The bigoted past of Ron Paul?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by hjmick, Jan 8, 2008.

  1. hjmick
    Offline

    hjmick Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    16,179
    Thanks Received:
    4,680
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Ratings:
    +7,122
    Paulitics and I were exchanging thoughts on Ron Paul earlier and I expressed the notion that one factor that gave me pause where Paul is concerned is the fact that my bigot of a cousin supports him quite strongly. While I acknowledged that the fact that a racist may support him, that in and of itself does not make Ron Paul a racist, I was prompted to look into his positions a bit more. I also applied this idea to the other candidates. It seems that I am not the only one looking at Ron Paul.

    While tripping around the internet today, I stumbled upon this article over at The New Republic. The author was curious about Ron Paul. He delved into Ron Paul's political past, particularly the different newsletters published under Paul's name. There is some disturbing content to be found in the newsletters, homophobic commentary, anti-semitism, racist comments.

    As the author points out, there are very few by-lines, so whether or not Paul wrote the pieces is debatable. However, if he did not author the work, the question should be asked, why allow the work to be published giving the impression that these are your beliefs?

    It is an interesting read. I am not accusing Ron Paul of being a bigot. I do not know the man. This is why the title of the thread is a question.

    But I will say that if he is not, perhaps he would have been better served by paying closer attention to what was printed in his name.

    Th jury is still out...


     
  2. indago
    Offline

    indago VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,055
    Thanks Received:
    98
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +180
    MSNBC TV — TUCKER CARLSON — 7 January 2008

    CARLSON: As many of you now, I have spent some time with Ron Paul on the trail. I’m impressed by his broad coalition of support. I have championed his commitment to always speaking the truth, no matter how unpopular it might be. Now, "The New Republic" is set to publish a piece on Friday that questions whether Ron Paul is really the man he seems to be. The piece cites offensive passages from news letters published under Ron Paul’s name going as far back to the 1970s.

    Paul’s campaign acknowledges that their candidate did publish these news letters for years. But it says it did not see everything before it went to print. The campaign has also apologized, most recently to me on phone. Joining me is the author of the new piece, the "New Republic’s" Jamie Kirchick. Jamie, thanks for coming on.

    JAMES KIRCHICK, "THE NEW REPUBLIC": Tucker, thanks for having me.

    CARLSON: So, the Paul campaign says yes, some friends of his misused his name and published unattractive, slightly crazy, maybe very crazy things under his name. They are sorry. And Ron Paul never saw these passages. Do you buy that?

    KIRCHICK: No. Well, when I first asked Ron Paul’s spokesman about this, Jessie Benton, he said that he had actually written parts of the news letter. And then he changed his story somewhat after I read him, for example, passages where Ron Paul calls Martin Luther King a gay pedophile. And after that, he said well, he goes—this was ghost written and the offensive parts were not written by Ron Paul.

    So no, I don’t believe it. You have, you know, 20 years of a news letter here, which will be available on our website starting tomorrow actually, at TNR.com — 20 years of a news letter that is filled with racist, anti-semitic, homophobic invective, and it is called "The Ron Paul Political Report" or "The Ron Paul Freedom Report." It is published by an outfit called Ron Paul and Associates.

    So I really find that defense to be utterly unbelievable.

    CARLSON: Yes. I mean, it is — there is no doubt he was at the very least negligent. It is not much of an explanation. Here’s the one—the one thing, though, that troubles me about the allegation of racism. Ron Paul seems to be the kind of guy that will say exactly what he thinks. If he was a racist, why wouldn’t he just say so?

    KIRCHICK: Well, let’s keep in mind that the actual racist portions of this news letter were published when he was not in Congress. It was in between 1984 and 1996, for the most part — sorry, 1988 and 1996, when he was not actually in Congress. So when you are not in Congress, there’s less scrutiny. There’s less attention paid to what you are saying. And look —

    Let’s see what happened last weekend. We have Barack Obama who is on the verge of becoming the first black Democratic presidential nominee, serious presidential contender. So, you know, racism of this sort, as readers see—racism of this sort does not get you votes anymore.

    CARLSON: OK. But — I mean, some of the stuff stuff, I agree, is offensive and weird. Some of it, though, criticizing Barbara Jordan as the archetypal half-educated victimologist. I don’t know. I mean, you don’t — it is not racist not to respect Barbara Jordan.

    KIRCHICK: No, it’s not. But what about saying that New York City should be called Zooville, as opposed to naming it after Martin Luther King, which is what he said, or Welfaria. You know, he called black people animals and said that his readers of his news letters should move out to the country, buy guns because the animals are coming. This was a couple years before the Los Angeles riots.

    Again, these are not isolated incidents. You should know that back in 1996, about two or three of the news letters were revealed at the time and Paul said that they had been taken out of context. Then five years later he said that he didn’t write them. But he took moral responsibility for them. So what we thought were just isolated examples back in 1996 now we are going to see are actually part of a two-decade long career full of this stuff.

