So Ron Paul backpedalled? That was my original point.

11/20/2010 11:15:40 AM

I wonder if Rand Paul is gonna to dress up like Tea Bagger, like with the wig etc that they did 100 years ago....



[Edited on November 20, 2010 at 11:41 AM. Reason : e]

11/20/2010 11:40:07 AM

no, he just didn't feel like defending himself against bullshit smears at the time. he might not be the son of God, but he's not a racist prick, either. and don't come in here with that "i was just trying to show he backpedalled" bullshit. you tried to paint him as a racist from the get go. shut the fuck up, troll

11/20/2010 1:53:06 PM

This was when it first came out. And yes I do think that he used to be racist, I think it's fairly obvious by the comments, I also think, like most libertarians, he used to be quite the conspiracy theorist. I also don't think he is anymore. But I've admitted this stuff isn't that bad, I've admitted I don't think he's a racist anymore, why I posted it was in response to this:
"Ron Paul has been saying the same thing his entire career"

Quote :

"shut the fuck up, troll"

You know that I'm not a troll, why don't you use a normal insult, like faggot.

11/20/2010 2:03:12 PM

it's obvious he's racist by the comments he, himself, didn't make? really?

Quote :

"I also think, like most libertarians, he used to be quite the conspiracy theorist."

guilt by association, much? do you have anything to support such an assertion? of course not.

Quote :

". I also don't think he is anymore. "

I'm sorry, but being a racist isn't exactly the kind of thing one normally lets go. If he was a racist as an adult, there's very little reason to think he changed his ways. who is the one backpedalling, now?

Quote :

"I've admitted I don't think he's a racist anymore, why I posted it was in response to this"

so, basically, you were just being a troll. thanks for admitting to it. now shut the fuck up, troll

11/20/2010 7:48:49 PM

Quote :

"it's obvious he's racist by the comments he, himself, didn't make?"

Come on. He made them, it's obvious he made them.

Quote :

"do you have anything to support such an assertion?"

You've been in TSB for a while, you should know better. I don't make assertions like that without evidence.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13749.html

Quote :

"I'm sorry, but being a racist isn't exactly the kind of thing one normally lets go."

That's not true, how do you think america was able to lose mainstream racism in less than a generation?

Quote :

"so, basically, you were just being a troll. thanks for admitting to it. now shut the fuck up, troll"

No faggot, read my post you faggot.

[Edited on November 21, 2010 at 3:47 AM. Reason : ]

11/21/2010 3:47:37 AM

Quote :

"Come on. He made them, it's obvious he made them."

Not obvious to me. He gave an alternative story, it sounds barely plausible, and no one that was there has contradicted him. As such, it is your word against the only eye witnesses. Convenient, I know, but thems the breaks.

That said, I believe Ron Paul believes in quite a few conspiracies, just like everyone else.

[Edited on November 21, 2010 at 9:23 AM. Reason : .,.]

11/21/2010 9:21:21 AM

Quote :

"He gave an alternative story"

Which one of the alternative stories he gave? The first one where he defended the statements and claimed that he had "different philosophies" or the more recent one where some random person secretly snuck this stuff into his newsletter and put ron paul's name on it without him noticing?

[Edited on November 21, 2010 at 12:18 PM. Reason : ]

11/21/2010 12:17:01 PM

Quote :

"That's not true, how do you think america was able to lose mainstream racism in less than a generation?"

because people were born who decided it was wrong. and they now outnumber those who think otherwise. durrrr.

Quote :

"No faggot, read my post you faggot."

thx troll.

Quote :

"You've been in TSB for a while, you should know better. I don't make assertions like that without evidence. http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13749.html"

So because Paul answered a bullshit leading question designed to trap him, one that was based on guilt by association, it makes him a conspiracy buff? give me a fucking break.

^ you know, the burden of proof is on YOU to show that he actually wrote the letters. it would seem quite plausible that if he had actually written those newsletters himself, that someone would have come forward by now to say so. yet no one has. As LS said, it's RP's word against NR's word. I know of one group that has a nice agenda running to smear the other, so let's just say I don't trust the smearer. Again, feel free to offer proof that goes somewhat further than hitpieces posted by bloggers

[Edited on November 21, 2010 at 7:44 PM. Reason : ]

11/21/2010 7:42:51 PM

Quote :

"because people were born who decided it was wrong. and they now outnumber those who think otherwise"

But that's not what happened.

