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.

 

The end of Ron Paul?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   
Ron Paul was born in Kenya, I have the proof!!!!!!!!!
He's a secret Muslim.....No seriously!!

I have his original birth certificate.....Why can't people see they're being lied to?

WAKE UP ATS!!!!!!!!

Wait,.........Oh,.. Okay never mind Im getting confused with Obama. Paul is racist is what I hear..My Bad.
Looking for proof!!!




posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ear-Responsible
You clearly don't know much about Ron if you think he's a racist. I'm just going to leave it at that because it's pointless to argue with someone such as drunkenparrot who clearly has already made up his mind. Either way, there still is no other person in the run for potus that is even close to being worth our vote. If nothing else, Paul wins by default.


Who's arguing? If you are comfortable supporting a political candidate without all the facts then more power to you.

I could really care less as I don't believe that Ron Paul is remotely electable however if you are denying the very real possibility that Ron Paul has made a lot of extremely questionable racial comments over the years it would seem that you are the one who may not know much about Ron and are very possibly deluding yourself into believing he is something that he is not.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:24 AM
link   
I can only hope he is done then maybe we can get away from the never ending pro RP propaganda from his followers. To be honest the out right blind worship of the guy by this small group is kind of scary. Myself I think the guy has a few good ideas but a lot of stupid ones as well.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 05:55 AM
link   
It would appear that the US electorate is looking for the perfect man (Can't say Woman obviously) yet are eternally surprised when their politicians turn out to be human after all, does anyone believe everything exactly the way they did 20 years ago? Until there Jesus stands for election it ain't gonna happen. If Jesus did show up i expect the news channels will pick up on some of his more "Controversial" quotes & leave the rest to his opponents. Ron Paul is the best your going to get & you need to realise it before you vote in yet another false prophet who will let you all down again.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
I wouldn't even bother arguing with Ron Droids, their blind support for Ron Paul puts me off. This just even makes it worse. Aren't we taught that you should ALWAYS read everything that your signature goes on?
edit on 12/23/2011 by muse7 because: (no reason given)


Don't wana bother with Ron Droids then go have fun with mindless mainstream media droids and let them tell you what the truth is

Your opinion of Ron Pauls supporters as being blind is only that, an opinion

Not everything that is published on ones behalf can be verified, mistakes happen over ones lifespan. And woopdedoo one little snip from Pauls entire 76~ years of life. Why don't you look at everything else he stands for?

The REAL question EVERYONE should be asking is this;

Do you think Ron Paul is racist ?

Regardless of whether or not you believe in these newsletters I think the large majority of individuals should be able to provide a sensible answer to this question.

And if you like to ask the NAACP this question this is the answer you get

truthandculture.wordpress.com...



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot

Originally posted by e11888
The best part is they're not even true.

Paul has said over and over that not only did he not write them, but he didnt even know about them until 10 years after they existed.


If such is the case how do you explain his signature at the end?



Ron Paul under fire for racist newsletters

Any other politician and the masses on ATS would be calling for blood in the streets.

I disagree with enough of Ron Paul's political ideals to be lukewarm to him at best, add to that the rampant schizophrenic hypocrisy that seems to be manifested throughout his internet fan-base and he has lost my interest.


Sadly, the sheep that may just be looking at Paul for the first time will think otherwise. Thats the whole reason behind this story. To steer the sheep back to the herd.


Aside from the sheeple line getting worn to death, in light of some of the recent public commentary if I were a Ron Paul supporter I would think twice about the specific implication of accusing others of a herd mentality in this context.

People in glass houses and all that good stuff



HAHAHAHA I want to thank you for the best laugh I have had all day.

If you really need someone to explain the signature at the bottom, I will go ahead and spell it out for you.

It's a stamp. A print off. Ron Paul did not actually "sign" it. Several years back when Bush 2 was in office, I received a photo of him and Laura Bush on a ranch. At the bottom of the photo it is "signed" by George Bush, but he did not sign it himself. The signature is placed onto a stamp pad. This happens so the person does not have to actually sign anything, an aid or whoever, simply uses the stamp and that is the end of it. It is a VERY common thing done by many busy people. It has been done this way for as long as I can remember. In many ways it is nothing more than a legalized form of fraud.

So is this the end of Ron Paul??

My answer to that question is, yes. It is the end of Ron Paul, just like it was in 1988, 1998, 2008 and every other time this SAME EXACT thing has come over and over again. Oh wait... I guess it's not the end since it has not worked yet.,
edit on 24-12-2011 by MrWendal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   

edit on 24-12-2011 by Drunkenparrot because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Kind of like I said earlier in the thread ?


Originally posted by Drunkenparrot

Originally posted by davidgrouchy

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot

If such is the case how do you explain his signature at the end?



That's not a signature.
It's a rubber stamp.
Hell even I can tell through the fuzzy low resolution picture of the bad photocopy.


David Grouchy


I am sure the signature is rubber stamped as well as it is common for anyone whose business requires signing large amounts of documents to use one.

You do understand that signature stamps are every bit as legally bionding as a hand written signature?

So is the implication that Congressman Paul was not only completley ignorant of the contents of a newsletter with the letterhead Congressman Ron Paul, the story is that the newsletter was endorsed with Ron Paul's signature stamp by an unknown third party without Congressman Paul's knowledge as well?



Possibly, but in my opinion not very likely. As is borne out on these forums time and again, the simple explanation is usually the correct one.

Personally, I don't think the content is all that scandalous or shocking in comparison to some of Congressman Paul's publicly endorsed idea's but the MSM seem to smell blood and wont miss a beat in doing what the modern media do so well....




Thank you for explaining that, I was clueless untill you came along and politley corrected my error....



