Ron Paul's racist comments

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Once the FAQ is updated, I think it'll be called the "Redbean rule."

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering the way the discussion was headed for RonPaulNation once we limited it to facts and credible sources.....we should call it the "Mercy Rule." [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The other article doesn't seem to make it clear that he actually wrote the statements.


[/ QUOTE ]

During his 1996 campaign, Paul defended the statements as his own.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he didn't. This has already been disproven.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The other being that him being racist is about as relevant as his skin color, his sexual orientation, and his religion. As long as none of the above effect his policies and ideas in regards to the Federal government, I don't really care.

[/ QUOTE ]

I realize that him potentially being a racist doesn't seem to matter to many of his followers

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it would matter quite a lot to us, or at least to me, it's just completely and totally ridiculous.

[ QUOTE ]
combined with the NAACP and other similar groups giving Dr. Paul bad marks for his voting record, while white power type organizations and guys like David Duke give him good marks based on his voting record.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does a racist group disagreeing with a racist man have to do with anything?

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does anyone find it odd that David Duke is a big time supporter of Ron Paul?

[/ QUOTE ]

No? Did you know that Hitler was a vegetarian?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you know MLK had extra-marital affairs?

Or that Jefferson owned slaves?

Incredible logic here.

Lets just spout random facts in lieu of discussion. Who cares if David Duke supports Ron Paul? Al Sharpton supports Hillary Clinton, I would say that makes the Dem's and Rep's equal on this argument.

[Money2Burn]

[ QUOTE ]
After all, as we saw his behavior in the 1996 campign, when he admittedly lied to voters for political gain.....in Ron Paul's mind, "the end justify the means".


[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't Paul have one of the most consistant voting records in Congress? Wouldn't you expect more wavering on issues if he were just doing things for his own "political gain" like, uh, most other poiticians?

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to "fight the power," and to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible. Anything is justified against "The Man."



[/ QUOTE ]

What context was this written in? This statement may be prejudiced if he's referring to black people as a whole, but I don't see how it is bigoted in any way. From my own experiences I can honestly say that I don't think Dr. Paul is that far off base with this comment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is it is in context, from Ron Paul's newsletter:

<font color="red">The criminals who terrorize our cities--in riots and on every non-riot day--are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are. As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to "fight the power," and to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible. Anything is justified against "The Man." And "The Woman.' A lady I know recently saw a black couple in the supermarket with a cute little girl, three years old or so. My friend waved to the tiny child, who scowled, stuck out her tongue, and said (somewhat autologically): "I hate you, white honkey." And the parents were indulgent. Is any white child taught to hate in this way? I've never heard of it. If a white child made such a remark to a black woman, the parents would stop it with a reprimand or a spank.
</font>

He's asserting in a rather inflammatory way that the reason for the amount of young black criminals is because black children are taught to hate whites, while he also asserts that he's never heard of it in the case of white children, implying that in all cases of hypothetical occurences from a white child, they would be reprimanded by responsible parents, but in the anecdotal case of the black parents, they were "indulgent".

And despite him speaking in generalities about entire racial groups, you don't see the racism. And "based on your experience" you tend to agree with the views anyway.

Amazing......

[AlexM]

Anyway...

I asked you earlier in this thread to explain what exactly is racist about the statements in question. Until you are able to do that, you have no business calling anyone associated with those statements racist.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
After all, as we saw his behavior in the 1996 campign, when he admittedly lied to voters for political gain.....in Ron Paul's mind, "the end justify the means".


[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't Paul have one of the most consistant voting records in Congress? Wouldn't you expect more wavering on issues if he were just doing things for his own "political gain" like, uh, all other poiticians?

[/ QUOTE ]

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

During his 1996 campaign, Paul defended the statements as his own.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he didn't. This has already been disproven.

[/ QUOTE ]

Incorrect.

I suggest you read Dr. Paul's interview with the Texas Montly from 2001, in which he explains he defended the newletter as his own writing during the 1996 campaing on the advice of his staff.

Simply put, in his own words, Dr. Paul admits defending the newsletter as his own during the 1996 campaign.

But if you really want to disprove that assertion from both me, the Houston Chronicle, Texas Monthly, and Dr. Paul himself......please do so using some sort of facts....rather than saying "um....we already disproved that" and wishing it to be true.

[img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]

And despite him speaking in generalities about entire racial groups, you don't see the racism.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most black people vote Democrat. Is this a racist statement?