Fund Your Utopia Without Me.™

31 December 2005

Ron Paul: See No Newsletters. Write No Newsletters. Read No Newsletters. IV.





 

P.S. to the Paul supporters.


Saying NU-UH, doesn’t make the facts above go away.

Shouting, “LIAR!” – doesn’t make the facts above go away.

Giving a link to a Ron Paul denial doesn’t make the facts go away.

Shouting "Israel Firster! doesn't remove Ron Paul's name as the Editor of his vile and various newsletters.

Shouting neo-con, shill, warmonger, hit piece, or any other word in your vocabulary, doesn’t make the above facts go away.

Saying this is old news, doesn’t make the above truth go away. If a candidate for president built wealth for two decades off of being racist, voters deserve to know.

Saying this was debunked years ago, doesn’t make the truth above go away. The above facts debunk any supposed debunking from Ron Paul.

Sitting there and spouting off any other rhetoric while you ignore the evidence, does not make the evidence go away.

Calling this a joke or an act of desperation does not make the above facts go away.

Spewing a quote about how racism is about collectivism doesn’t make the above facts untrue.

Calling the evidence bogus doesn’t make the newsletters go away. Plus if you say these are all bogus, then you’re calling Ron Paul’s denial bogus too! How could he blame a ghost writer for writing something that never happened?

Saying the first person language and the presence of Ron Paul’s name doesn’t prove a thing, shows you’re clearly biased. Ron Paul defended his newsletters in 1996. Showing that he was involved and did know about them. Combine that with his actual name and first person language in them, pretty much shows he did write them. Making the presence of his name and first person references inconsequential, is laughable at the least.

Paul supporters may ask, “How is this any different than someone going off and publishing a newsletter in your name?” It is very different. First, Ron Paul started a company called Ron Paul and Associates. The newsletters were printed under the umbrella of that organisation. Ron Paul profited from the newsletters. Ron Paul defended the newsletters. Ron Paul’s name, signature and first person references are found in the newsletters he defended. This is much different than some random person somewhere just starting a newsletter in someone’s name without their consent or permission.

Sitting there asking for evidence, when the evidence is right there and is all over the place, makes you look very insincere in your demands for evidence. Oh and that doesn’t make the above evidence go away either.

Saying Ron Paul forcefully denied the racist newsletters, followed by a link to a Youtube video, does not negate the facts above. Politicians lie all the time. Look at the evidence, not his words. Yes, Ron Paul can lie.

He’s not the messiah. He’s not perfect. He’s not pure. The evidence shows he is clearly lying. I don’t care how forcefully he denies it. Nixon forcefully said he wasn’t a crook. Clinton forcefully said he didn’t have sexual relations with that woman. Politicians lie.

Referencing African-Americans supporting Paul, does not negate the facts above. Ron Paul said in his newsletter that 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions. Those backing him would be viewed as the 5%. Well what about the other 95%?

You can’t negate the above evidence, facts and truth by demanding we find a video or tape of Ron Paul using such language. We see how Ron communicates when he thinks no one else is looking.  First of all, it’s laughable for a Paul supporter to act like they take evidence into consideration. Paul supporters are putting on a guise when they demand video or audio proof. The guise is that they actually care about the evidence in the first place. The evidence provided in the newsletters is enough. To ignore this evidence, shows us you would ignore any video or audio evidence if it were presented. Once again, any demand for evidence from a Paul supporter is merely a guise. They don’t care about proof in the first place.

Stating, “That’s all you have?” – does not negate the facts above. Honestly, that’s the standard Paulbot reply to any evidence against Ron Paul. I could have a video of Ron Paul gang raping infants, and the standard Paulbot reply would be, “That’s all you have?” 

 In Paulbot Land, facts don’t matter and the only facts they have are the delusions they conjure up from spammed online poll wins and rants off the Alex Jones show.

At this point, many of you Paultards are every bit as bad as the Obamabots were in 2008.




No comments: