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.

 

Unearthed by a Black Reporter: Fact - Ron Paul voted NAY to MLK DAY

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
The Atlantic - MLK Day Fact Check

Andrew repeats an interesting claim that I've seen all over twitter tonight:


Chuck Todd notes that Ron Paul voted for the MLK national holiday. Gingrich voted against. I find the notion that Ron Paul is a racist to be preposterous.


Again, I make no claims about the contents of Ron Paul's heart. I've never met him, and consider such things beyond the bounds of the ultimately knowable. But Ron Paul's voting record is a different matter.


But first here's Ron Paul on Martin Luther King Day in his newsletters:


"Boy, it sure burns me to have a national holiday for Martin Luther King. I voted against this outrage time and time again as a Congressman. What an infamy that Ronald Reagan approved it! We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day."


It has been alleged that these are Lew Rockwell's words, not Ron Paul's. One would think that Rockwell would be familiar with Paul's record, as he was his longtime Chief of Staff.


But, fair enough. Let us assume that Rockwell was, indeed, in error. Paul's supporters link to his Yea vote on this 1979 bill www.govtrack.us... as evidence that he supported an MLK Holiday:


TO AMEND H.R. 5461, MARTIN LUTHER KING HOLIDAY, BY DESIGNATING THE THIRD MONDAY IN JANUARY RATHER THAN JANUARY 15 AS THE LEGAL HOLIDAY.


But this actually isn't the bill for the holiday. The text doesn't even claim that. More importantly, the date is wrong. This vote was taken on December 5, 1979. The vote for the King holiday was actually taken on November 13, 1979:


The bill was called up in the House on Tuesday, November 13, 1979...www.wilsoncenter.org...
When the final vote was taken, 252 Members voted for the bill and 133 against--five votes short of the two-thirds needed for passage.


I'm sorry to report that one of those Nay votes, as you can see here www.govtrack.us..., was cast by one Ronald Paul. I'm sorry to further report that Paul again voted no on the 1983 bill that passed. www.govtrack.us...


If we are to take the version of events proffered by Ron Paul's defenders, the Congressmen voted for a holiday which his Chief of Staff publicly denounced as "Hate Whitey Day." In Ron Paul's own name, no less. This version of events should inspire skepticism even in a Paul admirer. I am happy to report that in some, it did.


I want to reiterate--again--that I make no claims on the heart of Ron Paul. How he truly feels about black people is best left to Paul and his conscience. His actual record, however, is wholly subject to the wiles of google.

- Ta-Nehisi Coates is a senior editor for The Atlantic

*
Now , I really enjoy Ron Paul . I enjoy that he is a Constitutionalist and I appreciate that he engages free thinkers in the political conversation.

HOWEVER, as a black person - a free thinker- I cant just gobble up and over look this repeated
suspicious behavior on the small "racism" issue.

To all those going to say "he believes in the Constitution" so did the founding fathers, and we know how the majority of them felt about race relations.

So to Ron Paul supporters are ask you:

1. Why is it while reading through - and searching before I posted this - can you guys accurately refernce articles, laws, and historical figures from the constitution yet no one (or few) could accurately account for his "votes" of MLK days. And NOT just to get it moved?

2. Why hasn't he denounced , or cut ties with , his seemingly racist once chief of staff?

3. I remember reading an article about this on here and quite a few people said "so what if he IS racist".

Just want to remind you that for a large percentage of people born in this country , even some of us who built this country, a racist president in 2012 is not ideal. Furthermore, I am not looking for the "lesser of two evils". If Ron Paul is what he and you guys claim, than it should be no problem to have a conversation based on fact and reason in regards to honor and morality. Isn't that what he stands for??

I dare say that voting against MLK day while touting him as one of your heroes, and allowing your supporters to spread disinformation does not seem that ethical. Oh yeah..and those racist news letters (that he may or may NOT have written but was in his name) don't help much..

Intelligent insight is welcome.



+1 more 
posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:28 PM
link   
I don't really think voting against making MLK day a National Holiday means someone is racist. The company I work for doesn't recognize it as a holiday and I'm pretty stinkin sure we aren't racist.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   
I would personally never run for president based on all the s*** that comes out about you. You fart in a Starbucks and someone will be talking about it when you run for president.

