Putting an END to the 'Ron Paul is racist' claims right here and now. Who will challenge me?

reply to post by blupblup

My post wasn't anti-RP.... just anti-stupidity.

It wasn't at all, and I don't get the problem with it, you can't prove someone doesn't hold some view deep inside them, it's impossible. All you can do is judge them on their actions. So you are 100% correct, and nothing about your post read as anti-Paul to me.

------

the OPs point was this:

You've got newsletters written in Paul's name, some of which we personally wrote, some he didn't, that say some nasty things, or at least allude to them.

Then you've got 20 plus years of actions.

A newsletter he might or might not have written or even read says he might be racist
20 years of action say he isn't.

I'm basing my opinion on his actions, just like I did with Obama.

You can't ignore a candidate because they might be feeding you a line, because then you might as well just sign over your life to a dictator. Obama got elected on promises he could have kept, but didn't.

but he wasn't judged on his actions, he was judged before that and his actions, and lack there of, just made gave justification to those who hated him from day 1 with nothing to base it on.

Now we see a similar but different situation, a person being judged, not by their actions or even promises, but by something someone 20 years ago said in a news letter produced by Paul.

And no, suggesting that Israel can handle themselves just fine without US intervention, is not antisemitic. Israel has already stated they don't require US assistance, and it's billions of dollars a year in aid that could be spent at home repairing infrastructure or something else that would benefit the americans who paid that money via taxes.

Paul HAS answered this "charge" every single time it's been aimed at him, because some people live life like a gold fish, wiping their memory every 15 seconds, doesn't change the fact that he's addressed this time and time again.

And he didn't "storm out" mid interview, the reporter started in saying he tried to blame Israelis for the first WTC attack, THAT's when he left, and he didn't storm out, he cut the interview short as there was no point in continuing to restate the same statements over and over while ignoring any of his policies he's advocating.

reply to post by lokdog


Look at where Herman Cain is now, ran right out the door when the q's became too much, perhaps Paul should follow suit!

He's 76 yrs old right now and what's the actual likelyhood of him surviving his first time without dropping dead from either old age or a heart attack by the end of Term 1? Not something I really would like to ponder or even consider hence why McCain's candidacy got torpedoed!

reply to post by beanandginger

Do they really think people are this stupid. Maybe once we were. But WE ARE AWAKE NOW and the politicians, Washington and the MSM got some splainin to do.

Think they are stupid, or know? Go re-read the thread start to finish and answer that for yourself.

The war on education and critical thinking has been a stunning success.

Like, wut up wit dat BRAH???
(those who get it, get it a lot)

reply to post by phishyblankwaters




Exactly though that is the point.
We can't know if he's racist... and just because he has black people coming out in support and because he had black patients doesn't prove a thing.


This was my only point.

Not the letters, not the controversy surrounding this subject right now... none of it.

Merely the logic of the OP.


And yes i get there was more too and I was being rather simplistic... but the point remains.

I am sure that Ron Paul, like most of us, doesn't have the option of being an actual racist. If you live in the real world then you must have realized by now that blacks are not inferior in any way. I think that often people mistake a legitimate political opinion for racism. For example, if an African American politician were to say,

"Whites in this country have held us down for too long, it is time we rose up to take our rightful place in this country. African Americans should be holding top positions in every state and federal government and in the military! Black Power!."

Many people would take this as an acceptable political, even inspirational position. People would probably not say, "He's a racist."

If a white politician were to say,
"Whites in this country need to hold onto positions in every state as well as the federal government and retain our rightful position in this country!"

He would certainly be called a racist.

I think that we need to differentiate between political disagreements and actual outright racism. It needs to be acceptable to disagree with the African American political agenda without being labelled a racist. As an example of this, I have heard many people mention that they strongly oppose black pop culture and what they percieve as the criminality, vulgarity and misogyny that is celebrated therein. Now within this same conversation I witnessed this person being called a racist. They tried to defend themselves but it is nearly impossible, anything you say just makes you sound like more of what you are being accused of. To me it seems that voicing an opinion about a legitimate disagreement with a facet of a culture does not mean that you think everyone within that culture is an inferior being. We need to realize that tossing out the term "racist" every time someone issues a critique of another cultural or political movement really weakens the true meaning of the word.

