Who here is lying? CNN, the Dallas Morning News, and the Houston Chronicle? Or Ron Paul?
Ron Paul can do no wrong. At least, that's what I'm seeing in the replies to other Blogcritics articles. There are some who are absolutely sure that Ron Paul had nothing whatsoever to do with those racist newsletters (photocopies here; they're very interesting reading). So let's first examine the known facts, the possibilities, and then let's examine the proof. For all those who are absolutely sure that Ron Paul is completely innocent, at least do yourselves the favor of reading this whole article before replying. The known facts:…
Article comments
226 - Daniel Knight
First of all, as a true Christian, I'm allowed to judge Ron, because he also claims to be one. The Bible says Christians are to do so (to other true Christians) without condemning. I don't know if Paul is a true C, but that he endorses the Constitution over the Bible makes him suspect. Christians aren't supposed to make out any document superior to the Bible being that it's God's word. Now that that is out of the way, I can't finding anything racist about what Paul says, and donations come from corrupt people often anyways, that one came from a known racist group makes no difference, so long as it isn't a bribe. However, I just read up on the Jim crow laws, and his supposedly saying he wouldn't have voted against them would be immoral, not because I don't believe that A CULTURE can be bad, or even that depending on your DNA you can be more prone to behave one way over another, but because there's no evidence that blacks in America are inherently worse than whites. It can easily be argued that, if they do commit a higher percentage of crimes, it's because of the disadvantage they had from the start, and the racist campaign Margaret Sanger carried out against them. In the Bible, Japeth is said to be the fairer race, a kind of hint that they are the most beautiful. I have no problem with that and I'm barely white. Everyone knows that the more beautiful person (unless their bad personality is too offensive to deal with) gets better treatment in general, or rather, are favored, although there are some exceptions, for example a beautiful blonde might be stereotyped as being dumber than some young Asian with black hair and plain eyeglasses on. Do you get where I'm going? So looks is another factor that disadvantages blacks. The same is true for masses of Chinese. A huge amount of them live in poverty. Ron, IF he believes in the Jim Crow laws, hasn't taken in to consideration these things. Also, I noticed he wouldn't say whether or not he believed in evolution. IF he believes in the JC laws, it would indicate to me that he leans towards evolution, believing that blacks are inferior in evolutionary development. For those who don't know by the way, Asians are apart of the line of Japeth, they aren't Semites or Hamites. As for culture, yeah, obviously blacks are inferior. I even heard it from a black woman herself in that she said she didn't understand why rich black women, famous ones, were always hooking up with evil black men. That they do that will have a bad influence on other black women. In the Bible, Cretans were said to be "all liars", it was acknowledged as true. Whether or not that's still the case I don't know. Oh and, I've had plenty of experiences with blacks, even someone who seemed to be the best of them was unfriendly, and friendly ones are rare. However, in these last days, most people seem to me to be corrupt and weak staffs. Whites may be friendlier, but I find they sour my experience with them with their ignorance. Ignorance makes all the races equal, blacks may a be a little more brutish, but what difference does it make in the end: most of the world will end up in Hell, and only a few will be saved, and God saves the poor and needy, and sinners." Consider also that homosexuals are among the worst groups in the Bible, perhaps those having sex with animals being even lower (and perhaps, though it doesn't say, those who have sex with inanimate objects being lower still). But does that mean that Christians should not help or shy away from them and instead spend more time preaching to non-homosexuals because, "they are less bad in general"? No way: Christ suffered and died for sinners, even for murderers, child abusers, prostitutes and rapists. Nothing in the Bible says, "Do not preach to the wicked". The only thing it says concerning that is to not contemptuously give valuable things to "pigs" and "dogs", meaning, those with poor self control, and those who react violently. I'm not going to direct my preaching only at two strains of humans and cower away from blacks because they might be more likely to chase me for saying, "Jesus be praised. Even if Paul has a tinge of racism, the Mormons are WAY more racist in general. And that I know from experience since I listened to younger members in secret, talking about their hatred for blacks, and one even told me she was racist. So can Romney be trusted? As for Newt Grinch, the Bible disqualifies him three times because he couldn't manage his family. In the Bible, no one is allowed to be a pastor or bishop who can't manage their family well. And Newt has divorced three times. How many times has Ron Paul divorced? And remember what the Bible says about divorce? It says God hates it. Further, Mormons follow and worship a demonic dead narcissist who could hardly control himself and ended up dead in a gun battle, firing back at his enemies (so much for forgive your enemies and love them). So between a cultist and a man who can't even manage his own family, I'd most likely choose Paul. Plus, Paul intends to stop us from wasting anymore money playing games in the Middle East. We DO need to protect our coasts from those intending to sneak attack us with an EMP weapon. We're over extended. If someone tries to nuke us, no doubt our military will nuke them back. Also, I seriously doubt Ron is going to recall our military submarines. I don't think he's so dumb as to not keep watch over what Russia, China or Cuba is doing near their borders. But if not, it still isn't a big deal to me, because China and Russia can already easily get to our coasts, and some think China already demonstrated that with that apparent missile that went onto California.
