It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul: Is He a Racist?

page: 1
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 07:38 AM
link   
The topic of Ron Paul's supposed racism was brought up by a couple of posters in another thread I authored. Before this tired, old attack comes out yet again, I wanted to attempt to head it off and point to an article that refutes, or at least provides another view, on the "racist" topic.

Some articles on the "Ron Paul is a racist" issue:

Ron Paul '90s newsletters rant against blacks, gays

Ron Paul’s Racist Newsletters Revealed

Those two are enough. Anyone can do their own research for more.

But to refute the articles supposedly written by Dr. Paul, who's consistency and outspokenness are almost legendary, I will post this article from Reason Magazine back in 2008. It suggests, with evidence to back it up, that the racist articles were actually written by Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard, two close friends of Dr. Paul (Rothbard died in 1995).

I would encourage everyone to actually read the article in full before dismissing, or even accepting, the information contained in it out of hand.

Who Wrote Ron Paul's Newsletters?

Some excerpts:


Yet in interviews with reason, a half-dozen longtime libertarian activists—including some still close to Paul—all named the same man as Paul's chief ghostwriter: Ludwig von Mises Institute founder Llewellyn Rockwell, Jr



During the period when the most incendiary items appeared—roughly 1989 to 1994—Rockwell and the prominent libertarian theorist Murray Rothbard championed an open strategy of exploiting racial and class resentment to build a coalition with populist "paleoconservatives," producing a flurry of articles and manifestos whose racially charged talking points and vocabulary mirrored the controversial Paul newsletters recently unearthed by The New Republic.



"We have a dream," Rockwell wrote in that same January 1992 edition of RRR, "and perhaps someday it will come to pass. (Hell, if 'Dr.' King can have a dream, why can't we?) Our dream is that, one day, we Buchananites can present Mr. and Mrs. America, and all the liberal and conservative and centrist elites, with a dramatic choice....We can say: 'Look, gang: you have a choice, it's either Pat Buchanan or David Duke.'"


Never before or since has Dr. Paul ever uttered or written anything resembling racially motivated thoughts or ideas. Yet during, and only during, the period when Rockwell and Rothbard were involved in his newsletters these ideas came out in print. If anyone would ever to bother to actually do research instead of regurgitating what Dems and Repubs write and say, maybe Americans could get on the road to being individuals instead of an unthinking kollective.

BTW: I will admit that this does show that Dr. Paul could be guilty of trust, I suppose. What a horrible thing to be guilty of.

/TOA
edit on 11-6-2011 by The Old American because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 07:48 AM
link   
I wish you luck and applaud your efforts to cut this off before it really gets started, but some people believe anything. If they truly believe that Ron Paul is a racist based on the fact that he thinks people should be responsible for themselves instead of asking for hand outs from Government, than they deserve to be stupid. I just hope come election day they stay stupid and stay home.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

BTW: I will admit that this does show that Dr. Paul could be guilty of trust, I suppose. What a horrible thing to be guilty of.

/TOA
edit on 11-6-2011 by The Old American because: (no reason given)


While I am not quick to label anyone a racist, we all have our personal likes and dislikes, and there is all sorts and levels of "ism's". Dr. Paul did allow these newsletters to be published under his name, by close associates. I have to assume, because I do not have the facts in front of me, that he read them, and allowed them to be published. So therefore, at the very least, he is not only guilty of trust, but guilty at the very least by association, and if he truly allowed them to be published under his name, after review, then he is guilty as charged.

I supported Obama in 2008, I am sorely disappointed in his performance to date, however, there is no one who has announced their candidacy on the Republican side of the ticket, that I feel represents any sort of mainstream electability. Ron Paul has some great ideas, but I do not believe him to be electable.


edit on 6/11/2011 by BubbaJoe because: fixed a spelling errot



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal
I wish you luck and applaud your efforts to cut this off before it really gets started, but some people believe anything. If they truly believe that Ron Paul is a racist based on the fact that he thinks people should be responsible for themselves instead of asking for hand outs from Government, than they deserve to be stupid. I just hope come election day they stay stupid and stay home.


Unfortunately they will turn up in droves like lemmings to the voting booth to vote for the Head Dictator In Charge. Thanks for your comments.

/TOA



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Probably so, the elites know they need to control us so this put Dr. Paul out there for us conspiracy people. I'm black and I wasn't trained to hate whites, I hate everyone regardless of skin colour. I don't discriminate



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Who knows ? In the end every president is the same.
We'll be in the same boat we started in
edit on 11-6-2011 by Heartisblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by BubbaJoe

While I am not quick to label anyone a racist, we all have our personal likes and dislikes, and there is all sorts and levels of "ism's". Dr. Paul did allow these newsletters to be published under his name, by close associates. I have to assume, because I do not have the facts in front of me, that he read them, and allowed them to be published. So therefore, at the very least, he is not only guilty of trust, but guilty at the very least by association, and if he truly allowed them to be published under his name, after review, then he is guilty as charged.


