Paul keeps white supremacist donation

[The Decider]

Paul keeps white supremacist donation - Yahoo! News

Paul keeps white supremacist donation - Yahoo! News[/url] Paul keeps white supremacist donation By BRIAN SKOLOFF, Associated Press Writer Wed Dec 19, 4:27 PM ET WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday. Don Black, of West Palm Beach, recently made the donation, according to campaign filings. He runs a Web site called Stormfront with the motto, "White Pride World Wide." The site welcomes postings to the "Stormfront White Nationalist Community." "Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said. "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom." "And that's $500 less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does," Benton added. Black said he supports Paul's stance on ending the war in Iraq, securing U.S. borders and his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants. "We know that he's not a white nationalist. He says he isn't and we believe him, but on the issues, there's only one choice," Black said Wednesday. "We like his stand on tight borders and opposition to a police state," Black told The Palm Beach Post earlier. On his Web site, Black says he has been involved in "the White patriot movement for 30 years."

So, "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom." Sounds like a great excuse for every dubious contribution from dubious contributors--"I'm going to use the money to oppose what the contributor stands for!" I like that one. I'm filing it away for future use.

[another day]

I don't see anything inherently wrong with this, all I see is a man who refuses to succumb to the political bullshit of this country.

As if a 500$ donation from some private citizen is going to encourage him to adopt white supremist values in his running of the country. If anything he's saying he doesn't care what your personal views are (hint, HE BELIEVES IN FREEDOM)

This is an obvious and pathetic smear campaign attempt. Someone passed this information along who has a vested interest in discrediting him.

[Clarence]

I called this outright. Where's the link?

Back when it seemed Hillary was taking an attack from all major sources about that one criminal who gave her money. It was stupid because despite being a likely scenerio, in Hillary's circumstance there was little way for her to know. I was confused about the hype it generated. Are there no better examples of corruption to highlight? So, I thought. And I predicted this thread months ago.

not sure why I'm saying that..

now I have to read the article

[Clarence]

$500

well ok. somebody was digging. The larger the sum, the less people there are to sort through and examine their life. Or was it the man that was found then the donation?

Don Black, of West Palm Beach, recently made the donation, according to campaign filings

small campaign filings are available at the perusal of ap reporters? I do not agree with the nationalist's apparent personality disorder, but I do wonder the nature of this article. Did he contact them for the interview? How did this article break out? Most times it is apparent

"Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom."

so this hatemonger or whatever is hoping to experience more freedom to do whatever it is he doesn't quite feel free to do. Sounds dangerous.

you're right sonart. I'm shitting my pants in fear over this fella. I mean, look at the danger freedom could promote. On the bright side, dumbasses are sending us money. Always a sign of success.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: another day a vested interest in discrediting him.

This is the part I'm wondering about myself.

[Chaossaber314]

Quote by: another day If anything he's saying he doesn't care what your personal views are (hint, HE BELIEVES IN FREEDOM)

That's interesting because I for one do not believe in FREEDOM.

Sarcasm aside, what an asinine thing to post.

[ZNFYRH]

I don't see what the big deal is.

Black even admitted that he donated the money because he supports Ron Paul's views on other issues, but is well aware that he isn't a white supremacist.

Just because someone has one opinion that is viewed negatively, doesn't mean they don't have other opinions that they want to see succeed.

[GHook93]

Quote by: The Decider [b]Paul keeps white supremacist donation - Yahoo! News So, "Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom." Sounds like a great excuse for every dubious contribution from dubious contributors--"I'm going to use the money to oppose what the contributor stands for!" I like that one. I'm filing it away for future use.

The RP supporters will shrug this off (and really it is no big deal). However, if Clinton took money from a shady group, or Obama took money from say the New Black Panthers or Rudy, McCain or Romney took money, then the RP liberal hyprocrits would cry foul!

