Disturbing Info On Ron Paul

[LuisCyphre]

Don't shoot the messanger, I came across this information inadvertently while searching the blogs for commentary on the debate. If the source is legit, this is quite unfortunate, because Paul seemed like such a nice guy.

Quote:VICTORIA, TX -- Gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman's racially charged statements, and the subsequent outcry against them, have drawn attention to the importance Texans place on diversity and inclusiveness. Ron Paul, however, apparently does not feel the same way.

During his 30-year career in politics, Paul has made a number of offensive, racist statements in the press and in his personal newsletter, The Ron Paul Political Report, including:

* "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know unbelievably fleet-footed they can be." – Victoria Advocate, 5/24/96

* "Given the inefficiencies of what the DC laughably 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 criminal." – Victoria Advocate, 5/24/96

* "Opinion polls consistently show that only five percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action." – Victoria Advocate, 5/24/96

Sentiments like these are probably why radical "white nationalist" David Duke, Grand Wizard and founder of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, has chosen to currently feature Ron Paul prominently on the front page of http://www.DavidDuke.com, his personal homepage. Like Paul, David Duke is a failed 1988 presidential candidate.

"These comments are outrageous," said Sklar spokeswoman Austin Bonner. "All children deserve our faith in them and opportunities to learn. It is incredibly damaging that their Congressman–a supposed role model–tells them they are good for nothing but crime from the get-go."

Source: http://www.shanesklar.com/news_DETAILS.php?news_ID=49



What do you guys think? He sounds a bit racist to me. Don't get me wrong, he is still the best candidate on the Republican side, but I can't say I'm too pleased if these words are truly his.

[harflimon]

I would like to see in what context those quotes were made. Do you have this Victoria Advocate article?

[LuisCyphre]

Quote:I would like to see in what context those quotes were made. Do you have this Victoria Advocate article?

Nope, I'd like to see more info on this as well but that's all I have time for. Supposedly some of those quotes are from his newsletter, and "vicotoria advocate" looks to be some local newspaper in south texas

P.S. I found another link with a few more tidbits of info
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/aol...05/23/paul.html

[harflimon]

Yea, I searched the Advocates website, but came up with nothing.

The top quote seems like a backhanded compliment :wink: j/k

They are fairly damning on their own. But I haven't seen any racist messages coming from Ron in his campaign.

[FighterFromAfar]

From the moment I first saw Ron Paul being billed as some kind of savior of the Republic over at Prison Planet, I began to have some nagging doubt in the back of my mind, like, this is too good to be true. I am wary of public figures who seem to rise out of nowhere.

I was wary of Glenn Beck when he made his entrance into talk radio, and in no-time flat, had himself a show on CNN.



However, I haven't seen anything from Ron Paul recently that would make me think he is racist. Maybe he has overcome those racist tendencies. I can't be certain.

[neWt]

Thats what happens when someone talk openly about dismantling the NWO's methods of control. They brand that person as a racist with one organization (Paul's congressional opposition) while supporting him/her with another (David Duke and the White Supremacists). No matter what the truth is, once a reputation is tainted in this way, one can never recover.

Character assassination is the next best thing to actual assassination.

[LuisCyphre]

Well I know Ron Paul's supporters will probably just write this off as "disinfo" or "character asassination" but how do you know it's not true? Of course his political opponents have used this against him, but does that mean they manufactured the quotes attribted to him? These reports go as far back as 1992 afterall, it's not like this jsut suddenly popped up during his campaign. I don't want to tell people how to vote, but let's be intellectually honest here and uncover the truth, whatever the truth may be.

I keep findind more unflattering articles on this guy:
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/vol1.../pols.paul.html

http://www.burntorangereport.com/showDia...aryId=1389

Quote:Aid for Hurricane Katrina Victims

NOTE: Paul’s own district, the 14th, has about 150 miles of coastline and was struck by Hurricane Rita a few weeks after Katrina inundated New Orleans.

"Is bailing out people that chose to live on the coastline a proper function of the federal government?” he asks. “Why do people in Arizona have to be robbed in order to support the people on the coast?" [Washington Post, 7/9/06]

OUCH!

