Ron Paul the Racist Homophobe!

[Howey]

I'm not in the least surprised. I believe I brought this up a few years ago...

First it was the racist newsletters. Now it’s the direct mail advertising them. In a signed appeal to potential subscribers in 1993, Ron Paul urged people to read his publications in order to prepare for a “race war,” military rule, and a conspiracy to use a new $100 bill to track Americans.
 
The eight-page mailer obtained by Reuters via Jamie Kirchick, who unearthed Paul’s newsletter archives in 2008, is mostly focused on a rambling conspiracy theory about changes to the dollar. But Paul tries to bolster his credibility on the issue by noting that his newsletters have also “laid bare the coming race war in our big cities” as well as the “federal-homosexual coverup on AIDS,” adding that “my training as a physician helps me see through this one.”

It's a shame there's no credible Republican challengers to the nomination.

[44nutman]

Looks like the media that hates Ron Paul is digging up some shit from 20 + years ago. I was waiting for this to happen once he got the lead. They can't dig up any women because who would fuck him. 
Just for the record, Ron Paul said he never wrote it and has disavowed the content of the letters. Don't worry, the media will keep trying to play the racist angle on Ron Paul. I wish our media would go back to covering elections instead of trying to dictate them. 
Here is a black man who thinks Ron Paul is not racist.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rsXoeSm2X0&feature=player_embedded#!

[44nutman]

I know this goes against what the media currently wants you to beleive about Ron Paul, but his is a strict Libertarian and ideas are beneficial to African Americans, dudes been preaching the same message for years. That is what makes this media attack such a sham. Sad really.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7hu5sVWSl4&NR=1&feature=endscreen

[Howey]

I know this goes against what the media currently wants you to beleive about Ron Paul, but his is a strict Libertarian and ideas are beneficial to African Americans, dudes been preaching the same message for years. That is what makes this media attack such a sham. Sad really.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7hu5sVWSl4&NR=1&feature=endscreen

Watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m-RhKBfb2g&feature=player_embedded

[Howey]

I know this goes against what the media currently wants you to beleive about Ron Paul, but his is a strict Libertarian and ideas are beneficial to African Americans, dudes been preaching the same message for years.

I really want to believe you, but apparently he's the cup of tea for our assorted crazies out there, including militia groups, racists, and jewophobes. The NYT explains:

The American Free Press, which markets books like “The Invention of the Jewish People” and “March of the Titans: A History of the White Race,” is urging its subscribers to help it send hundreds of copies of Ron Paul’s collected speeches to voters in New Hampshire. The book, it promises, will “Help Dr. Ron Paul Win the G.O.P. Nomination in 2012!”

Don Black, director of the white nationalist Web site Stormfront, said in an interview that several dozen of his members were volunteering for Mr. Paul’s presidential campaign, and a site forum titled “Why is Ron Paul such a favorite here?” has no fewer than 24 pages of comments. “I understand he wins many fans because his monetary policy would hurt Jews,” read one.

Far-right groups like the Militia of Montana say they are rooting for Mr. Paul as a stalwart against government tyranny.

More...

The white supremacists, survivalists and anti-Zionists who have rallied behind his candidacy have not exactly been warmly welcomed. “I wouldn’t be happy with that,” Mr. Paul said in an interview Friday when asked about getting help from volunteers with anti-Jewish or antiblack views.

But he did not disavow their support. “If they want to endorse me, they’re endorsing what I do or say — it has nothing to do with endorsing what they say,” said Mr. Paul, who is now running strong in Iowa for the Republican nomination.

Personally, if I had to shruggingly embrace the embrace of hate in order to try to win the nomination, I'd drop out first.

[Howey]

More from the NYT piece.

In May, Mr. Paul reiterated in an interview with Chris Matthews of MSNBC that he would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawing segregation. He said that he supported its intent, but that parts of it violated his longstanding belief that government should not dictate how property owners behave. He has been featured in videos of the John Birch Society, which campaigned against the Civil Rights Act, warning, for instance, that the United Nations threatens American sovereignty.

