Should we urge the campaign to look into this Don Black thing?

[FluffyUnbound]

The same set of a-holes who are always looking to attack Ron have a new thing they're pushing.

They claim that a guy named Don Black contributed to the campaign and that this Don Black is the owner of Stormfront.

Now, it seems like this is a pretty common name - there are something like 40 in the state of Florida alone, and that's just among listed phone numbers with the name Don [not Donald or D. or any of the other variations, which would add to the number - let alone unlisted people]. So I'm not sure they even have the right guy.

But just on the off chance that they do, and on the off chance that the campaign isn't aware of the whispering and rumor mongering campaign being conducted, should we request that the campaign look into it? And decline the contribution in question if there is anything to this?

[constituent]

just drop it. we're at the point now where bad press is best handled w/ a bitten lip biding time.

sorry.

[me3]

It's an issue for the campaign to resolve. We need to stay focused on the grassroots efforts.

[LibertyEagle]

No and the more we advertise it here, the bigger deal that will be made of it.

Paul can't dictate who contributes to the campaign. He's had a lifetime of proof that he does not support what Stormtroop does. Have we reached a point in this country, where now we require campaigns to sift through each campaign donation and evaluate the actions of each donor to decide whether their contribution is "worthy"?

[Ozwest]

It's a free country. Is it illegal for this man to donate? Has he broken any laws? Should you or the campaign vet every donor? It's a big tent.

[pcosmar]

Default Should we urge the campaign to look into this Don Black thing?
The same set of a-holes who are always looking to attack Ron have a new thing they're pushing.

They claim that a guy named Don Black contributed to the campaign and that this Don Black is the owner of Stormfront.

No, We should STFU.
We don't need ten threads a day about an American Individual donating to anything he wants.
I don't care for the mans personal philosophy, but he has a RIGHT to speak. He has a Right to spend his money.
IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.

[Ron Paul Fan]

Exactly. Mind your own business. This is an issue for the campaign if they want to do something. I won't urge them to look into anything. Congressman Paul is about to be on WHO Radio so let's focus on that and spreading the message! We've got some big events coming up today and tomorrow in Michigan and Iowa. Spread the word!

[DaronWestbrooke]

It is best to ignore it. Anyone can give to the campaign and we should accept money from wherever it may come.

[FrankRep]

We need to protect the freedom of speech of people we don't agree with.

[stevedasbach]

IMO the campaign should not return ANY donations that are lawful. If you start down the road of returning donations because of who someone is or what he/she believes, then by implication you support the views of all the donors whose contributions you don't return.

The strongest position is to simply say that the President is elected to serve ALL the people, no matter what their views, and that he will not refuse support from ANY US citizen or permanent resident. They are supporting him for President for whatever reasons -- he is not endorsing anything about them.