LOL…is that post supposed to actually be a negative message re: Rand Paul?
Looks like hear-say, innuendo and wacko-conspiracy drivel.
I do not see any actual items specifically about Rand Paul.
Glad you have the time to do “research” such as this.
That’s quite interesting. Rand Paul is quoted as saying he believes in conspiracy theory and that’s not a problem for you. He belongs to a fringe organization that promotes HIV-conspiracy theory and is a gathering place for members of the JBS, and that’s hear-say. But then you were the guy talking about that Obama birther stuff weren’t you. Maybe he is the Anti-Christ after all. And the people who vote Ronny wonder why they’re branded as crazies.
Real question, are you or have you ever been a member of the John Birch Society? What do you think them? The Pauls think they’re “patriots” - that’s the word that Grandpa Ron used.
But can Obama PROVE that he was not switched with a Muslim baby just after his birth? In that case the TRUE Obama might be training in a terrorist camp even as we speak–little suspecting that he is the rightful president of the USA.
And BTW, JFK’s assassin wasn’t hiding behind the grassy knoll, but from somewhere…much, much higher in the sky, if you know what I mean. (Cue five-note CE3K theme.) That’s why all that old footage is streaked with laser burn.
It’s too bad Paul is so obviously batshit nuts. I’ve been saying a lot of stuff in the FF’s video for a long time, but Paul is not the man to carry the flag.
[quote=“TainanCowboy”]LOL…is that post supposed to actually be a negative message re: Rand Paul?
Looks like hear-say, innuendo and wacko-conspiracy drivel.
I do not see any actual items specifically about Rand Paul.
Glad you have the time to do “research” such as this.[/quote]
Sorry to agree with this above, Scott. A while back you gave “evidence” that Ron Paul was lying about donations from the military. That “evidence” consisted of a random posting on Facebook. Anyone with actual military experience like myself would have told you that military personnel make tons of donations to their favorite candidates all the time. There’s no conspiracy about it.
They go to rallies and participate in many other ways. The only thing they aren’t allowed to do under UCMJ is attend rallies in uniform as this guy above no doubt intentionally did.
The focus on conspiracies is just another ploy to take attention away from the real issues that Paul addresses. Does he take money from the fringe elements? Again, as someone completely outside the Republicrat/Demipublican mainstream, how could he not?
Do I understand this correctly, your evidence for calling me a liar is a photograph? Or are you saying that Ron Paul doesn’t support the John Birch Society? Or is it that the John Birch Society is not a conspiracy organization? Or is it that Ron hasn’t spoken widely about conspiracy theories that he says he supports?
Or is it that a candidate’s belief in conspiracy theories doesn’t really matter? Or is it that Ron doesn’t really believe in these conspiracy theories that he’s always talking about?
I’m surprised you could ask such a question. Absolutely. KKK Grand Wizard donates money to Ron.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Black_ … ationalist
I personally know many active 9/11 conspiracy theorists who work for Ron Paul and his son Rand. I’d be happy to tell you who they are and explain their relationship with Ron once you straightened me out on what exactly it is you think about Dr. Paul and why he’s always talking to his supporters about nut case conspiracy theories.
I also recommend that you go back and look at my post, maybe read it again. The point of my post has nothing to do with soldiers donating money to politicians. My point is that reports of military support for Ron Paul are based on donations not from soldiers but from military workers.
content.usatoday.com/communities … nations-/1
So while that’s a cool picture you’ve posted, it has nothing to do with anything I’ve every said about Ron Paul.
But don’t believe me. Go back and read my post. You’ll find that either you’re wrong or making this up from some confused memories.
And seriously, Happy New Year. Hope to see you sometime this year.
I have to ask, because I’m really not clear on this: What’s the difference between a conspiracy theorist and someone who thinks that certain politicians are conspiracy theorists? Aren’t you doing what you criticize others for and making whacky theories (which may or may not turn out to be true)?
Dog, did you read the whole thread? How about the links to the videos? I think that’ll clear up the question. Maybe I’m wrong, but that should be a start.
Dog, did you read the whole thread? How about the links to the videos? I think that’ll clear up the question. Maybe I’m wrong, but that should be a start.[/quote]
With all respect, that’s a typical conspiracy-theorist response.
