CNN Hit Piece: Ron Paul Is A Racist - Walks out on interview

Look at his policies, he is a man that has convictions beyond the scope of just talking points.

Look at his voting record. I support Ron Paul 100%, he is the perfect candidate, a George Washington of our time.
 
Although I can appreciate your point of view, and do agree that he shouldn't have walked out of the interview (he's better than that), in terms of context, we must also take into consideration the time of the publishing. I completely agree that he is at fault for allowing these articles to be published, but similarly 20-22 years ago, when media was less harsh when filtering every piece of material sent out to the public, as well as the fact that he was primarily practicing medicine, I think it is safe to assume (all though it is an assumption), to think that he simply allowed them to be published without much proof-reading if at all.



Agreed, he did address them in 2007 when they were brought up, however he only addressed it as much as it was asked, which wasn't too much. But similarly, from Ron Paul's stand point, having addressed it many years ago as well as in 2007, one would think to find his response or his position on the subject the media could simply post a response from the time. But it is unfair to think and re-ask the same questions after 4 years as well as after 10 years.

An ideal media outlet would post the findings as well as his response at the time, and possibly presenting new information on the subject. You'd think that would be the unbiased way to report the news... I guess we should re-ask and republicize OJ Simpsons case, or why Bush went to war in Iraq, or why you stole that cookie out of the cookie jar when you were 5 years old because although you gave your explanation, your mom doesn't accept it so she wants the answer she wants to hear.

Furthermore as Sandro pointed out, Ron Paul has stated several times that the presidential issues should matter, not personal matters. I believe this to an extent, but I do like to know someone's character and in this case as any video would show, Ron Paul's character is simply NOT a racist.

Very well said.
 
Look at his policies, he is a man that has convictions beyond the scope of just talking points.

Look at his voting record. I support Ron Paul 100%, he is the perfect candidate, a George Washington of our time.

lol. really ?

George Washington in the 1780s was literally hundreds of years ahead of Ron Paul when it comes to religious ideology.

Then again..so were most of the founding fathers that had the balls to proclaim separation of state & church in the 1700's.

Imagine if current Republicans ( including Ron Paul ) would be responsible for drafting the Constitution. The US would be a Christian Iran!

In a December 2003 article entitled "Christmas in Secular America", Paul wrote:

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders' political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government's hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life. The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people's allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before putting their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation's Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war."[144]

Go Ron Paul!! Seriously, I like the guy and some of his foreign policy ideas - even though he's as simplistic as Bush - but he should never become President. It would be a huge step back for all of us
 
I think of all of the republican candidates and even obama he's the most tolerant towards other people's beliefs. It would be a step forward and backwards at the same time.
 
lol. really ?

George Washington in the 1780s was literally hundreds of years ahead of Ron Paul when it comes to religious ideology.

Then again..so were most of the founding fathers that had the balls to proclaim separation of state & church in the 1700's.

Imagine if current Republicans ( including Ron Paul ) would be responsible for drafting the Constitution. The US would be a Christian Iran!



Go Ron Paul!! Seriously, I like the guy and some of his foreign policy ideas - even though he's as simplistic as Bush - but he should never become President. It would be a huge step back for all of us

What Sandro said, who would you advance? Newt The Carbon Tax Gingrich? Or Romney let's bomb Iran?

Look through his record and find one place where he voted against the constitution. One, come back and post it.
 
One thing is for sure, if Paul becomes president, there will be no CIA operatives coming to Canada to permanently detain who they please.
 
Ron paul will not be better as president.. nothing will change.. and you all know that
 
If he becomes president he will veto every spending bill until they have one that balances the budget. Watch people shit bricks.
 
En une phrase, pourquoi vous trippez autant sur Ron Paul?

Alimentez moi en infos pour les discussions avec les mononcles de Noel !
 
I like Ron and admire his conviction but in this case he is being stupid. It's not a hit piece. He was asked how he could let racist newsletters be published under his name. The newsletters went beyond the libertarian platform and were actually hateful. I get his logic behind being anti-civil rights laws (even if I disagree it) but the letters were were written by biggots and he let them get published under his name which kinda says a lot about what he thinks. He should have made a much greater effort to distance himself from these in 2007 (they didn't get attention because he wasn't in the lead) and he definitely shouldn't have walked out of an interview with CNN. It's only drawing more attention to the issue. He screwed up.

Although I can appreciate your point of view, and do agree that he shouldn't have walked out of the interview (he's better than that), in terms of context, we must also take into consideration the time of the publishing. I completely agree that he is at fault for allowing these articles to be published, but similarly 20-22 years ago, when media was less harsh when filtering every piece of material sent out to the public, as well as the fact that he was primarily practicing medicine, I think it is safe to assume (all though it is an assumption), to think that he simply allowed them to be published without much proof-reading if at all.