Quote :

"it would seem quite plausible that if he had actually written those newsletters himself, that someone would have come forward by now to say so. yet no one has."

Who would that be? This is not a reasonable doubt. They were in his newsletter, the idea that somehow these got published is not likely. The fact that when initially confronted about them he defended them removes all reasonable doubt. Had it been accidental, one would expect some kind of retraction and apology, but none happened. Stop doing mental gymnastics, just admit he wrote them. You would place no where near the unreasonable burden of proof on any kind of scandal for any other politician you didn't dickride so hard.

11/21/2010 8:10:50 PM

Quote :

"But that's not what happened."

Only, it is. My grandparents were massively racist. My parents not so much. And me not at all. I know plenty of others that are in the same boat. it seems to be precisely what happened. Tigers simply don't change their stripes too readily, nor do leopards their spots.

Quote :

"Who would that be?"

Maybe someone at the local KKK meetings or something of the sort. It is simply incomprehensible that in all his written works, there exist only some random newsletters that hint at such things. Surely he would have given hints at it in other works, don't you think? Or is it some massive conspiracy on his part to hide his seedy beliefs so that if he becomes president he can then start puttin down the negroes? It would be an incredible accomplishment for a man who otherwise hasn't been the best of politicians.

Quote :

"The fact that when initially confronted about them he defended them removes all reasonable doubt."

Or maybe, like he has said, he didn't feel like trying to explain away bullshit accusations in the middle of a heated election. Also a likely thing. I also wouldn't be surprised if when it initially came out, it was such an obscure thing that he didn't know the full extent, so he just said it was out of context. Again, no one has ever accused him of being the most impeccable of shit-spewing politician. But yes, continue to believe that this is the one place he screwed up and let it slip that he hates those damn darkies.

11/21/2010 8:47:16 PM

You're just as bigoted as you forefathers, you just probably hate some group that's currently fashionable, like fatties or muslims or rednecks or hipsters.

11/21/2010 9:13:19 PM

Quote :

"My grandparents were massively racist."

They were pretty crappy racists. Even christians manage to ingrain their beliefs in their children.

Quote :

"t is simply incomprehensible that in all his written works, there exist only some random newsletters that hint at such things."

His own newsletters are the only ones that would publish this kind of thing. You think Mises or the like would?

Quote :

"Or is it some massive conspiracy on his part to hide his seedy beliefs so that if he becomes president he can then start puttin down the negroes?"

No, it's simply a man who used to be a little more racist when it mattered less.

Quote :

"It would be an incredible accomplishment for a man who otherwise hasn't been the best of politicians."

You're being modest. He's been extremely successful. I could only wish for a democratic senator with his ability to rally followers with such ardency.

Quote :

"I also wouldn't be surprised if when it initially came out, it was such an obscure thing that he didn't know the full extent"

He had no recollection of things he published? There was an entire campaign against it and he didn't bother to look it up or apologize for it for a decade?

Quote :

"Again, no one has ever accused him of being the most impeccable of shit-spewing politician. But yes, continue to believe that this is the one place he screwed up and let it slip that he hates those damn darkies."

Let me quote the number of times I've responded to this:
I will say it's not that bad, it's pretty clear he doesn't let it affect his actions in office.
I will readily admit that this stuff is not that bad
I also don't think he is [racist] anymore. But I've admitted this stuff isn't that bad, I've admitted I don't think he's a racist anymore

So, that's three times.

11/21/2010 9:47:18 PM

Quote :

"His own newsletters are the only ones that would publish this kind of thing. You think Mises or the like would?"

y not? Austrians aren't exactly known for their lack of racism. Yes, keep arguing that he only decided to spout racism in one obscure place. It really makes sense, dude. but really, you think that that highly of Mises.org? Really?

Quote :

"You're being modest. He's been extremely successful. I could only wish for a democratic senator with his ability to rally followers with such ardency."

hahaha. Yes, because he's done so well in the presidential races. You do know he's in the HOUSE, right? dumbfuck.

