Ron Paul- The Racist Liar

[Erinome]

Oh, Ron...

Recently, Paul has defended the newsletters by claiming that he had nothing to do with the newsletters (blaming them on his staff). Just this week, he walked off the set of a CNN interview saying, “I never read that stuff. I became aware of it probably ten years after it was written, and it has been going on for twenty years that people have been pestering me about this, and CNN does it every single time. So when are you going to wear yourself out? I didn’t write them, I didn’t read them at the time, and I disavow them.” There are really only two problems with that defense.

1. Blaming it on your staff is a little like refusing to pay your credit card because it was your teenager who charged up the card. Where’s the libertarian personal responsibility?
2. It’s a lie. In a video that recently surfaced, Paul was talking about the newsletters as early as 1995.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...W755u5460A#!

Talks about newsletter at 1:40

OOPS.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/12/23/...ain-video/

[Tiberius]

This isn't evidence he is racist, or a liar. His claim has never been that he knew nothing about the newsletter's existence, but rather that he didn't know anything about the content, since he didn't personally write or read them.

1) "Libertarian personal responsibility" is just that...personal responsibility. He didn't write the newsletters; they weren't his responsibility. Having said that, even though the content had nothing to do with him, he's apologized for it, and disavowed them. What more do you people want?

2) The video shows he knew about the newsletter's existence, which was never in doubt, and he has never stated otherwise. The video does not show an admission of him writing the newsletters, or reading them.

This is just the usual leftist attempt at smearing a guy who had some stuff written in his name 20 years ago. It's dirty politics; bringing up some element of the past that has long since been buried and brandishing it like it happened last week.

[kılıç_mehmet]

What is this "newsletter"?

[Erinome]

I've been waiting. Sheesh! Took ya long enough...

Evidence this means he's racist please.

What makes one racist in the UK? Here in America, if you're a rich white man, and you slap you're name on the title of a newsletter that makes negative statements of judgement on an isolated race of people, as if it's their skin color that makes them deserving of that judgment, it might mean you're racist... might not.

If you then lie about having heard of, or read the newsletter when you're running for president, because you know what's in it, and how racist it is, then what else is to be concluded?

Who knows what he says in private, and how he really thinks. We could speculate all day long, but nobody in a position of extreme power should think along the lines of black people and white people. We're all Americans here. Here is a video example of some indications that Ron Paul is a racist:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3EADdr-5...re=related

What if Barack Obama were to stand up there saying what Ron Paul is saying? Mind you, I agree with him on the general idea of drug prohibition statement. I don't totally hate the shit out of him. Black people aren't the only people in America who do drugs, or get needlessly punished for them, by the way.

The deal is, if he wasn't a racist, he wouldn't be trying so hard, and putting so much emphasis on championing the rights of "blacks". It's a classic sign of guilt. He's a racist, he knows it, he can run from it, but he can't hide from it. He needs the black vote, because black people are really not so much a minority on election day. Also, poor people who do drugs, of every color are not a minority in America.

He's a backward thinker. The last thing this shit hole needs is another backward thinker running it into the glory of yesterday. (When the blacks knew their fucking place) [barf]

[kılıç_mehmet]

It's really so easy to use that word.
Racist.
However he seems to be speaking on numbers, and well, I must say that most countries have at least one minority that is more deeply integrated with drug related or any other types of crimes.
This guy only adresses drug-related crimes.
They also called out the Jobbik party in Hungary for addressing the Gypsy problem, and it is a proven fact that crime is more prevailent amongst gypsies.
This is not due to something related to being a gypsy, it's related to the conditions under which the gypsies, or for America, the blacks live in.
Like if they live in an environment where the only way out to make a good living seems to be to deal drugs, that's what people are going to do, be they white or black.
But since blacks live in more impoverished and traditionally more criminally active districts of towns and etc..
What can you say, the guy is right. As with the gypsies in eastern Europe, they also live in such conditions that produce stress and economic disadvantages even if they're not nomadic, most gypsies are generally not considered to be productive members of the society, and surely, they're not.
But instead of adressing this problem, people generally call others labels and names for addressing this problem.
Where does this really lead?

[Tiberius]

What makes one racist in the UK? Here in America, if you're a rich white man, and you slap you're name on the title of a newsletter that makes negative statements of judgement on an isolated race of people, as if it's their skin color that makes them deserving of that judgment, it might mean you're racist... might not.

