Who is Ron Paul?

Donna Matrix · Post by **Donna Matrix** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 7:46 am

Associated Press: updated 1:44 p.m. PT, Wed., Dec. 19, 2007
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.

Don Black, of West Palm Beach, recently made the donation, according to campaign filings. He runs a Web site called Stormfront with the motto, "White Pride World Wide." The site welcomes postings to the "Stormfront White Nationalist Community."

"Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said. "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom."

"And that's $500 less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does," Benton added.

Black said he supports Paul's stance on ending the war in Iraq, securing U.S. borders and his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants.

"We know that he's not a white nationalist. He says he isn't and we believe him, but on the issues, there's only one choice," Black said Wednesday.

"We like his stand on tight borders and opposition to a police state," Black told The Palm Beach Post earlier.

On his Web site, Black says he has been involved in "the White patriot movement for 30 years."

Simon of the Playa · Post by **Simon of the Playa** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:31 am

um, yeah....

i told you, i'm a nice nazi, and am totally fine with mexicans, blacks and Jews...some of my best friends used to be Both Jewish AND Gay...

ok, i still have some issues with gypsies and catholics, but i'm working thru them with my life coach.

but WHITE POWER?, oh girlfriend, that is SO pre-millenial....

it's all about the Bilderbergers, DUH!.....

Donna Matrix · Post by **Donna Matrix** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:57 am

Well, we are running out of gas... maybe we could use white people on tred-mills to generate energy? Yea... white power!

After all whites are the smallest minority in the world (about 10% of the world's population). It would probably be easy to enslave them. You think?

Simon of the Playa · Post by **Simon of the Playa** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:20 am

Jesus was white, just ask the mormons.

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:35 am

Wasn't Ron Paul that telemarketeer that sold useless gagets on TV back in the 70's

Ugly Dougly · Post by **Ugly Dougly** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:58 am

But didn't he raise a bunch of money on the internet!

You'll see! He's gonna be the next President, and one day we'll all be FREE!

Kinetik V · Post by **Kinetik V** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:42 am

Simon of the Playa wrote:um, yeah....

i told you, i'm a nice nazi, and am totally fine with mexicans, blacks and Jews...some of my best friends used to be Both Jewish AND Gay...

ok, i still have some issues with gypsies and catholics, but i'm working thru them with my life coach.

but WHITE POWER?, oh girlfriend, that is SO pre-millenial....

it's all about the Bilderbergers, DUH!.....

Ya gotta work with your life coach on accepting the Chinese and people who like to wear Tevas.

Simon of the Playa · Post by **Simon of the Playa** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:37 am

as far as the chinese are concerned, MacArthur was right....

i'll leave it at that.....

(cursing under breath...."inscrutable, ant-like nation of.......")

Zhust · Post by **Zhust** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:58 am

Donna Matrix wrote:Associated Press: updated 1:44 p.m. PT, Wed., Dec. 19, 2007
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.

I think I see two themes in your posts, Donna Matrix. You tend to like to copy-and-paste news reports. I'm never impressed with this kind of thing â€” because to me it has echoes of blind faith, laziness, and a support of established, arbitrary authorities (i.e. "AP said it so it must be true"). Second, it seems you're dismissive of detractors: rather than trying to understand their point, you tend to respond as if a detracting opinion is just silly â€” as if it's self-evident that Ron Paul is superior to all other candidates. It's not self-evident, and it's not helping make your case to say, "see, I'm excited: why aren't you?"

However, I also understand that it's difficult to get through snarky comments: it shows a certain dismissiveness as well â€” that you're just a goosesetpping, brainwashed follower who'd jump off a cliff if Ron Paul said to.

Now I have my eye on both Ron Paul and Barack Obama because I see them both as people who have demonstrated independent thought and commitment that is not driven by whomever they speak with. And I also feel a draw to them as "anti-candidates": that they will turn the country around with an old-fashioned Constitutional individuality. However, I don't necessarily have absolute confidence in either one.

You seem to have this confidence. Why is it that you feel Ron Paul is so much superior? Specifically, is it through turning a blind eye to negative things? What are some of the things about Ron Paul that give you pause â€” and how do you resolve your disagreement with his opinions?