Just because he voted nay on MLK day doesn't mean he is racist. There are financial reasons why a day should not be turned into a holiday as well. Holiday's mean things shut down, no money flowing. Personally I think MLK day should be a holiday but that doesn't change my reason to vote for Paul.
edit on 10-1-2012 by mileslong54 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Just a hypothetical question: if say, a JFK national holiday day was proposed (or whoever), and a black person voted against it... would it immediately be seen as "racist" and call into question the integrity of the black person who voted against it, for nothing more than the fact that it was a black man voting against a day that was for a white man, without even looking into the details of the situation? Would they be hounded by the media and forced into continually trying to pacify the "racist" witch hunters, or would it never even be raised as an issue because a more mundane, non-racial explanation would be accepted as satisfactory by almost all?
edit on 1/10/2012 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
I'm not for any "holiday" that celebrates one man. Not trying to discredit what he did but there are plenty of people in this countries history that did great things and don't have a holiday in their name. While we are on the subject the the hell does that murderous asshat Columbus have a day after him?
edit on 10-1-2012 by NoClue206 because: not thought out

edit on 10-1-2012 by NoClue206 because: (no reason given)


+8 more 
posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Ron Paul voted NO to suspend the rules - you must remember that bills often contain more than what their title might have you believe. This bill never became law.

www.govtrack.us...



Ron Paul voted YES to create MLK Day when the original bill was amended to not suspend the rules. The bill was referred to and died in Committee.

www.govtrack.us...



Ron Paul then again voted against suspending the rules in 1983.

www.govtrack.us...


Here is what Ron Paul was voting against:

en.wikipedia.org...





I hope this clarifies for you. You're obviously intelligent and capable, don't let this horrible smear attempt work on you - because it is just that, a horrible smear attempt.


Peace!



edit on 10-1-2012 by TinkerHaus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaticusMaximus
Just a hypothetical question: if say, a JFK national holiday day was proposed (or whoever), and a black person voted against it... would it immediately be seen as "racist" and call into question the integrity of the black person who voted against it? Would they be hounded by the media and forced into continually trying to pacify the "racist" witch hunters, or would it never even be raised as an issue?


He would by some, just as Ron will be hated by some - those people are out there that will make a molehill out of nothing. It's a big game of jabs - who ever bleeds the least wins.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Right, because someone's voting record on a holiday is more important than on wars, spending, taxes, the budget, etc. etc.

I honestly fail to see the importance of a no vote on someone named "Mr. No"



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   
I think we could guess all day long about why he voted no.

Obviously, one guess could be that it's because he's a racist. Could be true.

Or perhaps it's because the only other "day" that we have that honor specific people is "Presidents' Day", and although we think of that in connection with Washington and Lincoln, it is technically now a day to honor ALL presidents.


Presidents' Day, celebrated each year on the third Monday in February, is a day when Americans honor the legacies of the U.S. presidents. The holiday was established in 1800, when Congress declared February 22–George Washington's birthday–a federal holiday. Still legally known as Washington's Birthday, Presidents' Day has become a day to honor not only Washington, but Abraham Lincoln, the 16th U.S. president who was born on February 12, and the lives and accomplishments of all U.S. presidents.


www.history.com...

(EDIT: Oops...forgot Columbus Day! But you get my point...)

Personally, I adore Martin Luther King, Jr. I love his message, and wish we lived according to his "dream". But really...aren't there lots of people who have made great accomplishments in the history of the US? Of ALL races (and genders, for that matter). Why don't we have a federal holiday for any women? Or any hispanics? Or any native Americans?

In addition, it may not be politically correct to say this, but I don't really think MLK would WANT to have this day named after him. He was not that type of man.

Yes, I can imagine there could be lots of logical reasons why Ron Paul might have voted "no" on this issue.

All I care about now is what he can do for the country.

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

And to speak to the issue of his alleged racism:

No, I don't care if he is racist. I don't think it is true .....but he is allowed to think whatever he wants.

What I'm going by is his record of voting to uphold the Constitution. Period. That's what I want a president to do at this point. He's had a pretty consistent record in that regard.