What makes one racist? Espousing racist views. There is no evidence Ron Paul has ever done that, and as I've said repeatedly before, even if there was, he hasn't done it in recent years. In fact, he's done the opposite; he's campaigned for a fairer justice system that treats minorities properly, and for equal protection under the law. This whole "once a racist always a racist" attitude that you (and other liberals) seem to have is really quite astounding, given the number of ex-racists that find absolution each year. These are human beings we are talking about here; everyone makes mistakes at some point...the very least we can do is accept them when they shed their evil views.

If you then lie about having heard of, or read the newsletter when you're running for president, because you know what's in it, and how racist it is, then what else is to be concluded?

...but he didn't lie. He never denied knowledge of the newsletter's existence. What he did deny was reading it and writing it. There is (to my knowledge) no evidence that he did read or write it, only speculation on both sides.

Who knows what he says in private, and how he really thinks. We could speculate all day long, but nobody in a position of extreme power should think along the lines of black people and white people. We're all Americans here. Here is a video example of some indications that Ron Paul is a racist:

Erm...did you even watch the video? Could you point out the bits that were racist? He quoted prison statistics that highlight the unfairness of the judicial system which give harsher punishments to blacks, and then went on to say Martin Luther King Jr and Rosa Parks were his heroes. If that's racist, what the heck isn't?

What if Barack Obama were to stand up there saying what Ron Paul is saying? Mind you, I agree with him on the general idea of drug prohibition statement. I don't totally hate the shit out of him. Black people aren't the only people in America who do drugs, or get needlessly punished for them, by the way.

Since I can only see good things in that video (which is scary since apparently it's "racist"), I'd say that Obama would be hailed as a hero for saying the same things.

The deal is, if he wasn't a racist, he wouldn't be trying so hard, and putting so much emphasis on championing the rights of "blacks". It's a classic sign of guilt. He's a racist, he knows it, he can run from it, but he can't hide from it. He needs the black vote, because black people are really not so much a minority on election day. Also, poor people who do drugs, of every color are not a minority in America.

How is he trying "hard"? Did you take a minute to look at the audience in the video, or to the people on stage? This was clearly a debate at a minority function; of course he's going to talk about minorities. You know what it's also a classic sign of? Not being a dick politician and focusing on one set of people. Fuck me...Ron Paul reaches out to all minority groups, highlighting the unfairness that he sees them suffer...yup, he MUST be a racist. Are you being serious?

He's a backward thinker. The last thing this shit hole needs is another backward thinker running it into the glory of yesterday. (When the blacks knew their fucking place) [barf]

So you like the fact that the drug war claims a disproportionate amount of minorities as victims? Because according to your argument, to point out that discrepancy is "backwards thinking" and racist.

---

Just wondering, what do you make of this: http://www.nolanchart.com/article1134-na...acist.html

I mean, the guy knew Ron Paul back in the days when he was "supposedly" writing racist newsletters on a semi-regular basis, yet according to him, Ron Paul was frequently talking about police repression of black communities, and how much respect he had for Martin Luther King Jr. Do you now at least see why you can't just tarnish someone with the "racist" label? There are multiple sides to the story.

[Erinome]

You make a good point, mehmet, and I agree with you that the system is designed to make criminals only to punish them. The thing is, Ron Paul doesn't really care. Our current president isn't allowed to say he cares, even if he left out the distinction of race, because he is a black man. People from the right wing, like Paul, would have a field day- parading wildly their racism by insinuating that he favors black people. Fox news would make snide comments about it, and John Stewart would call them out on it in a hilarious way, but he would never be able to live it down.

The white mafia, who owns America, likes the way things are in America right now. They're all getting richer by the day off the prison system.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?c...a&aid=8289

http://www.thegrio.com/politics/private-...judice.php

http://www.infowars.com/our-future-in-ch...on-system/

http://ppjg.wordpress.com/2010/12/26/ame...or-profit/



It's really fucked up, and they do target black people and Hispanics. It works, and it makes a lot of powerful people a lot of money. Ron Paul is a liar, and can't be trusted. Since they can't enslave these people, they're damn sure gonna do anything to keep them down, and make them profit. He doesn't give a shit about black people. He thinks they're waste, and will say anything to get elected into office. His drug policy will never go through. It's pretty talk to get elected so that he can protect the interests of the 1%.

[Tiberius]

You've yet to show that Ron Paul has "lied" about anything. I've refuted you twice now, and yet you still make the same claim without evidence. This is the same tactic creationists use...please don't sink that low.

[HeyItsZeus]

Regardless of if he's a liar or not, I still don't like him. Looking past his libertarian views on economics, Tiberius, you'll see he's the type of person you can't stand; a religious lunatic. He claims to be pro personal freedom but he tries to remove abortion rights for women! He's a libertarian within his Christian bubble. Do not be fooled by creating a hero of a politician.