Donna Matrix wrote:"Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said. "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom."

There are a lot of things to celebrate about Europeans and their descendants. However, Europeans and their descendants have also brought the world tremendous pain and destruction through war, slavery, and oppression.

I have observed that people who say they are "proudly white" often carry strong "anti-non-white" sentiments: white supremacy. I have two problems with this. First is that many non-white people have accomplished tremendous things that overshadow the accomplishments of more than 90% of white people â€” if it were true that "whites" are superior, then the average white person (or, say 25% of white people) would make Dr. Martin Luther King's accomplishments look pathetic. Second, there are other genetic and lifetime characteristics that predispose people to superiority â€” for instance, it is exceptionally rare that a person with Down syndrome exceeds the accomplishments of even 10% of the non-Down-syndrome-affected population, so if anything, it would make more logical sense to be "proudly non-Down-syndrome-affected" than "proudly white".

"White supremacists" are citizens of the United States and, it is just as much a crime for a president to ignore them as it is to declare homeless people non-citizens. For Ron Paul to say he's going to take the guy's money â€” and presumably his vote â€” and deliberately not represent him is dismissive. I think a superior stance would be to take to task white supremacy to prove that it is an indicator of superiority over other things â€” rather than to be dismissive, it opens a dialog for people to have a voice.

I consider "white supremacy" to be as wrong as 2+2=5. I would be willing to entertain either notion in rarely and carefully qualified conditions, but as a general case in most situations both are equally wrong. It is also equally wrong to agree upon a middle-ground â€” "whiteness predisposes people to a slight inherent advantage" is just as wrong as "2+2=2.1".

So I see holes in Ron Paul's awesomeness. I don't think he's a bad candidate, but I worry that by claiming to be "just like them only without any bad traits" is a recipe for disaster â€” a logical fallacy of measurement by declaration: that Ron Paul is faultless, so any fault you see in him is just an error in your judgment.

To me such superiority is measured by lack of hypocrisy. Things like dismissing citizens for a single issue, or hiding campaign finances with a private advertising company's blimp indicate to me that he's no different from Republicans today â€” only he has his own biases and issues, some of which are significantly different from any other candidate.

And that alone doesn't make him awesome.

Dork · Post by **Dork** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:01 am

It's one thing to celebrate the achievements of your forefathers (wherever they may come from) but claiming superiority based on what they did is just silly. We each have to make the most of the cards we're given. Rising above whatever is trying to hold you back is the true measure of superiority. If your birthplace/race/genetics started you out ahead of most everyone else, you have to work that much harder to find a way to improve yourself. By improve I don't just mean financially or politically - it could mean intellectually or spiritually.

Toolmaker · Post by **Toolmaker** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:53 pm

Does anyone here find it really funny that a white supremacists last name is BLACK?

ROFLMAO

Oh yeah .. I don't know who the fuck Ron Paul is but I hear that genetics is why I have such a big penis. I tried to search about Don Black and Ron Paul together and found this website. I don't know if its evil or not but I saw a Garbage Pail Kid card from Isreal and bookmarked it for later. The name is rather elite thou.. orthodox anarchist.. OMFG

http://orthodoxanarchist.com

[youtube][/youtube]

Simon of the Playa · Post by **Simon of the Playa** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:37 pm

i know a frank white who is black, as opposed to frank black, who is....

im so confused....

thank you Mr. J. from my hometown of CrotchFester NY for your thoughtful words...

you cut and pasted them, did'nt you....DID"NT YOU!

as a longtime political hack, i like nothing more than the blood sport of geeks and rolling around in the gutter, kicking republican ass.

call me what you want, but i knows it when i sees it, and i dont need to put the shit in my mouth after smelling it to confirm that it is indeed shit, and i should not step in it...

with that said, i prefer not to step in Mr. Paul.

Donna Matrix · Post by **Donna Matrix** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:00 am

(CBS) His progress has been as gradual as a tortoise on ice, but Ron Paul can no longer be dismissed as the favorite of the fringe, reports CBS News correspondent Dean Reynolds.

Unlike other candidates consigned to the periphery, Paul has refused to go away. He is now in a tie for third in Iowa with supposed top-tier hopefuls.

