Who is this man? (Ron Paul)

Man of the Hour Saturday, June 02, 2007     --by Sara Ron Paul seems to be the man of the hour -- the real winner of the GOP debates to date, the darling of Americans on both sides of the bar who prefer their political talk straight-up and undiluted. He's everywhere, it seems. I haven't read a comments thread in the past two days that didn't include at least one or two people making passionate statements of undying affection for the man. More surprising, I was on the table last week at my physical therapist's office (finally getting a two-year-old knee injury put right) here in Vancouver -- and even he couldn't stop asking questions about him. "He's all my progressive friends talk about. What can you tell me?" When a minor American political figure even gets Canadians talking, he's definitely not minor any more. What I can tell you -- what all of us need to know before we run out and sign on for a summer of Ron Paul Love Feasts -- is that Paul has some long-standing ties to early-90s Patriot groups -- and some ugly attitudes on race and equality -- that should give us all long and serious pause. Diarist phenry at Daily Kos lays out the particulars here and here. According to phenry, Paul's newsletter, The Ron Paul Political Report (renamed The Ron Paul Survival Report in 1993, in a bid to pander to the militia audience that was peaking that year) was a Patriot movement must-read, full of helpful advice on tax protest, gold-backed currency, urban race war and other pet legal and social theories of the extremist right. While content is very hard to come by now (Paul has scrubbed much of what was on the Web, and refuses to release the newsletter to the media), phenry dug up a few choice samples, including: * A 1992 screed on African-American"racial terrorism" in Los Angeles, in which Paul insists that "our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists -- and they can be identified by the color of their skin." * Another 1992 article, this one asserting that "complex embezzling" is "100% white and Asian;" and noting that young black male muggers are "unbelievably fleet-footed." * A Houston Chronicle citation from 1996, in which he asserts that Barbara Jordan was a "fraud." Paul wrote: "Everything from her imitation British accent, to her supposed expertise in law, to her distinguished career in public service, is made up. If there were ever a modern case of the empress without clothes, this is it. She is the archetypical half-educated victimologist, yet her race and sex protect her from criticism." In the second post, phenry outlines Paul's connections to various white supremacists groups. In 1996, Paul was one of only two candidates endorsed by Christian Identity leader Larry Pratt (who had previously worked with David Duke, and resigned from Pat Buchanan's team when his Identity role became public). Paul refused to repudiate the endorsement; and Pratt has stepped forward again with a quasi-endorsement of Paul's current campaign. Through the 90s, Paul was also a regular on the far-right talk circuit. He spoke to Texas secessionists in 1995 on the "once and future Republic of Texas"; has appeared on a radio program affiliated with the Council of Conservative Citizens; and is a frequent speaker at John Birch Society functions -- the group has given him a perfect 100 in its legislative rankings. These days, those who monitor CCC, David Duke, and Stormfront say they can't get enough of him. They know he's one of their own. Those of us who are interested in getting to a sane and functional immigration policy should also reflect on the fact that he stands right next to Tom Tancredo on that issue. Which brings us to the Big Question: How can someone who's been such a darling of the extremist right for over 20 years now become the Next Big Thing on the left as well? Straight talk is powerful. Americans are addicted to it -- and, too often, addled by it. We've seen this before with Ross Perot and John McCain, two other right-wing candidates who charmed us with their apparent penchant for telling us uncomfortable but necessary truths. (And to give the man his due: pointing out that 9/11 was the inevitable outcome of decades of monstrous US foreign policy was a very necessary truth.) But -- as we learned the hard way on both those earlier occasions -- just because someone can cut through the political drivel and speak with some clarity now and again, it doesn't mean they're someone we should dump our principles and better judgment out the window for, and rush right out and follow. The fact is that Ron Paul has built a political career pandering to the far fringes of the proto-fascist right. There's twenty-plus years of documentary evidence that he does not believe in democracy as we progressives understand it. No amount of disarming straight talk should blind us to that core fact. Update: Several apologists note that Paul now claims that the newsletter was written by a ghostwriter -- as though this somehow absolves him of responsibility for over a decade of hate speech. This argument, all on its own, should be enough to disabuse anyone of the idea that Paul is a "straight talker." The newsletter went out under his name. If he didn't read the copy first, he should have. He owns the words in it -- either because he wrote them, or he bought and paid for them to be written for his own purposes. To claim now that he's somehow not responsible is like a politician saying, "That thing I said? I don't really believe it -- it's just something my speechwriter cooked up." Or a businessman claiming he's not party to a contract because his lawyer, acting as his agent, signed it for him. Either argument would be laughed out of court. Paul deserves to be laughed off the public stage: either he means what he says, or he doesn't. You may think you like what you see today. But, given what we already know, it may be wise to do your homework before you decide this man is worthy to hold power in America. And the media needs to be asking serious questions about his past, probing him to see if he's still committed to bringing about that New World Order he spent so much of his early career promoting. --------------------------- Melinda in TN's Ron Paul quote of the day: * "Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action." OK, here's another one: * "Why do we need the federal government? There's no Cold War and no Communist threat. Many other nations are breaking into smaller and smaller pieces. The centralization of power in Washington occurred in a different time. Why not think about getting rid of the federal government, returning to the system of our Founders, and breaking up the United States into smaller government units?"

