This attack add is classless, UnAmerican, shameles, hateful and bigoted. And
those are only the nice words I can say about the person, or persons who put
this ad together. How disgusting politics has become. No wonder so many don't
become involved because of the low-life people who sponsor such attacks.
It is said that the Obama campaign was active and alive and well during the
Republican caucuses. Do you think his team did this? Really dumb.
Do you know Robert Taft? A recent politician that was dubbed by his colleagues
and other politician as being "Mr. Republican." This guy was the
embodiment of the republican party, and was praised and memorialized for it.Do you know that Ron Paul espouses all of the ideology and the platforms
of Robert Taft? And yet he is ostracized as "dangerous" and
"extreme".Liberty and the Constitution can be extreme to
We have no idea WHO posted this or who they actually like in the Primary. For
all we know it could have been someone who is not even a citizen. That is what
is silly about this article and so many of the emotional comments. Yeah, it was a garbage thing to do. The person posting it probably KNOWS that
-- which is why they cowardly did not use their OWN name while doing it. The
only thing this particular incident reveals is that some people hide behind
anonymity to live out their lowest impulses.
TruthseekerI'm not sure why you are focusing on me. I neither
endorsed nor disparaged any candidate in my comment. I merely suggested that
Heidi (and any other voter, for that matter) should not decide who they will or
won't vote for based on a comment some unknown person attributes to them. I'm surprised that someone who has chosen "Truthseeker" as
their name would have a problem with me advocating to Heidi that she base her
vote on something more substantial than an emotional response to some third
Ron paul wouldnt do this.And im not voting for paul.
Some of the comments here are amazing. The Paul campaign comes out and says
"We didn't do this. We find it in extremely poor taste." But nope.
It was a carefully crafted attempt (in the minds of some) to torpedo the man who
is currently in FOURTH OR FIFTH PLACE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE! It was a wing-nut
supporter. Every campaign has its wing-nut supporters. But at
least I can say that the GOP is doing a much better job of vetting its
candidates than the Democratic party. Ultimately, I think Romney is going to
get the nomination and win the presidency.
Goodbye Ron Paul. Your followers have always been ecentric, but this goes to
far. It crosses the line of racism. Now if we could corrrect the bigots who
attack Romney.Racist and bigots in the repbulican party, who would
have guessed it. We expect that from the Dems (cling to their guns and bibles),
but this isn't acceptable, really from any american.
Ron Paul is the only candidate to get this country united and back in order. All
the other candidates promote illegal aliens in american jobs as scabs to keep
prosperity under control and unattainable by the American people. If American's
choose to be oppressed and welfare dependents, then keep Obama in power, he's as
good a socialist as Republicans.About Huntsman's loyalty, he has
declared that he 'prefers' to give american jobs and industry to China, they are
now better equipped as an industry created by Corporate America for this very
purpose. His loyalties are to business and profit in foreign countries, not in
America for the American people. Most republicans want foreign
occupation by Mexico to ensure the destruction of hope, prosperity, and
independence by American's from government control. Illegal foreign nationals
are our country and home wreckers and its time for them to go.Ron
Paul is the only one with the guts to drop the wrecking ball on Wall Street,
banks, corporate profiteering, and debt to restore the economy to one that will
grow and make jobs by itself. Government can't create jobs, only well paid
workers and prosperity can create jobs and reduce debt.
Re: Pagan | 3:41 p.m. Jan. 6, 2012 "Let me ask, if it is 'wrong' to
target Huntsmans daughters...why was it 'acceptable' for Glenn Beck to target
Obama's daughters?"Answer: Instead of focusing on a non-issue
decent people are giving the Huntsman family two thumbs up for their unselfish
efforts in adopting two children who now have a family. My estimation of
Huntsman just went way up.No wonder President Obama admires Mr.
Huntsman and his wife.
USAlover,The reason why the "Are corporations people?"
dispute is worth attention is because of it's impact, not the principle behind
it. Of course, there are people behind corporations who are affected directly by
what affects the corporation. But whether a corporation should have the same
freedom of a human being, free speech, political donations, and so on- these
things are an entirely different issue. All of our opinions aside, this issue is
certainly relevant and an important one.I personally can see this
both ways. I look at big corporations I don't like, the influence they have, and
so on. This makes me very uncomfortable. Why? Because they're big? No. Because I
disagree with them. I am just as uncomfortable with how much of the youth today
support Marijuana. I can't stand that at all really.On the other
hand, if I owned a small business, it's 100% mine. I believe I have the right to
use my possessions, resources, etc. how I see fit and for what causes,
charities, ideals, and community efforts that I desire to support.There are two sides to every coin; one needs compromise and the will to listen
to see both.
re:USAloverWho was affected by Enron's fraud? Not just the employees and
shareholders who trusted Faustow, Skillings and Kenneth Lay but also every
Californian who saw their utility bills skyrocket, and suffered power outages.
