 100% of his donations are coming from individual contributors. It's incredible when you think about it. I read an article a while back that summed it up nicely: "The amazing truth is that Ron Paul is no longer running for President. His campaign has been hijacked, and it is now the PEOPLE of America who are running for President, through Ron Paul!"

So true.

Honestly, at this point Paul could kill a child on camera and the legion of defenders would go "Well, its a single child, but he supports LIBERTY."

Are you stoned?

No. He's like this all the time.

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: Capitalizt
All of the other candidates are promising to do MORE with government...more subsidies...more regulations, more interference in our lives. People who donate to Giuliani or Clinton have a reasonable expectation of getting a return on their investment, because those candidates have no problem robbing the taxpayers and redistributing wealth to groups they favor. Ron Paul on the other hand is the only candidate promising to do LESS with government. He is promising NOT to favor one group over the other...not to try and manage our lives, manage the economy, or manage the world... His goals are to promote LIBERTY...to restore personal freedom, to protect personal privacy, and to expose the secrecy of government.

It's no wonder corporations hate him. 100% of his donations are coming from individual contributors. It's incredible when you think about it. I read an article a while back that summed it up nicely: "The amazing truth is that Ron Paul is no longer running for President. His campaign has been hijacked, and it is now the PEOPLE of America who are running for President, through Ron Paul!"

So true.

No, corporations/interest groups don't support Paul because putting money on someone who until recently polled within the margin of error is a really stupid decision. Also, when someone wants to completely ruin the economy, it is a good idea not to support him either.
Honestly, at this point Paul could kill a child on camera and the legion of defenders would go "Well, its a single child, but he supports LIBERTY."
By the way, how goes the failure blimp?

Give me a break. Even if Paul was the leader big business wouldnt touch him. His views are to break the joined at the hip scenario of big business and govt. What does big business get out of that relationship?

What? You do understand that Lolbs want all government regulatory agencies to disappear, which is something that would help big businesses would like? Imagine what businesses could do if it wasn't for those pesky agencies like the FDA and EPA. We could welcome back Radium Water, or have Collodial silver and all the other homeopathic crap being pushed as real cures!
Also they don't support him because he is too busy courting whitesupremacists to bother with them.

 

[ayabe]

In other news, Obama has probably gotten money from the Black Panthers, so what?

In fact his church basically advocates kill whitey.

Being a white supremacist or a black supremacist, while ignorant, isn't against the law. So comparing either of these cases to donations from organized crime is a joke.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: Capitalizt
All of the other candidates are promising to do MORE with government...more subsidies...more regulations, more interference in our lives. People who donate to Giuliani or Clinton have a reasonable expectation of getting a return on their investment, because those candidates have no problem robbing the taxpayers and redistributing wealth to groups they favor. Ron Paul on the other hand is the only candidate promising to do LESS with government. He is promising NOT to favor one group over the other...not to try and manage our lives, manage the economy, or manage the world... His goals are to promote LIBERTY...to restore personal freedom, to protect personal privacy, and to expose the secrecy of government.

It's no wonder corporations hate him. 100% of his donations are coming from individual contributors. It's incredible when you think about it. I read an article a while back that summed it up nicely: "The amazing truth is that Ron Paul is no longer running for President. His campaign has been hijacked, and it is now the PEOPLE of America who are running for President, through Ron Paul!"

So true.

No, corporations/interest groups don't support Paul because putting money on someone who until recently polled within the margin of error is a really stupid decision. Also, when someone wants to completely ruin the economy, it is a good idea not to support him either.
Honestly, at this point Paul could kill a child on camera and the legion of defenders would go "Well, its a single child, but he supports LIBERTY."
By the way, how goes the failure blimp?

Give me a break. Even if Paul was the leader big business wouldnt touch him. His views are to break the joined at the hip scenario of big business and govt. What does big business get out of that relationship?

What? You do understand that Lolbs want all government regulatory agencies to disappear, which is something that would help big businesses would like? Imagine what businesses could do if it wasn't for those pesky agencies like the FDA and EPA. We could welcome back Radium Water, or have Collodial silver and all the other homeopathic crap being pushed as real cures!
Also they don't support him because he is too busy courting whitesupremacists to bother with them.

All? Not at in the least. That would be anarchy. Big Business wouldnt prosper in an open market because they'd be forced to compete honestly instead of using the brute force of govt to keep competitors out of the market.

That is why you dont see big business on his side.

 

[RaiderJ]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: Capitalizt
All of the other candidates are promising to do MORE with government...more subsidies...more regulations, more interference in our lives. People who donate to Giuliani or Clinton have a reasonable expectation of getting a return on their investment, because those candidates have no problem robbing the taxpayers and redistributing wealth to groups they favor. Ron Paul on the other hand is the only candidate promising to do LESS with government. He is promising NOT to favor one group over the other...not to try and manage our lives, manage the economy, or manage the world... His goals are to promote LIBERTY...to restore personal freedom, to protect personal privacy, and to expose the secrecy of government.

It's no wonder corporations hate him. 100% of his donations are coming from individual contributors. It's incredible when you think about it. I read an article a while back that summed it up nicely: "The amazing truth is that Ron Paul is no longer running for President. His campaign has been hijacked, and it is now the PEOPLE of America who are running for President, through Ron Paul!"

So true.

No, corporations/interest groups don't support Paul because putting money on someone who until recently polled within the margin of error is a really stupid decision. Also, when someone wants to completely ruin the economy, it is a good idea not to support him either.
Honestly, at this point Paul could kill a child on camera and the legion of defenders would go "Well, its a single child, but he supports LIBERTY."
By the way, how goes the failure blimp?

Give me a break. Even if Paul was the leader big business wouldnt touch him. His views are to break the joined at the hip scenario of big business and govt. What does big business get out of that relationship?