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Clarence I called this outright. Where's the link? Back when it seemed Hillary was taking an attack from all major sources about that one criminal who gave her money. It was stupid because despite being a likely scenerio, in Hillary's circumstance there was little way for her to know. I was confused about the hype it generated. Are there no better examples of corruption to highlight? So, I thought. And I predicted this thread months ago. not sure why I'm saying that.. now I have to read the article

The difference, of course, is that the Clintons have a long history of questionable involvement with the Chinese and being a white supremacist is not a crime (nor should it be: it's not the role of government in America to legislate against what people think and believe).

[Sonart]

.
Considering Ron Paul's Race Problem, Paul's attitude strikes me a politically tone-deaf. If you google "Ron Paul quotes", about half the links will be genuflections to his comments on freedom and free markets. The other half, however, will be racially... um... "insensitive" things he's said over the years.

Of course, libertarians here will leap to his defense -- Paul was perfectly right to keep the donation. Which is funny, because these same libertarians all roar the loudest when any other politician takes donations from questionable source, since it shows the depths of their political depravity and greed.

And Paul's quotes? Yep, just an honest man, telling it like it is.

Quote by: Chancellor ...being a white supremacist is not a crime (nor should it be: it's not the role of government in America to legislate against what people think and believe).

Maybe not, but you sure as hell don't legitimize their views by accepting political donations from them. That's called putting money before principles... unless, of course, Ron Paul's principles are not out of line with Don Blacks.

.

[improvident]

Sonart.. what a ridiculous thing to say..

If i am not mistaken one of the contributing factors to Ron Paul's running as a republican is because it would be too expensive to get any sort of media/television/radio etc etc coverage running as an independent 3rd party

and besides its 500 dollars.. whats he going to do with that? Buy everyone at his camp donuts and coffee.. thanks Mr. Black (which by the way is an awfully ironic name for a white supremacist) for contributing SOOO much money.. So much in fact that Ron has actually decided to side with your views more so than anyone else's..

GET REAL!

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Sonart .Maybe not, but you sure as hell don't legitimize their views by accepting political donations from them. That's called putting money before principles... unless, of course, Ron Paul's principles are not out of line with Don Blacks.

Accepting donations is not legitimizing someone's views. It's really stupid of you and others to go around saying that politicians should only accept donations from people with whose views they agree. It's like saying Hillary should turn down a donation from Newt Gingrich (not that he would donate to her campaign) because he's a Republican.

[adam10312]

We should take every person who donates to a candidate and analyze their views and opinions.

Then, logic tells us that every candidate's views and opinions are identical to anyone who donates to them. If not, they would give the money back.

Then we should judge the candidates based on this new information.

This is smart.

[Sonart]

.

and besides its 500 dollars.. whats he going to do with that? Buy everyone at his camp donuts and coffee.. thanks Mr. Black (which by the way is an awfully ironic name for a white supremacist) for contributing SOOO much money.. So much in fact that Ron has actually decided to side with your views more so than anyone else's.. GET REAL!

Get real yourself. And if this were about Hillary Clinton instead of Ron Paul we'd be hearing no end to it, since apparently every penny collected by Democrats or Republicans is securely anchored to a quid pro quo.

But like I said, I fully expected this kind of rationalizing.

Besides, if $500 is so meaningless, wouldn't it have been far more cost effective in the return, to combat the very rumors I sourced about Paul's racism? I mean, they can't not be aware of them, can they?

Quote by: Chancellor Accepting donations is not legitimizing someone's views.

It is if you're any candidate OTHER THAN Ron Paul.

The Early Word: Dubious Campaign Donations

.

[kubedawg]

Quote by: Sonart . Get real yourself. And if this were about Hillary Clinton instead of Ron Paul we'd be hearing no end to it, since apparently every penny collected by Democrats or Republicans is securely anchored to a quid pro quo. .

Prove it. People will vote for Hillary because she's a woman, people will vote for Obama because he's black. Those are stupid, idiotic people. Only an idiot would vote for someone based upon their race/sex... I will vote for Ron Paul because of his political views as well as his devotion to fixing this country.

Quote by: Sonart . But like I said, I fully expected this kind of rationalizing. Besides, if $500 is so meaningless, wouldn't it have been far more cost effective in the return, to combat the very rumors I sourced about Paul's racism? I mean, they can't not be aware of them, can they?.

Ron Paul is not a racist...