    CARLSON: Do you have any evidence he ever said anything like this?

    KIRCHICK: You mean said it out loud or in person?

    CARLSON: Yes, said it out loud, he, himself, Ron Paul, get out there and say something racist or sexist?

    KIRCHICK: I haven’t seen that. We do know, however — I have found out that he spoke at a pro-secession conference in 1995. This was a neo-confederate organization putting this on. He spoke along with many other writers who advocate for secession. Actually, last week on MSNBC he touted a book called "The Real Lincoln" by a guy named Thomas De Lorenzo (ph), who is a neo-confederate. He has long associations with these types of people.

    What he does, Tucker, is he speaks in code. He is a transmitter. He will say certain things that, you know, at fist may not appear to be overtly racist, but to certain audiences they know what he is talking about. So when he talks about secession, he says it in a way that’s not exactly neo-confederate or isn’t exactly explicitly neo-confederate. But to people who are in the know and people who are a part of this neo-confederate communities, they know exactly what he is talking about.

    CARLSON: Boy, I must say it has gone right over my head. But I appreciate your coming on, Jim Kirchick from "The New Republic."




    -
     
  3. hjmick
    Offline

    hjmick Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    16,179
    Thanks Received:
    4,680
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Ratings:
    +7,122
    In the interest of being fair, Ron Paul responded to the article to something called Reason Magazine.

    Exclusive: Ron Paul Responds

    Essentially, Paul's position is that the newsletters he wrote he stands by and someone else wrote the stuff he has disowned.
     
  4. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    31,577
    Thanks Received:
    4,856
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +15,424
    I don't know, I don't think that guy on Tucker made a case at all.

    At the end, he says Ron "speaks in code", and that the racists "know what he means". That's a pretty weak and totally unfounded argument right there. It's ridiculous, really.

    I don't personally think Ron has said anything that most people haven't thought about at least once. It's just another case of people taking something he said or did out of context.

    Until someone shows me a positively identifying, direct link between Ron Paul and a racist organization, I think this bullshit is exactly that...bullshit.

    We're here waging a "holy war" against a religion, and have been programmed to profile Islamic people, we bitch about all the mexicans in the country, but when one guy made a few ambiguous statements that some people perceive as possibly being "racist", the flood gates open up.

    How can you blame someone, especially a conservative, for being upset about the current state of the welfare system and it's abuse by so many people? How do you get "racist" from him saying Zooville, and referring to welfare recipients as "animals"? The TRUTH of the matter is that probably a majority of people in this country ARE abusing the welfare system, which to me is worth the label of "animal". What did a specific race have to do with that statement?

    MLK being referred to as a "gay pedophile"...You mean to tell me that there's people in here who have never referred to anyone as a "faggot", even if you didn't literally mean it?

    I'm sick and tired of the racism card being played in this country. There's way too much of a double standard when it comes to racism, and there's too much fake bullshit hype surrounding it all the time.

    Bottom line...show me something that explicitly shows Ron Paul to be a racist, with connections to racist groups, besides a random photo, and maybe I'll entertain the idea. So far, the evidence is sparse, circumstantial, and taken way too much out of context.
     
  5. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,794
    Thanks Received:
    2,367
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,306
    This surprised me. While I thought he was a little naive, the journalist's revelations on Tucker were astounding. If he were young at the time one could overlook some of it as youthful stupidity but he wasn't. He never had a chance but this has to crush many who looked at him as 'the great white hope' - pun intended.

    http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=74978161-f730-43a2-91c3-de262573a129

    The Newsletters: Since at least 1978, Ron Paul has attached his name to a series of newsletters--Ron Paul's Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report, and The Ron Paul Investment Letter--that frequently made outrageous statements:

    Angry White Man: Ron Paul's Bigoted Past

    "A Special Issue on Racial Terrorism" analyzes the Los Angeles riots of 1992: "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. ... What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided.""
     
  6. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    TNR basically found more of the same stuff I found when doing background on Paul about a year ago. I didn't go through all the newsletters, but enough. Now they basically went down the memory hole about 6 months ago. Good job on TNR finding them. :clap2:
     
  7. CrpRavens30
    Offline

    CrpRavens30 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    Messages:
    85
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Ratings:
    +6
    Great Post :clap2:
     
  8. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    31,577
    Thanks Received:
    4,856
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +15,424
  9. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,794
    Thanks Received:
    2,367
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,306
    How can you? You gotta be kidding me. "Animals!" How many people on welfare do you know?
     
  10. hjmick
    Offline

    hjmick Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    16,179
    Thanks Received:
    4,680
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Ratings:
    +7,122
    You have made some very good points and I tend to agree with most if not all of them. I also commend you for posting a thoughtful reply rather than an angry tirade as we so often see from some people. I trust you know that my intent was not to level an accusatory finger at Paul, rather it was to stimulate discussion on the topic. I found it strange to come across the article after our exchange and decided that, combined with what I had said earlier it might make good fodder for discussion.
     

Share This Page