Ron Paul

Channel Zero · **Posted:** Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:32 am

shoeless wrote:

James Kirchick of The New Republic has just exposed 20 years of racist newsletters by Ron Paul.

Angry White Man
The bigoted past of Ron Paul

Oh, man! I read that whole juicy article.

He claims he didn't have much to do with those newsletters.

He's either not as smart as people think (and therefore not worthy of a presidency) or lying (and therefore not worthy of a presidency).

shoeless · **Posted:** Wed Jan 09, 2008 12:53 pm

As I have explained in this and other threads, Libertarianism is inherently racist. One of their main goals is, and always has been repeal of Civil Rights Laws, and a return to Jim Crow.

That anyone is surprised about this is sad. It just shows how effectively Ron Paul’s Libertarian agenda has been hidden. One of the foremost tenets of Libertarian ideology is a return to “White’s Only” lunchcounters and darkys to the back of the bus.

From the Libertarian Party Platform:

Section I, Part 18 DISCRIMINATION.
Consequently, we oppose any government attempts to regulate private discrimination, including discrimination in employment, housing, and privately owned so-called public accommodations. The right to trade includes the right not to trade — for any reasons whatsoever.

http://www.rkba.org/libertarian/lp/platform.1992

shoeless · **Posted:** Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:23 pm

Libertarianism in One Lesson

This is an outsider's view of the precepts of libertarianism. I hope you can laugh at how close this is to real libertarianism!

Introduction

One of the most attractive features of libertarianism is that it is basically a very simple ideology. Maybe even simpler than Marxism, since you don't have to learn foreign words like "proletariat".

This brief outline will give you most of the tools you need to hit the ground running as a freshly indoctrinated libertarian ideologue. Go forth and proselytize!

Yes, the symbol of the Libertarian Party is
a Big Government Statue. It's not supposed
to be funny or ironic!

Catherine · **Posted:** Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:24 pm

Here we have Ron Paul criticizing Faux News for Jay Leno:

Ron Paul Blasts Fox News on Leno

What was up with Fox News excluding Ron Paul from Sunday’s Republican debate? Jay Leno puzzles over the network’s decision, and Paul posits some answers: He’s a “strict constitutionalist” and anti-Iraq war. Leno points out that Paul’s a “Republican.” But as for Fox News higher-ups, the Texas politician responds, “They’re not.”

shoeless · **Posted:** Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:09 pm

Catherine wrote:

What was up with Fox News excluding Ron Paul from Sunday’s Republican debate? Jay Leno puzzles over the network’s decision, and Paul posits some answers: He’s a “strict constitutionalist” and anti-Iraq war. Leno points out that Paul’s a “Republican.” But as for Fox News higher-ups, the Texas politician responds, “They’re not.”

Paul flatters himself. It has nothing to do with him being a “strict constitutionalist”, and Fox News barely acknowledges the Iraq Occupation anymore. No, they are pissed at him for his occasional, mild criticism of Bush. For Fox News, it's always been all about Bush, and it always will be.

Channel Zero · **Posted:** Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:32 am

God, could Fox be keeping Ron Paul off its various shows for the right reasons? :roll:

A Proud Liberal · **Posted:** Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:36 am

Channel Zero wrote:

God, could Fox be keeping Ron Paul off its various shows for the right reasons? :roll:

They may be right but NEVER truly righteous.

shoeless · **Posted:** Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:20 pm

Channel Zero wrote:

God, could Fox be keeping Ron Paul off its various shows for the right reasons? :roll:

No. As I said before, it is retribution for his tepid criticism of Bush. Aside from personal attacks on Hillary Clinton, updates on Brittany Spears and the missing blond of the week, the only remaining justification for the existance of Fox News is protection of their little hothouse orchid in the Oval Office.

Channel Zero · **Posted:** Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:29 am

The Economist on the Paul newsletters:

Quote:

...
While his statements sometimes leave the impression that Mr Paul simply licensed his name to people with whom he had little contact, there is much evidence to the contrary. The newsletters that appeared under his name were published by M&M Graphics and Advertising, a company run by Mr Paul's longtime congressional campaign manager Mark Elam—which Mr Elam himself confirms. And according to numerous veterans of the libertarian movement, it was an open secret during the late-80s and early-90s who was ghostwriting the portions of Mr Paul's newsletters not penned by the congressman himself: Lew Rockwell, founder of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and members of his staff, among them Jeffrey Tucker, now editorial vice president of the Institute.
...

The other things these newsletters will continue to expose is Paul's associations with other nutbags.

Channel Zero · **Posted:** Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:45 am

The Ron Paul newsletters controversy dates back to when he was in a race of a congressional seat with Charles "Lefty" Morris. Morris's campaign was clevor enough to highlight the newsletters.

So, RP has probably gotten good at defending his works. Here he deflects rather than denies.