[adam10312]

Quote by: Sonart . Get real yourself. And if this were about Hillary Clinton instead of Ron Paul we'd be hearing no end to it, since apparently every penny collected by Democrats or Republicans is securely anchored to a quid pro quo. But like I said, I fully expected this kind of rationalizing. Besides, if $500 is so meaningless, wouldn't it have been far more cost effective in the return, to combat the very rumors I sourced about Paul's racism? I mean, they can't not be aware of them, can they? It is if you're any candidate OTHER THAN Ron Paul. The Early Word: Dubious Campaign Donations .

I noticed you didn't respond to my last post. Anyway, what you think people would do if this was a different candidate is irrelevant.

He doesn't return it because he is not a weak coward. He knows that this has no bearing on him and in no way reflects his views. He is not going to compromise his principles because some whining morons won't stop complaining about it. Whining does not affect his behavior. What is right and what is wrong do. His campaign has already stated their position on the matter. If squawking and squealing did not make them change their view of what is right and what is wrong in other cases, what makes you think it will now?

If I told you I was a racist, then showed you a donation receipt to John Edwards, then you would say he is a racist until he refunded my money. This is what you would do. You have already admitted it.

[Clarence]

he could just send the money back and make a public statement. Then all these idle hands could investigate the other candidates followed by an information campaign to highlight the facts for the voters. Then use the money we're piling up to send tissues out to sore losers.

I raised a couple questions about the article nobody is interested in responding to...

[Milton Bradley]

At least he is intellectually honest enough to say, hey, I'm keeping your money, instead of donating it to a charity to sway public opinion like Hillary.


If you ask me, Hillarys handling of that suspect contribution she recieved was far more egregious than Dr' Puals cadid response.

[The Decider]

Quote by: Milton Bradley At least he is intellectually honest enough to say, hey, I'm keeping your money, instead of donating it to a charity to sway public opinion like Hillary. If you ask me, Hillarys handling of that suspect contribution she recieved was far more egregious than Dr' Puals cadid response.

This is hilarious. Had Hillary kept Hsu's donations because it's, as Ron Paul's aide put it, "less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does," you and the other Paulistas would not have praised her "intellectual honesty."

Paul took this racist money, kept this racist money, and will be reminded of this racist money for as long as he remains a presidential candidate. But I doubt this will hurt him much in the one state where he's generated some poll movement: South Carolina. No, I'm confident a racist donation won't hurt the good doctor down there.

But take heart, Paulistas. Most Republicans are focused on Mike Huckabee's anti-Mormon comments and not Paul's small but vocal racist cheerleaders. If Paul ever approaches the poll success Huckabee has had (with much less money I should add!), then Paul's tiny cadre of racist admirers like this particular donor will receive the national attention they so crave. We'll see how long it takes for Paul himself to publicly diss these folks. I'm guessing not long should that day ever come.

Happy Holidays!

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: kubedawg Prove it.

{{SIGH}} Fine... here.

ABC News: Exclusive: Hillary's Questionable Donors

"Three recipients of controversial 11th-hour pardons issued by former President Bill Clinton in January 2001 have donated thousands of dollars to the presidential campaign of his wife, Democratic front-runner Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., according to campaign finance records examined by ABC News, in what some good government groups said created an appearance of impropriety.

"It's not illegal," Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told ABC News. "But, of course, it's inappropriate and she should return the money. It does raise the appearance that this is payback."

Quote by: kubedawg Ron Paul is not a racist...

Really? He doesn't seem to think much of inner city blacks.

"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action," Paul wrote.

Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered "as decent people." Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote: "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," Paul said.

Quote by: Milton Bradley At least he is intellectually honest enough to say, hey, I'm keeping your money, instead of donating it to a charity to sway public opinion like Hillary.

Odd how what's "intellectually honest" for one would be "political payoffs" for the other. As Decider said, had this been Hillary, you guys would be screaming bloody murder about corruption.

Quote by: adam f I told you I was a racist, then showed you a donation receipt to John Edwards, then you would say he is a racist until he refunded my money.

Nah... YOU would say he's a racist.

.

.