Enron cost California $40 billion in 2000-2001. Corporations
employ people. They are not people. If CEOs of corporations have
legitimate business interests in what laws are enacted, let them publically
make their case, to the American people. But they should not be covertly buying
presidents, congress or manipulating elections.
I am not a Republican.My comment does not reflect partisan feelings
toward John Huntsman"...Huntsman responded to the video by
saying, "It's just stupid. If somebody wants to poke fun of me for speaking
Chinese, that's OK. What I object to is bringing forward pictures and videos of
my adopted daughters, and suggesting there is some sinister motive
there...".Two beautiful, innocent young girls rescued by a
loving family from a life few Americans could ever imagine.Thank you
John Huntsman and Family.
Corporations ARE people, Mr. Huntsman and here's why.Who was
affected by Enron's collapse? Computer hard drives? Machines? No...people
lost retirements and savings.If Ford were to collapse, who would be
affected? Windshields? Pistons? No..people would lose pensions and
savings.Corporations ARE people! Get over it...
Ron Paul can deny it all he wants but he has a proven track record of being a
I find it totally dishonest of these candidate to not take some level of
responsibility for what people do in their name. From Romney's pack run by his
best bud that has been running attack ads, to Paul and his followers, these are
prime examples of candidates running from responsibility for these actions. It
was wrong to target Palin's kids, it is wrong to target Obama's kids, and it is
equally wrong to try to make adoption something "wrong". Is winning really worth dragging our society that much further into the
Let us not forget the robocalls targeting McCain in the So. Carolina primary in
2000 stating "Mr. McCain's current wife, Cindy, was a drug addict and that
the couple's daughter Bridget, adopted from Mother Teresa's orphanage in
Bangladesh, was a black child Mr. McCain had fathered out of wedlock." The Washington Post reported "The advocacy calls for George W.
Bush's campaign that became an issue in this year's South Carolina GOP primary
were developed by Feather, Hodges, Larson & Synhorst." Of
course, then in 2008 McCain's campaign engaged in outrageous robocalls against
Obama. Political contests--a race to the bottom.
re:fresnogirlWhat about the racist nature of statements in Ron
Paul's past newsletters? His newsletters didn't come from some PAC
or unknown source. Apparently he was comfortable with them....
A Ron Paul spokesperson has said that this is not from the Ron Paul campaign and
would not have been made/posted by anyone who truly understands Ron Paul.To a certain extent, that is probably true.But Ron Paul
needs to come out loud and clear and immediately to denounce this
I honestly am not a Huntsman supporter.HOWEVER, is it not more
American of him to welcome people into his home, even his family, who need a
home? I'm sorry, but whoever thought of the "American vs Chinese"
slogan may not have as "American" of values as they think they have.
Pagan - Here's one other major difference between the two situations--Huntsman
didn't introduce his daughters into the news cycle, whereas Obama did. It was
Obama who first told the story about his daughter asking him if he had plugged
the hole yet.'When I woke this morning and I'm shaving and Malia
knocks on my bathroom door and she peeks in her head and she says, '"Did
you plug the hole yet, Daddy?"' he told a press conference.If
politicians want to keep their children out of the media, they shouldn't
introduce them to it. That doesn't excuse this random YouTuber or Beck or anyone
for their actions, but for the politicians it's theater. As FDR said "In
politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned
1) Ron Paul should not be a GOP candidate at all. He's a Libertarian trying to
hijack the process by pretending to be mainstream.2) Why would anyone
attack Huntsman at this point? He's no threat to anyone and the attack can
backfire.3) Candidates cannot control their supporters.4) Sometimes
candidates take advantage of #3 above and take shots at other candidates knowing
they have deniability.5) Delta Fox @3:50 pm puts the matter in true
Pagan - To be fair, Beck (although I thought it was Rush, not Beck) wasn't
"targeting" Obama's daughters. To "target" a person is to
make them the focus of an attack. No one was attacking Obama's daughters in the
statement you provided. And to be fair again, no one is targeting Huntsman's
daughters. However, both Obama's daughters as well as Huntsmans were used in
attacks on those two men. What makes the attack on Huntsman despicable is that
the race of the daughters is referenced. Children whose race doesn't match that
of their parents have to deal with enough without it being brought to national
attention. In the case of Obama no characteristic of his daughters was used as
part of the attack. There was no reference to their race, intelligence, hair
style, or anything else. The attack on Huntsman effectively says "Huntsman
has daughters who are Chinese, where do his allegiances lay?!" That is
offensive to Huntsman and his daughters. The attack on Obama was saying
"Obama has a daughter and here is something she could have said!" That
is hardly offensive, unless you're offended by anyone bringing up the fact that
Obama has a daughter.
