It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul keeps white supremacist donation

page: 10
5
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 05:59 PM
link   
I wouldn't take money from someone who's beliefs I didn't believe in either....pfffft


I can't believe this thread is still going. Honestly, why do people care about this so much?

And wouldn't it be kind of hypocritical if Ron Paul DID give it back, you know, since he's all for equality and freedom and rights? Oh, because you're only equal as long as you have the same belief system, right?

Better a white supremacist than a lobbiest, no?

[edit on 12/20/2007 by bigbert81]




posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
Hey I'll talk trash on Hillary all day long. Who wouldn't? It's not slander (or libel...) though if it's true. This ranting about Ron Paul is just that - ranting. The donation itself is a non-issue. People are making a fuss over their own personal belief that people of controversial viewpoints should be excluded from the electoral process. God bless the U.S.S.A.


The thing is, we don't invent petty scandals to push on Clinton. She has a voting history that we can point out. She has the massive corporate ties that are in everyone's face.

What does Ron Paul have worth attacking? A donation from a single individual? This is the issue - people are brainwashed into pushing petty scandals around just like they see on the television. Oh my, it's all over the news, must be a big deal, Ron Paul's candidacy is over etc. Complete and utter indoctrination, they would rather endorse this character attack on Ron Paul then study his REAL political agenda - something they only do for other candidates on the most basic and pre-wrapped level. They are all media puppets and they don't even know it



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Ron Paul believes in freedom of speech/religion/ etc.
Giving the money back would just go against his beliefs



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:02 PM
link   
We hear it time and time again...Ron Paul will be different, yadda yadda...yadda.

He'll return the country to us, the average american...yadda, yadda...yadda.

Yet, loe and behold, he excepts money from an avowed racist. Perfectly legal, yet troubling ethically. ...and its the ethics and supposed lawlessness of the currant administration that we constantly harp upon. I just witnessed a lapse in the so called integrity of Ron Paul. Yeah, it's only 500 bucks, meaningless in the letter of the law, yet a rather profound amount in the integrity department.

He also instantly began to attempt to spin it. So how is he different from all the other candidates again?



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:04 PM
link   
What does it matter what the person believes who donates money to him?
Please do tell me?



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:05 PM
link   
This is for FredT Moderator Extrordinaire

Ok Im going to spell this out so simple and your going to be like wow mybigunit you are correct in fact we agree totally and you are just to smart


Part I First off this guy is a single citizen not a corporation or special interest group first of all. He has just as many rites as you and me....we may agree or disagree with whatever he is saying but he can still donate. Now that does not mean that a candidate does not have to keep it but be warned when you start returning peoples money soon you wont have any because all of us are a part or have an opinion on one thing or another that might offend others. Example..He has white pride so do I but that does not make me racist..In fact my wife is of another ethnicity....that does not make him racist or mean hes out killing blacks. Another example not on a race line there are some extremists in california who burn suburban houses out because they think man is intruding on the wild....does that mean that all animal activists shouldnt be able to donate because they are all house burners (which we know they are not but under the assumption you are giving this white pride guy they are) or John Smith who kills cows in a meat plant can he not donate because it will offend the people at peta. Im saying everyone on this earth can be apart of a group or job that is offensive to other people but does that mean we should give everyones money back. My opinion is every individual citizen should be able to donate but as far as special interest groups or corporations go which ill explain in part II I dont think that is the case.

Part II K as far as corporations go I think that lobbying and special interests should have no part in donating to people running for office. I think this is the root to alot of our problems that we have today. I mean lets face it Altria who has killed more people and made more money off it why is this so? Because of a huge lobby dollar. Exxon we dont need to go into all the great things they have done for the country but you get the gist.

So to summerize if you are an individual you should be able to donate and not feel guilty or get your money handed back because you offend people. Everyone does something in their like offensive to someone and we go down a slippery slop going this route and last if you are a special interest group or corporation looking to expand your horizions expand somewhere else let america decide who they want not who has the most money.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by bigbert81
 


What does he stand for? Not all viewpoints stand equally. It's up to us as individuals to decide what we believe in. Mr. Paul can not be all things to all people, that's patently impossible. Make a stand on issues, yeah you'll piss off some people, but at least you'll be honest.

Honesty...in a politician, now that would be a change for the better. Send back the 500 bucks, and say very politely, thank you, but no thank you. Stand for something.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Big difference between accepting a political donation from a neo nazi group and / or its founder and shopping at Sprawlmart eh? I realize it may be tough to make the distinction, but its pretty obvious.


Funny that you keep mentioning strawman fallacies... There's a big difference between accepting a political donation from an unpopular organization, and accepting one from a private citizen. I realize it may be tough to make the distinction, but its pretty obvious, and yet you continue to attempt to blur/distort that line.

As I stated earlier; Do you think Mitt Romney would return a $500 donation from a private citizen who happened to be pro-choice? Not a chance; however, if he recieved a multi-thousand dollar donation directly from Planned Parenthood... he might actually have something to say about it.

Are you really having a difficult time recognizing that distinction, or are you merely attempting to spur further debate?

[edit on 12/20/07 by redmage]


apc

posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by mnmcandiez
 


That quote was from this post. You'll see the context.

