It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 01:42 PM
reply to post by civilchallenger

if people paid for their own school they dont have to worry about swat teams.

everything "Free" has its price and that will never change.

when you give government power over you

you get what you deserve.

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 01:42 PM

edit on 12-6-2011 by neo96 because: sorry double post

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 01:49 PM

Originally posted by jimnuggits
Forget the newsletters, that's pretty racist right there.

Not if you read the OP... then you understand it isn't racist for Ron Paul, right?

For Dr, Paul to use the nearsighted argument that it is discriminatory to whites is not giving the issue its due respect and place in America's History.

It is essentially the same tired argument that white people use when they discuss the NAACP. 'If there was a NAAWP, then all hell would break loose.'

Yes, it would. Not because of some conspiracy against whites, but because of the Reality of the History of this Country.

Wrong. Whites are discriminated against regularly. In fact, some are attacked in the street and beaten to a pulp due to their skin color. We have arrived at a point now where discrimination on whites is not quite as bad as on blacks but definitely approaching the same ballpark.

Perhaps there is no conspiracy to keep him out of the primary, he just simply isn't qualified.

He's qualified and anyone who thinks otherwise is simply a control-freak authoritarian with no understanding of economics... Paul's second area of expertise under civil rights. The fact that Obama voted yes to the patriot act means he was not qualified to become president. But you probably voted for him because you a control freak and Obama is a fellow control freak and to hell with civil rights so long as someone is best positioned to win a sound-bite based popularity contest?

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 01:52 PM
reply to post by Kali74

Say Ron Paul is elected president and he tries to repeal the The Civil Rights Act, what do you think is going to happen in our beautiful country? Further, what do you think will happen if he is successful repealling it?

Hi Kali, I know this wasn't directed to me but I think I may have an answer. Ron Paul KNOWS that without a doubt if he tried to reverse the civil rights act he would be railroaded out of town faster than a bullet. He knows that with the equality of class will come equality of race. So trying to repeal the civil rights act would be another instance of treating the symptoms not the disease. Ending the FED, returing to sound money and reducing our war spending is the cure to the disease. Then (if he's still alive and in office) he can begin to work on other issues like reforming (not repealing) the civil rights act. Honestly the civil rights act wouldn't be needed if we abided by the constitution, but not even the majority of the founding fathers did that

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 01:58 PM

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by The Old American

Ron Paul is a politician and you should never trust what a politician says. You should judge them by their actions and Pauls actions here are deplorable any way you look at it. Perhaps there are more racist examples out there that have yet to be uncovered or maybe he's really good at covering it up.

It really doesn't matter if this was only a one time event as that is enough. He is also a strict constitutionalist also so probably believes slavery should still be legal.

Yeah the biggest advocate of freedom in the history of congress is going to be for slavery. Haha, think again. No, slavery is one of the biggest evils for someone who is a pro-liberty advocate. Can you understand that?

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 01:58 PM
reply to post by The Old American

The two best methods of discrediting someone is by pulling the "He's racist!" line or claim he/she/they don't believe in the Holocaust and/or other "anti-Semitic" lines. One of the oldest plays in the book.

Ron Paul isn't any more racist then anyone else.

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:02 PM

Originally posted by Scope and a Beam
From reading those letters I would personally consider him a racist to some extent. I don't care how people will try to claim he was just talking about welfare and benefits, he wasn't, he was ridiculing black people a lot there too. Things like "Dr." King say it all.

Are you kidding me? The whole point of the OP is that Ron Paul DIDN'T write those letters. Wow.

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:03 PM

Originally posted by GreenFurnNW
He may be racist, but Ron Paul is the only man that can save the United States. If he doesn't become president, it will be a matter of time till the USA will fall to the ground.

Libertarians cannot be racist. Impossible.

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:09 PM

Originally posted by jimnuggits
reply to post by The Old American

For an 'Old American,' you have an extremely revisionist perception of history.

Seriously? Me? A revisionist? I know I'm just a name on a forum here, but even a tad of research on my post history tells anyone that your statement is, at the very least, incorrect. Manners and decorum prevents me from naming the worst that it is.