227 - Sterno
Notice how these newsletters are *never* shown so that we might gain some much needed context?
After all, I've seen Paul branded a racist for opposing the Civil Rights Act. You have to actually *study* his position to realize that it is not a racist stance.
I've received Paul's newsletter since the late 80's, and while admittedly I did not comb over every sentence for a racist gotcha, nothing ever jumped out as overtly racist, either.
228 - bobp
My biggest disagreement with ROn Paul is his support for releasing drug criminals.
229 - Norma
I don't believe Dr Paul has a hateful thought for anyone let alone for anyone kind of people.
Ron Paul loves America and wants to see us all free again. You Mr Contrarin I find you very contrary to to the principle of Restoring America and restoring fairness to our country. I find your motives for writing this suspect. As for Conservative Byte making it the story of the day. They have just lost any credibility they may have had with me.
230 - Igor
Is this guy an intentional caricature?
226 - Daniel Knight
"First of all, as a true Christian,..."
Oh, really? Sez who? Or is this your self-appraisal? In which case you really look like a true braggart more than a 'true Christian'.
"... I'm allowed to judge Ron,..."
Yeah, sure. Just as ANYONE is allowed to judge Ron, especially if he's running for public office. In fact it's the duty of every citizen to judge Ron.
"... because he also claims to be one."
So what? If he's running for PUBLIC office then everyone is entitled to judge Ron.
"... The Bible says Christians are to do so (to other true Christians) without condemning."
Do you guys (who brag to being true Christians) keep a membership roll, or something?
"... I don't know if Paul is a true C, but that he endorses the Constitution over the Bible makes him suspect."
I'm sure that's a big relief to Loyal Americans who are glad to hear that the supreme law of the land still applies.
"... Christians aren't supposed to make out any document superior to the Bible being that it's God's word."
Sez who?
231 - Ted Lindbeck
I lived and worked in Black Seattle for 13 years, and know the deep moral/spiritual/cultural divide that separates me from the large majority of black people. It is not a racial thing, it's a theological/philosophical/moral separation, and the black community cohesiveness DEMANDS that you buy these bad outlooks or be shunned....most cave in.
232 - Dr Dreadful
"... Christians aren't supposed to make out any document superior to the Bible being that it's God's word."
Sez who?
I'm guessing Daniel missed Sunday school the day they did the bit about rendering unto Caesar.
233 - Irene Athena
Daniel Knight: "True C.???" You decide.
If C stands for caricature, I'll vote yes.
234 - AnonRRealist
Sadly, race realism is considered "racist," regardless of truth. It's the reason why we talk about "bad neighborhoods" and "bad public schools" as euphemisms. Detroit is said to be a destroyed and dangerous city because of "liberal policy" when it is inhabited by 81% "bad" type of people. While Sweden is much more liberal and heaven in comparison.
Ron Paul will never be elected nationally because he has Eyes That Can See (or did, when the newsletters were written).
