Ron Paul's racist comments

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, it's obviously hyperbole


[/ QUOTE ]


For the record, I don't think this is obviously hyperbole. Why do you think it is?

[/ QUOTE ]

It just is. Why do you think it isn't?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well played. AlexM 1, elwood 0

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Uhm, someone who is speeding or parking incorrectly has broken the law and is therefor a criminal.

[/ QUOTE ]


Just a couple of things. Do you think that was the point that was being made in the article. 95% of black males in DC are criminals because they have gotten a speeding ticket?


[/ QUOTE ]

No, this is a tangent from the actual discussion.

[Ineedaride2]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The comments most definately are, and Ron Paul is most definately responsibly for them.

[/ QUOTE ]

First half of this is a maybe, second half is definitley false.

[/ QUOTE ]

Second half is true in Dr. Paul's eyes, as he's on record as saying he had some moral responsibility for them.

[/ QUOTE ]


NOW we're getting somewhere. I can agree with you 100% that he has some moral responsibility for whatever was written in that newsletter. I'll even go so far as to say he was temporarily insane to put his name on a newsletter that was being written by numerous other people.

Finally, we can agree on something.

But this. does. not. make. him. a racist.

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, it's obviously hyperbole, and whatever you might think of hyperbole, hyperbole isn't racism

[/ QUOTE ]

It certainly can be. I don't know why you would think that hyperboly couldn't be racism.

For the record, I don't think this is obviously hyperbole. Why do you think it is?

[/ QUOTE ]

It just is. Why do you think it isn't?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because of the context in which it was written. Hyperbolic statements generally don't try to sound "logical" because they diminish their hyperbolic affect. The statement was a failed attempt at logic. Further, the statement (in context) wasn't made to score a point about the police (which would be the intention if it were hyperbole), but rather to say something about Black Males in DC (we know this because the rest of the context of the whole article.) Finally, because the two numbers are relatively close (85 and 95) the hyperbolic affect would be minimal --- thus, hyperbole is, again, less likely.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And by the way, don't you think that 95% of people in GENERAL are "semi-criminal or criminal?"

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but let's assume that the author of the article does. Wouldn't it take a racist who believes that 95% of people are criminal to point out only that 95% of black people are criminal?

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's not, because if the author really does believe that then the statements are surely racist. It's entirely reasonable though for the author to believe something like that there are a lot more criminals than people who get arrested, even if all those arrested aren't criminals.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree that it is entirely reasonable to belive that 95% of black men in DC are criminals because a large number are arrested. I don't even think it would be reasonable to believe that 95% were criminals even if 95% were arrested. The arrest rate is SO high that you have to look at it in one of two ways: 1) the number is artificially high because police are over-arresting (my view); 2) black people are criminals and are rightly arrested 85% of the time (and should be arrested more) (the author's view)

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that the DC crime rate is completely absurd, right? Or at least it was then. Mind you, I agree that it's unreasonable to go for 95%, which is why I think it's clearly hyperbole, but even if it's not, I can certainly see someone getting to 95% without being racist. 70-80% seriously wouldn't surprise me for DC.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
I read the article, and there are definately some parts in it that would be considered racist.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for being honest about it. Most folks are either defending the article without having even seen it, or they are arguing it isn't racist out of their blind devotion to Dr. Paul.

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

From 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.' </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you disagree that some children are raised this way?

[/ QUOTE ]

The author alludes that all young black criminals are raised this way,

[/ QUOTE ]

No he doesn't. "They" obviously refers to the subject of the last sentence, which is "the criminals who terrorize".
(who he claims are largely black) This is quite a different statement than "all blacks are raised this way".

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, it's obviously hyperbole, and whatever you might think of hyperbole, hyperbole isn't racism

[/ QUOTE ]

It certainly can be. I don't know why you would think that hyperboly couldn't be racism.

For the record, I don't think this is obviously hyperbole. Why do you think it is?

[/ QUOTE ]

It just is. Why do you think it isn't?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because of the context in which it was written. Hyperbolic statements generally don't try to sound "logical" because they diminish their hyperbolic affect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhm, he was making a (very poor taste) joke about the DC police. How is that trying to sound "logical"?

[ QUOTE ]
Further, the statement (in context) wasn't made to score a point about the police

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhm, yes it was.

[ QUOTE ]
rather to say something about Black Males in DC (we know this because the rest of the context of the whole article.)

[/ QUOTE ]

It was an offhand jab at the police. This is very clear from the context. In the middle of giving random statistics, he says "the police suck!" I don't even get how you can not realize this was a jab at the police.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Second half is true in Dr. Paul's eyes, as he's on record as saying he had some moral responsibility for them.

[/ QUOTE ]


NOW we're getting somewhere. I can agree with you 100% that he has some moral responsibility for whatever was written in that newsletter. I'll even go so far as to say he was temporarily insane to put his name on a newsletter that was being written by numerous other people.

Finally, we can agree on something.

But this. does. not. make. him. a racist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aside from taking responsibility, Paul also defended the comments as being "in context to current events".

I think his defense of the comments are what make him a racist, in addtion to his responsibility for them, in addition to my belief that he wrote them.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

From 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.' </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you disagree that some children are raised this way?

[/ QUOTE ]

The author alludes that all young black criminals are raised this way,

[/ QUOTE ]

No he doesn't. "They" obviously refers to the subject of the last sentence, which is "the criminals who terrorize".
(who he claims are largely black) This is quite a different statement than "all blacks are raised this way".

[/ QUOTE ]

So your rationalization that the comments aren't racist is to pick apart the semantics and grammar?

Do you apply such high standards to all allegedly racist material, are only that of the prophet Ron Paul?