Ron Paul To Keep White Supremacist Donation

[wpiman2]

Well, his message is freedom; it is not surprising that a lot of people from different walks of life endorse that message. The guy isn't very polished but I like the freedom message. I think every true American likes the freedom message.

Freedom means having your own beliefs; no matter now screwed up they may be. Does he have to endorse all those free actions and beliefs? Of course not.

I love how they try to do all these gotchas on politicians. They criticized Paul for paying his daughter $160,000 as his political adviser. What they didn't tell you was this was her salary for the 5 years she did the job, quite a meager wage.

I happened to catch Russerts interview with him on Sunday; Russert spent the entire time trying "gotchas" on Paul and zero time on clarifying his positions. I was rather disappointed in Russert, but I guess I should not have been surprised given his leftist tendencies.

It sort of makes me wonder, why are people in the media so afraid of this guy?

 

[revolutio]

I actually have a good deal of respect for the way he has handled this. I got a chance to hear him speak and someone posed a question about his white supremacist supporters. His response was remarkably candid for a politician. He pointed out that they were going to be politically active either way and if they were supporting him he knew that their ideologies weren't going to seriously affect political decisions.

 

[Paisley]

I say, "So what?" if he's going to keep it. $500 doesn't buy very much these days, especially influence.

 

[Lynden1000]

This doesn't bother me in the least. White supremacists have the right to be white supremacists. They have the right to spout whatever ideology they wish to spout, whether I like it or agree with it or not.

 

[Christian Soldier]

Christian Soldier:
"This means that if the Paul campaign had returned 500 bucks to the creep, it would have been SOMEBODY ELSE'S donation money! Any intelligent, moral person would have a SERIOUS problem with their donation to the Paul campaign being used to reimburse a radical racist.

However, liberal democrats obviously have no problem with using somebody else's money to reimburse racist hate group leaders."

This would be true except that money is fungible, as the economists say. Every dollar is identical to every other dollar. There is no way to distinguish between one person's dollar and another, so it doesn't make sense to say that someone else's money would be refunded. It is, however, possible to reverse a transaction, such as a white supremacist giving $500 to the Ron Paul campaign. By refunding the money, the transaction is erased.

YES, somebody elses money WOULD be refunded! The monies were received at DIFFERENT times.

And I've noted that you completely failed to respond to the well-documented fact that liberal Democrats have made tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations (as well as giving him their votes election after election) to "former" Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd.

 

[Christian Soldier]

Why do the racist crazies want Ron Paul to win?

Who says all or even most "racist crazies" want Paul to win? Your attempt to "poison the well" is a very old and oft repeated logical error and act of intellectual dishonesty.

Have you personally interviewed every "racist crazy" in the country to see who they're supporting?

Fred "God Hates F-A-G-S" Phelps is a lifelong liberal Democrat who financially supported Clinton-Gore. In fact, both Phelps and his son received OFFICIAL invitations to the 1997 presidential inauguration.

Phelps once held a fundraiser for Al Gore at his Westboro "Church", which Al and Tipper ATTENDED IN PERSON. Phelps remains a card-carrying Democrat to this day.

Fred Phelps was also a civil rights advocate in the 1960's, and as a lawyer his law firm handled a number of prominent civil rights cases which promoted the legal rights of Blacks.

Should we judge all Democrats and civil rights advocates by Fred Phelps?

 

[revolutio]

And I've noted that you completely failed to respond to the well-documented fact that liberal Democrats have made tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations (as well as giving him their votes election after election) to "former" Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd.

I dunno what the liberal part of your statement is about apart from a jab at liberalism but as to this fact it is quite moot. He was in the KKK, despite the objections of your quotation marks. Yeah it was despicable but last I checked he was an extremely strong supporter of civil rights legislation and has been his entire political career. I subscribe to the notion that people can change and that they should be judged according to their continued actions. I certainly hope you weren't drawing a parallel between Byrd and active white supremacists. I don't think his party has anything to do with the willingness of people to support him.

 

[Christian Soldier]

I dunno what the liberal part of your statement is about apart from a jab at liberalism but as to this fact it is quite moot. He was in the KKK, despite the objections of your quotation marks. Yeah it was despicable but last I checked he was an extremely strong supporter of civil rights legislation and has been his entire political career. I subscribe to the notion that people can change and that they should be judged according to their continued actions. I certainly hope you weren't drawing a parallel between Byrd and active white supremacists. I don't think his party has anything to do with the willingness of people to support him.

I'm fully aware Byrd was in the KKK, in fact I was the first to bring it up in this thread.