Does anyone here really believe that Ron Paul plans to enact racist policies? Do you think Ron Paul is so foolish as to believe that Blacks are actually inferior beings? Is Ron Paul really a true racist?

I really did like Ron Paul and a lot of what he was saying ideology wise, and I am black, but now after this, it does cloud my view of this man, that nice heartwarming picture of him means nothing to me, he was a doctor with a patient it means nothing of whether or not he can hold racist views or not or if he is or is not a racist, that could be compared to being shown a picture of a hunter petting a lion cub and showing compassion for the cute little guy but it is known that he is the killer of lions, the picture would not establish anything about his true feelings about lions, now if this information was hearsay or something or he was accidentally recorded saying something similar to what was written with the mic on that would be one thing, but a newsletter that was netting at least a million dollars or more per year, then he tries to separate himself from the content and he is or was the editor and his name is associated with it or even try to use the old that was a long time ago defense, to me is a little unsettling, I watched the Young Turks last night and they brought out a few more things beyond the writings about Ron Paul that framed it very well to show he is racist and and not only holds those views against blacks either but has had not so flattering things to say about Jews and other groups using his newsletter, but regardless, there is no way Ron Paul will win the bid anyhow and if he did, there is no way he will become president because his policies threaten the elite, and their power base directly, it is a dream that the FED and the IRS will go away, sorry but that is just that, a dream, even if they did go away there will be some replacement body or organization that will fill the gap and be pretty much executing the same functions, to me we should all be wary of someone that might make it to the presidency that might at some point abuse that position in order to amplify their own personal views on race or any other issue that might have effect on policy in a negative way and then possibly convince other sheep to think like that.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
The facts continue to speak for themselves so to attempt to debunk this is futile. Then explain why would he get up mid interview and storm out?

I thought earlier posts had already clarified this: CNN edited the footage to discredit the only person whom may be of use to the interests of America not the federal reserve but America. Anyone else unfortunately is working for a Mafia power structure (that stenches way beyond the reaches of such things as the Government) this 'elite', as documented throughout many publications and writings from 'think tanks', ultimate goal is to destroy and obliterate this earth and watch it be engulfed in fires of evil-So in turn being left with a dead,soulless planet.

www.gspm.org...

Lance Morgan is chief communications strategist at Powell Tate in Washington, D.C. He specializes in developing and executing communications strategies for public policy debates, crisis communications and media training.

Morgan provides communications counsel to clients facing national and international media attention because of public policy controversies, congressional oversight hearings, criminal and civil investigations by law enforcement agencies, labor-management negotiations and trade disputes.

An experienced media trainer, he also regularly prepares clients for Congressional testimony and interviews with major national print and broadcast media, including 60 Minutes and 60 Minutes II.

Morgan has been the primary architect of numerous integrated communications programs on behalf of Powell Tate clients. In recent years, he has worked with clients in the financial services, pharmaceutical and food industries. He served as the executive in charge of an advertising, grassroots and media relations team working for major food and agricultural companies in educating the public on the benefits of biotechnology.

He was the executive in charge of several advertising, grassroots communications, media relations and polling projects during significant public policy controversies in recent years. He also served as a key advisor to a former cabinet member who was the subject of an investigation by a special prosecutor.

Previously, Morgan was the executive in charge of communications for a coalition of associations seeking passage of product liability legislation. He also served as a principal advisor to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum for all media-related activities connected with the opening of the museum in 1993 and its 10th anniversary in 2003.

Prior to joining the firm in 1988, Morgan served as press secretary and spokesman for the U.S. Senate Iran-Contra investigating committee, which was led by Senators Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI) and Warren Rudman (R-NH). He was a principal writer and editor of the committee's majority report on the investigation. From 1983 to 1986, Morgan was press secretary to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY). During his congressional service, Morgan routinely prepared Democrats and Republicans for newspaper and television interviews.

Before his Senate service, Morgan was a journalist for British and American newspapers.

He is married to Gloria Borger, Senior Political Analyst at CNN.

Originally posted by skepticconwatcher
reply to post by ultraplayer

 

Well, if he's being asked the same friggen question for the last 20 years, maybe it's because he is not answering the question.

