LOL, in NH, "Others" Beat DropDeadFred!

[Eurobabe]

Republicans
12 pledged delegates
Candidate Vote %
John McCain 87,735 37.1%
Mitt Romney 74,439 31.5
Mike Huckabee 26,356 11.1
Rudy Giuliani 20,254 8.6
Ron Paul 17,989 7.6
Others 5,479 2.3
Fred Thompson 2,849 1.2

[Sanity Claws]

1. But Fred looks and smells so manly!

:sarcasm:

[theredpen]

2. And Giuliani BARELY beat Ron Paul

Ron Paul is a relatively obscure obstetrician from Surfside TX who — regardless of his actual views on the race — keeps being associated with racists. Nevertheless, he was only 2100 votes behind the guy who was Mayor of New York City on 9/11. The two candidates were effectively tied for fourth place.

Ron Paul has distinguished himself with his direct, insightful and cogent criticisms of the Bush Administration, but I think the near tie with Giuliani says that voters are sick of "the Mayor of 9/11" already. Maybe Rudy will win Florida, but I think he's toast.

That Fredrick of Hollywood couldn't beat either of these turkeys (barely squeaked in with 1% of the vote) indicates that someone needs to wake Fred up and tell him it's over.

[mrdemocrat78]

3. Ron & Rudy are both racists

we all know rudy is... just ask any black person living in NY when he was mayor.

and ron can say that the news of his racism is an old story, but it wasn't that long ago.

and besides, even if someone else used his name, as he says, he isn't very credible anyway just for letting it happen.

[theredpen]

6. Ron Paul isn't a racist

I've said this over and over. I've got a family connection to the Paul's and I know that Ron Paul is honest when he says that the essays published under his name do not reflect his views.

When Ron Paul was living down in Brazoria county — where the KKK still recruits openly — he probably didn't worry about looking like a racist; a lot of people who cared one way or another about Ron Paul's views knew him well enough to know that he was no racist. But the area south of Houston — which also produced Tom Delay — is a weird place and those sensibilities don't need to be given a national position.

The critical issue that you (and only one other DUer) have pointed out is that whether or not Ron Paul is a racist, he sure ends up looking like one due to gaffes like this. I think, at first, people from both the right and left found it refreshing that Ron Paul is basically exactly who he says he is. Contrast that with Huckabee who's Mr. "aw shucks nice-guy Christian" on camera and a bastard behind the scenes.

Ron Paul is proof that the remedy to politicians who behave purely politically is not someone with no political instincts. There's a happy medium in there somewhere and that's where we'll find a true leader (and none of the Republicans are in that space).

[Occam Bandage]

7. Come on man, that's weak.

"He's not a racist! He's just from a racist area, and...sometimes you accidentally end up saying horribly racist things without believing them!"

Ron Paul, in addition to being an 19th-century throwback on policy, is a racist.

[theredpen]

8. I'll take my personal experience over your oh-so-compelling comeback

"He's not a racist! He's just from a racist area, and...sometimes you accidentally end up saying horribly racist things without believing them!"

Get your facts straight. Ron Paul didn't write the essays that were brought to light yesterday.

[Occam Bandage]

9. In his paper. He has full editorial control. Even if he didn't write them,

he said them.

[theredpen]

10. Talk about weak

When he took a break from Congress, Paul left his newsletter in the hands of other people. They screwed him. It's his fault for putting his reputation in other people's hands and not keeping tabs on him. Still, you have no basis to claim that he endorsed the views.

I don't know why it's so important for people on DU to flog these talking points about Ron Paul, anyway; it's not as if any of us want him to be President. Frankly, I'd love for him to be the nominee. In that case, a yellow dog would actually win the election if it was the Democratic candidate.

[Occam Bandage]

11. "you have no basis to claim that he endorsed the views."

I suppose there is always the possibility that Ron Paul has a history of repeatedly hiring racists to write for him, and never checking to see what exactly it is that they are writing, and then not apologizing for, retracting, or denouncing the words put in his mouth, until giving a half-hearted "whoops" a decade and a half later.

You obviously would prefer to believe such a fairy tale, but I find it weak.