Do you really expect that, by repealing rules like 'Equal Employment' and 'the Disability Act' the Constitution would be better served?

I'm not sure why you're saying any of that, as I haven't touched on it. At all. Did you travel into the future and find that I will mention those issues in a future post?

Sorry. I've a had a good day and I'm feeling whimsical.

edit on 12-6-2011 by The Old American because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:11 PM
I forgot to add this video in my previous comment, so I thought I'd do so here:

This young, intelligent BLACK man (or as I prefer to call him, young, intelligent AMERICAN) supports Ron Paul. Hear his heart-felt message:

Personally, I am sick of the "racist" issue; it's a ploy designed only to keep us divided, imo. I don't care what color you are, if you want to turn this country back towards freedom and liberty and away from the ever-advancing tyranny, if you want the Constitution followed (and it's NOT a living document)... then you are my brother, my sister...

If anybody but Ron Paul gets elected, "we" will only be getting more of the same. How much longer can this country hold on, especially economically??

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:18 PM

Originally posted by civilchallenger

Originally posted by BubbaJoe

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.

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.

Ron Paul has some great ideas, but I do not believe him to be electable.

The whole concept of racism is rested on a foundation of guilt by association. Take your guilt by association and shove it. People who participate in guilt by assosciation attacks (ie you) are guilty of bigotry. Christian's Jesus made associates who had stolen things, prostituted themselves, and done other socially unacceptable things. How excited would you be to have been able to crucify him for his guilt by association? I bet you'd be foaming at the mouth for a chance to torture him given the kind of people he associated with.

There are some things I am bigoted about, which at some point in this thread, I have admitted to. These articles were published under Dr. Paul's name, even the original poster has admitted that Dr. Paul, should have had more control and awareness of what was being published under his name. I am not sure how Jesus made it into this conversation, as I am not a Christian, find a different argument.

Ron Paul is not a racist and anyone who thinks he may be is simply a complete idiot. You'll rarely ever see me use the word idiot on ATS but here is on of those time. People would have to be a hopeless lost cause idiot to make a serious statement that Ron Paul is a racist. This is not a personal attack... this is me feeling sorry for you and embarrassed for you.

Don't feel sorry or embarrassed for me, I am not the one to have shown my behind. So much for being civil regardless of your screen name. You call me an idiot, and then tell me it is not an attack, like that makes some sort of difference.

I can't imagine what goes though your mind with the "unelectable" comment. Ron Paul is the single and only electable person in the entire candidate field. Mr. Mitt Romneycare... the anti-gun liberal is going to get elected in a Republican primary? I don't think so. Ron Paul is very easily the most electable person there... and clearly that is the reason why in a poll he did the best when it was him vs. Obama.

I am an independent, so follow both sides fairly close. Conservatives seem to be under the impression that they now hold a massive majority, which from every poll I have seen, is not the case. There are areas where they hold a majority, but an equal number of areas have a liberal majority. Right now, for me, I do not see any of the republican candidates as electable, they all have serious flaws. Where conservatives get confused, while a majority of folks may be fiscally conservative, there are many that are socially liberal, and that is where your Mr. Paul loses out.

The terrible things I hear people say about Paul are fantasy pretend BS based on fairy tales. Like for example, Ron Paul has never once advocated for heroin or prostitution being legal. But people delude them self into saying crazy things like under Paul heroin will become legal. Ron Paul has been in congress for decades... if he wanted a bill legalizing heroin I think in his 20+ years of congress he would have I don't know... maybe submitted a bill legalizing heroin? Ya think? Sure that stuff would be allowed under his principles (prostitution already is legal at the federal level... helllllooooo?) but he also has a grasp of reality enough to know that its not going to happen and is therefore irrelevant.

None of this can be attributed to me any where in this thread, I personally think prostitution, along with marijuana, should be legal, controlled, and taxed. As far as I am concerned, I have always felt Ron Paul to be somewhere out there on the fringe, so have not followed his career, I do not live in Texas. The only things I catch about him, are the things that hits different media sites I read. As I said in an earlier post, there seems to be a strong lack of coverage of him, so there fore I must not be the only to believe him to be unelectable.

