You don't know that. More likely he lost their money. The question is simply did he understand he was losing money from peoples accounts (the accounting systems are complex, but I've never seen a CEO able to operate any accounting system. Have I ever said it doesn't? You first say it's not a conspiracy and then you are right back to we're being spied on. Which the fuck is it? Yeah, the sneak attack of Japan didn't kill as many as were killed in 9/11. More importantly it wasn't asymetric warfare. Read up on it sometime. Your whole problem is you just don't think the wars were justified. So you vote against the people who do. If enough agree then the war stops. That's the way our government works.
Yeah, I saw that as well. Thank the Gods Santorum won't become POTUS - he's seriously Psycho. I seem to remember he said there's no law that says the government should stay out of your bedroom. I mean WTF kind of throw back is he? As Sanatorium and Dingrich crash and burn I'm hopeful we'll see more and more "Conservatives" going Paul's way Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Then it just comes down to the Economy.
☆PRESIDENT☆ Ron Paul Cleared Of All Accusations, Let's Put The Past Behind Us And Move On Interesting isn't it? James B Powell probably wrote these letters - and there you go.
Taking money out of individual accounts to cover a bet on the Euro (in the $100s of millions) has NEVER been done. It's never been done since the East India Tea Company started markets. THAT'S how outrageous this is. It was such a outrageous event that everyone I've read who have been interviewed have said it would have only been done under the direct leadership OF Corzine. Yet, he's walking away.... laughing his fatarse off. Who has been prosecuted? No one. Imagine you put your money into your trading account, you purchased a futures contract (gold as an example), you were issued a receipt for your futures purchase - then the day comes to collect your gold and you have no gold AND no money in your account! It was stolen from your account to cover a bet some douche CEO was gambling on. THAT is criminal. Yet, this is exactly what was done to plenty of traders and savers and just plain customers. Also to note: The very minute Corzine left GovernmentSach's Inc. and had to make money without the benefit of inside information, he fell flat on his f*cking face. The US government asked Google for user information 4,287 times during the first six months of 2010.During the same timeframe the UK government put in over 1,000 such requests. This is just two snippets from Google's new Transparency Report, a set of tools designed to show censorship levels around the globe. Let me guess, there were 4287 ISLAMIC TERRORISTS American Citizens planning attacks in America. I told you, it's YOU and I they want to monitor with all these god damn unPatriot Acts they keep creating. They're not worried about terrorists. Hell, Osama's not even alive! I'm not sure why symmetry matters. It was a couple of goat f8ckers in a cave. While you're willing to live with less Liberty I'm not. I direct your attention to the ACLU also condemned Obama for passing the American Indefinite Detention Act.
Are the African and Latino Republican also racist bitched or only the White ones? Anyway, the point is, WHO wrote the letters.
I don't know if Huntman's people made that ad or not. I don't even know if this is true or not either, but its still worth looking at: http://orinje.com/threads/430416-The-paulbots-are-going-crazy-with-our-video http://www.examiner.com/elections-2...t-piece-about-huntsman-claims-ron-paul-did-it God knows. But I guess 'guilt by association' is kinda the only thing being used against Ron Paul recently Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Mental Cripple Fight The problem at this point is that it is just as likely either way. Perhaps a Huntsman supporter made the video and then conveniently confessed, harming his preferred candidate. Perhaps a Paul supporter made the video in order to blame the Huntsman campaign by pretending they're stupid enough to hurt their own candidate with such simple-minded bragging. Actually, given the stupidity of the Orinje proposition, I would say the latter is probably a bit more likely. It makes more sense if it turns out that a Paul supporter made the spot as a sincere hit piece or a frame-up than a Huntsman supporter wounding his favorite candidate. I mean, come on— I cant believe how stupid these people are. As campaign insiders many of you are aware we created the fake video here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZeVqj-t1U0 and made it look like it came from the ron paul people. This is a suprise it went viral. And the good news is paul is getting blamed for it. My goodness this is turning out better than expected. I was on the phone today with the campaign and they have another one coming out monday. (Orinje) —even the idiotic perpetrators in television crime dramas aren't that stupid. Either way, we're learning a thing or three about Republicans, though. ____________________ Notes: "The paulbots are going crazy with our video". Orinje. (n.d.) Orinje.com. January 7, 2012. http://orinje.com/threads/430416-The-paulbots-are-going-crazy-with-our-video
So something that can't be proven either way, is being pinned on Ron Paul? And the MSM covers it like its factually determined to be related to Ron Paul's campaign or his supporters. And I don't see how you're seeing a "huntsman supporter wounding his favorite candidate' because that video is absolutely stupid no one would ever consider that as 'damaging' and almost will always garner sympathy- which is exactly what is going on. I think we're learning a thing or three about Media as well.