And in live-free-or-die New Hampshire, he believes his anti-Iraq war, anti-tax, pro-freedom message with its libertarian tinge may resonate.

"People are flocking to the campaign," says Paul. "Maybe they've been starved for a campaign like this."

Paul's trip to Plymouth was promising: one woman told Reynolds that he was following the next president.

"Absolutely! No doubt," she says.

Paul's supporters are fervent - almost feverish - both on the ground and online.

He has used the Internet to drum up the bulk of an eye-popping 18 million dollars in this quarter alone from what he says are frustrated members of both parties and first-time voters. If money talks, Ron Paul is shouting.

"I am surprised," Paul says. "But I'm disappointed that I am surprised. Why shouldn't this be a popular message? Why was I pessimistic?"

He adds: "Why do we assume that everybody wants the status quo? And evidently they don't."

"Every generation needs a new revolution."
Thomas Jefferson

Donna Matrix · Post by **Donna Matrix** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:11 am

Okay... snarking is hard to reply to without snarking in return... that said..

I am just trying to stimulate discussion about Ron Paul. I am not trying to push him or discredit him. However, I have tried to discredit single minded nonsense in following without question this, that or the other thing. If you read all the posts, you'd know this.

A lot of people have not heard of Ron Paul or know what he is saying or what the media is saying about him. I would like to see an honest election (hahahahahaha - if they exist) this time with people knowing about candidates that could win.

Ron Paul could win. He has the backing. Now, the question is:

Is Ron Paul what the United States needs right now?

Ugly Dougly · Post by **Ugly Dougly** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:16 am

Point A meet point Z.

If 10% of any politician's promises ever came true, we'd be living in a heavenly world.

Could he get his programs through Congress? Democrats have a hard enough time getting things done in a (mostly) Democrat dominated Congress. Paul's ideas are pretty much contrary to what's being voted on right now.

Can he get elected? If Huckabee gets nominated, will you vote for him anyway?

Donna Matrix · Post by **Donna Matrix** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:33 am

Well, I can't see Huckabee lasting that long. I think he is going to put his foot so in his mouth soon. But let's say some other Rep. gets nominated:

Yes, I'll still vote for Ron Paul.

And of course you are right about Congress having most of the power.

I see Ron Paul's campaign as just the start of a new revolution, maybe of a new Constitutional Party. I just finished Constitutional Law in law school and find Ron Paul's constitutional stance amazing.

The issue for me is really the Constitution, not Ron Paul. Ron Paul just stands behind the Constitution, so I support him for that. It all revolves around that issue - for me.

Donna Matrix · Post by **Donna Matrix** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:44 am

Kinetik V · Post by **Kinetik V** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:39 am

Donna Matrix wrote: Is Ron Paul what the United States needs right now?

Quite simply, NO. Foreign Policy experience will be crucial in the next 4 years. Ron Paul doesn't have it nor does he have a network behind him that can provide it. Hillary for damn sure does...

Also the constitutional support position statement cleared up some perceptions about your posts....you should have said something to that effect earlier...but that's how it goes.

We'll hopefully see Ron Paul in 2016. It's just not his time yet.

Green Wood · Post by **Green Wood** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:23 pm

Simon of the Playa wrote:Jesus was white, just ask the mormons.

And the Lost tribe of Israel took the Love Boat to the Americas, but because they hadn't tip their ship maids because you know all jews are cheap. This made god angry. He then turn them red to show that they were marked as cheap sinners and forced to eat only unKoshered corn

AIIZ

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:20 pm

Paul keeps white supremacist donation

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/e ... tion_N.htm

Updated 2d 10h ago
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) â€” Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.
Don Black, of West Palm Beach, recently made the donation, according to campaign filings. He runs a website called Stormfront with the motto, "White Pride World Wide." The site welcomes postings to the "Stormfront White Nationalist Community."

POLITICS BLOG: More on the donation decision

"Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said. "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom.

"And that's $500 less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does," Benton added.

FIND MORE STORIES IN: PALM BEACH | Blog | Ron Paul | Jesse Benton | Don Black | Stormfront
Black said he supports Paul's stance on ending the war in Iraq, securing America's borders and his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants.