Quote :

"He had no recollection of things he published?"

Considering that he didn't publish it, yeah, it wouldn't be surprising if he didn't know what was written. he has admitted to not keeping track of it like he should have.

Quote :

"Let me quote the number of times I've responded to this: I will say it's not that bad, it's pretty clear he doesn't let it affect his actions in office. I will readily admit that this stuff is not that bad I also don't think he is [racist] anymore. But I've admitted this stuff isn't that bad, I've admitted I don't think he's a racist anymore So, that's three times."

So then why bring it up in the first place? That's right, you are playing the typical race-card that liberals so love. Troll on, 18-wheeler

11/21/2010 10:03:40 PM

Quote :

"Austrians aren't exactly known for their lack of racism"

Austrians are not known to be racists, I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

Quote :

"Yes, because he's done so well in the presidential races."

That's not the only quality of a good politician.

Quote :

"Considering that he didn't publish it"

But he "bears responsibility for it"?

Quote :

"So then why bring it up in the first place?"

I've answered this several times. It's an example of an instance where he has backpedaled.

Quote :

"That's right, you are playing the typical race-card that liberals so love."

I don't give a shit what it was, it could have been on a flip flop on what his favorite color was, I don't give a shit. Any of it proves the point I made.

11/21/2010 11:02:40 PM

Quote :

"Austrians are not known to be racists, I'm not sure what you're trying to say here."

that's why the treated the jews soooooo well during Nazi occupation.

Quote :

"But he "bears responsibility for it"?"

Yes, because he allowed it to published under his name without keeping tabs on it, troll.

Quote :

"I've answered this several times. It's an example of an instance where he has backpedaled."

And that matters because... IIRC, someone was talking about RP's consistency on the wars. And then you brought in racism. What's that? Race card? From a liberal? SHOCKER

11/21/2010 11:27:20 PM

Quote :

"that's why the treated the jews soooooo well during Nazi occupation."

Oh, this is a good one. Equivocation is my favorite fallacy, I don't get to see it a lot in the soapbox, but this is the best example of it being used in an argument that I could ask for.

Quote :

"Yes, because he allowed it to published under his name without keeping tabs on it"

And he "bears personal responsibility" for it?

Quote :

"IIRC, someone was talking about RP's consistency on the wars"

I don't believe that was the context, the writer widened it. Regardless, I've made what I am arguing very clear, and you seem to disagree with it. If you agree with me that Ron Paul has flip-flopped, please say so.

11/22/2010 12:42:27 AM

Goldman Donations to Obama Campaign Totaled Nearly $1 Million
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-20/goldman-donations-to-obama-campaign-totaled-nearly-1-million.html

I just want to remind everyone. That is all.

11/22/2010 10:12:04 AM

Austrian school economics has nothing to do with nationality at this point. It originated in Austria with Carl Menger and Ludwig Von Mises, but in the latter half of the 20th century it spread to other parts of the world. Bastiat and other French free-market political economists could be seen as pre-Austrian school. Anyway, all this talk about Austrians being racist, the jews, etc, is completely non-sensical. Mises came from a Jewish family and emigrated to the United States because of German imperialism.

[Edited on November 22, 2010 at 12:23 PM. Reason : ]

11/22/2010 12:22:46 PM

RUN SARAH RUN!

11/22/2010 1:40:24 PM

Quote :

"Goldman Employees' Donations to Obama Campaign Totaled Nearly $1 Million"

ftfy

11/22/2010 1:46:21 PM

Quote :

"I don't believe that was the context, the writer widened it."

go back and read it again, buddy. THe conversation was about people being consistent on the wars, someone made a quip about RP pulling out all the troops, someone else responded that RP has been consistent, then you came in and threw the race card.

Quote :

"And he "bears personal responsibility" for it?"

Yep. In the same way that if I let someone borrow my car and he goes and wrecks it into a school full of kids, I bear some responsibility.

Quote :

"Anyway, all this talk about Austrians being racist, the jews, etc, is completely non-sensical. Mises came from a Jewish family and emigrated to the United States because of German imperialism."

