lifegoesonbrah
Well-Known Member
Its funny that you have to dig this deep to attempt to find a Ron Paul lie (which you have yet to prove), and I can find about 20 Obama lies in 5 minutes. This thread is full of fail.
ROTFLMFAO... HE HASN'T BACKED UP ANYTHING,Because he isn't a blithering idiot that resorts to name calling and ridicule when he can't back his argument.
Ron Paul never defended the racist newsletters as anyone who has followed his campaign knows. No proof of him saying anything of the sort. Tons of video of him saying the opposite. He never speaks that way and often speaks out against collectivism which racism falls into. uncle buck is a lying turtle turd.ron paul defended the racist newsletters as his own writings, and is a lying politician.
if you haven't called anyone a name you aren't really trying. unclebuck has a rule against no name calling, he encourages it.ROTFLMFAO... HE HASN'T BACKED UP ANYTHING,
HE CLAIMS THAT DR PAUL SAID SOMETHING THAT HE DID NOT SAY.
SHOW ME WHERE I CALLED ANYBODY A NAME OR RIDICULED THEM... I THINK YOU ARE DRINKING THE SAME KOOL-AID AS BUCKY, MAYBE YOU SHOULD SEEK OUT PROFESSIONAL HELP AS WELL.
I see your bold type face and raise you all caps and a bigger size.... nyuck, nyuck, nyuck
Yes very mature. Typical Ron Paul stupidity.
I see your bold type face and raise you all caps and a bigger size....
LOL, just using your own tactics to expose the hypocrisy.Yes very mature. Typical Ron Paul stupidity.
Which stupidity? The stupidity that called the housing bubble and economic collapse years before it happened or the stupidity that said to look for a 9/11 type attack on our country because of our foreign policy?Yes very mature. Typical Ron Paul stupidity.
so, when ron paul was on hannity and referred back to the article by s.c. gwynn in which he admits he defended the newsletters as his own writing in 1996, was he lying then?Ron Paul never defended the racist newsletters as anyone who has followed his campaign knows. No proof of him saying anything of the sort. Tons of video of him saying the opposite. He never speaks that way and often speaks out against collectivism which racism falls into. uncle buck is a lying turtle turd.
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe,so, when ron paul was on hannity and referred back to the article by s.c. gwynn in which he admits he defended the newsletters as his own writing in 1996, was he lying then?
lol. i got you by the toenails here.
i mean, you see it, right?Eeny, meeny, miny, moe,Catch a tiger by the toe.If he hollers, let him go,Eeny, meeny, miny, moe.
Lol, I know what you are saying about him admitting it is truth.i mean, you see it, right?
you see that i have ron paul on video referring back to an article in which he admits defending the newsletters as his own writing, right?
are these other people blind? willfully ignoring the facts? am i being dumb here, or are these facts just too much for the paul worshipers to digest?
that makes sense, because i am not making the claim that ronald is a racist. i hold that belief, and honestly believe ronald is an old bigot, just the same as my grandma is, but i don't try to argue it because it is pointless to argue the contents of a man's heart.Lol, I know what you are saying about him admitting it is truth.
It doesn't translate into him being a racist, though.
Limited Liability For CuntsThe acronym, LLFC, sounds like it follows the name of a bunch of lawyers. Hmmmmmmm. cn
Sorry unclebuck as much as you'd like to get your clammy hands on me in order to caress my body I don't swing that way. He never said the racist writings were his. You have no proof, all you have is dirty feet and long moldy toe nails.so, when ron paul was on hannity and referred back to the article by s.c. gwynn in which he admits he defended the newsletters as his own writing in 1996, was he lying then?
lol. i got you by the toenails here.
you have no proof whatsoever he wrote them and you have no proof whatsoever of him defended the racist rhetoric. He has never talked like that and you have no proof of him doing so.i mean, you see it, right?
you see that i have ron paul on video referring back to an article in which he admits defending the newsletters as his own writing, right?
are these other people blind? willfully ignoring the facts? am i being dumb here, or are these facts just too much for the paul worshipers to digest?