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 wins Louisiana

page: 17
83
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   
MITT ROMNEY is the RACIST

It is BUILT into his RELIGION...

The Mormon church as recently as 1978 disallowed black members from priesthood and discriminated
against all black members, not allowing them access to certain rites to enable them to receive
"All the blessings of God." Mitt Romney is a racist Moron...just like his dad

So, let's see how Dr. Ron measures up against Mitt Romney in the racist department...

Ron Paul was responsible for printing political newsletters thirty years ago that contained racist
imputations. He has denied that they represented his beliefs (or that he wrote them) and has, to the
contrary, shown how his beliefs and policies treat all men as equal under the law....a system that
has heretofore favored whites over minorities.

Mitt Romney believes that black men may only enter heaven as SERVANTS. And to enter heaven they
have to live a "perfect" life....

Oh yea, I almost forget..

If a black man does manage to squeak by and get into heaven, his reward is getting to serve
WHITE MEN....sound like paradise?

THAT IS WHAT YOU CALL RACIST. Racist to the CORE. When your central religious beleifs, your
tenet and philosophy of life is racist, then you are a racist.

It's shouldn't be Mitt Romney.......

It should be MITT RACIST!
edit on 30-4-2012 by rival because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 


None of your answers here are worth anything.
All they prove is how little you know about history. The great depression didn't have to happen just as this latest recession didn't have to happen. Gold and silver backing our money had NO negative effect whatsoever. All it would do is make our money more sound today and it would make it impossible for the FED to just print money as they wish. You don't know anything about the FED obviously either. What do you think has caused our problems? I would love to know how we got to the point we are at today and how it wouldn't have been avoided by simply maintaining money backed by gold and silver, and not having currency created by a private bank that attaches interest on every dollar they print. If you don't understand: the people who make our money charge us interest, there is no way to pay off the debt (which is where our taxes now go rather than infrastructure, we pay the FED) because there is more American debt than their is existing American money and if we print more money we ow the FED more debt.

Also this shows that you are ignorant about the civil war and you have been brainwashed into associating southern soldiers with racism and think the civil war was solely about slavery. You know absolutely nothing. You know what they say "it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool then to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
edit on 30-4-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I'm going to skip bits of this comment, but I wanted to address one point: Ron Paul's lackluster record as a congressman. Paul proponents often list things that Ron Paul has never done, such as vote for a tax increase. It's true that Ron Paul has an ideologically consistent voting record. But the price that representatives pay for this is never changing anything... compromise, including compromising on some principles in order to achieve a higher good, is part of a representatives job... and a key part of making any real change in this country. A congressman who does not compromise on anything is doomed to be screaming from the sidelines forever, just as Ron Paul Has. Far from being a force for change, Paul is, in practice, a buttress of the status quo, because he can never team up with anyone who doesn't toe his exact party line to make some real change happen.

Ron Paul is a professional politician who makes a living by selling delusional promises to suckers. The biggest con of all is that he has some chance of winnning the general election. far from it. An overwhelming majority of polls show Ron Paul losing to Obama.

link




Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Career politician? yes..........whats wrong with that? he has tried to introduce more to save this country and battle the fed then ANYONE in his position.........





posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
None of your answers here are worth anything.


And apparently, you can't be bothered to respond to them, other than to repeat your silly claim that everything was fine before the fed, so I doubt you gave it much thought.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   


Ron Paul has an ideologically consistent voting record. But the price that representatives pay for this is never changing anything
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 


I disagree with you but I'll give you a freebie because...

Ron Paul is running for PRESIDENT

Not for representative

And as a PRESIDENT he needs only the power as Commander-in-Chief, and executive order,
and VETO to be effective. Even if he receives no support from congress...

He will be very effective as president in leading this country



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Resonant
Paul has taken a lot of heat for his newsletters that were circulated more than twenty years ago that carry racial bias and motives, however, and this has been proven, they were not written by him.


No, it has not been proven at all: all we have is Paul's word that he didn't write them. He refuses to name those who did, and no one has come forth and admitted it.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by rival
I disagree with you but I'll give you a freebie because...

Ron Paul is running for PRESIDENT

Not for representative

And as a PRESIDENT he needs only the power as Commander-in-Chief, and executive order,
and VETO to be effective. Even if he receives no support from congress...

He will be very effective as president in leading this country


If he attempts to behave as president in the same way that he has as a congressman, the result will be a simple disaster. He'll just veto every budget until he forces congress to impeach him.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 


Vetoing is impeachable? Wow, I didn't know that. Thanks for heads up.

You see, since I believed that the president was the one who proposed the budget,
that congress would be the one under fire to pass it, not the other way around.

But he would still be commander-in-chief and wouldn't allow for undeclared wars...
unless congress actually declared a formal war as per the constitution...but that doesn't
happen often, The last two times we declared wars, they were considered World Wars.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by rival

You see, since I believed that the president was the one who proposed the budget,
that congress would be the one under fire to pass it, not the other way around.



Nope. The president is free to propose whatever he wants. Congress can ignore that suggestion entirely and create its own budget. (not sure from your sentence whether you meant this, or the opposite).



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by rival
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 


Vetoing is impeachable?



