reply to post by blupblup
My post wasn't anti-RP.... just anti-stupidity.
It wasn't at all, and I don't get the problem with it, you can't prove someone doesn't hold some view deep inside them, it's impossible. All you can
do is judge them on their actions. So you are 100% correct, and nothing about your post read as anti-Paul to me.
the OPs point was this:
You've got newsletters written in Paul's name, some of which we personally wrote, some he didn't, that say some nasty things, or at least allude to
Then you've got 20 plus years of actions.
A newsletter he might or might not have written or even read says he might be racist
20 years of action say he isn't.
I'm basing my opinion on his actions, just like I did with Obama.
You can't ignore a candidate because they might be feeding you a line, because then you might as well just sign over your life to a dictator. Obama
got elected on promises he could have kept, but didn't.
but he wasn't judged on his actions, he was judged before that and his actions, and lack there of, just made gave justification to those who hated him
from day 1 with nothing to base it on.
Now we see a similar but different situation, a person being judged, not by their actions or even promises, but by something someone 20 years ago said
in a news letter produced by Paul.
And no, suggesting that Israel can handle themselves just fine without US intervention, is not antisemitic. Israel has already stated they don't
require US assistance, and it's billions of dollars a year in aid that could be spent at home repairing infrastructure or something else that would
benefit the americans who paid that money via taxes.
Paul HAS answered this "charge" every single time it's been aimed at him, because some people live life like a gold fish, wiping their memory every 15
seconds, doesn't change the fact that he's addressed this time and time again.
And he didn't "storm out" mid interview, the reporter started in saying he tried to blame Israelis for the first WTC attack, THAT's when he left, and
he didn't storm out, he cut the interview short as there was no point in continuing to restate the same statements over and over while ignoring any of
his policies he's advocating.
edit on 22-12-2011 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)