PDA

View Full Version : "Reality Bites the Ron Paul Campaign" - Hatchet Jon on Capitol Hill Blue




Spirit of '76
07-04-2007, 04:07 PM
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cont/node/2838


Let her rip!

richard1984
07-04-2007, 04:16 PM
Yeah, I read that just a little bit ago.
I posted this on another thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=5556):


http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cont/node/2838

Man, this is a disgusting article.

Question: Where did the $1.5 million estimate come from?

I sure wish we had the official numbers.

I just wish people wouldn't write articles like this when the information is completely based on speculation, (admittedly) unconfirmed information, and (viciously negative) personal opinion. And if they do, they shouldn't be posted on websites like www.capitolhillblue.com--it because it really makes them look bad. Maybe we can get this article removed, too!!

LibertyEagle
07-04-2007, 04:21 PM
There is a very nasty bunch of comments in one posting from Doug Thompson. That name sounds familiar. Doesn't he work for Capitol Hill Blue? I'm not going to quote him here, but suffice it to say he is lying up a storm about Dr. Paul. It's on page 2 of the comments, currently.

Someone better than I, please comment on each of his points with facts to prove him wrong.

GoRonPaul
07-04-2007, 05:23 PM
Doug Thompson was the author of that last hatchet job from Capital Hill Blue...

MozoVote
07-04-2007, 05:28 PM
Even $1.5Mil for the Ron Paul campaign is like $5Mil in the hands of a spendthrift campaign. They do not have the passion of support, volunteerism, and determination, (and downright sneakiness :)) of the RP crowd.

Scribbler de Stebbing
07-04-2007, 06:01 PM
That's fine. It will make RP look all the better when the real numbers come in. I hope the campaign is just trying to lower expectations so his report will look good. I hope.

guntherg16
07-04-2007, 06:07 PM
Doug Thompson was the author of that last hatchet job from Capital Hill Blue...

He's the founder and publisher of Capitol Hill Blue.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/dtbio.htm

Original_Intent
07-04-2007, 06:20 PM
That's fine. It will make RP look all the better when the real numbers come in. I hope the campaign is just trying to lower expectations so his report will look good. I hope.

Almost every campaign tries to lower expectations before the numbers are announced.

I have a hard time swallowing the $1.5 million number because they said they were approaching $2 million shortly after the 2nd debate.

As for this article, the author just makes himslef look like an ass. If Ron Paul is really that irrelevant, why waste the ink to write the article?

llamabread
07-04-2007, 09:04 PM
We have 17,770 meetup members right now.
If we have $1.5 mil, then...

Each member gave just under $85 dollars.

Remember, one max donation makes up for 27 people who didn't donate a dime.
So, I'm having a hard time believing the "$1.5 mil" thing.

Spirit of '76
07-04-2007, 09:25 PM
Thompson has thrown a hissy fit, posted a bunch of libel regarding Dr. Paul, and closed the comments on that article before anyone could refute them.

How do we handle this one? Is there anyone connected to the campaign who can verify the accuracy of Thompson's claim to have personally spoken to Dr. Paul about the so-called 'racist' newsletter?

If not, he's opened up a whole new can of worms.

Dary
07-04-2007, 09:59 PM
Hahahah... I love it!

Doug's final post:

"As is typical whenever we write about the pseudo-campaign of Ron Paul, his supporters unleash the teenagers with computers to try and spam our servers with comments. Our spam filters caught most of them, especially the ones laced with obscenities but we have no desire to attempt a dialog with children or those who support a racist and anti-Semite."

"Comments are closed."

It's so typical. I've been involved in so many online debates where the opposition, when being pounded with rational, reasonable arguments just simply state "I will no longer respond to Dary" or I get put on their ignore list.

Doug is owned and he knows it, so he just turns off debate.

Typical.

And here I was just about to post this:

Have you ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male?

Well I have, and I have to tell you that they ARE incredibly fleet footed.

Does that make me a racist? No, I'm just a guy that just got ripped off by a black guy who could run the 50 in under 6 seconds.

Do I hate the guy because he is black? No. Do I hate him for stealing my wallet? Yeah. Would I hate a white guy that could steal my wallet in 5.5 seconds or 7? Ah...Yeah.