---

I tried really hard to avoid posting anything negative against candidates but even Steve Elliott told us that we need to know where candidates stand on issues and what kind of past they have.  I don't normally give much heed to blogs and other non-news forums but this one is exceptional.  It's exceptional because she has actually posted links to factual information.   You know you have a problem when liberal Canadians like him.

I will post some of the factual information as necessary.   Information such as Ron Paul's racist ties to right wing extremist groups.  I even have quotes!  I put a two quotes at the end of the above article.  There are several.  Believe me it wasn't easy to find them either because he has been very diligent in hiding them.

I know there are good decent members of FireSociety that support Ron Paul but they apparently don't know all of the facts behind this man and what he stands for.  I've often given hints of his ties to right wing extremist groups that have mostly been discounted by some.  Well, since so many Ron Paul supporters in here (not all) have spent so much time digging up information on other good candidates like Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter, I guess it's time to meet the real Ron Paul.

I have more where this comes from.

---

Melinda in TN,

You are right we should learn about the candidate of your choice.  I think I have been up front that I will not support Ron Paul for President.  One, because he voted against the Patroit Act.  Two, he seems to be really bitter towards Bush and the Republican Party.  Like I said just because you have a R in front of your name doesn't make you a Republican or conservative.  There are liberal Republicans.  It seems to me that he (Ron Paul) is using the Republican Party just to get elected.  He has already tried to run for President in 1988 as a Libertarin an LOST!  Why doesn't he run as an Independant? 

Also, I just think if a person who supports another canididate, other than Ron Paul should be labeled a NEOCON and not constitutionalist.  Like I have been label by some people in this forum.

HFTD, I wouldn't worry about the labels thrown at Fred supporters.  I've been called a Neocon and many other things in here but you know,  I just ignore it.  You know, sticks and stones and all that.

We have two liberals running as Republicans, Rudy and McCain.  The rest are good conservatives, including Fred.  I wouldn't worry about the labels too much.   It just makes them look ridiculous.

BTW, I know you are not a Ron Paul supporter.   I've seen the abuse heaped on you by them the same way they do me.  The thing is, I try really hard not to mention names in my posts if possible and sometimes that causes some confusion as to who I'm talking about.

---

Thank you for the information, Melinda.  You really do a thorough job investigating the candidates.  I have wondered if people who watched the debates were watching the same ones I did to conclude that Paul won either of them.  From my viewpoint, Romney won them both, hands down.  He was far more poised, more complete with his answers, and the best liberals on another board could come up on his performance was, "he said, 'I have a wife with a serious disease' instead of saying, 'MY wife......' "  Yeah, that's some serious criticism.  Paul would never get me my vote, but I think the chances of him getting the nomination are slim and nill.  To me, he is the Dennis Kucinich of the Republican Party....a total fruitloop moonbat nut job.