Health Care
Paul’s press secretary said that Paul believes that Medicare is “unconstitutional” but instead of scrapping it immediately, according to his spokesperson, he believes that Congress needs to “wean people off the federal pig.” [Victoria Advocate, 8/11/96]

“I am opposed to any form of government health insurance as I am opposed to the taxes, regulations, licensing requirements, and monopolistic practices, which keep health costs higher than their true market value.” [CNN Presidential Questionnaire, 1988]

Social Security
As for Social Security, "we didn't have it until 1935," Paul says. "I mean, do you read stories about how many people were laying in the streets and dying and didn't have medical treatment? …Prices were low and the country was productive and families took care of themselves and churches built hospitals and there was no starvation." [Washington Post, 7/9/06]

“Something must be done to phase out the government’s involvement in Social Security. Pension and annuity plans should be the concern of the people, not the government. Political control of these things will lead only to bankruptcy and misery for retired persons.” [CNN Presidential Questionnaire, 1988M]

[Ognir]

Oh yeah fuck CHRON is if that's a reliable source

Shower of fuckin Neo-Cons paid asslicks

[MC David]

Quote:Don't shoot the messanger, I came across this information inadvertently while searching the blogs for commentary on the debate. If the source is legit, this is quite unfortunate, because Paul seemed like such a nice guy.

Quote:VICTORIA, TX -- Gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman's racially charged statements, and the subsequent outcry against them, have drawn attention to the importance Texans place on diversity and inclusiveness. Ron Paul, however, apparently does not feel the same way.

During his 30-year career in politics, Paul has made a number of offensive, racist statements in the press and in his personal newsletter, The Ron Paul Political Report, including:

* "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know unbelievably fleet-footed they can be." – Victoria Advocate, 5/24/96

* "Given the inefficiencies of what the DC laughably 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 criminal." – Victoria Advocate, 5/24/96

* "Opinion polls consistently show that only five percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action." – Victoria Advocate, 5/24/96

Sentiments like these are probably why radical "white nationalist" David Duke, Grand Wizard and founder of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, has chosen to currently feature Ron Paul prominently on the front page of http://www.DavidDuke.com, his personal homepage. Like Paul, David Duke is a failed 1988 presidential candidate.

"These comments are outrageous," said Sklar spokeswoman Austin Bonner. "All children deserve our faith in them and opportunities to learn. It is incredibly damaging that their Congressman–a supposed role model–tells them they are good for nothing but crime from the get-go."

Source: http://www.shanesklar.com/news_DETAILS.php?news_ID=49



What do you guys think? He sounds a bit racist to me. Don't get me wrong, he is still the best candidate on the Republican side, but I can't say I'm too pleased if these words are truly his.

All of these quotes are from the same article in his newsletter that Ron Paul not only didn't write, but didn't see until after it was published which is probably why is was printed. He didn't look at it before it was published. Look up Paul's article on hate crimes bills, or maybe I'll post it if I can find it. In it he describes racism as "a problem of the heart."

[harflimon]

Quote:Aid for Hurricane Katrina Victims

NOTE: Paul’s own district, the 14th, has about 150 miles of coastline and was struck by Hurricane Rita a few weeks after Katrina inundated New Orleans.

"Is bailing out people that chose to live on the coastline a proper function of the federal government?” he asks. “Why do people in Arizona have to be robbed in order to support the people on the coast?" [Washington Post, 7/9/06]

I actually agree with that. Since when are people to rely on the federal government to bail them out of disaster? Did the government bail out all the farmers effected by the Dust Bowl? Or how about back before all this centralization, was Florida ever bailed out when it got hurricanes in the 1800's?

FEMA shouldn't exist. I can support some humanitarian efforts, but it isn't the federal governments job to give these people trailers and electricity after a hurricane.

He didn't pander to his own constituency. That shows character in my opinion.

[neWt]

Quote:Well I know Ron Paul's supporters will probably just write this off as "disinfo" or "character asassination"

i'm not a ron paul supporter, i actually don't support anyone. i don't understand how you got that from my post, as it was a generalized statement. assumptions make for poor discussion.

[MC David]

Quote:

Quote:Aid for Hurricane Katrina Victims

NOTE: Paul’s own district, the 14th, has about 150 miles of coastline and was struck by Hurricane Rita a few weeks after Katrina inundated New Orleans.