Quote:

Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered ""as decent people." Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote:

""Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. 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," Paul said.

Paul also wrote that although ""we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."

A campaign spokesman for Paul said statements about the fear of black males mirror pronouncements by black leaders such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who has decried the spread of urban crime.

Well, there yah go. Other black people said it, so so can he. :roll:

Channel Zero · **Posted:** Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:15 pm

TNR attempts to answer the question of who might be responsible for the content of the RP newsletters.

Quote:

...
Many libertarian bloggers have intimated or concluded that the man chiefly responsible for this content was Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., Paul's former congressional chief of staff and the founder of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama. John Robbins, who succeeded Rockwell as Paul's chief of staff, released an "Open Letter to Lew Rockwell" on the Internet last week. "This week, for the third time, the puerile, racist, and completely un-Pauline comments that all informed people say you have caused to appear in Ron's newsletters over the course of several years have become an issue in his campaign," Robbins wrote. "Your callous disregard for both Ron and his millions of supporters is unconscionable." Rockwell, however, in an interview conducted before "Angry White Man" was published, denied that he had any role in writing the newsletters.
...

Love the mini battle for whose to blame.

TNR also mentions a Blitzer interview:

Quote:

BLITZER: Congressman, there's a lot of material there. Let me just try figure out, how did this stuff get in these Ron Paul newsletters? Who wrote it?

PAUL: I have no idea. Have you ever heard a publisher of a magazine not knowing every single thing? The editor is responsible for the daily activities. People came and gone. And there were people who were hired. I don't know any of their names. I absolutely honestly do not know who wrote those things.

Lame! Lame, lame, lame.

The RP newsletters are no way the calliber of some mag. His newsletters were small town stuff that he could have handled.

A Proud Liberal · **Posted:** Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:44 am

The latest from the Arizona Weird File:
In my travels today, I stop at a red light when this guy comes up with Ron Paul brochures and is handing them out to the stopped cars. I roll my window down and he thinks he has a live one until on the way over I yell that Ron Paul is racist bigot AND that he (the guy on the corner) must be too to support Paul. He says to me where are you getting your information? I respond, from Ron Paul newsletters. He says that was many years ago and it isn't the same now. I tell him he should wear a KKK hood when doing his campaigning. He said if Ron Paul was elected he would have the "freedom" to do just that and I was probably just some "wetback" anyway. I drove off with a "Fuck You, you racist bastard." Such is trying to live sanely in Arizona.

Channel Zero · **Posted:** Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:56 pm

A Proud Liberal wrote:

He says that was many years ago and it isn't the same now.

Should have asked the RP supporter if he knew who Don Black is.

Quote:

Which brings me to Paul's other brush with racism and the media: his acceptance of $500 from white supremacist Don Black of Stormfront. Paul's been badgered to return the money and he's declined to do so. His campaign people fielded most of the criticism and stated, "if someone with small ideologies happens to contribute to the campaign thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money"

If things have really changed for RP, he would reject Don Black and those racist ways.

d4v1d duk3 supports RP's newsletters as well.

dori · **Posted:** Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:38 pm

The more I learn about Paul, the more I cringe.

People say, "It couldn't happen here", but obviously it could. We have so many clueless people--and before Bush 41, people didn't believe anyone like him could happen here.

And then there are that 30 odd percent that believe Bush is good... Of course Ron Paul could happen here.

shoeless · **Posted:** Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:45 pm

Give 'em hell APL!

dori wrote:

The more I learn about Paul, the more I cringe.

People say, "It couldn't happen here", but obviously it could. We have so many clueless people--and before Bush 41, people didn't believe anyone like him could happen here.

And then there are that 30 odd percent that believe Bush is good... Of course Ron Paul could happen here.

This reminds me of an argument I had with a Libertarian. I mentioned that, as a Libertarian, Ron Paul would like to disband fire departments. This person got extremely agitated and called me a liar. So, I posted this plank of the Libertarian Party Platform.

9. PUBLIC UTILITIES

We advocate the termination of government-created franchise privileges and governmental monopolies for such services as garbage collection, fire protection, electricity, natural gas, cable television, telephone, or water supplies.

http://www.rkba.org/libertarian/lp/platform.1992

He then fell back to the position that, as president, Paul could not disband local fire departments. So, I replied, "Look, I'm not naive enough to think you Libertarians only want a Libertarian in the White House. Your own platform calls for remaking government at every level, so you can carry out your plans to do such things as sell off local, county, and state parks to private interests, disband fire departments, shutter public schools, ect."

He then came clean, ranting that those things should go, because they are socialism, and unconstitutional.

My point is, as dori said, don't think it can't happen here, and don't support Ron Paul just because you think he can't get done all the crappy things he wants to do.

Ron Paul

Who is online