Or maybe because it's the closest thing to dirt that they can find on this man of integrity. When all else fails, pull out the race card. By just mentioning it on TV, many viewers will instantly form a negative opinion of him. The fact that it's not a quote from him nor something written by him is moot. It's guilt by association, and still in this day and age the MOST polarizing topic in America.

reply to post by freepatriot


Is this Lance Morgan character of any relation to banking tychoon and SCUM Extraordinaire J.P. Morgan?

i think the above going viral would have detrimental effect on CNN's and the MSM's credibility .. don't you think guys?

One sentence from a 20 year old newsletter that has been brought into question far too many times to be of any real issue does not a racist make.

Racism is based on a set of beliefs that would define one's moral character. This would be most evident in the way an individual lives their life.

Based on this, I can conclude that there isn't even a shred of racism in Dr. Paul. I hate to ask, but would this really be such an issue if we didn't have a black president? You see, it seems the tone and rhetoric of racism has increased ten fold since a black president was elected and this is coming largely from the black population.

Why is it that it is those who have cried for years for equality and the elimination of racism now cling to it's banner and throw it around without reservation! Who are the real racists in that case?

reply to post by Freenrgy2


Read this :
The Free Republic Webiste!
www.freerepublic.com...

I am glad finally RP's truths are coming out, before he was on a free ride with no problems and no chances. Now he has chances and we see the truth.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by Freenrgy2

 

Read this :
The Free Republic Webiste!
www.freerepublic.com...

edit on 22-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

I've already read the quotes mentioned many years ago. It's too easy for people to throw around the racism card and I'm not going to play it. Didn't Martin Luther King Jr. say not to judge someone by the color of their skin but on the content of their character?

Is Dr. Paul racist because he's white and might have spoke some factual truths about black people? Would Dr. Paul have been called a racist if he made the same comments against a group of white people? So, by calling into question the character of someone who's black, makes one a racist especially if they're white?

Color is only skin deep and, unfortunately, for many people who want to play the racism card against Dr. Paul, they don't want to take a deeper look into the man's character. No, they are judging him based on the color of his skin.

Originally posted by EspyderMan
I am glad finally RP's truths are coming out, before he was on a free ride with no problems and no chances. Now he has chances and we see the truth.

You are easily led astray.

Too bad.

reply to post by Freenrgy2


Are you kidding me? The "factual truths about black people" comment shows and proves that the statement there is racist. How about a few African American's here slam you on that and see how much flack you catch and how little support you get for this.

Defending racism and racist ideology is equally as bad as being racist yourself.

How about member : phinubian reads that as and as an African American he goes ballistic on you over it?

All to prevent the current African American in the WH from having a success story!

I'm a Caucasian American male and I find what you say offensive! This has not a damn thing to do with the colour of Mr. Paul's skin but every damn thing to do with racist statements and to remain blind to this means you are racist and a Bible Belt American whose only perception of African Americans is what you see on COPS! or America's Dumbest on TRUtv! One of my best friends is African American and if he saw this you would be torn a new one!

I'm not sure that anyone has noted this so far, but I didn't see it... They closed the comments section on the Ron Paul article on the CNN site. Story Here. I think we should give CNN a piece of our minds about that. We can't even defend him from this trash journalism.

reply to post by DocHalladay


CNN caught modifying content because it can't suit them, there's nothing new there!

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
I hope you have at least $1 Million in the bank because let him in and your Social Security is gone, your Medicare and Medicaid is gone, your Social Security retirement is gone! I hope you have a plan in place now to take care of your parents as they get older because they will be left out in the cold if he gets his way.

LOL, it's all clear now. Just admit it mate, it's your irrational fear of the above that has led you to so desperately grasp onto the most pathetic of "dirt" that you, along with the MSM could muster up on Ron Paul.

For someone who claims to have done their due diligence when it comes to research on the matter, you are very much misinformed, and/or dishonest. You make it sound like he'd just do away with your precious Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid soon as he got the chance. Fact is, he'd phase it out over the span of a few years, and for very good reasons.

1. It's unconstitutional.
2. It continues to force the people to depend on the government which is a very dangerous road.
3. The economy is failing and pretty soon there won't be any funds left anyway, unless some serious steps are taken.

On top of that -- as with most of his views when it comes to social policies -- just because he wants to get rid of things on a federal level, those that are unconstitutional, doesn't mean he's against the states taking them up.

His main goal is to abide by the Constitution and give back power to the states, which ultimately is giving power back to the people. Sounds pretty freaking good to me and I got literally nothing in the bank.