235 - ED
It looks to me like this nalle guy is the real boob. He needs to go back to the libeeral side that I`m sure he really believes is, and let RON PAUL do what I believe he was destined to do, whick is lead our country out of the mess the dems, and socialist liberals have gotten us into
236 - AussieSpectator
What garbage... Ron Paul 2012! He deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.
237 - Igor
I cannot understand why Ron Paul failed to denounce and stop the racist stuff that was said in his name.
In the Bush administration a guy named Cooney (political crony of the Bush administration and spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute) CHANGED some papers from scientists, pre-publication, and thus changed what it appeared that the scientists had said! Cooney forgeriesThat's forgery.
The scientists blew the whistle on the crook. Why can't Paul blow the whistle on people who lied in his name?
238 - Rusty
Paul-ites can't take it when their hero is shown up to be the racist coward that he is - if ANYONE else ducked press questions with "I'm too busy to find out" they wouldn't take it, but now they fall all over themselves to explain away.
239 - OWNtheNWO
Ron Paul hates Copyright laws so he never did so to his newsletter. This is the end result.
240 - Igor
It has nothing to do with copyright laws.
There are many people struggling against copyright abuse (notably, many software developers) and still protecting their work.
241 - Hovy
reprehensible 9/11 Truth movement? This "liberatarian" Dave Nalle could find himself in a asswhooping using those choice words to the families of the victims who take that very seriously.
242 - Gedas
Story of Ron Paul's racism is designed for the weak-minded people to lead them astray...
243 - adrian
Just when you thought Ron Paul was racist...
In this ad by RevolutionPac, James Williams of Matagorda County, Texas recounts a touching true story. Living in a still prejudice Texas In 1972, his wife had a complication with her pregnancy. No doctors would care for her or deliver their bi-racial child. In fact one of the hospital nurses called the police on James.
Dr. Ron Paul was notified and took her in, delivering their stillborn baby. Because of the compassion of Dr. Ron Paul, the Williams' never received a hospital bill for the delivery.
Ron Paul views every human being as an unique individual, afforded the rights endowed by our creator and codified in the Bill of Rights.
244 - Glenn Contrarian
Adrian -
That does not mean that Paul isn't racist. I was raised racist in the MS Delta, and my whole family was racist, but we still gladly shared food from our garden with the blacks and talked to them and laughed with them...
...and then when they walked away, we'd start the n-word jokes.
No, Paul is racist. That is the reason why he believes that all businesses have a right to discriminate on the basis of race, color, creed, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. All the libertarian label does is 'legitimize' his racism.
245 - Dr Dreadful
Glenn, by your logic, that would also make Ron Paul a xenophobe, a religious bigot and a homophobe.
It is, you may be surprised to learn, possible to believe that someone should be allowed to act like a complete tit without condoning their completetittedness.
As I understand it, the thinking is that such behaviour will eventually lose the bigoted entrepreneur so much business that he'll stop doing it. It's essentially the same as saying, sure, Mr Corner Store Druggist, go ahead and be an arsehole and charge $30 a pop for toothbrushes if you want, but don't be surprised if everyone stops shopping with you and buys them at CVS instead where they're $3.99.
No, Adrian's anecdote doesn't prove that Paul isn't a racist (after all, some of his best friends might be black too), but neither do his opinions on civil rights legislation as it relates to commerce prove the opposite.
It's about as feeble as taking a few racist articles that may or may not have appeared in 30-40 year old newsletters that may or may not have been approved by the man himself as proof of Paul's opinions on race now.
Sorry, not buying it.
246 - Glenn Contrarian
Doc -
It means no such thing. All my post means is that something nice that Paul did for somebody black does NOT mean he wasn't racist. After all, Abraham Lincoln was by today's standards quite racist, and he did something really nice for the blacks.
What gets me is that
1) he claims he never wrote them, but he refuses to say who did, and
2) his political staff at the time that the newspaper first exposed his writing (according to proof that I gave somewhere in this thread if not in the article itself) certainly thought Paul agreed with the racist remarks, and
3) when this matter was first brought up in the 1990's, Paul did not deny them at all.
