Ron Paul's 2012 Campaign

[steve74baywin]

Those quotes came from his newsletter. He may not have written them but he did sign his name to them. Try to disavow them as he might he's going to have a tough time distancing himself. I see it like this. Someone makes an offensive statement in your kitchen. At that point those are their words not yours. You then alow a yard sign with the same words. Still their words but you've now attached yourself to them. Am I using a faulty logic?

My points are this.
1) What is being claimed as in the letters may be inflated, or outright misinterpretation.
No ones seems to being able to produce what is actually in the letters to support what the media is saying or calling him. So first I would like to make sure or see if it is even correct to call the letters what they are calling them.
2)Then, there is the neglect of allowing them to go out in his name.
In your yard sign example it would be as if he did have the sign up for a short spell 10+ years ago, but then realized what was on the sign, took them down, and says he didn't write them and didn't know what was on them. That is what he is saying. He didn't read every letter, so that would mean he didn't read what was on the sign. But the sign has been taking down for years. I forget the dates but he rejected them when he ran for office many years ago, so it would be like a sign got put up without him knowing what was on it, but he throw the sign out as soon as he found out.
Did I understand your example?

[steve74baywin]

I may read these letter further.
To aide in this matter, here is one someone claims the media says is the worst Ron Paul letter.
http://www.tnr.com/sites/default/files/PR_June92_p1.pdf

[steve74baywin]

I really want to be open minded about my favorite candidate.
I claim to seek the truth and I am wanting to do it for this as well.
Here is the letter Neal provided.
http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/11/1 ... ation2.pdf

Here is one someone claims the media says is the worst Ron Paul letter.
http://www.tnr.com/sites/default/files/PR_June92_p1.pdf

I am going to see if I can find what the media is claiming makes Ron Paul a
Racist.

Edited to add,

I did some typing.
Here is the letter some say is the worst.

"1992

A Special Issue on Racial Terrorism

The Los Angeles and related riots mark a new era in American cultural, political, and economic life. We now know, if we did not before, that we are under assault from thugs and revolutionaries who hate Euro-American civilization and everything it stands for: private property, material success for those who earn it, and Christian morality.

This is America, 1992
Ten thousand stores and other buildings looted and burned, thousands beaten and otherwise seriously injured, 52 people dead. That was the toll of the Los Angeles riots in which we saw white men pulled from their cars and trucks and shot or brutally beaten. (In every case, the mob was not too enraged to pick the victim's pocket.)

We saw Korean and white stores targeted by the mob because they "exploited the community, " i.e., sold products people wanted at prices they were willing to pay.
Worst of all, we saw the total breakdown of law enforcement, as black and white liberal public officials had the cops and troops disarm in the face of criminal anarchy.

In San Francisco and perhaps other cities, says my coin expert Burt Blumert, the rioting was led by red-flag carrying members of the Revolutionary Communist Party and the Workers World Party, both Trotskyite-Maiust, The police were allowed to intervene only when the rioters assaulted the famous Fairmont and Mark Hopkins hotels atop Nob Hill. A friend of Burt's, a jewelry store owner, had his store on Union Square looted by blacks, and when police arrived in response to this frantic calls, their orders were to protect his life, but not to interfere with the rioting.

Even though the riots were aimed at whites (and in L.A. at Koreans who had committed the crime of working hard and being successful, and at Cambodians in Long Beach), even though anti-white and anti-Asian epithets filled the air, this is not considered a series of hate crimes, nor a violation of civil rights of whites or Asians. "

I will read it again and I look forward to comments on it.
My first thoughts are, I think what was said by many people today, the media and Politicians after 9/11 in regards to Muslims is far worse than this letter.

[Velokid1]

I was somewhat racist, and certainly did and said a couple blatantly racist things, 20 years ago. I'm not racist now.

I really don't care about an old letter from Ron Paul. I would care if he made racist remarks today. Now. If all people can fault him for is a somewhat-possibly racist letter from 20 years ago, I'd say the guy's doing pretty well. Personally, I'm more turned off by what he says daily on the campaign trail than what he maybe-sorta said or coulda-mighta endorsed in the past.

[ruckman101]

I really want to be open minded about my favorite candidate.
I claim to seek the truth and I am wanting to do it for this as well.
Here is the letter Neal provided.
http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/11/1 ... ation2.pdf

Here is one someone claims the media says is the worst Ron Paul letter.
http://www.tnr.com/sites/default/files/PR_June92_p1.pdf

I am going to see if I can find what the media is claiming makes Ron Paul a
Racist.

Edited to add,

I did some typing.
Here is the letter some say is the worst.

"1992

A Special Issue on Racial Terrorism

The Los Angeles and related riots mark a new era in American cultural, political, and economic life. We now know, if we did not before, that we are under assault from thugs and revolutionaries who hate Euro-American civilization and everything it stands for: private property, material success for those who earn it, and Christian morality.

This is America, 1992
Ten thousand stores and other buildings looted and burned, thousands beaten and otherwise seriously injured, 52 people dead. That was the toll of the Los Angeles riots in which we saw white men pulled from their cars and trucks and shot or brutally beaten. (In every case, the mob was not too enraged to pick the victim's pocket.)