Conspiracy theorists have all kinds of links and data available to back up their claims.
Paul lost me when he talked about Lincoln. He’s crazy.
The point of the thread was the issues that Judge raised in the initial video. What if they’re lying to you? What if there is no “choice”? What if the two party system is a way of keeping other ideas out? What if “public opinion” is being delivered to you right before your eyes? What if there is no real difference between the Democrats or Republicans, Obama and Romney?
Any third party politician has to be a “whack job” because that’s what an alternative will look like. Outside the mainstream is …well…outside the mainstream. It’s part of the media narrative we’re being fed. Outside the mainstream = kooky, scary, crazy. Ron Paul’s candidacy is simply a view behind the curtain at what goes on all the time. His stances on serious issues are being deliberately ignored in favor of the conspiracy stuff so his or any other alternative ideas won’t be debated.
Now I’m hearing from some mainstream Republican emails that Ron Paul’s candidacy is a ploy by communists, jihadists, etc. to insure a Democratic victory. They’re trying to scare the grassroots. The idea is that Paul can’t win and many people who have never voted Republican are changing their allegiance to vote for him in the primaries. Republican party members are being told this is a deliberate tactic by the Democrats. The fact that many Democrats are disaffected by their own parties policies is being ignored and in fact must be countered because if enough disaffected members of the left and right get together then we have a viable third party challenge to the system. That has to be stopped.
Serious question: looking at the broad Republican/Democrat consensus behind the Patriot Act, the NDAA, SOPA, PIPA, the creation of the TSA, etc., when did America decide to become communist China?
I’d like to toss in a comment:
The fact that a candidate receives a contribution, or donation or endorsement or honorarium for a speech or any funding, does not necessarily mean that the candidate believes in or espouses the beliefs of that person/group/organization.
While it might be an easy debate point to toss out and “feel” good, those dots do not always connect.
Funding is the name of the game in politics - get the money first and sort out the problems later - always easier to apologize later than ask permission first.
Also - re:The John Birch Society - I sincerely doubt that comments made reflect an actual understanding of why the John Birch organization was founded.
Actual research and learning trumps hear-say and innuendo in the real world.
I agree with you. This is a a real problem. In fact, I would say this monopoly of power is one of the great problems of modern life. Established institutions can not be dismantled because they monopolize all the legitimacy. This is a very serious issue for our generation.
I am unfamiliar with anyone talking like this, but anyone who did would be an idiot. Besides, it would be wrong. Paul’s candidacy probably will have little effect on the overall nomination process. Large numbers of Paul supports are new voters and would probably not be voting one way or another in a primary.
The discussion of Third Party politics in the USA is almost exclusively among disaffected supporters of the Republicans.
redstate.com/tabithahale/201 … ird-party/
thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- … -tea-party
As much as there would disaffected Democrats, my guess is that most are White Americans and that support among Blacks, Hispanics and Asian-Americans is unaffected by the debate you refer to.
I’m sorry. I don’t understand the use of this rhetoric - " when did America decide to become communist China?" There’s only a minority of Americans to whom this sort of language appeals. These are serious problems you are pointing to, but this is just a rhetoric that uses words only people already on the right would find persuasive. And that’s why the American third party movement is primary aimed at the White man. Because it is a White man’s movement with right-wing goals.
[quote=“TainanCowboy”]The fact that a candidate receives a contribution, or donation or endorsement or honorarium for a speech or any funding, does not necessarily mean that the candidate believes in or espouses the beliefs of that person/group/organization.
While it might be an easy debate point to toss out and “feel” good, those dots do not always connect.
Funding is the name of the game in politics - get the money first and sort out the problems later - always easier to apologize later than ask permission first.[/quote]
You seem to misunderstand my point. Certainly I understand why Dr. Paul would take money from a senior official in the KKK. I’m wondering what it is about Dr. Paul that a senior official in the KKK thinks he’s supporting with this money. Are you trying to pretend that what’s going on in the Ron Paul Revolution is not some fringe aspect of American party politics? At least Formosa Fitness is willing to face up to the hard truths of alternative politics.
[quote=“TainanCowboy”]Also - re:The John Birch Society - I sincerely doubt that comments made reflect an actual understanding of why the John Birch organization was founded.