---

Being from Texas Ron Paul has always been a whack job. He is nuts. The H. Ross Perot of 2008. If Hillary, Bill Blow Job Clintons wife wins it will be because of nut cases like Ron Paul.

---

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” -Ghandi

 

Ahh pulling out the race card finally to slanderously smear Ron Paul.

Quite simply Melinda, Those were not his words . Why don't you Ron Paul haters go read the post about this speech in Austin, the one about "Stop Dreaming, Restore the Republic", and some of his other videos where the words actually came out of his mouth, and comment on that?

Why don't you read his positions on issues from his own website, his voting record in the last 9 terms in Congress, his numerous awards won as "Taxpayers Best Friend", his substantive pieces of legislation he authored himself (as opposed to Council Fred's 4) and comment on those?

Why don't you read one of his many weekly articles published, as linked to in my signature, and please comment on those? That's right, you're a Kool-aide drinker of an individual, rather than any ideology, therefore you blindly support one candidate.

 

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost...

_________________________________________________________________

In one issue of the Ron Paul Survival Report, which he had published since 1985, he called former U.S. representative Barbara Jordan a "fraud" and a "half-educated victimologist." In another issue, he cited reports that 85 percent of all black men in Washington, D.C., are arrested at some point: "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." And under the headline "Terrorist Update," he wrote: "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

In spite of calls from Gary Bledsoe, the president of the Texas State Conference of the NAACP, and other civil rights leaders for an apology for such obvious racial typecasting, Paul stood his ground. He said only that his remarks about Barbara Jordan related to her stands on affirmative action and that his written comments about blacks were in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time." He denied any racist intent. What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U. S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this.

When I ask him why, he pauses for a moment, then says, "I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. It wasn't my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady." Paul says that item ended up there because "we wanted to do something on affirmative action, and it ended up in the newsletter and became personalized. I never personalize anything."

His reasons for keeping this a secret are harder to understand: "They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them . . . I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn't come from me directly, but they campaign aides said that's too confusing. 'It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it.'" It is a measure of his stubbornness, determination, and ultimately his contrarian nature that, until this surprising volte-face in our interview, he had never shared this secret. It seems, in retrospect, that it would have been far, far easier to have told the truth at the time.

_________________________________________________________________

---

Sounds more like YOU are not only drinking the RP kool aid, you're drunk as a skunk and blind as a bat on it!  You never did answer...how much is he paying you to post?

---

Patsy they will not admit the truth about halfwit Ron Paul.

---

Gee, it sounds like somebody doesn't like the truth so much when it turns on him. LOL

---

More of that typical moonbat "do what I SAY, not what I DO"???  It is more and more apparent RP is paying folks like RP08 to post.  Desperate times call for desperate measures I suppose.

---

OK, he asked for it.  Here is another quote by Ron Paul.  Yes, these are his words.  First, here is the introduction to the page where the long list of quotes is found:

Totally Paul-ly

Here it is, a collection of some of Paul's "greatest" quotes, taken from seven of his monthly political newsletters written between 1990 and 1994. Because of the incredibly politically incorrect content, Morris asked Paul to release all past copies of the Ron Paul Survival Report to the media, going back to the newsletter's origin in 1986. Paul promised to do so, but never did. Individual copies, however, can be requested from his surfside home, at 409/233-5854. As to why he wouldn't release his entire body of work to the media, Paul says voters may not understand his "tongue-in-cheek, academic" writings.

Now, a quote:

* "There is good news after the L.A. riots. Statewide, gun sales are up 45% over the same period last year. People have been purchasing a record number. If the cops are not going to take care of the problem, the people will."