"Is bailing out people that chose to live on the coastline a proper function of the federal government?” he asks. “Why do people in Arizona have to be robbed in order to support the people on the coast?" [Washington Post, 7/9/06]

I actually agree with that. Since when are people to rely on the federal government to bail them out of disaster? Did the government bail out all the farmers effected by the Dust Bowl? Or how about back before all this centralization, was Florida ever bailed out when it got hurricanes in the 1800's?

FEMA shouldn't exist. I can support some humanitarian efforts, but it isn't the federal governments job to give these people trailers and electricity after a hurricane.

He didn't pander to his own constituency. That shows character in my opinion.

And they did a horrible job, all they did was go door to door and take peoples' guns. Also a lot of black people were shot for taking food I think. I agree with the general idea that people need to be self-reliant. One thing FEMA is good at: http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=co...tion+camps

[harflimon]

Yea, FEMA is terrible. I was more debating the philosophy of having such an organization.

Their true reason for existing is anything but humanitarian.

[LuisCyphre]

Quote:

Quote:Aid for Hurricane Katrina Victims

NOTE: Paul’s own district, the 14th, has about 150 miles of coastline and was struck by Hurricane Rita a few weeks after Katrina inundated New Orleans.

"Is bailing out people that chose to live on the coastline a proper function of the federal government?” he asks. “Why do people in Arizona have to be robbed in order to support the people on the coast?" [Washington Post, 7/9/06]

I actually agree with that. Since when are people to rely on the federal government to bail them out of disaster? Did the government bail out all the farmers effected by the Dust Bowl? Or how about back before all this centralization, was Florida ever bailed out when it got hurricanes in the 1800's?

FEMA shouldn't exist. I can support some humanitarian efforts, but it isn't the federal governments job to give these people trailers and electricity after a hurricane.

He didn't pander to his own constituency. That shows character in my opinion.

did you think government response with Katrina was appropriate? What do you think should they have done?

P.S. I just realized how stupid your question was. Isn't the purpose of government to protect its own citizens? We are not superheroes afterall, we do need government for certain things like evacuating thousands of citizens out a flooded toxic wasteland or at least providing them with food and shelter don't we?

[harflimon]

No.

They should of just encouraged people to help out and not forced them to. I was reading that blog you posted in the AJ alternative thread. Here's a decent metaphor he had

Quote:Saturday, February 17, 2007
Locked in the Trunk of a Car: A Political Solution to Shopping

Now that my wife has started taking political science courses, things are getting really confusing at my house. Just this morning there was a knock at our front door. Opening it, I saw an enormous man, who asked for my wife.

“Actually, I think she’s just heading out to go shopping,” I said, my eyes narrowing just a little.

“Yeah,” he drawled, a toothpick working back and forth across his lips like a little oar. “I know. That’s what I’m here for.”

I stared at him, then shrugged. A personal shopper? Professional bag-toter? Foot-masseuse? Who knew?

I heard my wife coming downstairs. “Ah!” she exclaimed. “Excellent, I’m just ready!”

“All right,” growled the man. He pulled out a large burlap sack from under his coat. “Lean forward,” he said to my wife, lifting the sack over her head.

I made a motion to grab his arm, then decided to use words instead. “What are you doing?” I demanded – not weakly, I hoped.

My wife held up her hand, smiling at the man. “It’s okay,” she said. “I’m afraid my husband is a libertarian.”

The big man rolled his eyes, then sighed and crossed his arms, leaning up against the door frame.

“You see, honey,” my wife smiled, “I really want to go shopping…”

“So this… man gets to put you in a sack?”

“Of course! That’s how it works. I didn’t really understand it until I started taking political science, but it’s so radiantly clear now!”

“What is?”

“Well, before, when I wanted to go shopping, I wasn’t very efficient. I just grabbed my purse and my car keys, went to the mall, and just – shopped. I mean, how crazy was that? Now, I finally understand how it’s supposed to be done. So when I want to shop, I call this fine gentleman, who takes my credit card, puts me in a sack, puts the sack in the trunk of my car, then drives me to the mall and does my shopping for me – and buys quite a bit for himself as well! Now isn’t that so much better?” Her eyes shone.