[Erinome]

What makes one racist? Espousing racist views. There is no evidence Ron Paul has ever done that, and as I've said repeatedly before, even if there was, he hasn't done it in recent years. In fact, he's done the opposite; he's campaigned for a fairer justice system that treats minorities properly, and for equal protection under the law. This whole "once a racist always a racist" attitude that you (and other liberals) seem to have is really quite astounding, given the number of ex-racists that find absolution each year. These are human beings we are talking about here; everyone makes mistakes at some point...the very least we can do is accept them when they shed their evil views.

If I had a newsletter, and somebody tried publish racist content in my newsletter, I would fire them on the spot. I would never be so negligent that I wouldn't require reviewing it's contents before it was published. If I was too busy, I would make sure that I was responsible for who I hired to write the contents of my newsletter, and would make it clear to my employees that racist rhetoric of any kind is forbidden.

Now, what if he suddenly realized that a person's character was not defined by their skin color? I live in this country, in the southeast, and having had this lifetime experience, I can't be that naive. Rosa Parks and MLK are his heroes? Give me a break. Wanna buy some ocean side property in AZ? I'll give you a bargain.

...but he didn't lie. He never denied knowledge of the newsletter's existence. What he did deny was reading it and writing it. There is (to my knowledge) no evidence that he did read or write it, only speculation on both sides.

You're right. I apologize for saying he said he never heard of the newsletter. What he did say was, "I never read that stuff. I became aware of it probably ten years after it was written, and it has been going on for twenty years that people have been pestering me about this, and CNN does it every single time. So when are you going to wear yourself out? I didn’t write them, I didn’t read them at the time, and I disavow them."

He never read it? Please! If he didn't, then he's the least self-interested person in the world, a veritable saint among men. Or, just a lying liar.

Erm...did you even watch the video? Could you point out the bits that were racist? He quoted prison statistics that highlight the unfairness of the judicial system which give harsher punishments to blacks, and then went on to say Martin Luther King Jr and Rosa Parks were his heroes. If that's racist, what the heck isn't?

The reason the whole video was racist, is because he was lying. I could tell by his nonverbal queues that he was lying. He's saying that to reconcile his racism, and obtain the black vote. Is it okay to be a racist, if you lie about it to achieve political advancement? I don't think so. He's overdoing it, painfully.

Since I can only see good things in that video (which is scary since apparently it's "racist"), I'd say that Obama would be hailed as a hero for saying the same things.

WTF are you smokin'? He would be crucified for mentioning that blacks were treated like shit. Crucified. He was tortured by the media, and by members of the house for leaving the word "god" out of his Thanksgiving speech. Imagine what they'd do to him if he mentioned that black people were treated poorly. If he agreed with Ron Paul on his drug policy openly, he would then be accused of being a typical black person because he's in favor of drugs. He can't do it.

How is he trying "hard"? Did you take a minute to look at the audience in the video, or to the people on stage? This was clearly a debate at a minority function; of course he's going to talk about minorities. You know what it's also a classic sign of? Not being a dick politician and focusing on one set of people. Fuck me...Ron Paul reaches out to all minority groups, highlighting the unfairness that he sees them suffer...yup, he MUST be a racist. Are you being serious?

Does Barack Obama go to predominately white functions, and talk to them about white struggles? Fuck no. He wants their vote. He doesn't want them to believe he's a racist because he wants their vote. He has been advised to repeat sympathetic bullshit over and over to achieve that goal. Repetition has been proven to be an effective tool in the art of brainwashing.

So you like the fact that the drug war claims a disproportionate amount of minorities as victims? Because according to your argument, to point out that discrepancy is "backwards thinking" and racist.

No. Racism is backward thinking. I don't believe he wants to legalize drugs. I think he's a liar.

Just wondering, what do you make of this: http://www.nolanchart.com/article1134-na...acist.html

I mean, the guy knew Ron Paul back in the days when he was "supposedly" writing racist newsletters on a semi-regular basis, yet according to him, Ron Paul was frequently talking about police repression of black communities, and how much respect he had for Martin Luther King Jr. Do you now at least see why you can't just tarnish someone with the "racist" label? There are multiple sides to the story.

If you hold the opinion that he gives a shit about black people, good for you. I'm not convinced. He's made himself too risky in my eyes. I don't trust him. He should've had a little forethought while he was back in TX being a racist and publishing newsletters with racist content.