Uh Oh, sounds like he's encouraging violence to me.

---

Ah, the vigilantes of the wild wild west.  Just don't shoot 'em in the back!!  And if you shoot them in your yard, drag their dead asses into your house so you can say you were protecting your property!  LOL!

---

In point of fact, I can't say I disagree with Ron Paul for supporting the militia (patriot) movement in the early 90's. So did I, and considering the actions of the Klintoon White House and Butch Reno - Ruby Ridge and Waco, to name a couple of incidents - I think the militia groups were right, considering the time and the bunch in power.

I still think they were on the right track, and they haven't gone away. They're just not as visible these days. They have a very sizeable presence here in the Western States, I think larger than a decade ago.

 Fred Thompson though is my man. He isn't watching polls and changing his tune from day to day.

---

Patsy, I have a boat load of stuff saved of things he said several years ago.  I have a couple that are very racist.  One is a rant against black people and the other is a rant against Jews.  Some of the things this nut believes in is scary.  No wonder he tried to get rid of the evidence. LOL

RonPaul08, he didn't write everything in the Ron Paul Survival Reports but there are plenty of articles in the reports written by him with quotes.  He put his name on the Ron Paul Survival Report and wrote several newsletters.  He IS responsible.  His quotes, like the ones I'm posting, are classic right wing extremist rants full of racism and bigotry that no Presidential candidate should ever be a part of.  You wonder why people don't take him seriously?  People my age and older remember him, that's why.    Also, it was not that long ago, 1990-1994.

---

I can't say before this year I've ever even heard the name Ron Paul. While interested in politics, I've not kept that close an eye on every single member of congress and what they do, say, or think.  But, when they try to come to the forefront, I certainly enjoy reading the compilations of their past doings.

---

"There is good news after the L.A. riots. Statewide, gun sales are up 45% over the same period last year. People have been purchasing a record number. If the cops are not going to take care of the problem, the people will."

Actually, I kind of liked that quote when I heard it at the time!

Fred's my man, though.  Can't wait for the debates that include him.

---

FireWing said:

"There is good news after the L.A. riots. Statewide, gun sales are up 45% over the same period last year. People have been purchasing a record number. If the cops are not going to take care of the problem, the people will."

Actually, I kind of liked that quote when I heard it at the time!

Fred's my man, though.  Can't wait for the debates that include him.

 

I remember an interview with Charlton Heston after the riots, where he said all the liberal anti gunners were coming to him asking to borrow guns for defense. They couldn't get them due to the Calif waiting period. His reply. "You wanted the waiting period, so what's the problem?"

In other words, you got what you asked for now live with it.

---

It would be Firewing if he was talking about a militia against a tyrannical government but he wasn't.  At first I thought that too.  He was talking about vigilantes against black people though and unless a person is under imminent threat of death or bodily harm, that would be considered murder.  The worst thing I can think of for a supposedly pro-gun politician to do would be to encourage vigilantism against American citizens.

---

Melinda in TN said:

RonPaul08, he didn't write everything in the Ron Paul Survival Reports but there are plenty of articles in the reports written by him with quotes.  He put his name on the Ron Paul Survival Report and wrote several newsletters.  He IS responsible.  His quotes, like the ones I'm posting, are classic right wing extremist rants full of racism and bigotry that no Presidential candidate should ever be a part of.  You wonder why people don't take him seriously?  People my age and older remember him, that's why.    Also, it was not that long ago, 1990-1994.

 

Where are these quotes that you have that apparently came from him?  Obviously the ones you posted in the first topic do not come from him.  You are simply slanderously smearing him.  

This sounds like a quote in favor of the 2nd amendment to me.  Someone who understands our Constitution and supports it, rather than actors for president, would know this:

"There is good news after the L.A. riots. Statewide, gun sales are up 45% over the same period last year. People have been purchasing a record number. If the cops are not going to take care of the problem, the people will."

---