I know. I was just making a stupid quip

[Edited on November 22, 2010 at 6:41 PM. Reason : ]

11/22/2010 6:40:54 PM

Quote :

"THe conversation was about people being consistent on the wars, someone made a quip about RP pulling out all the troops, someone else responded that RP has been consistent"

I pointed out he hasn't always been consistent on the issue of "not being a racist".

Quote :

"if I let someone borrow my car and he goes and wrecks it into a school full of kids, I bear some responsibility"

some != personal

I wouldn't say you bear personal responsibility for it, that is unless you knew he would wreck it into a school full of kids.

Quote :

"I know. I was just making a stupid quip"

Who's the troll now faggot?

11/22/2010 6:57:49 PM

Quote :

"I pointed out he hasn't always been consistent on the issue of "not being a racist"."

which was completely irrelevant to what was being talked about. ergo, you played the race card for no reason, troll

Quote :

"some != personal"

If some of it is "my" responsibility, I'd call that "personal". don't be that guy.

11/22/2010 9:19:26 PM

Dude he is always that guy. He does more arguing about the arguing than he does about the subject of the argument.

11/22/2010 9:26:28 PM

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/11/obama-romney-palin.html

Quote :

"As recently as Sept. 20, his job approval was 49%. A whopping 60% now disapprove of his job, up from 51% disapproval Sept. 20. Obama now trails in hypothetical 2012 matchups against Republicans Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and the next Bush, Jeb. "

Still WAAAYYYY to early to worry about this stuff, but someone posted a week back how well he was doing vs the GOP front runners.

11/23/2010 12:21:48 PM

LOOK AT HOW HE DOESN'T EVEN CARE!

HE'S JUST LAUGHING IT OFF!

WHAT IS WRONG WITH HIM?!!

[Edited on November 23, 2010 at 12:37 PM. Reason : LOOK AT THAT BOAT]

11/23/2010 12:36:31 PM

^haha.

Are you suggesting that the boat is a symbol of sorts?

11/23/2010 1:28:42 PM

Quote :

"According to this they gave Kyl everything he asked for so he would sign on"

This is pretty funny.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

11/25/2010 4:57:03 PM

Halliburton is up 137% since Obama became president.

12/1/2010 1:24:47 PM

He's a fucking punching bag for republicans.

12/1/2010 5:57:30 PM

12/4/2010 4:17:25 PM

Worst Unemployment Since WWII

12/6/2010 12:25:38 PM

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/06/all-access-pass-to-the-presidency-north-carolina/

Quote :

"All access pass to the presidency: North Carolina (CNN)-President Obama traveled to Winston-Salem, North Carolina, and then returned to Washington Monday afternoon to finalize tax negotiations with Democratic leaders at the White House. It was a brief trip, just three hours on the ground, thanks to the luxury that presidential travel affords, like Marine One, Air Force One, and a motorcade. Meanwhile, journalists who also made the trip weren't so lucky, contending with flight delays and long drives back to Washington. White House producer Erika Dimmler and photojournalists Martin Dougherty and Geoff Parker covered the president's trip for CNN. Dimmler provides an ALL ACCESS PASS of their trip with these behind-the-scenes photos."

Those poor reporters! I think this really hurts the President's credibility making those reporters go to where the story is, especially when its somewhere as remote as North Carolina.

12/6/2010 9:12:58 PM

^ that's pretty odd phrasing. Why was that paragraph even necessary?

I would really like to see the Obama admin spin the recent "compromise" on the tax breaks as the republicans not caring about the deficit though.

12/6/2010 9:39:21 PM

^why? THe republicans wanted the extension for all, the dems wanted to pump in the spending increases.

If the dems really wanted to increase taxes they had the easiest job ever...simply do NOTHING. These things were going to expire and required action to extend them. They have the majority now and could have stopped any GOP offer.

12/7/2010 10:55:15 AM

obama's looking pretty weak.

i'm not impressed.

12/7/2010 11:09:29 AM

yeah, as a nominal obama supporter

I agree.

This was a really stupid move.

12/7/2010 12:41:56 PM

Democrats have lost the high ground on blaming bush for "passing tax cuts without paying for it"...and then some.

12/7/2010 3:17:20 PM

^ there's no high ground anymore.

It's only delusion that makes people think republicans care about the debt/deficit, as their latest positions make clear.