Possibly a new low Like I said, Ron Paul needs to weigh in on this himself, instead of just leaving it to his campaign chairman. And he did. I don't see the media pinning anything on him. So you don't think that a Huntsman supporter trying to frame Ron Paul's supporters with that advert and then bragging about it like a retarded supervillain who doesn't know how to monologue properly would hurt the candidate? If it emerged tomorrow, or next week, that this was a frame-up by a Huntsman supporter, do you think that the former ambassador's campaign would not suffer any as a result? Perhaps. Would that be anything new, though? Maybe by next week Republicans will be blaming Hillary Clinton. And why not throw that in? This is a very bizarre episode, and wildly entertaining. After all, American politics often operate in the gutter, but in any context—genuine Paul supporters, genuine Huntsman supporters, a Democratic conspiracy to discredit Republicans in general—one can reasonably argue that this might well be a new low. Whosever supporters did this, the candidate will be hurt.
Well since I doubt Corzine knows how to program the software or even operate it to move money from various account types, then there is most likely going to be an audit trail back to how and where this happened. Are you willing to wait and see what the forensic auditors say about it before you hang him? I don't think he has been cleared yet. Well one has to get evidence first you know, and being somewhat familiar with these accounting systems, that is going to be done by outsiders and they are going to take a while to get up to speed on the system and then there is likely voluminous data that has to be looked at before they can say how this was done, and if it was deliberate (your working assumption) or an operational error (big oops, but it could be entirely accidental) or a system flaw (another big oops and again, no one actually to blame) See above. It's done with an accounting system. They can have flaws and things can happen in the operation of the system which can cause the loss of money and not be criminal. At this time we don't know how this money was used or if it was deliberate and if so, who was responsible. Can't you wait to find out? So? So? Do you know what the requests were for? Because without further info they might have been about internet fraud, identity theft, child porn and other legitimate criminal cases. Indeed, given the 239 MILLION internet users in the US alone (and Google is international) I'd say ~8,000 requests for info is VERY LOW and not at all an indication that the Govt is spying on us, indeed it would be good evidence for the opposite conclusion. What liberty have I given up? Be specific, what can't I do now that I could do before? Yeah, and while I generally support them, I'm also aware that they, like you, take the worst possible interpretation of all legislation and if they can possibly construe that it could be used negatively they are proactively against it. Which gets them LOTS of followers like you to support their general agenda. So knock yourself out railing against the injustice of the NDAA and be sure and donate some money to the ACLU while you are at it, they always need the money.
This is exactly what I have already brought up. People want to smear him by association. I've read some of those articles, they aren't necessarily explicitly racist. They are slightly bigoted, and insensitive, but nowhere in them do they imply that somehow whites are inherently a better race then blacks or hispanics, nor do they imply that the races shouldn't interbreed or any of the other "white power" non-sense you attribute to white racism. They are more about the government support and perpetuation of a divisive system of class and racial politics based on government handouts. Why? You don't like a mirror being held up to your candidate? It's OK for Obama to show support for someone who supports white hatred, but if Paul publishes articles by someone that has distaste for minorities and lower classes which support the state seizure of liberty, it's somehow different? The lowest form of rebuttal is not logical analysis spidey, it's hypocrisy, something I never thought I would see you sink into.
Here is the thing, people are not attempting to smear Paul. They are using and reading Paul's own words or the words his news letter represented as being his words. Either way, it is not a good story for Paul. And two, there is no evidence to support the notion that government is supporting a divisive system of class and racial politics based on government handouts - minor details again. No one outside the Republican camp minds looking in mirrors. Show me where President Obama has supported someone you supports white hatred. Show me how President Obama has practiced this "white hatred" since being elected president. He hasn't. President Obama has done nothing remotely similar to the Paul letters that are now coming to light. And that someone who published the racist letters was Paul and those articles were represented by the publisher as being Paul's articles. There is no hypocrisy here. There is however a number of Paul supporters trying desperately to put lipstick on a pig.