We saw Korean and white stores targeted by the mob because they "exploited the community, " i.e., sold products people wanted at prices they were willing to pay.
Worst of all, we saw the total breakdown of law enforcement, as black and white liberal public officials had the cops and troops disarm in the face of criminal anarchy.

In San Francisco and perhaps other cities, says my coin expert Burt Blumert, the rioting was led by red-flag carrying members of the Revolutionary Communist Party and the Workers World Party, both Trotskyite-Maiust, The police were allowed to intervene only when the rioters assaulted the famous Fairmont and Mark Hopkins hotels atop Nob Hill. A friend of Burt's, a jewelry store owner, had his store on Union Square looted by blacks, and when police arrived in response to this frantic calls, their orders were to protect his life, but not to interfere with the rioting.

Even though the riots were aimed at whites (and in L.A. at Koreans who had committed the crime of working hard and being successful, and at Cambodians in Long Beach), even though anti-white and anti-Asian epithets filled the air, this is not considered a series of hate crimes, nor a violation of civil rights of whites or Asians. "

I will read it again and I look forward to comments on it.
My first thoughts are, I think what was said by many people today, the media and Politicians after 9/11 in regards to Muslims is far worse than this letter.

There are worse examples is a very weak statement of justification.

Glad you found The New Republic articles with links to pdfs of the offending pages of RPs newsletters.

Kevin Drum's opinion rings true, well at least this statement from him: "Ron Paul is a full-bore crank. In fact he's practically the dictionary definition of a crank: a person who has a single obsessive, all-encompassing idea for how the world should work and is utterly blinded to the value of any competing ideas or competing interests."

I added the italics.

And Steve, I vote in every election. I may have missed one or two in my lifetime.


neal

[Velokid1]

Bukowski said something about the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship. In a democracy, you vote prior to being told what you're going to do. In a dictatorship, you don't waste your time standing in line to vote.

Voting is important but has also become this thing that is used to belittle and shame people, by holding it up as a duty that is important almost to the point of being sacred. The fact is that voting is important because it can change many important things, but its usefulness in that regard has some very obvious limits, i.e. there are many things, perhaps the most important, overarching problems with our country, that no amount of voter turnout or consensus among voters is ever going to change.

Voting is NOT a suitable replacement for hitting the streets. Some people like to belittle movements like Occupy Wall Street, partly by holding up the voting process as a more reasonable means of making changes and the notion is ridiculous.

[ruckman101]

oops, here's the link to the links.

http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/01 ... can?page=1


neal

[Amskeptic]

I am not going to buy Ron Paul's arguments about not being aware of what was written under his name, even if he did not write the words himself (an extremely stupid and sloppy oversight if that were the case, if you ask me). Nor am I going to buy that he was unaware for ten years. If I was in his shoes, there would be at a bare minimum, a record of my firing the son-of-a-bitch who mis-quoted me, and a full press correction of my views.
Colin

[vdubyah73]

I was somewhat racist, and certainly did and said a couple blatantly racist things, 20 years ago. I'm not racist now.

I really don't care about an old letter from Ron Paul. I would care if he made racist remarks today. Now. If all people can fault him for is a somewhat-possibly racist letter from 20 years ago, I'd say the guy's doing pretty well. Personally, I'm more turned off by what he says daily on the campaign trail than what he maybe-sorta said or coulda-mighta endorsed in the past.

so are you willing to defend romney for changing his views on abortion? people do change as time passes. i wrestle with abortion and the death penalty every time it comes to stating my opinion.

[ruckman101]

Curious opportunistic timing on Romney's change of position.


neal

[Velokid1]

Absolutely. I hold the space for every man to change and evolve. It's most difficult to do with myself, actually.

The exceptions are (a) when someone's transgression is too great OR hits me too close to home to forgive and (b) when it's obvious political maneuvering. Being racist and pandering to assholes by pretending to be racist, for example, are both equally evil.

[steve74baywin]

And Steve, I vote in every election. I may have missed one or two in my lifetime.


neal

Point of me asking was this.
Did you use the same standard to disqualify in the past?
Who have you voted for over the years?
I would like to see if you always had such a standard/way of eliminating a candidate.

[ruckman101]

Everyone has a certain amount of baggage, regardless. I obviously lean to democrats, and perhaps it's selective on my part, but I don't recall baggage I've recoiled from with anyone I've ever voted for. And, again obviously, baggage to some is no big deal to others. Clinton carried a load, but I never bought in. Nader is Nader. The killer on Perot was his willingness to trample personal rights. What was dredged up on Carter? Kerry?

If a person holds similar views, that baggage would be a light tote instead of filling a boxcar. Are you in this boat with RP, in agreement with the statements he didn't write, didn't read, put his name to, defended in the past and finally after more than twenty years disavows? I certainly hope not.

How about Newt reaching out to the, not African-American, but black community? How about Santorum? Both have recently made statements that I feel demonstrates an inherent racism they feel they don't have.

neal

[BellePlaine]

http://www.theendrun.com/huntsman-compl ... ainst-paul

[ruckman101]

What a tangled mess. Sounds like Huntsman has a grasp on utilizing new technologies. Dirtier dirty tricks. Any inclusion by Breitbart is a nasty smear and indication that this came from unfathomably deep depths of the sewer. If true, a truly poor choice on Huntsman's part that has sullied my opinion of him.


neal