All of this other stuff is a diversion.

Which of us doesn't have SOMETHING in our past, or some part of our personality that could reflect badly upon us?

Rather than worrying about his imperfections, worry about if he could be the person to turn this ship around. That's what I'm worried about.
edit on 10-1-2012 by GeorgiaGirl because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2012 by GeorgiaGirl because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   


Maybe we should find what Paul himself was thinking when he voted no instead of jumping on the Paul is racist bandwagon.....It's hard to find anything in his defense as the first couple pages on Google return peoples blogs ranting "See i told you he was racist I told You ALLLLLL"

edit on 10-1-2012 by Vardoger because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2012 by Vardoger because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2012 by Vardoger because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by femalepharoe
 

I think you must also realize that there are many procedural votes, that are recorded, during the deliberation of any bill in the house. At, www.govtrack.us..., yes he votes no. But at, www.govtrack.us..., he votes yes. He may have, during deliberations, voted yes and no many more times before the final vote.

edit on 10-1-2012 by dumschidt because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Think you will find that was to change the day the holiday would be held has been covered in another thread that tinfoil started not as a thread but a subject in one of his threads. I'm an Aussie and have found that out hope the American public isn't as gulible to believe this crap



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Ron Paul voted Yes to MLK Day.

www.politifact.com...

"For example, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, he voted to authorize the continuing operation of NASA and to celebrate Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday on the third Monday in January."

St. Petersburg Times had that, and they are dedicated to fact checking.

And here is some interesting stuff for you too.


Ron Paul, did in fact, vote to CREATE Martin Luther King day. The first vote was one to SUSPEND THE RULES in order to CONSIDER the bill, and Ron Paul voted no to this (to SUSPEND the rules).
www.govtrack.us...
To clarify, Ron Paul voted no to SUSPEND the rules to vote for MLK day.
H.R. 5461 - NEVER BECAME LAW

In order for the bill to once again be considered a vote, AN AMENDMENT was made to the initial bill, and thus now able to be properly voted on: RON PAUL VOTED YES ON THE ENTIRE BILL, INCLUDING THE AMENDMENT. This was the FIRST proper vote on the bill without SUSPENDING THE RULES.

Ron Paul VOTED YES to CREATE MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY an a national day of OBSERVANCE.
www.govtrack.us...


The third vote in 1983 was to again SUSPEND THE RULES in order to AMEND TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE. Once again, Ron Paul voted no to SUSPEND THE RULES to AMEND TITLE 5.
www.govtrack.us...

To the author and anyone reading this, please brush up on your Parliamentary Procedure as to how bills are actually VOTED on in our Congress, brought to the floor BY THE RULES for a vote, and why an amendment IS NEEDED to bring certain bills back to the floor for a vote.

www.dkosopedia.com...

In summary, Ron Paul voted NO TO SUSPEND RULES, voted YES TO CREATE MARTIN LUTHER LING DAY AS WE OBSERVE IT TODAY, THE THIRD MONDAY OF JANUARY each year.

www.sodahead.com...

It is okay to oppose certain parts of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and stand behind the right of property owners to do what they want with their property without being a racist, and without endorsing discrimination by property owners, which RP has said he doesn't.

Its the government that legislates segregation by doing things such as turning a crime into a "hate crime" when it happens to someone other than your own color. You seem to support that.

Not only that, but there are at least two things in the newsletters that point to RP NOT WRITING the "racist comments". First is MLK Day, then there is a writer in the 1990 newsletter who said he picked up his first issue of Gentlemens quarterly. Then the SAME writer in the New York Times covers a convo that RP had with his Press Secretary in which he said he didn't even know what Gentlemens quarterly was.

There is plenty of concrete evidence pointing to Ron Paul not being a racist. For you to be so dismissive of those who believe with good reason that he is not a racist is arrogant and wrong.

I would have done all the research and linking myself but its like talking to brick walls apparently.

You, being black, need to help stop spreading this garbage. Simply because Ron Paul would risk his life to protect you, as colour of your skin does not mean a damn thing to him!! So please stop spreading racism, Thanks!!

edit on 10-1-2012 by godfather420 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by femalepharoe
 


So do we even have freaking president's day off anymore? NO, so wtf?