If taken to an extreme, it could be considered an example of "high crimes and misdemeanors" an abuse of the powers of office.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer

Originally posted by Resonant
Paul has taken a lot of heat for his newsletters that were circulated more than twenty years ago that carry racial bias and motives, however, and this has been proven, they were not written by him.


No, it has not been proven at all: all we have is Paul's word that he didn't write them. He refuses to name those who did, and no one has come forth and admitted it.


James B. Powell is the author, and this is very old news. Your employer should have had you do some research on the subject before posting. It doesn't make your case look very good.

www.youtube.com...

docs.google.com...
edit on 4/30/2012 by bl4ke360 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by bl4ke360

James B. Powell is the author, and this is very old news. Your employer should have had you do some research on the subject before posting. It doesn't make your case look very good.

www.youtube.com...

docs.google.com...
edit on 4/30/2012 by bl4ke360 because: (no reason given)


That was pretty weak, really. Why should we believe that this author was the one who wrote the bigoted articles? There is no reason given in the video, save for unspecified "similarities", and the fact that he did write under his own name for the ron paul publications.

Neither Kirchik nor the talking head in the video actually say they have evidence that Powell wrote the newsletters.
edit on 4/30/2012 by DrEugeneFixer because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer

Originally posted by bl4ke360

James B. Powell is the author, and this is very old news. Your employer should have had you do some research on the subject before posting. It doesn't make your case look very good.

www.youtube.com...

docs.google.com...
edit on 4/30/2012 by bl4ke360 because: (no reason given)


That was pretty weak, really. Why should we believe that this author was the one who wrote the bigoted articles? There is no reason given in the video, save for unspecified "similarities", and the fact that he did write under his own name for the ron paul publications.

Neither Kirchik nor the talking head in the video actually say they have evidence that Powell wrote the newsletters.
edit on 4/30/2012 by DrEugeneFixer because: (no reason given)


There's far more evidence he was the author than Ron Paul was, and similarities is one more reason than you can come up with when you claim Ron Paul was the author.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   
These are FACTS...

1. Mormons are racists who believe the black race is CURSED by God

2. Mitt Romney is a Mormon

______________________


These are opinions...a collection of Black American's opinions on Ron Paul and his stance on race




edit on 30-4-2012 by rival because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by bl4ke360

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer

That was pretty weak, really. Why should we believe that this author was the one who wrote the bigoted articles? There is no reason given in the video, save for unspecified "similarities", and the fact that he did write under his own name for the ron paul publications.

Neither Kirchik nor the talking head in the video actually say they have evidence that Powell wrote the newsletters.


There's far more evidence he was the author than Ron Paul was...


So far none of that evidence has been posted here. Only speculation.

As for evidence that Ron Paul wrote the newsletters- his name was on the cover of every issue. Deal with it.



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer

Originally posted by bl4ke360

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer

That was pretty weak, really. Why should we believe that this author was the one who wrote the bigoted articles? There is no reason given in the video, save for unspecified "similarities", and the fact that he did write under his own name for the ron paul publications.

Neither Kirchik nor the talking head in the video actually say they have evidence that Powell wrote the newsletters.


There's far more evidence he was the author than Ron Paul was...


So far none of that evidence has been posted here. Only speculation.

As for evidence that Ron Paul wrote the newsletters- his name was on the cover of every issue. Deal with it.



This has been discussed and deemed irrelevant for the past 20 years, so you're a little late to the party to bring this up now. The biggest piece of evidence that he wasn't the author is that that everything Ron Paul has done has been the opposite of racist, including fighting for the end the drug war because it fuels racism, puts a disproportionate amount of blacks in jails vs everyone else, and many more examples that you've never heard of because you've no doubt only started looking into Ron Paul.
www.youtube.com...

Plenty more examples here, knock yourself out.
www.buzzfeed.com...
edit on 5/1/2012 by bl4ke360 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 


I don't have to you are the one making the claims and denouncing policies without giving any real reason. I would go into detail if I was arguing with someone that put any effort in and weren't just calling Ron Paul names. There are plenty of sources that explain the great depression, what caused it, and the FED and why it's a problem.

You made statements with no intentions of backing them up writing a huge post to explain it to you would be a waste of time. I've seen hundreds of posters just like you you aren't interested in hearing facts or changing your mind.



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by bl4ke360
 


Yeah, none of that bears on the newsletters at all.



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by DrEugeneFixer
 


I don't have to you are the one making the claims and denouncing policies without giving any real reason. I would go into detail if I was arguing with someone that put any effort in and weren't just calling Ron Paul names. There are plenty of sources that explain the great depression, what caused it, and the FED and why it's a problem.

You made statements with no intentions of backing them up writing a huge post to explain it to you would be a waste of time. I've seen hundreds of posters just like you you aren't interested in hearing facts or changing your mind.


I've gone into far more detail on these questions in this thread than you have. Until you can back up your words with evidence and links, consider this conversation finished.



posted on May, 1 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by bl4ke360
 


Yeah, none of that bears on the newsletters at all.


Actually it does, because it proves he's not racist and thus didn't write the newsletters. This is called logical deduction, something you may be unfamiliar with.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
83
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join