Your preposterous statement that Byrd was an "extremely strong supporter of civil rights legislation and has been his entire political career", is both dead wrong and laughable.

Byrd voted AGAINST both the 1964 Civil Rights Act AND the 1965 Voting Rights Act! Don't take my word for it, Google it yourself.

With an "extremely strong supporter of civil rights" like Robert Byrd, the civil rights movement sure didn't need enemies!

 

[Dale]

Wpiman in post #21:
"Well, his message is freedom; it is not surprising that a lot of people from different walks of life endorse that message. The guy isn't very polished but I like the freedom message. I think every true American likes the freedom message."


What does Ron Paul's "freedom" consist of? Paul describes himself as a Libertarian, although he is not a member of the Libertarian Party.

What does the Libertarian Party stand for? Harry Browne ran for President as the Libertarian candidate several times. Browne wrote a book, How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World. In this book Browne explains how by dodging taxes it is possible to have more spending money. Likewise, if you have relatives who can't take care of themselves, just let them starve. Browne's "freedom" boils down to having more spending money to take a vacation or whatever. The Libertarians trivialize freedom.

 

[Dale]

Christian Soldier in post #16:
"Many of the same anti-Paul liberal democrats who are whining about this, have given a wink and a nod to Democrat Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd for decades now, even though he was a card carrying Ku Klux Klansman for years."

I'm not really in the business of defending Senator Byrd but I will respond. By the way, I haven't noticed anybody "whining," just passing on information.

Senator Robert Byrd is not the Majority Leader of the Senate and has not been since 1989. The position he does hold is President pro tempore of the Senate.

From Wikipedia on Senator Robert Byrd:

In the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's (NAACP)[44] Congressional Report Card for the 108th Congress (spanning the 2003–2004 congressional session), Byrd was awarded with an approval rating of 100% for favoring the NAACP's position in all 33 bills presented to the United States Senate regarding issues of their concern. Only 16 other Senators of the same session matched this approval rating. In June 2005, Byrd[45] proposed an additional $10 million in federal funding for the Martin Luther King memorial in Washington, D.C., remarking that "With the passage of time, we have come to learn that his Dream was the American Dream, and few ever expressed it more eloquently."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Voting_record

 

[Christian Soldier]

Christian Soldier in post #16:
"Many of the same anti-Paul liberal democrats who are whining about this, have given a wink and a nod to Democrat Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd for decades now, even though he was a card carrying Ku Klux Klansman for years."

I'm not really in the business of defending Senator Byrd but I will respond. By the way, I haven't noticed anybody "whining," just passing on information.

Senator Robert Byrd is not the Majority Leader of the Senate and has not been since 1989. The position he does hold is President pro tempore of the Senate.

From Wikipedia on Senator Robert Byrd:

In the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's (NAACP)[44] Congressional Report Card for the 108th Congress (spanning the 2003–2004 congressional session), Byrd was awarded with an approval rating of 100% for favoring the NAACP's position in all 33 bills presented to the United States Senate regarding issues of their concern. Only 16 other Senators of the same session matched this approval rating. In June 2005, Byrd[45] proposed an additional $10 million in federal funding for the Martin Luther King memorial in Washington, D.C., remarking that "With the passage of time, we have come to learn that his Dream was the American Dream, and few ever expressed it more eloquently."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Voting_record

And nothing in your irrelevant post does anything to disprove the KNOWN HISTORICAL RECORD---that Robert Byrd voted AGAINST both the 1964 Civil Rights Act AND the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Oh sure, nowadays NOBODY is going to claim they were ever against civil rights. But back in the 1960's when supporting civil rights was far more controversial, Robert Byrd FIERCELY OPPOSED civil rights, both in his Senate votes and his speeches to the Senate and public.

Now that Byrd has to face an electorate that includes Black voters, of course he's going to praise M.L. King. But in the 1960's when his voting constituency was overwhelmingly White, Byrd frequently ATTACKED MLK and other major civil rights leaders.

Yet liberal democrats to this day continue to give the old Ku Kluxer and segregationist a wink and a nod.

 

[Christian Soldier]

Another undeniable historical FACT about Robert Byrd, is that he personally LEAD the U.S. Senate filibuster AGAINST the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Byrd did everything in his power to OPPOSE the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He spoke out against it on the Senate floor and in public, he filibustered it, and he voted against it.

Don't take my word for it, Google it!

 

[fieldy]

YES, somebody elses money WOULD be refunded! The monies were received at DIFFERENT times.

That doesn't make sense.