So instead of attacking Paul on imaginary non-issues people need to actually talk about bills he has actually in reality land voted for, advocated for, and otherwise spoken about. And when they talk about electability they need to talk about issues that people actually discuss and have actual merit... like the economy, health care, the Iraq war, and other actual real issues. Its so laughable how people say Paul will redact the Civil Rights Act. Paul is absolutely a champion for civil rights... the strongest candidate on civil rights by a factor of 10. Attacking Paul on his greatest strength... civil rights... is like saying Micheal Jordan isn't hireable as a basketball player because he is bad at basketball. And so that is why I feel comfortable saying people who attack Paul on racism are simply idiots without the slightest grasp on reality... they live in opposite land on a planet on outer space.

Please somewhere, show me a link where he champions civil rights, he himself has said he would not have voted for the civil rights act, due to it discriminating against whites. I do believe I have a great grasp on reality, he has supported some very off the wall legislation, his kid wants to repeal the CRA, and he wants to hand everything back to the people who have created the problems in the first place. In my post that you quoted, I was CIVILLY responding back to the OP, and just sharing my opinion. Even in that post, I said that Dr. Paul has some good ideas, but after dealing with someone who is blinded by reality, I find myself wanting to fight Dr. Paul's name even being on the ballot, if these are the types of people he attracts as followers.

The greatest issue facing the economically downtrodden minorities at the moment is the drug war the feds wage against them. And certainly Paul will do everything in his power to end that... thereby doing more for blacks than Obama is willing to... who has proven he is a total Nazi pig when it comes to drugs.

I am thinking the greatest issue for the economically downtrodden minorities at this moment is probably a 25% unemployment rate among black men. Additionally, I am sure some of the other minorities feel that the immigration issue is infinitely more important than the war on drugs. Wow, just wow, please old american come back and post, we were initially having a very civil conversation.

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:20 PM

Originally posted by Heartisblack
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

That's the problem today...everybody hateing everybody! No one being able to trust anyone! From what i was told " people used to give the shirt off their backs to help someone"( as in a neighbor or good friend or who ever).

I wish things were like that now...too bad we let the government come between us all! Its sad!

United we stand is they way to be...even when you dislike someone i am sure we could all agree on that!

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:24 PM
reply to post by BubbaJoe

So let me get this right.
According to you, whites have been trampling the rights of blacks since before this country was founded, right?
That IS pretty "black and white", I must say.
Read some real history, and you will find that POWERFUL people have been trampling on the POWERLESS since before this country was founded, black OR white, and it continues to this day. The lust for power knows no race.

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:25 PM
reply to post by The Old American

Thank you for summarizing the exceptionally weak case against Ron Paul. The black people who support Ron Paul seem to have two things in common: they are much more intelligent than average, and they are not gullible enough to fall for the ridiculous idea that Ron Paul is a racist.

Libertarianism and racism absolutely do not mix. I absolutely challenge anyone who thinks any differently to go out and find a Libertarian racist. What an oxymoron... talk about a needle in a haystack! Libertarians are even less racist than liberals are, falling among the least racist people in existence... because in point of fact the definition of libertarian includes the concept of equal rights for all.

Ron Paul is the biggest champion of civil rights we have in congress at the moment. He may well be the only candidate to have voted against the patriot act. All the other candidates in the field are aiming to destroy one of our most important rights: the freedom of speech, though heavy regulation of the internet.

Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
Voted NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
Voted YES on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance. (Sep 2004)
Voted NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)
Voted YES on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)
Voted YES on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions. (May 1998)

National ID card is part of fear-based government. (Feb 2008)
Civil Rights Act was more about property than race relations. (Dec 2007)
Against ID for immigrants; it leads to national ID card. (Dec 2007)
Protect all voluntary associations; don’t define marriage. (Oct 2007)
No legislation to counteract the homosexual agenda. (Sep 2007)
No affirmative action for any group. (Sep 2007)
No need for Marriage Amendment; DOMA is enough. (Sep 2007)
First Amendment was written for controversial speech. (Sep 2007)
Use power of presidency to restore habeas corpus. (Sep 2007)
Don’t ask, don’t tell is a decent policy for gays in army. (Jun 2007)
Tamper-proof I.D. for immigrants is a bad idea. (Jan 2006)
Gender-equal pay violates idea of voluntary contract. (Dec 1987)
In times of war, our freedoms are threatened at home. (Dec 1987)
Rights belong only to individuals, not collective groups. (Dec 1987)

I am very thankful we have Ron Paul standing up for civil rights in America and there are few who know their civil rights better than him.

