Ron Paul's racist comments

[RedBean]

I figured to start a new thread here, to keep it out of the other RP threads, and focus solely on the issue of the racial comments attributed to him that he continually defended as being accurate "in context of current events".

Basically, even though I agree with the majority of Paul's platform otherwise, I'm having trouble justifying supporting him.... considering this questionable history of despicably racist comments.

A complete summary of those comments can be found here, where the Houston Chronicle reported in 1996 on the racist and anti-semitic comments that were published in Ron Paul's newsletter, and attributed to him as author in 1992.

For the purpose of discussion, I wanted to be as objective as possible, thus limit it to indisputable facts from credible sources regarding the racial comments from Paul's newsletter.


FACTS:


1992 - Racial comments appear by "Ron Paul" in Paul's newsletter.

1996 - Paul defends comments and asserts they are his own to the Houston Chronicle.

2001 - Paul claims he did not write the comments, asserts a staffer did, yet still defends them as being "in context" in an interview with Texas Monthly.

2007 - "Unnamed sources" in an article on "Freemarketnews" claims Paul's campaign have nothing to do with newsletter, it was written by outside source.

(I'm not familiar with the credibility of "Freemarketnews.com", as I've never seen them before, and the credibility of "unnamed sources" is obviously dubious.....but even so, it has been asserted as credible by Borodog, so I'll list it here for the purpose of objectivity.)

Questions that arise:

1. Why did Paul claim they were his words and defend them 4 years later, in 1996, if he initially disagreed with them as is claimed in 2007?

2. Why did Paul wait 9 years to finally claim they weren't his words in 2001? And even then, why did he still defend them as being accurate "in the context of current events"?

3. When was this staffer "fired" as has been asserted? No credible source exists that I can find.

[AlexM]

Your questions have all already been answered. HAND

[RedBean]

Here are some of the quotes with authorship attributed to Ron Paul that were published in the official Ron Paul newsletter, under the title "Terrorist Update", (1992):

[ QUOTE ]

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions..."

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

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.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

What else do we need to know about the political establishment than that it refuses to discuss the crimes that terrify Americans on grounds that doing so is racist? Why isn't that true of complex embezzling, which is 100 percent white and Asian?

[/ QUOTE ]

[Bedreviter]

Funny how obsessed you are about these remarks considering who you have in your avatar.

"Bonds stood up, looked me in the eye and said, “I don't sign for white people.” If lightning hits me today, I will swear those were his exact words. Matt Williams and other Giants were in the room and they heard what Bonds said."

"The Southland News reported that Bonds’ spokeswoman and a Giants’ spokesman both declined comment on the story."

http://www.intellectualconservative....ticle4402.html

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Your questions have all already been answered. HAND

[/ QUOTE ]

While I appreciated your input in the other thread, I didn't feel the questions were adequately addressed.

In fact, it pretty much turned into Paul supporters resorting to name-calling, and hopefully we can leave that behind, and stick to legitimate discussion of the facts.

And I certainly respect your aversion to discussing it anymore, as the Paul's position on these comments appears rather indefensible when limited to facts and credible sources.

[ojc02]

How many times are you going to keep posting this? Ironic that the Ron Paul supporters are accused of spamming.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

"Bonds stood up, looked me in the eye and said, “I don't sign for white people.” If lightning hits me today, I will swear those were his exact words. Matt Williams and other Giants were in the room and they heard what Bonds said."

[/ QUOTE ]

Aside from staying on topic, we're also trying to limit the discussion to facts and credible sources. If you'd really like to discuss this issue regarding Bonds, take it to sports, and I'll happily oblige.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
How many times are you going to keep posting this? Ironic that the Ron Paul supporters are accused of spamming.

[/ QUOTE ]

I consolidated it into this one thread for the express purpose of keeping it out of other ones, and as to avoid "spamming".

Worry not, I'm sure it will slide down the page and disappear, as I doubt anyone is actually willing to discuss the facts surrounding it.

[ojc02]

Ok, he was wrong to allow his name to be used without maintaining close editorial control over what was said.

Ron Paul either is or is not a racist. You have presented evidence you that believe proves he is a racist. I choose to believe those words were in fact not written by him because they are totally at odds with everything else he has said or written.

This feels like one of the religion conversations in SMP. When it comes down to it, it is impossible to prove one way or the other - ultimately we'll get nowhere.

I choose to believe the side with *vastly* more evidence. You will keep harping on the same one thing. Sigh.


Incidentally, for the lurkers:
Ron Paul on racism:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul381.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul68.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul192.html

and I'm sure there are more where that came from.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, he was wrong to allow his name to be used without maintaining close editorial control over what was said.


[/ QUOTE ]

If that is the case, why did he defend the words as his own 4 years later, in the 1996 Houston Chronicle article?

And in 2001, why did he claim they were written by a staffer, rather than a source outside his campaign, as was asserted by "unnamed sources" in 2007?

[ QUOTE ]
I choose to believe those words were in fact not written by him because they are totally at odds with everything else he has said or written.


[/ QUOTE ]

If they are at odds with everything else he has said or written, why did he defend them in both 1996 and 2001 interviews as being accurate "in context to current events"?

[ QUOTE ]

When it comes down to it, it is impossible to prove one way or the other - ultimately we'll get nowhere.


[/ QUOTE ]


It may be impossible to prove whether or not Paul is inherently a racist, but it is most definately a matter of fact that he participated in asserting and defending these particular racist views, as backed by the facts above.

It had previously been asserted that these claims were false, hence the desire to discuss the relevant facts and credible sources in the abscence of childish name-calling and other rhetoric.

[ QUOTE ]
I choose to believe the side with *vastly* more evidence. You will keep harping on the same one thing. Sigh.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "one thing" appears to be the systematic defense of a despicably racist viewpoint over the course of 10+ years.

I understand you may think it "isn't a big deal", but this man is running for President, after all. It's kind of a big deal to the folks who Paul appears to be bigoted against.