Not an unfair assessment. I would point out, however, that his newsletter was published by practically an army of people. He would give them his writings and they would publish it. True, he should've been more vigilant and proof-read everything that went into it, but I have trouble keeping up with my 13 year old. I can't imagine trying to keep up with a newsletter read by hundreds of thousands of people, on top of the duties of being a Congressman.


I supported Obama in 2008, I am sorely disappointed in his performance to date, however, there is no one who has announced their candidacy on the Republican side of the ticket, that I feel represents any sort of mainstream electability. Ron Paul has some great ideas, but I do not believe him to be electable.


The only unelectable candidate is the one that everyone thinks is unelectable. Thanks for your comments.

/TOA



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


I like Dr. Paul's message today. I was not aware of this issue before today. My take on this, from just reading the article you linked in your post, is that when one has ghostwriters sending out newsletters for them, they better make darn sure that everything in them is what they want to be associated with their name. Dr. Paul didn't seem to do this. He states in the CNN story:


"I do repudiate everything that is written along those lines," he said, adding he wanted to "make sure everybody knew where I stood on this position because it's obviously wrong."


My question, then, is: Well, Dr. Paul why didn't you proofread what was being sent out under your name?

After all, your name and the reputation that goes along with it is all that your have in politics, right?

-------------------------

Now, on the issue of race. I believe that we have created a mess where it comes to race. Any time one group of people is given preference over another, that is going to create tension. I (being white) have experienced the racist attitudes of black people against me. My children, after being raised to see no difference in white and black people, have experienced this as well. I could give examples here but that's not what this thread is about.

What a shame that people can't understand that racism is only limiting potential (no matter which race your are).



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by MrWendal
I wish you luck and applaud your efforts to cut this off before it really gets started, but some people believe anything. If they truly believe that Ron Paul is a racist based on the fact that he thinks people should be responsible for themselves instead of asking for hand outs from Government, than they deserve to be stupid. I just hope come election day they stay stupid and stay home.


Unfortunately they will turn up in droves like lemmings to the voting booth to vote for the Head Dictator In Charge. Thanks for your comments.

/TOA

Is that why you are trying to get the message out about the infallible Ron Paul? Do you want to be the head lemming to the polls that day to vote for him or just be in the middle?



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American
True, he should've been more vigilant and proof-read everything that went into it, but I have trouble keeping up with my 13 year old. I can't imagine trying to keep up with a newsletter read by hundreds of thousands of people, on top of the duties of being a Congressman.


He personally didn't have to keep up with them. If this wasn't his stance on this issue, his aides should have brought this to his attention and he should have refutted it immediately. He didn't. Perhaps he thought it would just get buried, perhaps he thought it might help him with certain groups of people, OR perhaps he agreed with it. We will never know.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by BubbaJoe

While I am not quick to label anyone a racist, we all have our personal likes and dislikes, and there is all sorts and levels of "ism's". Dr. Paul did allow these newsletters to be published under his name, by close associates. I have to assume, because I do not have the facts in front of me, that he read them, and allowed them to be published. So therefore, at the very least, he is not only guilty of trust, but guilty at the very least by association, and if he truly allowed them to be published under his name, after review, then he is guilty as charged.


Not an unfair assessment. I would point out, however, that his newsletter was published by practically an army of people. He would give them his writings and they would publish it. True, he should've been more vigilant and proof-read everything that went into it, but I have trouble keeping up with my 13 year old. I can't imagine trying to keep up with a newsletter read by hundreds of thousands of people, on top of the duties of being a Congressman.


That I do understand, however, and many public figures fall into this trap. The words were accredited to him however, and it is perceived by some to be his personal thoughts and comments. Unfortunately in our world, for some, perception is reality. In addition to this, his son Rand has made comments, which I personally felt to be approaching racism, I have to believe the apple does not fall far from the tree.

I am middle aged white male, lived in the small town South for about 6 years and have personally witnessed that discrimination still exists at levels that I find discomforting in this day and age. As my hair is halfway down my back, I have even felt it directed towards me, by my own race. So it does exist, and continues to be a problem.





I supported Obama in 2008, I am sorely disappointed in his performance to date, however, there is no one who has announced their candidacy on the Republican side of the ticket, that I feel represents any sort of mainstream electability. Ron Paul has some great ideas, but I do not believe him to be electable.


The only unelectable candidate is the one that everyone thinks is unelectable. Thanks for your comments.

/TOA


I am agnostic, so any of the evangelical Christians that are running, will not even come close to receiving my vote. I am not real in to Mormons either, so that wipes out a couple of more. Yes I understand I am being bigoted in these thoughts, but they are my own "ism's" and I take full responsibility for them. Either party only has a solid base of about 30%, it is the other 40% in the middle that are going to decide the election, and fringe candidates from either party are not likely to have a big draw among those of us in the middle.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by the owlbear

Is that why you are trying to get the message out about the infallible Ron Paul? Do you want to be the head lemming to the polls that day to vote for him or just be in the middle?


I wasn't aware that Ron Paul was infallible. In fact, the article I posted points out that he makes mistakes. Nobody but an unthinking moron can believe that every one of his ideas is rote and that he can immediately make a Utopia the day he steps into office.