When all this is considered, it doesn't take much to draw a line directly from what was written in HIS newsletter to his belief that businesses have a right to discriminate due to race...
...and if you've been paying attention to the news, one of his former aides (named 'Dondero', I think) related a story of Paul's homophobia. But you know what? Since that's only ONE person making the accusation, I will ignore it. But what I can't ignore is the evidence of his racism that I've pointed out to you in this comment, for it directly involves not only his newsletter but also his staff.
247 - El Bicho
"Since that's only ONE person making the accusation, I will ignore it."
And yet you didn't ignore as even you can plainly see. How utterly disingenuous.
I heard Glenn was an enemy of democracy, but since there's only ONE person making the accusation, I will ignore it. (See how it works?)
248 - Glenn Contrarian
El B -
Show me anywhere that I've ever accused Paul of being a homophobe.
You can't.
Racist, yes, but until I see more evidence, you'll never see me call him a homophobe.
249 - El Bicho
Honestly, Glenn, your reading comprehension is terrible.
"Show me anywhere that I've ever accused Paul of being a homophobe. You can't."
Show me anywhere that I've ever accused you of accusing Paul of being a homophobe. You can't.
What I responded to was you claim that you were going to ignore the charge of Paul's alleged homophobia, but pointing out you are ignoring is the opposite of ignoring it. You are recognized it and drew attention to it. Do you not know what the word "ignore" means?
250 - Dr Dreadful
Glenn:
Again, the beliefs about race that Ron Paul held, or may have actively or passively condoned, several decades ago are not necessarily those he holds now. People's opinions change: your account of your own upbringing demonstrates that.
As silly and naive as it may seem to you and me, all Paul is saying here is that a business should be free to decide who it does business with, just as you and I are free to decide who we invite into our homes. That's just standard libertarian idealism. Reading any more than that into it is innuendo.
As far as Paul himself is concerned, I'm pleased that he's become (for the moment, anyway) one of the GOP front runners. It shows that at least some Republicans value principles over posturing. And I do agree with a lot of his positions, especially on social issues.
That said, a Ron Paul White House would be a disaster. He lacks pragmatism. He would certainly be a different sort of president, but he would be working with the same old Washington. There's no way Congress would countenance most of what he wants to do (or undo), and no way he would sign most of the bills Congress passes.
If you think DC is gridlocked now, just wait...
251 - Christopher Rose
From my outsider perspective, Ron Paul is the only candidate that even begins to make sense, although he is only the best of a bad bunch and there is not a single candidate to actually get enthusiastic about.
Everybody has prejudices; I myself, in addition to not liking faithists, French or the French, don't much care for redheads or the Welsh.
It is how one acts that matters though and acting out of prejudice is bad. I don't allow my prejudices to get the better of me - and, yes, I even have church-going red-headed Welsh friends and relatives!
252 - Irene Athena
Dr. D: "[Paul] would certainly be a different sort of president, but he would be working with the same old Washington."
A different sort of electorate is emerging, and if it decides to put a different sort of president in office, it will in all likelihood be electing a different sort of Congress as well.
The Democrats will be defending 23 senatorial seats in '12; the Republicans, ten.
253 - Reisa Gerber
Hello...I read some nonsense on an informative site that a man I do not and do not care to know, has quoted that "...I hate the rich... tra la la.. I was also labelled a racsist... and that means I have to sit down at the darn computer at a quarter to nine and correct thet nothing I did that makes this a falsehood... but I can see the source and I do understand this nonsense... so I have to reply.
First of all, I wrote a song which was supposed to be a satire... called "aint that afroamerica" meant to be a sweetheart love letter to my sister, Bless her, who minored in afroamerican studies in princeton way back in 1980... I don't see the need to further inquiry into her life...
Secondly, who is ron paul, for goodness sakes? And believe me... that is that... do I have to throw the final punch? I clearly support
president obama and while I certainly support him/check it out... I love money!!!