 

[Douger]

What does Ron Paul's "freedom" consist of? Paul describes himself as a Libertarian, although he is not a member of the Libertarian Party.

What does the Libertarian Party stand for? Harry Browne ran for President as the Libertarian candidate several times. Browne wrote a book, How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World. In this book Browne explains how by dodging taxes it is possible to have more spending money. Likewise, if you have relatives who can't take care of themselves, just let them starve. Browne's "freedom" boils down to having more spending money to take a vacation or whatever. The Libertarians trivialize freedom.

Yep, you've pretty much got Paul's platform summed up right there. Dodge Taxes
Let your relatives starve
Enjoy extra spending money

 

[Christian Soldier]

That doesn't make sense.

I disagree.

The money received by the racist had long since been spent. So five hundred dollars given by subsequent donors would've been the money that would have to be returned to the racist.

They'd have the right to be plenty ticked off if they knew their money was spent to reimburse a radical racist, when the money they donated was clearly intended for Paul's legitimate campaign uses, such as travel expenses etc.

This whole thing is a tempest in a teapot stirred up by Paul's freedom-hating enemies.

 

[Christian Soldier]

Could one of the Paul-Browne-Libertarian haters please give me the direct quote and page number from Browne's book where he advocates letting "relatives starve"?

They simply believe that welfare spending should be dealt with by the STATES, and that the federal government should keep their nose out of it. Of course, the entrenched financial interests who make big money off of the welfare-warfare state, are the ones opposing the constitutional and common sense position of the Libertarians.

 

[Tenka]

Who says all or even most "racist crazies" want Paul to win? Your attempt to "poison the well" is a very old and oft repeated logical error and act of intellectual dishonesty.

Have you personally interviewed every "racist crazy" in the country to see who they're supporting?

Fred "God Hates F-A-G-S" Phelps is a lifelong liberal Democrat who financially supported Clinton-Gore. In fact, both Phelps and his son received OFFICIAL invitations to the 1997 presidential inauguration.

Phelps once held a fundraiser for Al Gore at his Westboro "Church", which Al and Tipper ATTENDED IN PERSON. Phelps remains a card-carrying Democrat to this day.

Fred Phelps was also a civil rights advocate in the 1960's, and as a lawyer his law firm handled a number of prominent civil rights cases which promoted the legal rights of Blacks.

Should we judge all Democrats and civil rights advocates by Fred Phelps?

My attempt to poison the well happened only in your mind. I didn't say 'all the crazies' or that Ron has major racist support I just said 'the crazies' as in the crazies mentioned. I don't care who Phelps parties with, I'm not even an American.
I asked a fair question, I don't like being accused of things in paranoid rants.
So save it, mate.

 

[revolutio]

Another undeniable historical FACT about Robert Byrd, is that he personally LEAD the U.S. Senate filibuster AGAINST the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Byrd did everything in his power to OPPOSE the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He spoke out against it on the Senate floor and in public, he filibustered it, and he voted against it.

Don't take my word for it, Google it!

Yeah I know. I was incorrect early in saying his entire political career. I meant his recent career, specifically the last two decades. My point was more that he actually has shown regret for his prior actions and has worked to make amends unlike other Congressmen such as the late Strom Thurmond. Both were supported by their parties despite both filibustering major civil rights legislation. Thurmond's filibuster became famous yet his political career continued nearly 25 more years afterwards.

Also, don't take Google's word for it either. Maintain a healthy skepticism of anything you read online.

EDIT:
About the money donation. Donations are almost always in check form since mailing paper currency is discouraged, especially that much of it. So, unless they cashed the check, used the money, and then decided to send it back, no one's physical money is going right back to white nationalists after they send it in to the campaign. Also, as someone pointed out, which precise bills are used doesn't really matter anyway. Bills are just symbolic of a monetary value.

 

[Lynden1000]

Yep, you've pretty much got Paul's platform summed up right there. Dodge Taxes
Let your relatives starve
Enjoy extra spending money

Libertarians don't advocate letting people starve. What they prefer is to place it in the hands of the private sector rather than the government, which tends to muck things up. They don't claim such a solution as a panacea, only a better solution than the current one.

I wouldn't advocate dodging taxes because I wouldn't want to be carted up the river to the pokey, but there's nothing wrong with sheltering as much money as is legally possible. Otherwise Uncle Sam will nickel and dime you to death.

 

[Franze]

Ron Paul is a great man, the end of the Iraq War, a humble foreign politics and deep interior reforms are necessary. I am completely agree with his politics, I hope that He can win.