But lumping me in with the people that will vote again for Obama because he's willing to hand them the fruits of your labor is trolling. I have a written history on this site of supporting freedom, liberty, and rights of all American citizens, even those like you who apparently ascribe to the thought that anyone who desires those things is a lemming.

But thanks for your comments anyway.

/TOA



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by the owlbear
Is that why you are trying to get the message out about the infallible Ron Paul? Do you want to be the head lemming to the polls that day to vote for him or just be in the middle?


Or, a shill in the mix since Dr. Paul probably wants this to go away.

Or, just an ordinary citizen wanting to "clear this up" when Dr. Paul couldn't do it himself.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by BubbaJoe

I am agnostic, so any of the evangelical Christians that are running, will not even come close to receiving my vote. I am not real in to Mormons either, so that wipes out a couple of more. Yes I understand I am being bigoted in these thoughts, but they are my own "ism's" and I take full responsibility for them. Either party only has a solid base of about 30%, it is the other 40% in the middle that are going to decide the election, and fringe candidates from either party are not likely to have a big draw among those of us in the middle.


There aren't any evangelical Christians running this year. There are people running that pander to whomever they think they can get votes from, including the religious right, but none of them are evangelicals. Dr. Paul ascribes to a personal belief in Christianity, but his political views are secular, which I applaud him for.

/TOA



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
OK OK.....
I just read the two links.
It's sad today, but if anyone makes any observable comment about the "ways" of a particular race, and you happen to be white, you get branded a racist. But a black or hispanic can talk hate about honky all day long, and no one says a thing.
Today, everything is so uber-PC, and we are so oversensitive, especially if you are white and been programmed with self-loathing.

Whether Dr. Paul wrote these things or not, and of course in todays anti-white media world, he has to deny it. What I read may not be pretty to today's cherry blossom ears filled with sand, but basically what was written here seems mostly true.

I mean, yes, in today's fanatically PC environment, any critical mention regarding race, said by a honky, is automatically considered racist, and even if what's said is true, or somewhat true, it has to be denied, which only makes the issues become worse, because everyone is afraid to address them.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
Why does racism even matter anymore? We have a racist in the WH now, and yet only hear about people on the right and if maybe they are or aren't. It's all just a tool of the current administration and the MSM. It's just one big joke anymore.......



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

Originally posted by the owlbear
Is that why you are trying to get the message out about the infallible Ron Paul? Do you want to be the head lemming to the polls that day to vote for him or just be in the middle?


Or, a shill in the mix since Dr. Paul probably wants this to go away.

Or, just an ordinary citizen wanting to "clear this up" when Dr. Paul couldn't do it himself.


Oh crap, the secret is out!




/TOA



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:45 AM
link   
Anyone who runs against The Emperor, is going to be labeled a racist.
Regardless.

Beez



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   
I agree to a point however, shouldn't the Gov't be obliged to help the people who are hiring them 'The People of America' and paying their way for fancy Vacations and extravagant get togethers with other Elitists? Don't the people who need a hand have family who paid taxes so that their Ancestors would have a right to ask for handouts if they needed. Seeing as the Govt clearly cannot create a stable market let alone decent lifestyle for the average blue collar joe, and then spend billions on unnecessary events, War being one of them? I think the Govt is totally obliged to help those who need it without question.


Originally posted by MrWendal
I wish you luck and applaud your efforts to cut this off before it really gets started, but some people believe anything. If they truly believe that Ron Paul is a racist based on the fact that he thinks people should be responsible for themselves instead of asking for hand outs from Government, than they deserve to be stupid. I just hope come election day they stay stupid and stay home.

edit on 11-6-2011 by awareness10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by BubbaJoe

I am agnostic, so any of the evangelical Christians that are running, will not even come close to receiving my vote. I am not real in to Mormons either, so that wipes out a couple of more. Yes I understand I am being bigoted in these thoughts, but they are my own "ism's" and I take full responsibility for them. Either party only has a solid base of about 30%, it is the other 40% in the middle that are going to decide the election, and fringe candidates from either party are not likely to have a big draw among those of us in the middle.


There aren't any evangelical Christians running this year. There are people running that pander to whomever they think they can get votes from, including the religious right, but none of them are evangelicals. Dr. Paul ascribes to a personal belief in Christianity, but his political views are secular, which I applaud him for.

/TOA


Sorry, I may have used the wrong phrase when I said evangelicals, I am not sure what term to use. We have Bachman and Palin waiting on the word from God to run, Pawlenty and Santorum have both made strong Christian references, and Gingrich has just imploded, not that he is a good example for "Family Values". Romney and Huntsman are both Mormons, so for me, the only possible choice is Dr. Paul, and while I agree with some of his ideas, we have strong differing opinions on others. Please don't get me wrong, it is a good thing that I didn't know about Dr. Paul's Christianity, it tells me, while his beliefs may be guiding him personally, which is fine, he doesn't feel the need to shove it down anyone else's throat.
edit on 6/11/2011 by BubbaJoe because: typos







 
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join