In the mid-1990s, between his two stints as a Texas congressman, Mr. Paul produced a newsletter called The Ron Paul Survival Report, which only months before the Oklahoma City bombings encouraged militias to seek out and expel federal agents in their midst. That edition was titled “Why Militias Scare the Striped Pants Off Big Government.”

An earlier edition of another newsletter he produced, The Ron Paul Political Report, concluded that the need for citizens to arm themselves was only natural, given carjackings by “urban youth who play whites like pianos.” The report, with no byline but written in the first person, said: “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self-defense. For the animals are coming.”

I'm beginning to understand now. One can run on a racist platform as long as they say they don't want government intervention.

So when his followers start killing the blacks, mo's, and Jews he can say "Yeah...but at least the government wasn't involved!"

sheesh...

[44nutman]

More from the NYT piece.
 


I'm beginning to understand now. One can run on a racist platform as long as they say they don't want government intervention.

So when his followers start killing the blacks, mo's, and Jews he can say "Yeah...but at least the government wasn't involved!"

sheesh...

So when the right said  Barack Obama is supported by the Black Panthers, what was your reaction?
This whole racist angle is full of shit and I don't care what the once proud New York times posted. Our media is shit.

Ron Paul has support from some white hate groups because like them, he want less government, no different than Barack having support from Black Panthers. Neither one of them, I would consider a racist. Like the YOutube clips I posted, Ron Paul asks the question why are so many blacks in prision. He also has support from blacks, but of course that does not support the new Ron Paul is a racist angle, so his support from black voters goes ingnored. That would not play well with Ron Paul is a racist, angle. Like I said our media is agenda driven.


I want to be clear, I agree with some of what Ron Paul says, the dude has great ideas, some of his other ideas I am against, but to fall into the media trap that he is a racist is just redonkulous.
I also don't know who I am voting for as president. Barack has been a let down and seems like the typical corporate candidate. He talks a good game but look at his appointees and history of donors, the dude is up to his ears in corporate money. For me it might be another vote for the enemy I know. 

[Howey]

So when the right said  Barack Obama is supported by the Black Panthers, what was your reaction?

My reaction? I checked the sources (Drudge, Breitbart, et al)

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201110030013

Andrew Breitbart wants you to know that he doesn't think President Obama is "a secret member of the New Black Panther Party." But he's more than willing to hide the truth in order to conjure up the ridiculous smear that sometimes, they hang out.

Under the headline "Shock Photos: Candidate Obama Appeared And Marched With New Black Panther Party in 2007," Breitbart reports that at a March 2007 march in Selma, "then-Senator Obama was joined by a group of Panthers who had come to support his candidacy."

Breitbart is providing some publicity for charges that New Black Panther Party fabulist J. Christian Adams leveled at the president in his new book Injustice: Exposing The Racial Agenda Of The Obama Justice Department, which comes out tomorrow. Breitbart provided a blurb for the back of the book, and in the acknowledgements Adams thanks Breitbart, whom he describes as his "soul brother and pied piper."

In claiming that Obama was "joined by" the Panthers, "appeared and marched with" them, and "shar[ed] the same podium" with them, Breitbart carefully avoids explaining just what the event in question was. References to Obama campaigning "in Selma, Alabama in March 2007" and a mention of how "then-Senator Hillary Clinton and Al Sharpton were also in Selma at the same event" do more to confuse the readers than explain it to them.

Being in a march of thousands and thousands of people (along with the New Black Panthers) does not equate words taken directly out of Paul's mouth.

Ron Paul has support from some white hate groups because like them, he want less government

I believe I also said that.

Barack has been a let down and seems like the typical corporate candidate. He talks a good game but look at his appointees and history of donors, the dude is up to his ears in corporate money.

So is Paul.

Among his GOP colleagues, only Mitt Romney raised more than Paul, R-Texas.
 
The Paul campaign said that most of the money from the latest Constitution Day moneybomb came from small donors contributing less than $200.
 
According to The Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan non-profit research group dedicated to tracking money in U.S. politics, small-dollar donations made up about half of Paul’s total donations for the period.
 
In fact, those $200-or-less donations added up to $2.26 million – the largest total amount among his GOP colleagues.
 
CRP broke down the numbers further and found that of the top 10 biggest individual contributions; three were associated with a branch of the military.
 
