Yeah. Speak less plainly. More complex. More ambigious. Not be so dumb on foreign policy. Take bold steps. You know what’s wrong with this country? People just can’t get along. If politicians would just get their act together, stop bickering, come to the table and roll up their sleeves and work together we could actually get things done. Why can’t they just take it down a notch and compromise and work on collective action and allow the government to get things done and create solutions for real people with real problems?
Holy crap JJ, you sound exactly like 90% of the public. I am literally freaked out right now. Holy crap. And to think that this drivel is what is considered “pragmatic” in America.
I would have lost it if i was him, he was good to retain his composure. She would have been on the floor with a broken noes if i was in that interview. That cheeky bitch has no respect and it is typical of a jewish news organisation to pick on pathetic points and make a big deal about it, to try and discredit him. If you don’t get in bed with AIPAC then cnn will send this women to do interviews with you. This is not the end of CNN and their disrespectful and pious behaviour towards Mr Paul.
Ron paul does not need CNN.
“jewish news organization”
please be troll.
Jewish news organisations? Careful old boy
Threatening violence against people for asking questions is always classy too.
I do not mean to offend anyone but the interviewer was asking about something specific to isreal and it is common knowledge that cnn is a jewish news organisation. I just put the two together.
I have to admit that the interview did get me a bit worked up because i thought she was very rude and this is not the first time that cnn has interview ron paul in such a rude way. Over the years i have seen this again and again.
Mises: Jewish
</ the end>
I am aware that mises is jewish and I can not realy see how that is relevant to this thread. I was not being prejudice to all jewish people. I was merely trying to point out what I had notice.
In hindsight I can see how my previous post might have made a few people emotional. I would have rather written this sentence
“That cheeky *** has no respect and it is typical of a jewish news organisation to pick on pathetic points and make a big deal about it, to try and discredit him.”
As follows “That cheeky *** has no respect and it is typical of cnn to pick on pathetic points and make a big deal about it, to try and discredit him.”
Then gone on to explain in a different sentence. I find it interesting that cnn, which is a jewish news organisation brings up a point about isreal during an interview and persists until the interviewee turns off his mic.
Plenty of non Jews are intersted in Israel.
The way you write carries the implication that Jews are poor journalists and even that there is such a thing as a universally Jewish talking point and so that is what a Jew would say.
Furthermore Im curious what a Jewish news organisation means when you say it? And whether you are known to categorise other news organisations as Protestant or khurdish and so on
CNN attacks RP’s ideology, which is based on Mises, who is Jewish and whose lessons actually favor Jews. So if a Jew is anti-RP because RP is anti-Israel and, thereby, “anti-Jew,” but he (RP) really isn’t because he supports Jews and is heavily influenced by a long line of Jewish intellectuals, then how can a Jew blame a non-Jew for being anti-Jew when the non-Jew is actually pro-Jew and is friends and is an intellectual descendant of Jews when, in reality, the Jew is being anti-Jew by promoting a state (Israel) that steals from Jews and wants to tax Jew in the USA to fund the plundering of Jews in another state?
Cool, Tom Woods has linked to my FAQ. It’s also up at RonPaulForums. Hopefully this’ll start getting some traction.
Please read my FAQ, precisely sections #12 and #13, where I address this charge. The newsletters ran for 3 decades, and perhaps 360 issues were released contained no more controversial commentary then appeared in a lot of conservative and popular media at the time. For instance, as Woods notes at his blog today:
From a brief period from about 1990-1994 perhaps 7 newsletters were published containing some comments that could be seen as pandering to racial and sexual prejudice. This would constitute about 2% of all the newsletters that were ever published, and 16% of those published during that period.
This occurred during a time when Paul had relinquished responsibility for the newsletters’ operation, retired from Congress and an exhausting Presidential campaign, and consigned himself to working full-time as a medical doctor and public speaker, in addition to raising five children. In other words, there were other things on his mind. Paul was quite angry when he found out about these articles.
I would really like to see you or anyone else take on Paul’s punishing work schedule back then and go on to have anything better than a 16% margin of error. Should we blame Paul for not having superhuman powers? Should we blame him for comments on his Facebook page too? Would you like to be held accountable for everything other people might do in your name?
For those who are visual:
He’s SUCH a racist:
N-nonsense! Stormfront and Bill O’Reilly secretly hacked those poll numbers! I- I mean… homophobism… anti semite…
I think people trying to say that RP is NOT a rascist are sort of missing the point. No serious people would believe that RP is a rascist, and anyone that does beleive that, was not going to vote for him anyway. However, there is another side to it, and that is criticism in how he has been dealing with the issue. When pressed on this topic he turns into a politician, only giving out select information. Honesty is always the best policy, I think he should hold a press conferecne and spill all the beans on everything that went on during that time, naming names, explaining how it was that that person came to writing for the newletter and why it stopped and RP’s relation to that person or persons before and after. He also should come out and figure out exactly how much money he made from the newsletters over the life of their existence and from the ones that had the racist writings. ALL of them should be put on the internet w/ RP saying who wrote everything.
Then he could never be asked any questions about the issue EVER again.
THe point is not exposing him as a racist, people will question his ability to manage and be an executive.
I thought this was hilarious.
http://factsandotherstubbornthings.blogspot.com/2011/12/more-ron-paul-newsletters.html
Now Kuehn is aboard the Ron Paul smear train (admitting that he believe Ron Paul is threat to America and will vote for Obama) by linking to a particularly nasty individual who went through the newsletters himself.
This story is really brining out the ugly in people.
I don’t know what is worse; that people would find that those newsletters outweigh all the actual racial equality that RP would bring by ending the drug war, or that Obama would be their savior.
Also, isn’t the revelation of these newsletters actually good for RP? After all, aren’t Republicans a bunch of white, racist red-necks? Lol. RP should win the nomination by a landslide.
(Yes, I do very purposefully use “savior” and “revelation” in my post.)
Let’s not forget all of the racial profiling that would no longer occur by getting rid of the TSA. All my Indian homies wouldn’t have to drive to Vegas anymore for fear of flying there instead and being strip searched.