Thread: Ron Paul doesn't remember what he wrote in his newletters?

I find that to be a moronic response. The newsletters had his name on the them, yet he claims other wrote racist comments that he was not aware of. WTF? I think a better response would be something like: "I was a younger man back then, and I have grown since then. What I wrote was just plain wrong. However, I am a different man now". I think people would respect that more. What do you all think. I think it would come off much more sincere than that sex freak Gingrich, who claims he has suddenly been saved by catholism.

Here is what makes Paul stand out. He is not out there stating we should engage in new wars when we haven't even recovered from the war GWB started. I don't like Paul's racist background, but some of the things he says are reasonable. I think my Republican brothers are overlooking him foolishly. I think Paul could capture enough moderate Dems and independents to make a difference. Santorum or Romney? Eh! They will be made mincemeat if they run agains Obama.

Just some food for thought.

Abner

I'm waiting to see one of Ron Paul's public appearances where 2 guys in white coats throw a net over him and drag him off to a mental hospital.

According to my older learned Jewish friends Ron Paul has expressed anti-Semitic remarks in the past.

Originally Posted by Abner

I find that to be a moronic response. The newsletters had his name on the them, yet he claims other wrote racist comments that he was not aware of. WTF? I think a better response would be something like: "I was a younger man back then, and I have grown since then. What I wrote was just plain wrong. However, I am a different man now". I think people would respect that more.

Not really. I'd suggest, "I didn't pay close enough attention to the newsletters. That was a mistake, and I never should have allowed that to be published in my name." Admitting you were ever a racist is not going to work in a presidential campaign.

What do you all think. I think it would come off much more sincere than that sex freak Gingrich, who claims he has suddenly been saved by catholism.

Here is what makes Paul stand out. He is not out there stating we should engage in new wars when we haven't even recovered from the war GWB started. I don't like Paul's racist background, but some of the things he says are reasonable. I think my Republican brothers are overlooking him foolishly. I think Paul could capture enough moderate Dems and independents to make a difference. Santorum or Romney? Eh! They will be made mincemeat if they run agains Obama.

Just some food for thought.

Abner

There is NO WAY Paul would get any significant number of moderate democrats. Moderate democrats are democrats for a reason. If they were hardcore anti spending they'd be republican. Typically a moderate democrat is open to social programs but is also open to reform. Paul's "burn it to the ground" approach won't work here.

Originally Posted by StefanM

Not really. I'd suggest, "I didn't pay close enough attention to the newsletters. That was a mistake, and I never should have allowed that to be published in my name."

Conveniently, that is what he said about it.

Originally Posted by Bruce

I'm waiting to see one of Ron Paul's public appearances where 2 guys in white coats throw a net over him and drag him off to a mental hospital.

I don't love him on everything, but I have to say it's a sad statement that people think he must be crazy because he's the only one who doesn't want government telling everyone what to do.

And here is how disgusting Ron Paul REALLY is,

Jon Huntsman's Values - YouTube

Originally Posted by SteveFoerster

I don't love him on everything, but I have to say it's a sad statement that people think he must be crazy because he's the only one who doesn't want government telling everyone what to do.

Have you read his anti-Semitic newsletters that he now claims he doesn't remember writing/didn't write?

Originally Posted by JWC

And here is how disgusting Ron Paul REALLY is,

Jon Huntsman's Values - YouTube

That is very suspect, since it doesn't have the usual disclaimer "I'm Ron Paul and I approved this message" as required by election law, and neither does it have the disclaimer about it being from a non-profit "Swift Boat" type organization that supports Paul.

Originally Posted by JWC

And here is how disgusting Ron Paul REALLY is,

Jon Huntsman's Values - YouTube

I think it's a travesty that the American Ambassador to China actually bothered to learn how to speak the Chinese language.

Originally Posted by Kizmet

I think it's a travesty that the American Ambassador to China actually bothered to learn how to speak the Chinese language.

What is this world coming to?

Abner

Originally Posted by SteveFoerster

Conveniently, that is what he said about it.

He's emphasizing more of the "I didn't know" rather than "It was a mistake." I think if he focused on contrition more it would get him more points.

I suppose if I were him I'm deliver a major speech about race and libertarianism is a better way to handle injustice and create opportunity for all. I have to admit, though, I have this nagging feeling he's at least going to wait until after South Carolina before addressing this any more, if then.

Oh well. Like I said, I'm more of a Gary Johnson kind of guy. :-)

On Ron Paul -

His message is much better delivered by his organization than he is capable of delivering it himself. This is a major problem with the modern media covering elections.

At best, he's a novelty unless someone starts force feeding him stem cells and it somehow corrects his core nature of appearing like he has first stage alzheimers.

Reagan, he is not.

Originally Posted by StefanM

There is NO WAY Paul would get any significant number of moderate democrats. Moderate democrats are democrats for a reason. If they were hardcore anti spending they'd be republican. Typically a moderate democrat is open to social programs but is also open to reform. Paul's "burn it to the ground" approach won't work here.

I think many of Ron Paul's libertarian views work well with at least some Democrats. If it weren't for his racist statements, I'd consider voting for him. My daughter is a pretty liberal Democrat and she's a big Ron Paul fan. He did pretty well in Iowa and I understand that some polls have him running a distant second in NH. I would consider him more electable in a general election than Gingrich or Palin.

Originally Posted by Bill Huffman

I think many of Ron Paul's libertarian views work well with at least some Democrats. If it weren't for his racist statements, I'd consider voting for him. My daughter is a pretty liberal Democrat and she's a big Ron Paul fan. He did pretty well in Iowa and I understand that some polls have him running a distant second in NH. I would consider him more electable in a general election than Gingrich or Palin.

It's probably because he's an iconoclast. It's "cool" not to be mainstream. It just seems that a true liberal or moderate would never be able to endorse Paul's economic policies, if they were truly analyzed.

Originally Posted by StefanM

It's probably because he's an iconoclast. It's "cool" not to be mainstream. It just seems that a true liberal or moderate would never be able to endorse Paul's economic policies, if they were truly analyzed.

Fiscally conservative Democrat beliefs are not that far off from Ron Paul are they? For example, I think we spend way too much on our military. We should stop trying to be the policeman for the whole world. I like Ron Paul's views on that better than Obama's. As another example, for all the money we wasted in Iraq we could have funded every American's medical expenses for years, probably. Okay maybe the last only supported Ron Paul's ideas half way. Which I guess supports both of our points. :-D