Do we celebrate oh IDK Whitey day or cracker day? NO!
edit on 10-1-2012 by ldyserenity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   
I checked out the other Ron Paul thread authored by the OP. She posted no replies.
I see none here, even though the reasons why Paul voted the way he did has been brought to the thread.
This reads like an attack on Ron Paul from a "rational, but concerned" party. Fine.
Let's discuss, OP. That is why you authored the thread isn't it?



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mileslong54
 


Sure some would, I agree with that. What get to me is it is almost an involuntary reaction by a significant portion of people to assume racism in cases like these where mundane explanations are more than sufficient to explain the actions taken by the white person in question.

However, reverse the colors, and the standard changes for those who scream "racism" the other way around. In fact, if you dare even insinuate racism with the colors reversed, you might even be labelled a racist yourself!

The double standard is very real.


Originally posted by femalepharoe

Just want to remind you that for a large percentage of people born in this country , even some of us who built this country, a racist president in 2012 is not ideal.


And its also ideal to not have a racist populace in 2012 either. Instead of this obsession with race, look at the real issues like foreign policy, economic policy, how much a person supports the constitution, etc.

There is no "race-policy", it doesnt exist, so get over it, and start voting based on actual issues.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by SurrealisticPillow
 


Let's discuss.

I don't typically stay at my computer all day.

You didn't ask any questions so ...what would you like to discuss?

I am concerned, there are some good replies with good information but mainly people have been like "so what".
I know racism is a minor concern to the majority in priveleage but the possibility is unsettling to black people.

The reason I posted this piece about his MLK voting record is due to the fact that Ron Paul supporters keep saying that he is not racist because MLK is his hero, correct?

This is the evidence, the main exhibit, the offer up.

In that same vein, if he can NOT be racist because MLK is his hero ; his voting record on MLK is relevant in the discussion, yes?

The point is, I don't think most of you supposed "free thinkers" on this site who support Ron Paul realize how (not damaging, but) hurtful those newsletters were and how it has damaged his image.


But...sorry..want did you want to discuss?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 08:20 AM
link   
MLK day as "hate whitey day"? That is deplorable. I'm white and I've never noticed the Holiday to be anything other than what it is. A celebration of MLK and his contributions and accomplishments.

Paul's remarks suck. He doesn't need to be in power if he disdains a large part of our population. I'm afraid he will try to punish them somehow, through cutting social programs, or other ways. We can't have that.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaticusMaximus
reply to post by mileslong54
 


Sure some would, I agree with that. What get to me is it is almost an involuntary reaction by a significant portion of people to assume racism in cases like these where mundane explanations are more than sufficient to explain the actions taken by the white person in question.

However, reverse the colors, and the standard changes for those who scream "racism" the other way around. In fact, if you dare even insinuate racism with the colors reversed, you might even be labelled a racist yourself!

The double standard is very real.


Originally posted by femalepharoe

Just want to remind you that for a large percentage of people born in this country , even some of us who built this country, a racist president in 2012 is not ideal.


And its also ideal to not have a racist populace in 2012 either. Instead of this obsession with race, look at the real issues like foreign policy, economic policy, how much a person supports the constitution, etc.

There is no "race-policy", it doesnt exist, so get over it, and start voting based on actual issues.



there is no "race-policy"? Doesn't Ron Paul state that racism is written into the laws and the laws must be changed?

Doesn't Ron Paul confirm institutionalized de facto racism in this country when he offers his solutions to fix it?


My posts , in actuality, are not aimed at Ron Paul as I am trying to see what he's "made of" so to speak.

But if his supporters are going to say how "different" he is and then yet pander to logical people and excuse him/his actions/or dealings like the BushBabbies of old , it says a lot about the candidate himself.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Ron Paul is fiscally very conservative.
He didn't want to spend money on yet another paid federal holiday.
He was FOR the holiday - but on a weekend.

Question for the OP - WHY did you feel it necessary to call the reporter a 'black' reporter?
Why is it important that the person's skin color be said? I don't get it.




top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join