Originally posted by: Pabster
No, I'm not accusing Paul of anything. :roll:
I'm simply passing along what has been written. Isn't this a discussion forum?
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: BradT
I have only been perusing P&N over the past couple of weeks for the primary/caucus action, but holy sh!t, what is Pabster's deal? Less than half of what he says is true, and just about ALL of what he says is purely to provoke others.
Must have offended another Paulbot. :roll:
If a story "provokes" thought, that is exactly what it is intended to do. Or do you like being a mindless drone?
Originally posted by: palehorse74
*cough* RP is currently at less than 9% in NH primaries *cough*
sorry, once again, I couldnt resist.
ps: this story and thread are crap Pabster. come on man, you can do better than this. Please stick to bashing Clinton, or RP's lack of support. This old racism crap is worthless!
Yep the Pabsmear is in full regalia.Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: palehorse74
*cough* RP is currently at less than 9% in NH primaries *cough*
sorry, once again, I couldnt resist.
ps: this story and thread are crap Pabster. come on man, you can do better than this. Please stick to bashing Clinton, or RP's lack of support. This old racism crap is worthless!
That's right where I would expect RP to be. Pretty good numbers considering he'll probably run independent and get similar numbers all the way to November. Which IMO is why Pabster keeps starting senseless threads like these. Paul is poised to play the same role that Perot did back in '92.
Originally posted by: Vic
That's right where I would expect RP to be. Pretty good numbers considering he'll probably run independent and get similar numbers all the way to November. Which IMO is why Pabster keeps starting senseless threads like these. Paul is poised to play the same role that Perot did back in '92.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Except if I recall correctly Perot got close to 20% of the vote?
Originally posted by: techs
If one were to judge Ron Paul solely on the people who have been supporting him in this forum, than I would believe anything anyone says about him.
After all, his supporters are living in a fantasy land. I can only assume thier candidate is too.
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
He has met the burden of proof using the article.
Never have I heard more rediculous responses by Ron whats his name supporters.
Since when have the rules changed?
So anybody now who posts and article that stands on its own merits has to also post a 2nd article supporting the first?
hmmm
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
LOL if you believe this, I'll hand out the tin foil hats for you guys :laugh:
Can you refute it?
You're the accuser. The burden of proof is on you. That's the way it works.
As far as I'm concerned, this stuff could all be fabricated by crafty minds of the Rudy Guiliani campaign until it can be proved Mr. Ron Paul himself has written these documents.
I can just as easily get the typewriter from my attic and write out some really damning texts and then type "by Rudy Guliani" or whatever at the end, and then scan it and send the pictures to the media,
Not even We-hate-Ron-Paul FOX NEWS has this story
He has met the burden of proof using the article.
Never have I heard more rediculous responses by Ron whats his name supporters.
Since when have the rules changed?
So anybody now who posts and article that stands on its own merits has to also post a 2nd article supporting the first?
hmmm
He's a pedo??Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
LOL if you believe this, I'll hand out the tin foil hats for you guys :laugh:
Can you refute it?
You're the accuser. The burden of proof is on you. That's the way it works.
As far as I'm concerned, this stuff could all be fabricated by crafty minds of the Rudy Guiliani campaign until it can be proved Mr. Ron Paul himself has written these documents.
I can just as easily get the typewriter from my attic and write out some really damning texts and then type "by Rudy Guliani" or whatever at the end, and then scan it and send the pictures to the media,
Not even We-hate-Ron-Paul FOX NEWS has this story
He has met the burden of proof using the article.
Never have I heard more rediculous responses by Ron whats his name supporters.
Since when have the rules changed?
So anybody now who posts and article that stands on its own merits has to also post a 2nd article supporting the first?
hmmm
We should all post blogs stating that JediYoda is a pedophile. Obviously that's all the proof that anyone should need on any topic.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
He's a pedo??Originally posted by: BoberFett
We should all post blogs stating that JediYoda is a pedophile. Obviously that's all the proof that anyone should need on any topic.
Originally posted by: Thump553
Although the chances of me ever voting for him are slim to none (in large part to his federal reserve views), I find Ron Paul to be a refreshing and invigorating candidate who has done much to inject actual substance into the national political debate. If I'm channeel surfing and run across an interview of him, I'll nearly always stop to listen.
If the views expressed in Pabster's thumbnail were in fact expressed by Ron Paul I'll feel greatly disappointed, even soiled. OTOH, given the tendency to perpetuate dirty tricks in politics (especially in the Republican arena) I'll withhold any judgment for now.
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
So when Ron whats his name drops out of the race are you going to drink the koolaid that he offers you??
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Pabster
If it is such an "obvious political smear", surely you could prove it?
You're accusing Paul of some pretty ugly and offensive comments. If they're not true, those making such claims are guilty of libel (in print) or slander (spoken).
OTOH, truth is a 100% defense to any charges of libel or slander, but if you think the quotes are accurate, the burden of proof is on you. If it's NOT such an "obvious political smear", surely you could come up with credible original sources for the quotes. :roll:
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
He's a pedo??Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
LOL if you believe this, I'll hand out the tin foil hats for you guys :laugh:
Can you refute it?
You're the accuser. The burden of proof is on you. That's the way it works.
As far as I'm concerned, this stuff could all be fabricated by crafty minds of the Rudy Guiliani campaign until it can be proved Mr. Ron Paul himself has written these documents.
I can just as easily get the typewriter from my attic and write out some really damning texts and then type "by Rudy Guliani" or whatever at the end, and then scan it and send the pictures to the media,
Not even We-hate-Ron-Paul FOX NEWS has this story
He has met the burden of proof using the article.
Never have I heard more rediculous responses by Ron whats his name supporters.
Since when have the rules changed?
So anybody now who posts and article that stands on its own merits has to also post a 2nd article supporting the first?
hmmm
We should all post blogs stating that JediYoda is a pedophile. Obviously that's all the proof that anyone should need on any topic.
Originally posted by: Xonoahbin
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
He has met the burden of proof using the article.
Never have I heard more rediculous responses by Ron whats his name supporters.
Since when have the rules changed?
So anybody now who posts and article that stands on its own merits has to also post a 2nd article supporting the first?
hmmm
Oh it's OK dooode! I'd say you have the right to your free speech, but I'm not sure it's included in the six amendments of the bill of rights. I don't know what you people are talking about with your ten amendments.
Bill of Rights Pared Down to a Manageable Six
Well, there we go. Bill of rights is six. I win. What's that? You want to discredit me? Hah, yeah right. I just proved it using that article. Prove it's not credible and prove that I'm wrong! You can't!
Your logic is wonderful, but it's 100% incorrect. Please stop trolling.
Originally posted by: MadRat
There is nothing to refute. None of what you said is even linked to Ron Paul.
You're the only one stuck on your claims.
Originally posted by: shrumpage
Originally posted by: MadRat
There is nothing to refute. None of what you said is even linked to Ron Paul.
You're the only one stuck on your claims.
Look at the links i posted, they show the original scans, from 1978 up to the early 90's. It was HIS newsletter, and he even admitted that.