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


Ron Paul is so racist, he voted for MLK Day.


Seriously you shills are a joke.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


Ron Paul is so racist, he voted for MLK Day.


Seriously you shills are a joke.


Have you bothered to read anything that has been posted?



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by e11888
These newsletters that are over 20 years old are pulled out every single time he starts to gain ground. The best part is they're not even true. Paul has said over and over that not only did he not write them, but he didnt even know about them until 10 years after they existed. For a man with a flawless 30 year record I trust him over the people that lie to me on a daily basis. Sadly, the sheep that may just be looking at Paul for the first time will think otherwise. Thats the whole reason behind this story. To steer the sheep back to the herd.


They were published in his own newsletter under his own name and he never even knew about them for a decade?

Wow, tell me how to vote for him twice! he does not sound like an idiot at all from your explanation.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Wow so just anyone can get a stamp of G.W.'s signature and use it whenever they want and that is totally legit and legal?
Or...do you not really know what you are talking about?



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
I wouldn't even bother arguing with Ron Droids, their blind support for Ron Paul puts me off. This just even makes it worse. Aren't we taught that you should ALWAYS read everything that your signature goes on?
edit on 12/23/2011 by muse7 because: (no reason given)


Exactly, I had one thing to say about Ron Paul that was negative in one thread and I was labeled a paid shill and a lair. I have lots of bad things to say about ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL the candidates. The fact that Paul supporters expect me to treat him as a god with zero flaws at all is why I cannot support him.

Oh, and then there is his long long long history that was kind of why I did not support him anyway.

Seriously. Paulers, stop pretending he is god. Admit he is a man with a flaw or two and you might actually finally get some more people than just you to support him this time.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


Umm no. You didnt say it, Dave Grouchy said it and explained it.

And I never got that far into the thread cause I saw your post and busted out laughing and I replied to it right away, hence why I quoted it.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Algernonsmouse
 


Yes, exactly. That is exactly what I said. It is good see reading comprehension is not lost on you.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


Ron Paul is so racist, he voted for MLK Day.


Seriously you shills are a joke.


yet another problem with the Ron Paul cult...

if you do not agree, there is no room for debate, because YOU ARE A SHILL...

You must be, there is no other logical explaination...



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


Umm no. You didnt say it, Dave Grouchy said it and explained it.

And I never got that far into the thread cause I saw your post and busted out laughing and I replied to it right away, hence why I quoted it.


No, e11888 said...


Originally posted by e11888
The best part is they're not even true.

Paul has said over and over that not only did he not write them, but he didn't even know about them until 10 years after they existed.


To which I asked...


Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
If such is the case how do you explain his signature at the end?


When Dave Grouchy glibly and incorrectly interjected...


Originally posted by davidgrouchy
That's not a signature.
It's a rubber stamp.
Hell even I can tell through the fuzzy low resolution picture of the bad photocopy.


David Grouchy


To which I corrected davidgrouchy's mistaken assertion that there was any confusion or relevance in Ron Paul's signature being stamped or handwritten. It should be rather obvious for most that the issue is not the medium the signature was struck in, it is that it is there at all. Furthermore, I extrapolated on the stamp topic for davidgrouchy's benefit in my reply explaining that...


Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
I am sure the signature is rubber stamped as well as it is common for anyone whose business requires signing large amounts of documents to use one.

You do understand that signature stamps are every bit as legally binding as a hand written signature?

So is the implication that Congressman Paul was not only completely ignorant of the contents of a newsletter with the letterhead Congressman Ron Paul, the story is that the newsletter was endorsed with Ron Paul's signature stamp by an unknown third party without Congressman Paul's knowledge as well?


Finally, you make the same mistaken assumption that davidgrouchy did on the first page but then you go a step farther in demonstrating your intellectual laziness by repeating nearly the same thing I posted a page earlier because you couldn't be troubled to read all 3 pages of the thread in your miscalculated rush to mock somebody who possibly disagrees with your choice of political candidate.

I must say, if I wasn't completely uninterested in Ron Paul before watching his supporters in action, I wouldn't consider voting for him now. It does not take long conversing with his internet fanclub to get a bad taste.

Way to support your candidate!

I think that about covers it, glad I could help you get that minor annoyance cleared up....



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   
I have been doing some research today on this and I found an excellent article from Reason Magazine from 2008 about the possibility that Lew Rockwell may have been the ghost writer who put together those articles with Ron Paul's signature. Here is the link:
reason.com...

It's strange to me that if in fact Rockwell wrote the letters and if many libertarians including Ron Paul were in the know about what was going on why didn't he, or any of the others, just say that Rockwell wrote the letters? As far as I can see this journalist, Weigel, is the only one that has wrote a piece that even points out Rockwell may have been the writer.

Oh and as a sidenote I do know that is autopen, which i realize isn't the question, however I did get a piece of mail from the Ron Paul campaign that had a similar written name than what was on the newsletters and not his actual signature which I believe an ATS'er already pointed out on a bill that he signed.

But overall, does this make Ron Paul racist? I don't think so, because it's not in line with civil liberties or the constitution which he claims to champion both. I have no facts to prove Ron Paul isn't racist of course, just his living record and what he claims to stand for, and delivering all those babies, were they all white women I wonder? But on the flipside it does show some ignorance on his part, this coming from a Ron Paul supporter. How could you let garbage like that float about without knowing it and claiming all that money in the process? I will continue to support my candidate any way I can, but I would appreciate some more clarity on this subject and if all Ron Paul is guilty of is simply being ignorant of the material I think that is something I can get over, that was decades ago after all.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by dr treg
 



watch the uncut interview where he actually answered all those questions, at least 3 times.

CNN lied!!!



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Dr. Obama's a pretty good racist too. Go Ron!!



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join