reply to post by jsobecky
That article does more to support your argument than anything else you've said. You should have brought that article to the table to begin with.
You claim not to understand whether someone tying your shoelaces for you makes you guilty of tying your own shoelaces. I find that claim remarkable
because the answer is obviously, no. Understanding that simple logic would make it possible to understand that you would not be guilty of being a
criminal for accepting stolen money from a criminal for goods that you've sold to the thief. You would also understand the distinction between
donating to a campaign and a campaign accepting a donation. That is to say, accepting money from a racist does not make one a racist, just as an evil
person does not become a good person simply by donating to a good person's cause or campaign. All of these issues you have disputed with me, taking
pride in your ability to create and sustain quarrels over dissension with your point of view. If this is all just amusement to you then it is no
wonder why you do not take the time to understand simple logic -- you have no need for it. Otherwise you would create and sustain your argument on a
foundation made up of more than just your opinion. Which brings me back to the article you posted.
The article you reference is the subject of a different argument than the one posed by this thread. This thread, the OP, addresses whether Ron
Paul's campaign acceptance of a donation from Don Black makes Ron Paul a supporter of racist and separatist policy and agenda. However, the article
that you refer in the Daily Kos to addresses whether Ron Paul is a racist because of writings he allegedly authored in a newsletter that was published
by himself and his campaign party. Again, those are two distinct arguments questioning whether, one, Ron Paul is a supporter of racism, or two, a
racist himself. The stronger case to be made as whether Ron Paul is a racist is made form the article you posted and not the OP. As I've already
said, acceptance of a campaign donation from anybody only proves support for the candidate whose party receives the donation. It doesn't prove
anything else other than that. Yet the article you've posted goes a long way towards establishing the strong possibility that Ron Paul is at least
strongly prejudiced towards Black Americans. There are many reasons to support that contention. One reason is that his newsletter published what has
been determined to be pure propaganda based on studies and statistics that have never existed. One more reason is that those writings support the
creation of legislation that would target Black Americans as criminals simply because they are Black. Now THAT particular reason is purely racist in
nature. Finally, yet another reason is that the article appeared be published under the pen of Ron Paul. Ron Paul's contention in 2001, 9 years
after the fact of the article's first appearance in a 1992 edition of the Ron Paul Political Report
, was that one of his staffers wrote the
article. Whether or not Ron Paul's claims are true, the question still arises, does Ron Paul agree with the content of that article?
According to the Daily Kos (sourced in your comment) which is addressing this issue of racist writings in Ron Paul's newsletter:
Either Paul was lying when he admitted to writing those words, or he was telling a belated and convenient lie when he claimed that they were ghost
written by an unnamed staffer. Either way, Paul is a liar. Further, he has repeatedly refused media requests to release all of his newsletters. (Paul
published the Ron Paul Political Report from 1985 to 1992, then changed the newsletter's name to the Ron Paul Survival Report in 1993.)
Ron Paul's admission, of course, comes from publishing that article under his own name. Paul's subsequent denial of writing of those words, again,
comes from the fact that he credits one of his staffers with the writing of those words published in the article under Paul's name. Paul is saying
that he had a ghost writer. So, clearly, a lie has been told. The question is, which lie is the truth? Regardless of which lie is the truth, the
publication of the article is without question evidence of Ron Paul's support for the content of the article. This cannot be discounted or spun in a
That Ron Paul refuses to release all of his newsletters to the press further raises suspicion, and ironically goes against the pledge for open,
transparent and accountable government that Ron Paul has repeatedly said he subscribes to. Apparently, Ron Paul agrees that there is a need for
secrecy after all.
The publication of "Los Angeles Racial Terrorism" in Ron Paul Political Report, 1992
Blacks have "civil riqhts," preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors,
black curricula in schools, black beauty contests, black tv shows, black tv anchors, black scholorships and colleges, hate crime laws, and public
humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.
In the same issue Ron Paul wrote:
We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised
on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such.
Without question both statements taken together represent fear, a racist disposition, and the advocation of racist policy.
jsobecky, this is important enough that it deserves its own thread and discussion. If you hadn't been so intent on amusing yourself at being able to
handle dissension, we could have addressed this article at an earlier time. From this article alone, Ron Paul does indeed have credibility problems
relating to his stance on race in the United States. Never mind the issue of accepting $500 from a known racist, the issue of Ron Paul disseminating
or supporting the dissemination of racist opinion and propaganda under the authorship of his own name is MUCH more important. As far as I am
concerned, it is of paramount importance and it should be addressed accordingly.