Actual research and learning trumps hear-say and innuendo in the real world.
-----------[/quote]
So I misunderstand the JBS, do I. Well straighten me out on this one. In what comment is it that I show this misunderstanding? Put it in a quote and tell me why.
[quote=“ScottSommers”] As much as there would disaffected Democrats, my guess is that most are White Americans and that support among Blacks, Hispanics and Asian-Americans is unaffected by the debate you refer to.
…
I’m sorry. I don’t understand the use of this rhetoric - " when did America decide to become communist China?" There’s only a minority of Americans to whom this sort of language appeals. These are serious problems you are pointing to, but this is just a rhetoric that uses words only people already on the right would find persuasive. And that’s why the American third party movement is primary aimed at the White man. Because it is a White man’s movement with right-wing goals.[/quote]
I don’t really understand these objections based on race. Why is that relevant? BTW, I’m not writing ad copy trying to sell Paul. I’m simply using his campaign and the clip in the first post to bring up the questions about the system.
But Paul does seem to have some support in other sectors: washingtonpost.com/national/ … story.html
[quote]While some political observers question whether Paul has the staying power and widespread appeal to win the nomination, his campaign has proven unique in one respect: he’s drawing serious support from Muslims.
After abandoning the GOP in droves during the George W. Bush presidency, some Muslims say Paul is the kind of Republican who could draw them back and seriously challenge their loyalty to President Obama.
The renegade Republican has piqued Muslim interest with promises to extract America from foreign wars, cut aid to Israel, and protect civil liberties. There are at least four “Muslims for Ron Paul” Facebook pages, and a scan of Paul’s political donors shows many common Muslim names, like Mohammed, Ali and Ahmed.[/quote]
And there’s this: businessinsider.com/nassim-t … aul-2012-1 Nasser Taleb endorses Ron Paul.
Haha. That’s me – always the realist. 
Maybe I’m learning a thing or two as I get older.
[quote=“Formosa Fitness”]I don’t really understand these objections based on race. Why is that relevant? BTW, I’m not writing ad copy trying to sell Paul. I’m simply using his campaign and the clip in the first post to bring up the questions about the system.
But Paul does seem to have some support in other sectors: washingtonpost.com/national/ … story.html[/quote]
My point is that the Ron Paul Revolution and the Third Party Movement are quite limited in their appeal. It is significant to me that this appeal is primarily to white people. I don’t mean to imply there’s inherently anything racist in them. Honestly, I think Ron Paul is a fantastic human being. I would trust him to deliver my baby, without hesitation. But Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are also fantastic people. They’re just wrong. And they too have a political ideology that is not racist, but appeals to the problems that predominately white Americans are suffering from.
[quote=“Formosa Fitness”]While some political observers question whether Paul has the staying power and widespread appeal to win the nomination, his campaign has proven unique in one respect: he’s drawing serious support from Muslims.
After abandoning the GOP in droves during the George W. Bush presidency, some Muslims say Paul is the kind of Republican who could draw them back and seriously challenge their loyalty to President Obama.
The renegade Republican has piqued Muslim interest with promises to extract America from foreign wars, cut aid to Israel, and protect civil liberties. There are at least four “Muslims for Ron Paul” Facebook pages, and a scan of Paul’s political donors shows many common Muslim names, like Mohammed, Ali and Ahmed.
And there’s this: businessinsider.com/nassim-t … aul-2012-1 Nasser Taleb endorses Ron Paul.[/quote]
You know that Business Insider is a whako magazine. Hardcore conspiracy theorists regularly cite it as their source from the Mainstream Media. It contains such interesting ideas articles as,
HOLY CRAP: They Found Atlantis!
businessinsider.com/they-fou … tis-2011-3
I Quit My Job At Business Insider Because I Got Fat
businessinsider.com/i-quit-m … fat-2012-1
Dreading The Bill Is No Excuse To Skip Your Date With The Dentist
businessinsider.com/instead- … und-2012-1
There’s nothing wrong with a lot of the stuff they print. I’m just saying it’s not serious news.
