namelesstavern.net

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/ ... index.html

Whether he admits to actually writing or having this shit written on his behalf or not, it's enlightening as to the kinda of supporters the man has garnered in the past. I hope all the liberals that are out there campaigning for this guy take notice of the real mentality behind his political career.

re-circulating it was just a matter of smearing him right before the NH primary. i'm not fond of what was written in the newsletters, but people make mistakes, and if newsletters from ages ago is the worst people can dig up on him so be it, there are a LOT worse skeletons in the closet to have, and this old shit has nothing to do with what he's done since he's been in the white house and what he can contribute to this country as president.

toss, I just went through this on another board.

That is OLD ;news...from the 80's. It's been commented on and denied by RP since he was informed of what was printed. I will go find the link if I need to, one that was posted back in May last year...there are several others that cover this...

He's denied a million times...lent his business name to the newsletter and had no idea what was happening. too bad for him and that he's still having to explain himself. It's simply not true.

ps don't spread lies about my candidate ^_^

I'm not a Ron Paul fan, but I don't buy this article for a second. I find it curious that a reaching attempt at character assassination had to be made rather then simply taking issue with his politics.

well right, that's the thing. just like hillary's tears, the recirculation of this mess was very carefully placed to make people who didn't care for ron paul really hate him, and make his liberal supporters (which he has heaps of) question him right before the NH primaries. the fact is that the newsletters do exist; the details are where it all gets foggy - I firmly believe that he didn't write it, and he's stood firm to that for 15+ years. The name of the newsletter had his name in it but it would be a little naive to think he wrote them all, or that *any* politician or person in a powerful position has the time to write stuff like that. that's why they have 'people.'

anyhow, if you look at the history of the whole ordeal, you'll see about a gajillion links to the same thing throughout the years where it's resurfaced around election time, all with the consistent story from him that he didn't write it but he's very regretful that he didn't pay more attention to what was going out under a newsletter with his name in the title. you'll also find that it's the only thing people can seem to bring out against him as if it's something he's trying to hide. he hasn't tried to hide it and has been up front when asked about it; the fact of the matter is that it keeps being rehashed because when the anti-Paulites want to make their voice heard as to why they don't like him, they've no other material to shock other than something that's been beaten into the ground for many years.

Toss you just fell for the rhetoric as it was designed.