“Seriously, honey – I have no idea how that even makes sense, let alone could be ‘better’!”

“Honey,” she said soothingly, “this is how it is supposed to be done. If I want to do something, I call a man up who forces me to do it! What could be better? It’s perfect!”

“Do you get to keep your car?”

My wife looked inquiringly at the large man, sunning himself in our doorway. He shrugged. “Dunno. I guess I could use it for a day or two. I’ll give you a call when I’m done with it, and you can come and pick it up. Okay?”

“No, it’s not okay!” I fume. “If my wife wants to go shopping, she doesn’t need you to force her to go shopping, and buy things for yourself besides!”

“Sweetie,” my wife said soothingly. “It’s exactly how things are supposed to work.” She tapped her fingernails against her front teeth. “It’s exactly how we help the poor with welfare programs, right?”

“What?”

“Well, we as voters want to help the poor, right? So we vote politicians in who force us to help the poor. They take our money, spend it on the poor as they see fit, and buy a lot of things for themselves as well! And if that way of doing things is good enough for something as important as helping the poor, surely it is good enough for something as inconsequential as my shopping expeditions! Am I right, or am I right?”

“But – if we want to help the poor so badly that we vote politicians in who force us to help the poor, then what do we need the politicians for in the first place? Why don’t we just help the poor ourselves?”

“Ah,” she said with a triumphant grin, “that’s because we are too selfish to help the poor ourselves!”

“But if we’re too selfish to help the poor ourselves, then surely we would never vote politicians in who would force us to help the poor! And if we don’t want to help the poor, then the government will never do it for us, because we’d never vote in a politician who promised that! So if the majority of people want to help the poor, then they don’t need to vote politicians in to force them to help the poor, right?”

For a moment, she seemed confused. “Well…”

“I mean, look what’s happening here! In the past, if you wanted to go shopping, you just went to the mall and bought whatever you wanted! Now, look at all this extra overhead and complication – this guy has to come and put you in a sack, and drive you to the mall in the trunk of your car, and then shop for what he thinks you might want, and buy stuff for himself as well. How is that more efficient – or in any way better – than what happened before?”

She frowned. “No, that’s…”

“If we get all these politicians to force us to give them money to help the poor, what happens if they spend money in ways that don’t help the poor? What if they decide to spend more money on themselves than on the poor? Can we get our money back? You see, if we want to help the poor – or the sick, or the old, or whoever – then we’ll just do it, and we don’t need the government to force us to do it. If the government reflects the will of the people, then it doesn’t need to force those people to do things. If the government does not reflect the will of the people, then it is mere tyranny. Do you see what I mean?”

“Yes, but…” My wife scowled, trying to reason her way out of the fog of statism.

“I mean, who told you all this stuff?”

The big man leaned forward. “I did,” he growled.

“Yes,” said my wife distractedly. “Sorry I didn’t introduce you. This is my professor of political science.”

He stretched out his enormous hand. I stared at it.

“Hey,” said the professor, dropping his hand suddenly. “I haven’t got all day. What say we put this to a vote? I mean,” he added, leaning over my wife, “I assume I can count on you to do the right thing, and show me that you understand the course material.”

She nodded slowly, staring up at him. I guess she really wants to pass his course.

The professor raised his hand – the one with the sack. “Then I vote: let’s go shopping!” he grinned. “I need some stuff!”

My wife tightened her lips. “It’s the right thing to do,” she said, raising her hand and averting her eyes.

In a blink she disappeared into the sack. I was about to cry out in opposition to this violation of sense, property, morality and rationality, but of course I am in the minority, so what’s the point?

Posted by Stefan Molyneux, MA at 2/17/2007 04:16:00 PM

I think if you really look into the incident you will find that normal people helped (or tried to at least before FEMA stepped in) a lot more than the federal government. Many of the victims ended up going to stay in homes from Texas to Michigan to California so they could get back on their feet. The outpouring of donations of not only money, but food and other essentials eclipsed anything the government was trying to do.

The government just took people's guns and tried to regulate everything.

Edit: BUT they didn't evacuate. My question wasn't stupid. The government is not there to protect us. Ask the police, they have no obligation to protect you. All the government tried to do was after the fact bullshit.