Learn what the soo called "FREE MEDIA" forgot to mention.

Why Should you vote for Dr.Paul?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXIufIXPsYs

Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve (Must Watch)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553

Interesting bullshit word "paleoconservative", is that the opposite of a neocon? Don't know what kind of propaganda you prescribe to, but if you want to insinuate that Dr. Paul is a raciest you are full of crap! There is a "War on Drugs" going on that is imprisoning 1 out of 4 black men in some age groups, and then using their black ass as slave labor in prison factories. Only Dr. Ron Paul choses to view this issue as an injustice and will free these enslaved drug possessors and you want to say that he is the one with race issue?. Get real! You are the victim of propaganda, Liberty has a big umbrella, it covers the best and the worst of us as long as we do not harm the life , liberty or property of another. Under this philosophy people can live side by side that share different views. Ron Paul has never shared the views of STORMFRONT and don't you dare say that he does! I am an 88 year old great grandmother and I will kick you dirty ass for saying this slander. (IF I could.) There are a few people in this world that have not succumbed to the evils that the lust for power or success can bring to the human soul. That no matter how tempting the dark side may be they will always choose the right path. Dr. Paul is the only man in Washington that has not been corrupted by the dark side. He is not owned by the the military industrial complex, big Phrama, lobbyist, corporations, secret societies, such as the CFR, Bilderbergers or any of the others. I hope I do not live long enough to see the end of America, which will surely occur if he does not get elected.

"Storm Front's favorite candidate" - you know, after listening to all the invective and polemics thrown at Ron Paul and his supporters, your nasty little smear under the guise of humor seems rather amateurish. A little race baiting, crack a joke, some more race baiting, and a doctored photo.

All while talking about Love... Nice work,kid. It reminds of a line from Heathers - "what I need is cool kids like you outta my life".

If anybody's actually interested in the evidence that pandering to racist groups has been a fundamental part of Ron Paul's political career, I put a good deal of it in the comments thread of this post.

Perfect response Mr. Hansen. Keep spreading that recycled, tyranical, cool kid mediocrity you embrace so much Mr. Shaw. Have you ever had a remotely original, logical thought?

Look, "Jeff Shaw", you and your "evidence" can't stop our movement of love and understanding for some! I know because the good doctor told me. I don't see a "Dr." in front of YOUR name - and you want me to believe you?? Show some respect for people who are more smarter than you - like Dr. Paul, and Dr. Frist, and Dr. Phil. Boy I hope their in the Ron Paul cabinet!!!! That would sure show Oprah!

Break it up, break it up! Can't we all get along?

To those of you hatin' on Mr. Shaw: let's try to keep the gloves above the belt.

To Shaw: I've said it once and I'll say it again-- the anti-MLK quotes come from the infamous newsletters, which were not penned by Paul. I know, I know. That sounds like a bullshit cliche, a-Paul-ogist excuse. But that doesn't make it any less true. If we want to examine Paul's thoughts on race, we should turn to essays he's actually written.

For this, go to http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul68.html
(This was written in 2002, before The New Republic shitstorm, so it's preposterous to chalk it up to "damage control.")

It's also dubious to suggest Paul has been willfully courting segregationists and neo-Nazis via vague states' rights innuendo.

Again, a Paul quote from 2002: "We must not allow the term 'states’ rights' to be smeared and distorted into code words for segregationist policies or racism."

How much clearer could he be? If he was indeed courting segregationalists or pandering to his "racist base," why would he go out of his way to snub them? Especially at a time when damage control wasn't necessary?

The implications are obvious: Paul's states' rightist stance is a result of his libertarian philosophy-- NOT a cover for malicious racism. His followers are another matter.

Snyders, Snyders, Snyders. I totally agree with you. Instead of looking at the actions of a politician and his closest associates over decades, we should instead look at a short essay he "wrote" for his friend's Web site.

(A friend who, incidentally, almost certainly wrote the worst racist bits in the infamous newsletters, according to this Reason article.)

What possible reason could a politician hoping to improve his national profile have to condemn the abstract notion of racism? This is probably how he really thinks. It's a good thing that states' rights has never been used to justify racist policies; this makes it a lot easier to believe him, for sure! David Duke has also recently claimed that he's not a racist. Perhaps I should re-evaluate my opinion of him.

Seriously, have you never heard someone begin a sentence "I'm not racist, but ..."? Don't you always cringe in response? Saying you're against racism these days is like saying you're against terrorism. Nobody says they're for it, even if objectively they are.

Talk's cheap. What do Ron Paul's action say? In order to believe Paul's hands are clean, you must believe all of the following:

a) he didn't write any of the material that appeared under his name over the course of many years

b) he didn't read any of the racist material that appeared under his name over the course of many years

c) he didn't discuss these issues with personal friend Lew Rockwell, the likely author of most of these passages and a man he is still close to ("Hey, Lew -- why are you saying racist stuff under my name? Repeatedly?")

d) he didn't know that, at the same time, his campaign was sending fundraising letters with racist language to white supremacist groups (and it's awfully tough to deny this, given that Paul himself admitted that "his best source of congressional campaign donations was the mailing list for The Spotlight, the conspiracy-mongering, anti-Semitic tabloid run by the Holocaust denier Willis Carto.")

e) he kept the guy from Storm Front's money "just to keep it out of that group's hands," you know, the same way he does for the National Right to Life Committee

f) he doesn't understand that pushing anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about a "New World Order" where the U.S. will be taken over by international interests is bigoted and insane

g) he doesn't know that one of his top field organizers in Michigan is in the Klan

h) he's not condemning the racists among his closest friends, supporters and staff because he's a libertarian, and as such just wants everybody to have a right to express their opinion, whether they think people of color are human or not.

If you don't believe all of those things, then you must acknowledge that Paul is at least complicit in the virulent racism of a close friend in his name.

If you do believe all those things, and still think Ron Paul's just a gentle ol' libertarian, well ... I don't know what to tell you, and I'm not going to convince you.

To take the edge off, I offer another hilarious photoshop of Ron Paul and Lenny Kravitz.