I'm not being intolerant of anybody. Quite the opposite if you'll click the thread button at the bottom of this post. I just said he's an idiot. Which yeah... I really don't need to check his SAT scores on that one.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by bigbert81
 


What does he stand for? Not all viewpoints stand equally. It's up to us as individuals to decide what we believe in. Mr. Paul can not be all things to all people, that's patently impossible. Make a stand on issues, yeah you'll piss off some people, but at least you'll be honest.

Honesty...in a politician, now that would be a change for the better. Send back the 500 bucks, and say very politely, thank you, but no thank you. Stand for something.


Uhm, no...that makes no sense
Then he'd probably have to give back 99.9 of his donations if he examined every personal belief the person had that he also didn't feel was right.


[edit on 12/20/2007 by mnmcandiez]



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
Yeah, it's only 500 bucks, meaningless in the letter of the law, yet a rather profound amount in the integrity department.


Yeah, it is only 500 bucks, and it came from a source outside of Ron Paul's influence. He did not ask for that person to donate.

Do you honestly believe that the other candidates have more integrity because they are funded by the military industrial complex?
By pharmacy companies pushing an agenda which has bereft the American populace of health-care?

My God. People are so clueless to the real issues that it scares me. This election is not only in danger because of media control, it's in danger because we have a malleable and un-educated public.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:16 PM
link   
It's up to him to make that decision. Whether rightly, or wrongly, you are known by the company you keep, especially in politics.

Most of his donations, like those of most of the other candidates are more than likely above board, from people like you and me, who just want to help the candidate of our choice. Others are suspect, from organizations that no sane politician should touch with a ten foot account ledger. This is one of them. Free speech is all very well and good, don't get me wrong, but he doesn't have to accept money from organizations/persons, and still support free speech.

If he truly wants to be different...that's what he's got to do. Donations, of whatever amount, need to be scrutinized.


apc

posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:18 PM
link   
This is kinda funny...

So it's pretty well established that this issue has not driven away any real Ron Paul supporters, and only people who were never going to vote for him seem to care. But I betya it's gotten a few more white supremacist votes. I wonder just how many of them there are.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


Read my above post but then you need to give everyones money back because everyone does something offensive to someone one way or another.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Am I the only one that gets the joke here? And who it's on? You guys are all arguing about a small donation while the PTB have HUGE money invested in the rest of the candidates. Rep and Dem.

Keep the divide going. THEY have you arguing about a non-issue while THEY keep on going to the bank. Until you all can get past THEIR programming, you are doomed to have ANY candidate they want in the White House. THEY don't care if it's a Rep or a Dem, as long as the candidate is in their pocket. Best way to do that? Keep the serfs squabbling. It's worked up until now and I don't see any break from the mold.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:25 PM
link   
$500 in the hands of a white supremacist, or $500 in the hands of a freedom-delivering, well-meaning presidential candidate.

YOU decide!



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


I hope you are not equating flipping someone the "bird" when they cut you off, with advocating white supremecy. Seriously...

Yes people are offensive to each other all the time. However, a politician to whom apperances are 90% of everything, to appear to tolerate something of this nature hurts him. Evidence is this thread itself.

500 dollars isn't a whole lot of money, less than a drop in the bucket. But it's a very big deal in the appearance department. Perception is all. What does a black voter, who might have been swung to Mr. Pauls side think now? I'm betting not a whole lot, he/she may agree with everything he says, then comes the question: "Why did he take money from that guy?" I'm not black, and I'm thinking that.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


Your going to have to deduct me points cause this is short..who is they?



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


Thats why I said read my post above because it gets into more detail but here ill copy and paste a part of it so you know what I am saying.

Part I First off this guy is a single citizen not a corporation or special interest group first of all. He has just as many rites as you and me....we may agree or disagree with whatever he is saying but he can still donate. Now that does not mean that a candidate does not have to keep it but be warned when you start returning peoples money soon you wont have any because all of us are a part or have an opinion on one thing or another that might offend others. Example..He has white pride so do I but that does not make me racist..In fact my wife is of another ethnicity....that does not make him racist or mean hes out killing blacks. Another example not on a race line there are some extremists in california who burn suburban houses out because they think man is intruding on the wild....does that mean that all animal activists shouldnt be able to donate because they are all house burners (which we know they are not but under the assumption you are giving this white pride guy they are) or John Smith who kills cows in a meat plant can he not donate because it will offend the people at peta. Im saying everyone on this earth can be apart of a group or job that is offensive to other people but does that mean we should give everyones money back. My opinion is every individual citizen should be able to donate but as far as special interest groups or corporations go which ill explain in part II I dont think that is the case.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Am I the only one that gets the joke here? And who it's on? You guys are all arguing about a small donation while the PTB have HUGE money invested in the rest of the candidates. Rep and Dem.

Keep the divide going. THEY have you arguing about a non-issue while THEY keep on going to the bank.


Exactly. I'm pretty sure Ron Paul supporters are aware of these techniques to begin with, which makes this whole slandering effort by the media THAT much more fundamental to our effort. We can all point out the hypocrisy of this election and how all the 'major' candidates are being funded by war machines (I.E. corporations that murder people...) and then we can ask ourselves, why are they pinning Ron Paul on a donation from a single individual?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join