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:25 PM
reply to post by The Old American

Ron Paul is no racist.

Ron Paul is an equal opportunity offender, he offends everyone equally.

edit on 12-6-2011 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:30 PM

Originally posted by Kali74

But it is not the right of any american citizen to practice discrmination. By law, and rightfully so, we are not allowed to deny someone based on their race, religion or creed. It is a broad law that applies to every citizen of the United States. The Constitution did not specify race there for all races are included in protection. A white business owner is not entitled to refuse service to a black person simply because they are black, reversely a black business owner is not entitled to refuse me service simply for being white. I rather like that equal footing.

I have a question for you TOA. Say Ron Paul is elected president and he tries to repeal the The Civil Rights Act, what do you think is going to happen in our beautiful country? Further, what do you think will happen if he is successful repealling it?
edit on 12-6-2011 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)

Aside from the topic at hand, may I say I enjoy sparring with you? For some reason you never make me yell at my computer screen.

Well, first I don't believe he would try to repeal it. It's become one of those "too big to fail" things.. Repealing it would have too many repercussions. I wouldn't support repealing it myself for that reason. I don't think it's needed today, but repealing it would be too much of a headache to bother with.

But let me ask you two questions:

Do you think the Civil Rights Act really stopped people from hiring based on race, sex, or religion?


Do you honestly think I, a white, Southern male, could walk into a black-owned shop in Harlem, ask for an application, turn in a resume and reasonably expect a call back for an interview?

I've been involved in the hiring process many, many times. I can assure you that, while my title at the time didn't allow me to make the final offer, I was the interviewer and made suggestions to the manager on who was or wasn't more or less qualified than another candidate.

Most candidates were white males, probably a good 98%. Guess who picked the candidates? But he would never pick anyone that wasn't a white male (until HR told him to), even if I informed him that a particular non-white and/or non-male was the most qualified. Needless to say, he got fired. It felt good.

This happens every day in every city of every state. The Civil Rights Act didn't so much help individuals as it hurt business by forcing them to hire people that, frankly, aren't necessarily worth hiring.


posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:32 PM

Originally posted by civilchallenger

Originally posted by neo96
"paul wants to get rid of the department of education"

yeah they have done such a bang up job so the past few decades that people who scream racist

have no clue of its meaning.

Yes, the Federal Department of Education just conducted SWAT team raids on someone over a student loan. Yeah, that was literally a bang-up job LOL. I can't imagine what a great job they must have gotten with their student loan that they couldn't pay it back.

Not that this is on topic, but the raid was not over a defaulted student loan, it was over a case of fraud. The IG of DOE conducted this warrant, and they are not concerned with defaulted loans, only large levels of fraud. Talk about spreading mis-information.

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:35 PM
reply to post by The Old American

I have a question.
What destroyed the black families in the U.S?
Look at any statistics you want and you will find that before the Civil rights act, there were many more black families than there are today. Real families, not grandma raising the kids.
So, whodunit?

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:36 PM
reply to post by The Old American

I wouldnt believe anything bad I heard about Ron Paul thats their plan to keep him out of office

posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:41 PM

Originally posted by BubbaJoe
TOA, I do understand the point you are trying to make, but I believe you to be examining this issue, using the Constitution as a blindfold.

No more than you use the Civil Rights Act as one. Which one, the Constitution or the Civil Rights Act causes more consternation by its detractors? The Constitution is not a blindfold, it's a wall, blocking the Federal government from imposing their will on our rights.The Civil Rights Act is the blindfold here, and a badge of entitlement for most.


new topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in