Ron Paul Story
Indifference
Posts: 2,725
SHOW COUNT: (164) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=108, US=118, CAN=15, Europe=20 ,New Zealand=4, Australia=5
Mexico=1, Colombia=1
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
someone hacked drudge report and put up a link that is probably being hacked itself right now.
Breaking news: Ron Paul Shock Newsletters Unearthed: Claim MLK a Gay Pedophile, Praise David Duke, Speculate 1993 WTC Bombing Was Mossad Job...
:rolleyes:
RIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiighhhhhhhhhhhhhht!
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Thanks for the read. Interesting stuff that, if actually directly connected to Ron Paul, would certainly call his personal ethics into question.
However, until Ron Paul explicitly calls for discrimination as policy, be it aimed at racial minorities or homosexuals or any other group, I'm not going to pay much heed to those fearful of some words on a page. Ron Paul stands for a state wherein all are treated equally by the government, be them rich or poor or black or white or gay or straight. Every other candidate stands for some kind of direct entitlement, punishment, or selective modification of the rights of some, be them corporate welfare, poverty welfare, affirmative action, reparations, war or "progressive" taxation. So to call Ron Paul a discriminatory candidate because of 10 year old newsletters that may or may not have been written or approved by him seems kind of silly when every other candidate out there is loudly calling for some group to treated differently than another at each campaign stop.
I also find it amusing that the simple suggestion that a group of people have fundamental rights to secede from this nation is so often perceived as a tacit approval of slavery. There is much irony in this statement, as limiting the right of secession is, in itself, a form of slavery. I completely support any group of people in this country that chooses to secede from our nation, for whatever reason they choose. I may not support them in what they do after secession, nor would I necessarily support their reasoning, but I would absolutely support their right to secede.
I believe Ron Paul is a good and decent person. However, I don't really know Ron Paul personally, nor can I completely get in his head. So perhaps I am wrong. That said, I do know that the message he is spreading across this country represents the best path to a nation where people are judged by their abilities, as opposed to their attributes.
If true, maybe some more mainstream reporters will hit those libraries to do some reporting on this also.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-rele ... regarding-old-newsletters
Press Releases › Ron Paul Statement on The New Republic Article Regarding Old Newsletters
January 8, 2008 5:28 am EST
ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – In response to an article published by The New Republic, Ron Paul issued the following statement:
“The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.
“In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person's character, not the color of their skin. As I stated on the floor of the U.S. House on April 20, 1999: ‘I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.’
“This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.
“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publically taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.”
http://www.ronpaulforums.com
and they should be.
Who wouldn't be scared of having such a bigot getting the highest office?
Luckily, he doesn't seem to have enough support to make it anyway.
He's not a bigot....where do you guys get this nonsense?
He's not mainstream that's for sure, but he sure as heck isn't a bigot.
Tinfoil hat status would be a step up for you.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Not exactly tin foil hat territory when his name is on stuff like this.
provide the url to this sub tinfoil hat mentality blog pls.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
http://www.tnr.com/downloads/October1990.pdf
http://www.tnr.com/downloads/december1990.pdf
http://www.tnr.com/downloads/January91.pdf
wow... i knew there was something up with this guy
None of those links work for me. I get page not found :(
edit now they do...looking at them
So this is supposed to be his own words?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
http://www.ronpaulforums.com
"Criticisms
The Institute has been characterized by some writers as "right-wing,"[23][24] a label which individuals associated with the Institute, including Lew Rockwell, say is inaccurate.[25]
[edit] Historical views
LvMI's publications have, like abolitionist Lysander Spooner, been supportive of the Confederate States of America's attempted secession (or more accurately, the right to secede), which precipitated the American Civil War. They have also been highly critical of Abraham Lincoln's conduct of the war (e.g. suspending Habeas Corpus, jailing those who dissented against the war and against the draft), asserting that his policies contributed to the growth of authoritarianism in the United States. Senior faculty member Thomas DiLorenzo, in his critical biography The Real Lincoln, argues that the 16th president substantially expanded the size and powers of the federal government at the expense of individual liberty. Adjunct faculty member Donald Livingston shares a similar view, blaming Lincoln for the creation of "a French Revolutionary style unitary state" and "centralizing totalitarianism." [26]
LvMI's publications have also maintained that fascism and National Socialism (Nazism) are branches of socialist political philosophy. They cite the fact that these ideologies are based on collectivist rejections of the individual in favor of some "greater good", and that they incorporate central control over the economy and often also society. This line of argument is discussed in more detail at Fascism and ideology.