"We know that he's not a white nationalist. He says he isn't and we believe him, but on the issues, there's only one choice," Black said Wednesday.

On his website, Black says he has been involved in "the White patriot movement for 30 years."

The website LoneStarTimes first reported on Black's donation on Oct. 25.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:22 pm

yeah I know Toolmaker posted about this already but maybe you guys have tv. I haven't been watching in months so maybe I get the news a little bit late.

But the point is, politics is for suckers.

MikeVDS · Post by **MikeVDS** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:53 pm

I think it's lame when people make a big deal about who someone takes donations from. Many politicians take donations from groups yet do not vote for the bills those groups are pushing. I am anti-x-supremacist but if they wanted to give me money because somehow they thought I might benefit them, I'd still take the money. The only reason to not take the money is that idiots would think it could somehow change my opinion on how I should vote.

It's almost as lame as when people say "Politician X voted against benefits for group X". Did the bill have tons of other crap? Was it horribly written? There are a million reasons to vote against a bill. I don't think politicians should have to explain everything they vote against, but they should have to explain for everything they vote in favor of.

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:54 pm

jaycerochester wrote:
"White supremacists" are citizens of the United States and, it is just as much a crime for a president to ignore them as it is to declare homeless people non-citizens. For Ron Paul to say he's going to take the guy's money â€” and presumably his vote â€” and deliberately not represent him is dismissive. I think a superior stance would be to take to task white supremacy to prove that it is an indicator of superiority over other things â€” rather than to be dismissive, it opens a dialog for people to have a voice.

All Hail the true color of superiority: The Green-Back!

Donna Matrix · Post by **Donna Matrix** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:51 pm

Do many Burners vote?

Maybe it doesn't matter what they think about the candidates.

Do you vote? I have and I plan on continuing to do so.

Toolmaker · Post by **Toolmaker** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:11 pm

I just found out today that they are removing Diebold from our elections. If this is true than I will vote. I am kinda commited to voting for Obama in order to try to keep the Clintonistas out. I know voting Lib or Grn is considered a "wasted" vote in the final election but I cannot sleep at night voting for either Rep or Dem when it counts.

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:21 pm

I don't call them wasted. If we don't get out there and vote for alternatives, we wont have them. That being said, I do strategize depending on poles and the like.

Simon of the Playa · Post by **Simon of the Playa** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:03 am

as a good democrat, i vote early, and often...***

*** dammit dammit dammit, somebody ALREADY used that joke in another thread....***

MikeVDS · Post by **MikeVDS** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:09 am

If the polls show that it will be close I vote for the lesser of the two evils.

If there is already a clear winner then I vote for whoever has qualities I want the main parties to look at and consider that they may have had my vote if they acted a bit more like that person or their party. That's typically Libertarian, though if most of them had a chance to win I'd probably vote against them. Most of their candidates are too extreme. I just wish the Dems weren't taking our freedoms away as much as the Repubs.

Ugly Dougly · Post by **Ugly Dougly** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 11:42 am

Simon of the Playa wrote: (cursing under breath...."inscrutable, ant-like nation of.......")

Inscrutable, ineffable, unflappable, insurmountable... yes, but I know a massage parlor down the street where you can get a happy ending.

Ugly Dougly · Post by **Ugly Dougly** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 11:59 am

Donna Matrix wrote:Well, I can't see Huckabee lasting that long. I think he is going to put his foot so in his mouth soon. But let's say some other Rep. gets nominated:

Yes, I'll still vote for Ron Paul.

And of course you are right about Congress having most of the power.

I see Ron Paul's campaign as just the start of a new revolution, maybe of a new Constitutional Party. I just finished Constitutional Law in law school and find Ron Paul's constitutional stance amazing.

The issue for me is really the Constitution, not Ron Paul. Ron Paul just stands behind the Constitution, so I support him for that. It all revolves around that issue - for me.

In the Kalifornia open primary system, you may vote for Ron Paul, but if he is not nominated for the general election, you have only your party's choice to choose from.

Hate to see the Republicans win again just because Ron Paul managed to get some hippies hooked up.