You're so deluded. That's not how it works. Enough agreed and they voted for Obama, the wars didn't stop. They gave him a Noble Peace prize, but the wars didn't stop. He increased the wars and put more troops into the wars. He started more covert wars, and more overt wars. That's not what the people wanted. People will vote against war, but it doesn't matter one lick. I listen to conservative radio talk show hosts who use pomp and a shtick about "supporting" the troops. . . you know what the troops want? They want to talk about Ron Paul. None of them ever get through to talk about Ron Paul. None of them ever get put on T.V. to talk about Ron Paul. Funny that, huh? These guys are so in support of our military, but they don't give a shit about what the majority of the non-commissioned officers and enlisted men actually think and feel. Huh. Odd. So you see, you're full of shit, this is not how it works. Ron Paul has the support of fully one quarter of the Republican party, if not more. Yet. . . I listen and read the MSM, that is NOT the amount of coverage he receives. I know very little details about what he intends to do and how he intends to implement his positions. I know very little about his life or his relationship with his son, who I believe is a Senator as well? It's all complete bullshit this news black out since he came in third in the last caucus. It irritates me to no end that I hear more about other candidates that he beat out. Nobody cares about the other candidates. Who cares about Santorum or Gingrich? NO ONE. For that matter, who cares about Romney? He is just the same as Obama. They should just do an expose' on who the donors are, then we will know what whose policies are going to be. Who donates to the candidates pretty much will tell use where they stand. Duh! :shrug: Romney’s top contributor: Goldman Sachs, Ron Paul’s: US Army "Democrats are shocked to see President Obama treat Wall Street's top banks with respect and kindness. In order to predict his kindness (Obama's justice department has failed to prosecute the crimes that helped lead to the financial crisis of 2008) towards the top financial institutions it didn't take a crystal ball, all it took was a list of his top donors which included Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and Citigroup. Applying this same logic to the GOP primary election Romney is the candidate that will likely be buddy-buddy with Wall Street. Mitt Romney's top ten is made up of Goldman Sachs, followed by Credit Suisse (Switzerland), Morgan Stanley, Barclays (UK), Bank of America and JP Morgan. In contrast Romney's co-frontrunner in Iowa, Ron Paul, has a top three donor list made up of the US Army, US Navy and US Airforce. . . " ". . .It is critical to understand that even though Goldman Sachs tops Romney's donor list does not mean they are lining up all of their resources behind Romney alone. Goldman has also donated heavily to Obama's reelection campaign. And while this may signal a subtle divide in the Goldman ranks, a more likely scenario is that Goldman is simply hedging their bets and lending their Wall Street credibility to each candidate that they believe will allow the crony capitalism necessary for them to continue their winning ways. " http://milwaukeestory.com/index.php/2012/01/02/romneys-top-contributer-goldman-sachs-ron-pauls-us-army-346/ Arthur, your defense of American institutionalized corruption and war mongering is indefensible. Unless you are just plane ignorant of it and are as uneducated in it as a high school kid or a typical ignorant American. I don't believe this is so though. I believe you're smarter than that. I believe you are on the banker's side, and you want the government to be corrupt. I believe you are actively lobbying for the corruption and illegitimacy of the people's government. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I know what you meant despite your terrible grammar and diction. How about his current black liberation theologian pastor? This is precisely the point. Liberals misconstrue all of those articles that have been printed in Dr. Paul's past news letters in the past as "racist," when if you read them in the correct political light, they have not been, they have been anti-quota. They have been pro-equality and anti-social engineering. They have been against minority groups using their minority status as an excuse to avoid individual responsibility and use the government for affirmative action programs. Have they been harsh, insensitive, even bigoted and ethnocentric? Sure, probably. But racist? Probably not. I think quotas are enforcing prejudices, don't you? Yet to speak out against affirmative action is somehow. . . racist? So there can be no genuine debate of the economic impact of the programs, of even the effecacy of the programs either on minority communities, or on society, can there? Did you know that some research has shown that affirmative action programs actually serve to keep minorities as a lower class? Obama’s Easter Pastor Makes Inflammatory Racial Remarks Trust me. . . Obama hangs with black liberation theologians still. Racists. Most virulent racist thinkers than Dr. Paul ever has. Do I think Obama is such a hater? No. But I think he is more rigid, divisive, and suspicious in his thinking than Dr. Paul is, I do know believe much. But in the end, you're right, it's actions that speak louder than words. We are getting hung up here. Obama never has said or done anything to make himself look like a bigot or a racist. Nothing in legislation, nothing in word or deed. And you know what? Ron Paul has a much much longer career. And NEITHER HAS HE. You can go ahead and associate him with others that have, because his name was on a newsletter, and some authors and editors let some conservative views that were anti-quota anti-social engineering go out under his name. Yippie. And we can argue all day long whether that makes him a bigger racist (guilt by association) than sitting in a black liberation theology church for twenty years, and continuing to do so, but claiming to not necessarily believe in everything that is said? But I think YOU'RE right Joe, we should actually judge the candidates by what they actually do and say, and what laws they have written and passed, not the crap that people that they may have been associated with have said.