[edit] Southern Poverty Law Center
The historical views of the Institute and of several people affiliated with it have been interpreted by some critics, such as the Southern Poverty Law Center, as sympathetic to the Confederacy. The SPLC has criticized the Institute for its "interest in neo-Confederate themes", which SPLC considers to be a form of racism. SPLC has also criticized some members of the Institute for their connections with the League of the South. [27]
Another SPLC complaint[28] involves a Murray Rothbard essay called "Origins of the Welfare State in America"[29] on the Mises Institute website. According to an SPLC Intelligence Report article written by Chip Berlet:
Rothbard blamed much of what he disliked on meddling women. In the mid-1800s, a "legion of Yankee women" who were "not fettered by the responsibilities" of household work "imposed" voting rights for women on the nation. Later, Jewish women, after raising funds from "top Jewish financiers", agitated for child labor laws, Rothbard adds with evident disgust. The "dominant tradition" of all these activist women, he suggests, is lesbianism.[28]
Ludwig von Mises Institute-affiliated individuals have denounced the SPLC's allegations: LvMI's Tibor Machan argues that the SPLC's tactics are not aimed at "fighting poverty" as the its name suggests, but rather to create a "major threat against the First Amendment and the presumption of innocence in our criminal justice system" by unfairly labeling organizations with differing political viewpoints.[30] Myles Kantor, also affiliated with LvMI, has asserted the SPLC engages in fear-mongering and smearing of legitimate non-racist groups in pursuit of profitable financial contributions and ideological goals. According to Kantor, the SPLC's labeling tactics include "egregious" and "defamatory" implications that "the Center for the Study of Popular Culture and Mises Institute seek to restore Hitlerian policies."[31]"
The Cato Institute http://www.cato.org/ (a libertarian group) separated itself from the above institute.
but the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel Boorstin
Only a life lived for others is worth living.
~Albert Einstein
Hail Hail HIPPIEMOM
Wishlist Foundation-
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
info@wishlistfoundation.org
RP supporters believe anything - 5 second search gives results by City which disputes these facts:
http://www3.whdh.com/elections/NH080108/race.php?rn=31146
SHOW COUNT: (164) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=108, US=118, CAN=15, Europe=20 ,New Zealand=4, Australia=5
Mexico=1, Colombia=1
You know the drug war that arrests, tries, convicts and imprisons blacks and hispanics at higher rates than whites who statistically are more likely to use more illegal drugs?
Would a racist want to repeal racist laws?
http://www.mikecann.net/2009/02/best-smoking-song-poll.html
Vote on Our Best Smoking Poll with Pearl Jam song!
i mean, this is a friggin slam dunk if you ask me... this guy is fucking nuts
I'm not seeing a clear case the guy is a outright racist. Personally, I don't think it's there. As goes the old adage "when the argument fails, attack the person." Racism is the oldest smear in the book.
If anyone could show me some clear cut evidence direct evidence of Ron Paul tossing around racist remarks and rhetoric , I'll look at it.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I think that 98% of the people trying to paint Paul as a racist based on one 20 year old item that he has addressed over and over for years are pretty damn ignorant. They cant do their own research to see the facts, and they dont understand the political game being played with this news, nor do they understand that he would not be re-elected to office over and over for 20 years if he were truly a racist.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com
Different climate today, I'll admit, but: George Wallace. And yes, I'm just saying that cos I listened to the Drive-By Truckers.:p