What? You do understand that Lolbs want all government regulatory agencies to disappear, which is something that would help big businesses would like? Imagine what businesses could do if it wasn't for those pesky agencies like the FDA and EPA. We could welcome back Radium Water, or have Collodial silver and all the other homeopathic crap being pushed as real cures!
Also they don't support him because he is too busy courting whitesupremacists to bother with them.

I'm more than willing to entertain realistic points of view... but yours are completely inaccurate. Big businesses basically ignore Ron Paul because he won't give them special treatment when it comes to laws and such. Look where big business puts their money, it's not Ron Paul.

And just because a KKK member gave him $500 doesn't mean RP supports his views - it's the exact opposite. I'm sure you could find plenty of other racists and other criminals donating to other candidates.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: bamacre
If a White Supremacist sent me $500, I wouldn't give it back either.

If you are running on your own deeply held values you would. Then again if you have no values then I can see why.

If a person with ties to the communist party in China sends Paul money should he return it?

You don't see the difference between someone with ties to a foreign government and a US citizen? :roll:

So a US citizen with ties to a terrorist/hate group is okay in your book? What about a US citizen with ties to organize crime?

A "terrorist" group?

Shees, he's a white supremist. I may not know anything about him, but you make it sound like it's something illegal. You got anything to back that up?

If it's just you find his (free speech) positions distasteful, I'm not sure that's sufficient for the outrage. There are plenty of PACs/groups with distasteful positions donating to candidates and no one is complaining.

Where are other "race promoting groups" donations going? Who is the Black Caucas promoting? Who are the Black Panthers donating to? Where are Luis Farakhan's group's donations going? etc etc.

I guess it's only bad if it's white people promoting themselves, and OK for any other group.

Fern

 

[RaiderJ]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: bamacre
If a White Supremacist sent me $500, I wouldn't give it back either.

If you are running on your own deeply held values you would. Then again if you have no values then I can see why.

If a person with ties to the communist party in China sends Paul money should he return it?

You don't see the difference between someone with ties to a foreign government and a US citizen? :roll:

So a US citizen with ties to a terrorist/hate group is okay in your book? What about a US citizen with ties to organize crime?

A "terrorist" group?

Shees, he's a white supremist. I may not know anything about him, but you make it sound like it's something illegal. You got anything to back that up?

If it's just you find his (free speech) positions distasteful, I'm not sure that's sufficient for the outrage. There are plenty of PACs/groups with distasteful positions donating to candidates and no one is complaining.

Where are other "race promoting groups" donations going? Who is the Black Caucas promoting? Who are the Black Panthers donating to? Where are Luis Farakhan's group's donations going? etc etc.

I guess it's only bad if it's white people promoting themselves, and OK for any other group.

Fern

True... I'll bet money that the good 'ol Rev. Jesse Jackson could be tied to plenty of "hate crimes".

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: bamacre
If a White Supremacist sent me $500, I wouldn't give it back either.

Hell yeah, I'd rather keep it for my cause than his.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: bamacre
If a White Supremacist sent me $500, I wouldn't give it back either.

hahaha, i wouldnt either. i would donate it to a black or jew charity and send dumbass racist a receipt. :evil:

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
That rings totally true to me.

The lengths Ron Paul supporters go to to rationalize and justify whatever he does/says reminds me the diehard Bush supporters and frankly I find that dsturbing.

In this particular scenario their excuse is that the end justifies the means. Sounds familar, no?

I'm no rabid RP supporter - the guy's got some common sense ideas, but doesn't have a snowball's chance - but his response to that Cavuto jackass was pretty much spot on.

You get millions upon millions of dollars from tens of thousands of supporters, and you actually expect him to research and evaluate the political and idealogical beliefs behind each and every dollar bill? And once he discovers them, he's expected to carefully weigh their entire belief system against every one of his campaign platform issues, and if any don't match 100%, then he should refuse and refund their donations?

Riggghhhtt!! So your claim is your not for Ron Paul, your just rabid?

So, you're saying, what?

Yes? You think all candidates should conduct research and evaluation into the idealogical beliefs behind every cent they receive and determine whether or not to accept that money based on thier findings?

No? That would be silly and you guess you made a mistake in your blind bigotry towards a particular candidate?

Maybe? Perhaps you're just a bit lost?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: bamacre
If a White Supremacist sent me $500, I wouldn't give it back either.

hahaha, i wouldnt either. i would donate it to a black or jew charity and send dumbass racist a receipt. :evil:

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
That rings totally true to me.

The lengths Ron Paul supporters go to to rationalize and justify whatever he does/says reminds me the diehard Bush supporters and frankly I find that dsturbing.

In this particular scenario their excuse is that the end justifies the means. Sounds familar, no?

I'm no rabid RP supporter - the guy's got some common sense ideas, but doesn't have a snowball's chance - but his response to that Cavuto jackass was pretty much spot on.

You get millions upon millions of dollars from tens of thousands of supporters, and you actually expect him to research and evaluate the political and idealogical beliefs behind each and every dollar bill? And once he discovers them, he's expected to carefully weigh their entire belief system against every one of his campaign platform issues, and if any don't match 100%, then he should refuse and refund their donations?

Riggghhhtt!! So your claim is your not for Ron Paul, your just rabid?

So, you're saying, what?

Yes? You think all candidates should conduct research and evaluation into the idealogical beliefs behind every cent they receive and determine whether or not to accept that money based on thier findings?

No? That would be silly and you guess you made a mistake in your blind bigotry towards a particular candidate?

Maybe? Perhaps you're just a bit lost?

Oh look, a stalker. Let's just get this over with. FUCK YOU ASSHOLE!! SHOVE IT UP YOU HOLE SIDEWAYS.

Now I feel better.