Ron Paul keeps white supremacist donation , page 5
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times


reply posted on 19-12-2007 @ 11:09 PM by FredT
reply to post by apc



You persist in ignoring what I have said time and time again:

It was well within the neo nazi's rights to make the donation. However, it was also in Pauls rights to refuse or return the same. He chose NOT too its reallty that simple.

[edit on 12/19/07 by FredT]


reply posted on 19-12-2007 @ 11:11 PM by FredT
reply to post by krackedkid



I doubt it. There would have been a blurb about it and thats it.



reply posted on 19-12-2007 @ 11:17 PM by apc
reply to post by FredT



His choosing not to is the point. Unless it could be shown that the donated money was somehow the gains of a criminal act, the only dirty thing about it is the personal opinions of the donor. Opinions which every single person has a right to. Even if we don't agree with that opinion, there are few things more important than their right to have it, and that is what must be respected.


reply posted on 20-12-2007 @ 12:26 AM by shooterbrody

Are you suggesting that the guy that made the donation is not assosited with Stormfront?


No
Are you suggesting the donation came from stormfront? Perhaps the guy has changed his mind since then.


Ive made it pretty clear where I stand on donations from hate groups eh?

See that statement in relation to this story is a baldfaced lie. The group did not write the check the INDIVIDUAL did. BIG difference there pally. That is the same smeat tactic Cavuto tried on RP earlier.



Does this strawman have a set of overalls? As I have said before it would be impossible to test everybody. However, with public revelations that the money comes from a known neo nazi why would you want it? Yes you can go on and on about the legalities of it. But morals and ethics are another story.

LOL
There are no "legalities" to discuss; what was done in no way is illegal.(another attempt at smear) You admit it is impossible to test everyone then choose who to impose YOUR moraity on. That is laughable and is in no way credible.




Can you litmus test every campaign contributor? No. But if you do find one with morals, ethics and values contrary to your own you do not have to accept it.

So then your in the all or none crowd on this one. Unless someone entirely is in moral, ethical and in values in aggrement with you you cant accept money from them.

that is just dumb

You go ahead and not try to find common ground with anyone else in the usa. That stance will take you far in life bub.


reply posted on 20-12-2007 @ 01:19 AM by Sublime620
reply to post by FredT



Personally, I'm against lobbyists and the whole bit. I don't think we should have anyone representing a private company or interest group giving money to or even whispering in our politician's ears.

However, this is not the case. My point was only that we are talking about $500. What's $500? I think tabacco and oil lobbyist donations are far more dangerous than some wacko donating $500 that no one cares about.

[edit on 20-12-2007 by Sublime620]


reply posted on 20-12-2007 @ 02:18 AM by Hypntick
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.

news.yahoo.com...


The white supremacist himself said that. That right there tells me that even he is aware that this $500 private donation is not going to get any favoritism to his cause.

He donated the money because he supports some of the views of Ron Paul. I would say this is why Ron Paul chose to keep the money is the fact that he is aware this person is donating it for Ron Paul's cause and not his own.

If the money that was sent in were raised illegally that would be one thing, but since this is clean money there should be no moral issue at all. I wouldn't say this guy even supports Ron Paul on his moral standing, it's just his political standing he supports.

[edit on 12/20/07 by Hypntick]
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>    ^^TOP^^




Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Santorum wants more fracking!!!
  US Political Madness, Posted 11 hours ago, 53 replies
Pass Me My Rifle
  World War Three, Posted 7 hours ago, 51 replies