I just don't see anything inherently racist in the comment (not that Paul actually made it to begin with).

As for the comment attributed to Paul as saying that "I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

From what I understand, these comments were made facetiously and were actually made in defense of inner city blacks who have been unfairly treated and targeted because of the drug war and other social issues that tend to keep the poor, well, poor.

Why they are being taken out of context in Doug’s post is a good question.

One should ask why Doug hates Ron Paul so much as to post this vitriol.

Why is he so threatened?

Also, why would a racist consider Walter E. Williams (http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/) as a running mate?

It's too easy to say that yeah, so Ron Paul will be the first racist presidential candidate to potentially choose a black guy who agrees with him on the issues. But if he were a racist, why wouldn't he instead choose a white guy that agrees with him on the issues.

To make himself look good right? But when have you ever known a racist to be concerned about his looks?

Concerning Doug's comment about campaign finance reform...

What part of the First Amendment which states "Congress shall make no law" doesn't he understand?

Doug's original article was on the subject of money raised by the campaign.

But how much money does it cost to vote?

Zero dollars.

I can afford that.

How much is a vote worth?

More than Doug will ever know.

I would have thought that the hit pieces would have subsided seeing as how each time one is run Rep. Paul only seem to get stronger.

America loves an underdog, and for some reason, they love this guy.

Maybe one reason why the hit pieces continue is (and I find this so ironically entertaining) that the opposition is funding their web sites and blogs by simply including Ron Paul's name in the text.

If you want more hits, hit Ron Paul. They know that the RP supporters will arrive in mass in order to set the record straight. It's a love hate relationship that these sites have with the good doctor.

Just ask Pajamasmedia.com

They hate Ron Paul, but unlike Ron, they gotta get that money man!

One last thing. Doug wrote:

"Paul wrote that lobbying groups who seek special favors are evil and that "by far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government.""

Well duh.

Ever hear of the names Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman?

It didn't take long for the opposition to label Ron as an anti-Semite.

Though I believe that this is the first time that I've actually seen it in print.

I don’t see how a dislike for a lobbying group equates to Jew hating.

By the way Doug, I’m not some teenager with a computer. I’m a 47 year old American, and I can’t wait for November, ’08.

Peace.

Spirit of '76
07-04-2007, 10:32 PM
I tried to sign up for his forum, but he denied my registration.

The reason given was simply "ip address".

I assume this means that he matched my IP up with the guy who was making him look the fool on the comments section, and didn't want to get shown up again.


My response to the denial email:



Mr. Thompson,

I understand that you want to deny me a voice to further expose your
lies about Dr. Paul. It mustn't be easy to have someone come onto
your own website and make you look the fool. It's clearly also the
reason you closed the comments section of that article before your
supposed 'evidence' could once again be debunked.

It's quite alright. You can kick me out of your sandbox and keep your
toys to yourself, and I won't complain about that. What I will
complain about is your libel of Dr. Paul. I have archived your
comments and made screenshots. Perhaps you would like to offer some
evidence for your claim to have personally spoken with Dr. Paul and
that he personally told you that he wrote those words himself.

I thought that I would provide you an opportunity to back up your
words before I send out these letters of complaint about your lack of
ethics and integrity to the NPPA, WCP&J, and the ethics committee of
the Society of Professional Journalists. The Media Matters watchdog
group has already been notified of your obvious bias and lack of
professional journalistic standards; unless your apparent libel is
either substantiated or retracted, they will be notified of it as
well.

I'm looking forward to your response and your promise of retracting
the misinformation you have spread.

Most sincerely,
etc. etc. etc.

Mesogen
07-04-2007, 11:56 PM
Whatever the true story is behind the charges of racism, I'm really worried that this will be the very thing that will sink Ron Paul.

All that needs to be done by the media is to start talking about this, muddy the waters, and a huge swath of the population will be turned off automatically.

Then they'll hear about David Duke's support of Ron Paul and it's over.

What Paul needs to do is get some prominent black figures out there to support him and shed some light on their relationships with him. That would be the best way to attempt to dispel some of these stories.

But again, I fear this will be the biggest weapon in the arsenal of Paul's opposition.