A more credible source says something quite different and for much stronger reasons
sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=153898
in.reuters.com/article/2011/08/3 … 3020110830
Seriously Dave, take a look at these links. Muslims support Obama and this wishful thinking among some Republicans is naive. Of course: US Muslims support Obama israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2011/0 … obama.html
and African Americans
nytimes.com/2011/10/27/us/po … wanted=all
huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/3 … 42541.html
and HIspanics
content.usatoday.com/communities … slipping/1
Check out this link that tells us politico.com/news/stories/1211/70046.html
[quote]African-American and Hispanic voters in swing states still back President Barack Obama by overwhelming margins and are motivated to go to the polls… About nine in 10 blacks in swing states still back the president. While 71 percent of Latinos in swing states still approve of Obama’s performance
Read more: politico.com/news/stories/12 … z0rQHPpAsU[/quote]
You’ll find Muslim and Black-Americans to endorse Paul. But you’ll also find that come next November, Muslim and coloured Americans will once again overwhelmingly support Obama. Of course they will. The idea they’d support Ron Paul is kind of silly
At least you’re being honest about things. The John BIrch Society…The Cowboy might as well be defending 9/11 conspiracy theorists.
BTW, the link to at least some Muslim support for Paul is being played up as a full endorsement by CAIR on Republican websites: freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2835231/posts Headline: CAIR: Muslims Endorse Ron Paul As “Our Kind of Republican”
The only link I can find to CAIR is that this article may have appeared on their Twitter feed. But they are in no way endorsing Ron Paul. As Scott is showing, most American Muslims are supporting Obama. But CAIR is a scare acronym in the Republican community and any linkage between them and Paul, real or as in this case imagined, is being used to scare mainstream Republicans. The Republican establishment really hates him and will do everything they can to make sure he doesn’t get the nomination. This is an example of scare tactics against Paul.
As for Business Insider not being a serious news site, I’m quite sure hard core conspiracy theorists reference the NYT all the time. Just because a fruitcake cites a source, that doesn’t make it a bad source. I personally read it because it’s entertaining. For clarification, Nasser Taleb actually wrote that on his Facebook feed himself. It’s easy to find.
I agree with you completely on this point, although I suspect our reasons for this differ. But yes, a strong showing by Paul in the primaries would be a serious problem for the Republicans. I’m not sure if 15% is strong enough, and probably something over 20% is the real threshold. And we’ll have to see how well Paul can do in places like New York, California and Illinois.
Conspiracy theorists generally cite Business Insider, the Washington Times (which is owned by the Moonies) and the New York Post as their examples of mainstream media. Most of them don’t even like FOX News. But one thing I can say with great certainly is that almost all the hard-core conspiracy theorists who vote, vote for Ron Paul. My opinion on this is that it is conspiracy theorists and those leaning in this direction who make up the bulk of this new support for Paul.
[quote=“Formosa Fitness”]The point of the thread was the issues that Judge raised in the initial video. What if they’re lying to you? What if there is no “choice”? What if the two party system is a way of keeping other ideas out? What if “public opinion” is being delivered to you right before your eyes? What if there is no real difference between the Democrats or Republicans, Obama and Romney?
[/quote]
I largely agree with this, at least in that there’s no real difference between the two parties today.
Personally, I’m ready for an alternative candidate. I like a lot of what I hear from Paul on the issues. I want to like him! But I couldn’t support him, purely because of the nuttiness.
The question you have to ask is whether the nuttiness is integral to his politics. My position is that it is. The further back you look at him, and the more local his campaigns were, the crazier he was. Here’s a guy who deals with the John Birch Society as if it was the Chamber of Commerce. I’m going to pick on my friend FF here, but you see it all the time where Paul supporters make claims that African-Americans support him because of his stand on drugs. But they don’t. Or Muslim-Americans support him because of his stand on war in the Middle East. But they don’t. Paul is supported by a particular kind of White man and woman, and a few others. There’s a reason for this. In a democratic state, those people should have political representation. Over the past few decades the needs of this group have been systematically ignored by the Republicans - who are the party most similar to Paul’s position. The result is Ron Paul. But just be cautious about what you think Paul stands for. Everyone says that Paul’s still talking about the same thing these days and that he was talking about a decade ago. It’s what he’s not saying anymore that’s so telling.