Ron Paul: Racist; Paranoid; Insane

[Laivasse]

I've seen that several times.

It's the one where Hitchens makes some reasonable arguments and Galloway spends 5minutes calling him 'a slug' 'leaving a trail of slime'.

I had no real bias for either side in that, disliking them both, but it didn't bother you that Hitchens tried to undermine the whole debate beforehand by handing out little fliers that character assassinated Galloway? And I don't remember any reasonable arguments...

Just saying, Hitchens is a bit of a turd no matter how much you enjoy his book on anti-theism, and he's big on this kind of ad hominem stuff. I wouldn't take the fact that he linked to this info as any kind of mark of authority.

 

[Solaris]

I had no real bias for either side in that, disliking them both, but it didn't bother you that Hitchens tried to undermine the whole debate beforehand by handing out little fliers that character assassinated Galloway? And I don't remember any reasonable arguments...

Just saying, Hitchens is a bit of a turd no matter how much you enjoy his book on anti-theism, and he's big on this kind of ad hominem stuff. I wouldn't take the fact that he linked to this info as any kind of mark of authority.

I never read the leaflet but I don't believe its false.

I'm a big fan of all Hitchens writings.

 

[Laivasse]

I never read the leaflet but I don't believe its false.

The point is that at a forum of debate, Hitchens chose to distribute a flier aimed at lowering public opinion of his opponent, rather than just letting his arguments do the work. This is an ad hominem attack, regardless of whether the claims in the flier were true or false.

What can be learned from the fact that Hitchens links to negative material about Ron Paul? Well, given his past tactics, all you can infer is that Hitchens dislikes Ron Paul, not that the material has any greater claim to veracity.

 

[Thunderclap]

That's an assumption.

True, meaning he is merely grossly incompetent instead of a bigot. Which if anything is worse.

 

[Kadayi]

True, meaning he is merely grossly incompetent instead of a bigot. Which if anything is worse.

With generalizations that broad I doubt you're of an age to judge.:dozey:

Also whats with the obnoxious Sig...4 lines max..it's the rules :dozey:

 

[Sparta]

Yeah i heard about these Newsletters ages ago. The thing is, he claims these newsletters aren't his own writing and they are someone elses, and that he never read them. Sounds dodgy as all hell doesnt it. But apparently these newsletters are the only thing ever written by them that spout non-sensical racist bullshit. At least according to a bunch of referenced articles on Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#Newsletter_controversy

In 2001, Paul took "moral responsibility" for the comments printed in the newsletters under his name, telling Texas Monthly magazine that the comments were written by unnamed writers and did not represent his views. He said newsletter remarks referring to U.S. Representative Barbara Jordan (calling her a "fraud" and a "half-educated victimologist" whose "race and sex protect her from criticism") were "the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady." The magazine defended Paul's decision to protect the writer's confidence in 1996, concluding, "In four terms as a U.S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this."[37] In 2007, with the quotes resurfacing, New York Times Magazine writer Christopher Caldwell concurred that Paul denied the allegations "quite believably, since the style diverges widely from his own", but added that Paul's "response to the accusations was not transparent."[11]

And if that isn't enough...

Nelson Linder, president of the Austin chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), defended Paul, saying that he has known him for 20 years, saw him as a "free thinker", "very intelligent and very informed", talking about "real issues" that "invite attacks on him", who was "correct in what he's saying", and that knowing his intent, he believes Paul has been misconstrued and taken out of context.[152]

So when the NAACP President comes out and says he's known him for 20 years and he's not a racist, well... It's hard to argue with that.

Still wont help Ron Paul win any primary though. As for being batshit crazy I dont agree entirely (unless you're talking about the NAFTA thing). You get him talking about a subject and its clear that unlike most of the Republican (or even Democratic) candidates, he knows exactly what he's talking about. Its just his solutions to the problems that make him so radical and unelectable.

 

[Mr Stabby]

True, meaning he is merely grossly incompetent instead of a bigot. Which if anything is worse.

Or he is a congressman and a doctor, so a very busy man, maybe too busy to always act as the editor on a low circulation newsletter.