[theredpen]

12. Ron Paul didn't hire ANYONE to write for him

His newsletter was taken over by other people while he was out of office. Furthermore, he has explicitly apologized and denounced what they wrote. He did so many years ago which is why he says this is old news. You've apparently read some headlines and a few blog posts and come up with an inaccurate understanding of what happened and when it happened.

Get your facts straight. Seriously. THEN you can be preachy about believing fantasies. Sheesh. :eyes:

[Occam Bandage]

14. LOL. When your best counterargument is to try and argue semantics of the word "hire..."

And his apologies did come many years ago--and years after the words were published, and even then only when prompted by media attention (if you have proof otherwise, I'd be glad to see it). If he were honest, you'd think he would have apologized and fired those involved the day they were published.

[theredpen]

15. Hire means hire

He didn't hire anyone. He gave control of the newsletter to some Libertarian party operatives and didn't give it any further attention. That was stupid.

You're really scraping the bottom of the "available information" barrel trying to "prove" that Ron Paul approved of what was written. Again, I have no idea why you think I'm going to accept quiddities from some anonymous hack on an Internet forum over my own personal experience.

[Occam Bandage]

17. So does that mean that you've got nothing? That Paul didn't denounce his words until years later?

Just checking.

[theredpen]

21. These newsletters surfaced ten years ago...

...and Ron Paul denounced them then.

[Occam Bandage]

23. You don't think he read them before that? That Ron Paul didn't bother looking at

what was coming out under his name? You're straining your credibility here. Of course he knew what was being written and distributed by his office. Maybe--maybe--he didn't know until after they were published, but to suggest he never knew that "he" had been periodically writing and publishing horrendously racist articles out of his office? Ridiculous.

He only denounced them once the media caught wind of them and started applying pressure.

[theredpen]

24. You keep inventing facts

Of course he knew what was being written and distributed by his office.

He was an obstetrician, not a Congressman, when these newsletters were published. They weren't published by "his office."

Look, you haven't had your facts straight on this since you started this. Believe what you want.

[Occam Bandage]

25. Did I say "his Congressional office?" Sounds like you're the one inventing facts.

Seriously, is this the only argument you have? I would say that anyone who read that would understand that to mean, "out of his publishing office," with "office" being a largely symbolic word. You can try to spin the meanings of individual words to avoid answering the questions all you like, but the questions will still be waiting for you.

This is even more egregious when one considers that neither of your word-choice objections would have absolutely any bearing on the substance of the argument or question being considered. How you choose to construe "office" is beside the point. Similarly, "hire" meant only "bring in to write for Paul," and claiming that no contract of employment existed does not affect the point being made.

So let me ask again: do you think Ron Paul was unaware of the articles until the media discovered them?

[Alexander]

16. Then why was Paul photographed with members of Stormfront?

Why didn't he return their money?

Why does he link to Stormfront on his own website?

Why does Stormfront's leader say that he KNOWS Ron Paul is a white supremacist?

[theredpen]

19. Why was Al Gore Photographed with Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps?

If we're going to play "smear by photo," this is a doozy.

I couldn't find a link to Stormfront on Ron Paul's web site. I admit I didn't check every page, but if it's there it's not easy to find. You have links for any of your claims?

[theredpen]

22. We can play "smear by photo" all day: Here's Cindy Sheehan with Stormfront's leader...

I know that Cindy Sheehan has been controversial, but I don't think she supports Stormfront. I suspect that someone came up and said, "Hey, Cindy, can I get my picture with you?"

A photo is not an endorsement. Jeebus, it's like arguing with Freepers on this.

[Ian David]

5. I don't think 9iu11ani would get better than 3rd place in ANY state. He'd be dead last in New York.

[Ian David]

4. He lost to Jonathon "The Impaler" Sharkey? n/t

[ginchinchili]

13. Biden was, and is still, right.

Too bad Dems are too dumb to realize it. Now we run a serious risk of another Republican administration. Sucks.

[no name no slogan]

18. He's too sexy for this race

[slick8790]

20. Must be some freeper heads exploding over this.

Silver lining,eh?