12/7/2010 4:10:36 PM

Quote :

"there's no high ground anymore. "

I agree.

How do you figure about the debt and republicans, when those recently elected are not in office. Who pushed for the majority of the "costs" associated with this? Yes, it was the dems. Sorry.

Cutting spending should be the priority, imo.

12/7/2010 4:35:39 PM

Quote :

"Cutting spending should be the priority, imo."

IOW, you don't care about deficits either.

Quote :

"How do you figure about the debt and republicans, when those recently elected are not in office."

Because Republicans just fought hard for and won changes being made to a bill to make it even more deficit inducing, changes that the newly elected haven't been criticizing.

12/7/2010 6:32:36 PM

Quote :

"there's no high ground anymore."

I would probably vote for somebody who openly admitted that was a part of their campaign strategy.

12/7/2010 6:38:55 PM

You might have to explain to me moron how by wanting to cut spending I dont care about deficits? lol

What changes to the bill did republicans fight for and add to? The 75Billion extension for the rich? (that some argue will help create jobs, but thats another arguement)

So a bill that is about 600B in "costs" you blame the people who fought to add 75? ok

I think you either let them expire or extend the tax cuts for EVERYONE. Gosh, doesnt that seem fair?

12/8/2010 8:45:41 AM

Quote :

"Obama: ‘I will fight’ to end tax cuts for rich in 2012"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/obama-i-fight-tax-cuts-rich-2012-2/

12/8/2010 2:44:34 PM

Quote :

" I think you either let them expire or extend the tax cuts for EVERYONE. Gosh, doesnt that seem fair?"

Fairness has not objective meaning in this context.

It's not logical or rational considering the economic climate, or the rhetoric of the right.

Quote :

"The 75Billion extension for the rich? (that some argue will help create jobs, but thats another arguement)"

It's not "another argument," it's just plain wrong. The tax cuts have been in place since 2001 and we are in some of the worse job-creating environments in a decades. It's mind-boggingly silly that after the catastrophic failure of conservative economic policy over the past few years, you're going to try and say "just give it more time, it's sure to work this time!"

The marginal tax rate bumping up a few percentage points has no measurable effect on job creation, it's is overwhelmingly driven by other factors.

[Edited on December 8, 2010 at 2:52 PM. Reason : ]

12/8/2010 2:47:59 PM

and what happened in 2001? Our economy took a pretty large hit and most people credit the taxcuts with turning it around.

You dont seem to think the housing bubble has anything to do with the current recession?

Actually I will argue that our govt interaction causes these "bubbles" and Feds "pumping" have real consequences and prevent the market from adjusting, or at the least putting off the adjustment.

Like I said before, I dont care if they let these expire, but do so for everyone. Other than the unemployment ext, the real issue is that businesses dont plan on election cycles. So simply moving this out 2 yrs doesnt provide a lot of certainty for long term planning. (Its kinda like our medicare cuts they keep pushing back a couple months at a time.)

Gotta be a pretty rough week to be an O fan. Looks like he will extend the tax cuts for the evil rich (which dems have hated since 2001, hell look at the outrage on the left and how pissed people are that these earners will keep their money), looks like he wont close Gitmo at all, no public US trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and he even comes out in a presser calling the NY Times "out of touch". man, I almost feel sorry for ya fellas.

Calling the republicans "hostage takers" was a nice touch though, Im sure that plays well in blogs. Not entirely accurate, but are we surprised he is trying to deflect the blame when it should be solely on his shoulders and his party's?

12/8/2010 4:02:08 PM

Lets see, Total revenue
1999 3.3T
2000 3.7T
2001 3.8T
2002 3.3T
2003 3.7T
2004 3.9T
2005 4.3T
2006 4.7T
2007 5.2T
2008 4.7T
2009 4.3T

Yet people still claim spending isnt the problem.

http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/#usgs302a

[Edited on December 8, 2010 at 4:15 PM. Reason : forgot the link]

12/8/2010 4:14:49 PM

Apparently the House Dems have a grown a pair and told Obama to shove the tax cuts.

12/9/2010 5:57:57 PM

hopefully this gives obama a chance to give a "my bad" and do a bit of a 180

12/9/2010 6:56:09 PM