Heidi, for all we know a Huntsman supporter put up the video to make Paul look
bad and to get Huntsman some positive press.
re:fresnogirlThis is not new to Ron Paul. Here are a few examples of
past statements in Ron Paul newsletters:"Given the
inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think
we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are
semi-criminal or entirely criminal." "We are constantly
told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational."
After the Los Angeles riots, one article in a newsletter claimed,
"Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick
up their welfare checks." One referred to Martin Luther King
Jr. as "the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours" and who
"seduced underage girls and boys." Other newsletters had
strange conspiracy theories about homosexuals, the CIA, and AIDS.In
1996 when the Texas Monthly investigated the newsletters, Paul took
responsibility for them and said that certain things were taken out of context.
(exactly what context would make these statements acceptable?)We are
seeing another aspect of Ron Paul. It isn't acceptable.
'American values? Or Chinese?' the ad asks, ending with 'Vote Ron Paul."One would think a Doctor knows best when it comes down to a human being.
Right?.Those PaulBots are as bad as OWS hey?. In China they do have
a "one child only law", a boy.Huntsman's other adopted
daughter was left to die on a roadside in India the day she was born. Jon
Huntsman, who often speaks of his adopted daughters from China and India while
on the campaign trail. Aaaaaah soooooo, poor baby rich guy, if the heats to bad
then get out of the kitchen. Face it he's a 'Manchurian candidate' that's all.
Huntsman is speaking Chinese to his daughters, but English to Mitt Romney. To
show us his tax returns. Huntsman adopted daughter, but one thing
here, his daddy can't buy him The White House. That belongs to me and it ani't
The smearing of candidates by unknown sources - PACs, fans of one political base
vs another - is nothing new. But it is really low to bring in a candidate's
family into the picture and to smear them, when it is no fault of their own as
to what country of origin they are from.
Heidi T.Please go back and reread the article before basing your
vote on the assumption that Ron Paul is a racist. He had nothing to do with the
video-- someone just slapped his name on it. If you don't like him as a
candidate then OK. But base it on something better than this, please.
Not that I have decided to vote for Jon Huntsman, but whatever thought I had
regarding a vote for Ron Paul has disappeared. His unfair and uneducated
assumptions followed by condemnation and judgment are disappointing to me. Is
this his model of assessment for a democratic government?
The creator of this video is entitled to free speech, but he/she doesn't deserve
all the free publicity. The Paul campaign even finds it offensive. Let's not
draw attention to stuff like this, DN.
wow people care what some random youtube user posted about ron paul? huh?
This is not something Paul would ever do. Its the opposite of what he believes
and professes. He believes in an open society, and that we should try to be
friends with other nations. It is either the work of one supporter who Paul
cannot control, or it is a dirty smear tactic from a supporter of another
@cjbDid you even read the article?"Kate Schackai,
Ron Paul's New Hampshire spokeswoman, also derided the online ad. "The
video was utterly distasteful and no one who actually supports Dr. Paul's
principles would have made it."The identity of YouTube user
"NHLiberty4Paul" is unknown, and no other videos have been uploaded to
YouTube from that account."This is a rotten thing to do, but it
wasn't done by the Paul campaign. This has nothing to do with Ron Paul. Using
this dope's YouTube video to paint Ron Paul as a racist or xenophobe is a
irresponsible as the post itself.
Neither Hunstman nor Paul have a snowball's chance of winning the nomination, so
anything they say is irrelevant.
"An online ad posted by 'NHLiberty4Paul' includes video footage of Huntsman
with daughter Gracie when she was an infant," the Associated Press
reported. "It also shows Huntsman holding Asha shortly after she was
adopted from India. 'American values? Or Chinese?' - Article This is
not new. A persons CHILDREN have been the subject of scrutiny for
awhile now. As exampled by: **'BECK: (imitating Malia)
Daddy? Daddy? Daddy, did you plug the hole yet?' - Glenn Beck transcript
for the Glenn Beck radio show, 05/28/11This can also be found on: **'Glenn Beck smears Obama's 11-year-old daughter' - by Simon Maloy -
Media Matters - 05/28/11 I think both examples are shameful. Let me ask, if it is 'wrong' to target Huntsmans daughters... why was it 'acceptable' for Glenn Beck to target Obama's daughters?
Ron Paul is a throwback to an earlier era. Back in the 30', 40's or 50's his
attitude would have been accepted without a second thought. As disturbing as it
may be, it is also interesting, like steping into a way back machine.