Agreed, he did address them in 2007 when they were brought up, however he only addressed it as much as it was asked, which wasn't too much. But similarly, from Ron Paul's stand point, having addressed it many years ago as well as in 2007, one would think to find his response or his position on the subject the media could simply post a response from the time. But it is unfair to think and re-ask the same questions after 4 years as well as after 10 years.

An ideal media outlet would post the findings as well as his response at the time, and possibly presenting new information on the subject.
You'd think that would be the unbiased way to report the news... I guess we should re-ask and republicize OJ Simpsons case, or why Bush went to war in Iraq, or why you stole that cookie out of the cookie jar when you were 5 years old because although you gave your explanation, your mom doesn't accept it so she wants the answer she wants to hear.

Furthermore as Sandro pointed out, Ron Paul has stated several times that the presidential issues should matter, not personal matters. I believe this to an extent, but I do like to know someone's character and in this case as any video would show, Ron Paul's character is simply NOT a racist.
It is a hit piece 100% they are covering 2008 election stuff asked, answered & coverd in 2008. yet here they are asking the exact same q's like it was Brand New Startling Info - wtf!?

in hey g's video it shows the very 2008 cnn wolf blitzer interview where blitzer himself asked the q's, paul responded decimating the racism claim.

I agree paul shouldn't of walked off, no 1st one of his aids should've pulled a laptop out with the 2008 interview. saying 'asked and answered' before walking off! that would've been epic :p or belittling the reporter saying stuff like: asked & answered, people an go online & see the interview with wolf, shame on you for trying to pass this off like its new & trying manipulate voters, etc..


lol. really ?

George Washington in the 1780s was literally hundreds of years ahead of Ron Paul when it comes to religious ideology.

Then again..so were most of the founding fathers that had the balls to proclaim separation of state & church in the 1700's.

Imagine if current Republicans ( including Ron Paul ) would be responsible for drafting the Constitution. The US would be a Christian Iran!



Go Ron Paul!! Seriously, I like the guy and some of his foreign policy ideas - even though he's as simplistic as Bush - but he should never become President. It would be a huge step back for all of us

omg hard core troll bait! as for your christian iran comments... so what you think its ok to rob,rape & murder..perhaps people/children you judge weaker than you? no? ok well then you are already following some religious/moral/ethical tenents aren't you? but we all know that in certain muslim theocratic societies its not that way. women by themselves get raped (happens here, everywhere) and are then tried as the criminal & sentanced to death or sometimes killed by their very own family to restore 'honor' - - so yeah damn christianity, the foundations of western society :rolleyes:

but status quo with our current gov's is: Our sharia law morality squads (police) pulling people over, routinely violating rights, to search for Drugs
while the u.s gov lets it in from mexican cartels for 'intel' :rolleyes: launders there money too..etc etc on & on. the majority of the population is dumber than bush
Ron paul will not be better as president.. nothing will change.. and you all know that

actually the change he would cause could be 'calamitous' it would cause alot of upheaval & restructuring to the powers that be.
mind you he's on record saying he'd do things gradually, but i can see the power structure throwing wrenches into the gears out of spite.
ps: the status quo is war with pakistan, iran (both currently being bombed) with russia & china appearing to be very angered -talk of nuclear weapons & etc..
-------
 
Ron Paul is the anti-politician. He doesn't go by polls or the opinion of the mass morons, he just goes by what makes sense and what he believes in and agree with him or not, you can't not respect him.

indeed. its almost as is he's out to do what politicians should be doing , serving the people instead of themselfves and big corporations
 
Uncut Ron Paul Interview - CNN Lies and Cuts over 30 seconds of the interview to make it seem that Ron Paul was storming off, when actually the interview was OVER.

Uncut -




CNN's edited, misleading footage:


The cut comes at 2:29. A section is missing.

Here is that missing section, at 7:25, in the uncut video.

 
If he becomes president he will veto every spending bill until they have one that balances the budget. Watch people shit bricks.

And again with this fixation. I'm not saying it wouldn't help if the US were a bit better balanced but they don't have to.

All the people who complain about these things really believe that the US plays or has to play by the same rules as everybody else. You are probably too young to remember what a war is like. A war is basically a guy forgetting all "logical reasons" and invading someone else's territory in order to acquire it. It's the same as rape or killing but on a much bigger scale. AND THIS STUFF HAPPENS!

The US has the biggest army, they are the big bully. They threaten, they intimidate, they scare people and they DON'T HAVE TO PAY BACK any money if they don't want to. Nobody is a threat to them, not for 50 years. Europe is on the brink of collapse, Russia is gone, China is nowhere near and actually on the brink of disaster itself.

They are in a position of power and using it to their advantage. It might not "make sense" according to all the poindexter's logical reasoning, but real life doesn't have to make sense. It just is.
 
At the end of the interview when she asks "you understand it's my job",, Ron Paul replies with frustration "I understand how the system works"

that just sums it up
 
Back
Top