Mesogen
07-05-2007, 12:01 AM
As is typical whenever we write about the pseudo-campaign of Ron Paul, his supporters unleash the teenagers with computers to try and spam our servers with comments. Our spam filters caught most of them, especially the ones laced with obscenities but we have no desire to attempt a dialog with children or those who support a racist and anti-Semite.

Ok, the anti-Semite thing is just plain retarded. Ron Paul named his son Rand after Ayn Rand, who is Jewish and he follows the economic philosophy of Ludwig von Mises, who was Jewish by heritage.

Spirit of '76
07-05-2007, 01:39 AM
Yeah, the racism thing needs to be nipped in the bud.

Here's a juicy little bit of info:

Doug Thompson, the guy who charges Ron Paul with being an "anti-semite", was the press secretary for Congressman Paul Findley, one of the most outspoken critics of the Israeli lobby in Washington.

Does Doug Thompson want to play hardball?

CountryB4Party
07-05-2007, 03:53 AM
Houston Chronicle 1992 and Texas Monthly 2001

Houston Chronicle alleges that Ron Paul made comments in a 1992 edition of his Ron Paul Survival Report (a newsletter that he had published from 1985) which could be construed as racist, including disparaging remarks about fellow congressperson Barbara Jordan, and that this could help his political opponents.

In a 2001 interview with Texas Monthly magazine, Paul acknowledged that the comments were printed in his newsletter under his name, but explained that they did not represent his views and that they were written by a ghostwriter. He further stated that he felt some moral responsibility for the words that had been attributed to him, despite the fact that they did not represent his way of thinking:

“They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them…I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn’t come from me directly, but they [campaign aides] said that’s too confusing. ‘It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it.’”

He further stated:
“I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren’t really written by me. It wasn’t my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady… we wanted to do something on affirmative action, and it ended up in the newsletter and became personalized. I never personalize anything.”

Texas Monthly wrote in 2001, at the time they printed the denial, “What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U. S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this.” They state that it would have been easier for him to deny the accusations at the time, because the controversy would have destroyed most politicians.

------------------------------

An Interview with Presidential Candidate Congressman Ron Paul - June 2007

Muckraker Report | 6/28/2007 | Joseph Murtagh

Muckraker Report: My next few questions concern race relations. In a 1992 newsletter, arguing that government should lower the age at which juvenile criminals can be prosecuted as adults, you wrote, “We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such.”

In the same newsletter, you also wrote, “What else do we need to know about the political establishment than that it refuses to discuss the crimes that terrify Americans on grounds that doing so is racist? Why isn't that true of complex embezzling, which is 100 percent white and Asian?” Obviously, there are many Americans, and not just blacks and Asians, who would find these comments upsetting. What would you say to these people?

Congressman Ron Paul: In 1992, I was back in medicine full time, but lent my name to a foundation that published large volumes of material. A staffer wrote some things under my name that I did not approve. I have taken responsibility for these comments and apologized. If you look at my 30-year record and my numerous writings on the subject of race, I think anyone will clearly see that those comments do not reflect my beliefs.

-------------------------

Government and Racism
by Ron Paul

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul381.html

quote:
Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.

--------------------

Yours in Liberty,
Dena

CountryB4Party
07-05-2007, 03:59 AM
Eric Dondero, who is a former RP staffer who was fired by Dr. Paul and who is going after Dr. Paul's House seat AND who likes to trash Dr. Paul online in most ways imaginable, posted this statement (one para out of several) on a blog:

"Ron Paul has had some ties that are nothing to be proud of in the past to far-right groups. My former boss IS NOT AN ANTI-SEMITE. However, he is grossly inattentive in dealing with groups who are blatantly anti-Semitic."


http://www.samwilkinson.org/2007/03/06/ron-pauls-office-calls-back/#comment-7552


Yours in Liberty,
Dena

Spirit of '76
07-05-2007, 11:07 AM
Thanks for the info, guys.

No response yet from Doug Thompson to justify or retract his libel.

I'm reporting him to the journalists' organizations to which he belongs and those which pay him to speak on the subject of journalism. I will inform them of his clearcut case of libel, his lack of professionalism, and his use of his status as a 'journalist' to promote a personal agenda.

angelatc
07-05-2007, 11:29 AM
I liked the bit about "I'm not going to write about Dr Paul much more...." Anybody want to start a pool? (Just joking! We don't need to involve the campaign finance investigators!)