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

What kind of fucking garbage twisting tyranny is this fucking bullshit? Again MORE "IF A WHITE MAN DOES IT - IT'S RACIST" Fucking ******s are gonna nig and they're gonna want to twist his words to make him look like an asshole.

Fuck the media.
 
BigMike_Quebec said:
What kind of fucking garbage twisting tyranny is this fucking bullshit? Again MORE "IF A WHITE MAN DOES IT - IT'S RACIST" Fucking ******s are gonna nig and they're gonna want to twist his words to make him look like an asshole.

Fuck the media.
Click to expand...

f*ck CNN they are the assh*les doing everything to destroy Ron Paul's name.
 
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.
 
If he did indeed write these things, I respect him even more for having the balls to do so.

From the quotes they showed... well let's just say that every one of them is 100% factual/correct.
 
I am still watching.... wow, they're doing everything they can to discredit him.

CNN is now JNN.

@ 5:10 I yelled "SHUT UP YOU FUCKING CUNT" to my monitor.

6:06 - Bitch got owned.

It is infuriating, only because the double-digits will eat this shit up hook line and sinker.
 
Fuck its not like the guy dressed up like Adolf Hitler, and climbed the congress any yelled I hate Niggaz from the roof. And bessides it was the 80's and 90's racism was still cool back then.
 
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.
 
he distanced himself several times on them in the past. he also said the media shouldn't be focusing on herman cain or newt gingrich's personal problems but should focus on the issues.
 
DannyITR said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

Sandro_Bit said:
he distanced himself several times on them in the past. he also said the media shouldn't be focusing on herman cain or newt gingrich's personal problems but should focus on the issues.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top