In fact, Paul’s non-interventionist philosophy helped him raise $32,089 among those who identify their employer as the U.S. military, the biggest total among his GOP colleagues.
 
Outside of the military, some of Paul’s biggest donations came from the financial and communications sectors.
 
Employees of Google, Entergy Corporation, and Lockheed Martin are some of the top companies whose employees have backed Paul. Paul currently sits on several financial services and foreign affairs committees.

So, as you are well aware, are all the candidates. Unless we reform election laws and get rid of that pesky guy named Citizens United, they always will.

[lil mike]

Looks like the media that hates Ron Paul is digging up some shit from 20 + years ago. I was waiting for this to happen once he got the lead. They can't dig up any women because who would fuck him. 
Just for the record, Ron Paul said he never wrote it and has disavowed the content of the letters. Don't worry, the media will keep trying to play the racist angle on Ron Paul. I wish our media would go back to covering elections instead of trying to dictate them. 
Here is a black man who thinks Ron Paul is not racist.

I think the Republicans started dropping the dime on him before the media got to him.  They really want to stop him from winning Iowa.  The newsletters came up in 2008, but they didn't get much traction then, but Hannity brought them up this time to stop his growth in Iowa.  If he wants to attack Republicans he would do better to go after Gingrich.  Gingrich and Paul's chances of being President are just about equal.

[uselesslegs]

I am always leary of anyone, who in a thought experiment of Governing Principals, finds the forced inclusion of different races, those of different sexual orientation, and different religious practices...to be an infringement upon the right of the individual to decide whether or not they will service them (hey nooowwww) in business.

It's the type of isolationist thought experiment that forgoes community equality for individual freedom, at the expense of the members of the community as a whole...for the individual who'd prefer not to deal with others they deem undesirable, for any number of reasons...least of which would include dislike based solely on bigotry and stereotypes.  That caters to divisive practices being *the norm* and acceptable and shits on an entire swath of people, merely because of their skin color, choice of God, sexual orientation,...hell...even hair color if they want to take it that far.  It's dangerous and it erodes the well being of the society, as the worth and standing of a certain *type* is decided entirely on the whim of the individual, not in private, but in real world business practice.

Want a loaf of bread?  Not in my store nigger, get out.  Want to pay your gas bill? Fuck you faggot, use the phone to make the payment, don't bring your homo ass into the payment center ever again!  While not smart business, it would be lawfully permissible.  That scares the shit out of me.

[uselesslegs]

I think the Republicans started dropping the dime on him before the media got to him.  They really want to stop him from winning Iowa.  The newsletters came up in 2008, but they didn't get much traction then, but Hannity brought them up this time to stop his growth in Iowa.  If he wants to attack Republicans he would do better to go after Gingrich.  Gingrich and Paul's chances of being President are just about equal.

You're right.  I remember (I think it was Hannity) doing an interview with Ron Paul in 2007-08 and during most of the back and forth, it didn't take an observant person to see that Hannity was leaning towards "Buffoon" or "Whacky" with regards to Paul.  I remember feeling bad for Ron and thinking, "Jesus, I guess Paul isn't Hannity's idea of a Republican."

[lil mike]

It's the type of isolationist thought experiment that forgoes community equality for individual freedom,

That's it exactly.  The tension between liberty and equality are the two opposing forces of our Republic.  The growth of one necessitates the reduction of the other.  Where we want that balance to lay is the root of most of our political conflicts.

[uselesslegs]

That's it exactly.  The tension between liberty and equality are the two opposing forces of our Republic.  The growth of one necessitates the reduction of the other.  Where we want that balance to lay is the root of most of our political conflicts.

Correct you are sir.  Does freedom envelope it's name sake in unconditional practice or is it applied in a capacity that is not unconditional, but enacts laws that incorporate to the benefit of the many at the expense of the few, who view any laws dictating "freedom* as just the opposite...?

Tis quite the debate.

[lil mike]

Correct you are sir.  Does freedom envelope it's name sake in unconditional practice or is it applied in a capacity that is not unconditional, but enacts laws that incorporate to the benefit of the many at the expense of the few, who view any laws dictating "freedom* as just the opposite...?

Tis quite the debate.

That's why it's always been a shifting balance.