This Ron Paul White Supremacist Thing Just Won’t Die Already

$*#@_*& Arrrrgh!  Yet in the frustration a part of me wants to just soak in all that delicious stupid just floating about.   It can’t be all bad, can it?  The cheeky optimism that looks facts right in the face, and stars with glassy eyed conviction right the fuck through.  How awesome would life be if it was viewed with the same unimpeachable faith held by Ron Paul’s supporters?

First up, via the right good General Jesus Christ (Christian, Patriot), we have this gem:

Michael Rivero
What Really Happened Radio

Dear Mr. Rivero,

Like you, I support Ron Paul to be our next president and was very upset with Bill White, Commander of the American Nazi Party, for posting about the good relationship white supremacist groups have had with him in the past. Certainly, that could not help his campaign.

Your response was perfect. It was a stroke of genius to counter the charges that Dr. Paul is a secret white Supremacist by declaring that a “Jewish cabal” is trying to frame him.

And David Duke’s posse rush to his defense as well (via the right good General JC):

Well, the Anti-Defamation League has exhibited another acute attack of foot-in-mouth disease by attacking the extremely popular presidential candidate Ron Paul. Ron Paul’s supporters come from all walks of life. They are white, black, Asian, heterosexual, homosexual, Catholic, Protestant, Wiccan and Jewish. Probably no other candidate has shown such a broad appeal, or excited such intense commitment in his supporters.  There’s a reason for this other than his good looks, of course, which we’ll explore in a minute.

From that last line, someone has an acute attack of nose in Paul’s ass disease.  I mean come on.  (And as if DavidDuke‘s website has any credibility when discussing the ADL.  It would be like expecting the KKK’s website to fairly discuss the NAACP or SPLC).  But back to the argument, if you can call it that.  Essentially they repeat the tired and broken line that having friends/supporters of a given group erases the possibility of prejudice, bigotry and hatred.  It does not.  Aside from being genuinely ignorant about Ron Paul’s racism, there are those who simply have other priorities, or who refuse to look at the facts.

The problem is not that Ron Paul has racist blowhards for supporters.  The problem is that Ron Paul has actively pandered to these groups, and has worked to bring their malicious rhetoric of bigotry into the mainstream.   The problem is Ron Paul’s positions, even when they don’t actively appeal in and of themselves to hate groups, provide the exact same arguments, excuses and loopholes sought by those who opposed every shred of dignity and every step of progress we took together as a nation during the civil rights movement.

It would be so easy for Ron Paul to deal with this White Supremacist skeleton once and for all.  He could come out and condemn these groups.  He could take responsibility for and apologize for the articles he wrote and the groups he supported, and promise not to do so again.  He could stop using the insane rhetoric surrounding his ideas about who controls the banks and other bits of hate group grist in his speeches.

He could recognize that maybe, for some fundamental rights, federal level protection is desirable.  Hell, he could even realize that for human rights, we need world level action.  But that’s a bit progressive for most these days, especially a modern day isolationist.

So in the meantime it looks like we’ll keep hearing about these little messes, and his supporters will continue to cover their eyes and ears, and shout desperate things in our general direction.

But until Ron Paul takes the right stand on bigotry and hate, he isn’t even a viable candidate.

Advertisements

26 Responses

  1. But it’s not Paul who is making an issue out of a non-issue. It’s irrelevent. Just like the stupid Edwards “love child” fiasco. Who gives a crap? It has nothing to do with how they would govern.

  2. Except it has a great deal to do with how Paul would govern, and is thus utterly unlike the love child fiasco.

    Ron Paul would weaken hate crimes legislation, work against the civil rights act, send federal rights packing to the state level, and create a legal environment that fosters hate crime and prejudice.

    His rhetoric also, and this is an important point, moves hate groups closer to the mainstream, and increases their political power.

    So its a pretty big issue, even if he hasn’t the smallest chance of winning.

  3. In Paul’s interview with NPR NOW he states his position.

    Minute 13:00
    http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/350/index.html
    Video: Ron Paul and Internet Politics

    Perhaps if people were actually interested in the truth that video segment would get more press than the many false and distorted claims about him.

  4. Paul’s rhetoric doesn’t move hate groups closer to the main stream any more than the this:

    1)Associate Paul with a hate group.

    2) Publicise it in a way that paints Paul as a sympathiser or hate group supporter.

    Since Paul’s views are essentially constitutional which are more mainstream than recognized, then hate groups are mainstreamed…

    I respect your sensibilites, but it is not Paul that is amping the hype.

  5. Interesting. So he won’t give back any of the money, but he doesn’t want anymore. Still, even if it took this long to say it, he did, and that’s a great first step. Now that Ron Paul has taken the risk of saying White Supremacy is bad, do you think he’ll tackle his past support for White Supremist groups, or attempts to weaken laws that fight hate crimes and prejudice?

  6. Commenter,
    Here is how he does it:
    1. Take a hate group item like “Jews control the world banks!”. Replace it with “a few people control the world banks” and a general screed against central control of finance.
    2. Take the racist battle cry of “State’s rights” and use it to tackle issues like hate crime enforcement and the civil rights act.
    3. Make the DADT issue about “disruptive” sexual behavior, which in addition to never having been the original issue, subtly reinforces the idea that homosexual behavior is more likely to be disruptive.

  7. No, from Paul’s perspective he would oppose hate crime legislation at the federal level, mostly because its not a role for the feds, but also cuz it would tread too close to a loss of free speech slippery slope…

  8. I recommend: Confessions Of An Economic Hitman by John Perkins for an interesting introspect of world banks. Or watch a video interview here:

    http://www.democracynow.org/2004/11/9/confessions_of_an_economic_hit_man

  9. Dan, I take you less serious every time you use the “it’s an old tired position” quote on things that you either cannot grasp or just plain don’t like the truth of.

    Bottom line is you are a devout liberal and cannot conceive of doing anything to stray from party lines. It’s a weak stance at best and so are your arguments against Ron Paul until you openly distance yourself from the “viable” candidates you support that do so much worse to this country for personal gain and completely ignore their oath of office.

    The distinction is that for every issue you have with Paul, there are multiple issues of significantly more importance and detriment to hold your “viable candidate” accountable. You ignore your candidates short comings and make mountains out of conjecture towards Paul. Compare what he has done in his political career and his intentions with your chosen candidates then spew rhetoric based on your findings. Until then harping on past issues or supposed issues is just being a devout democrat not a conscientious objector.

    Your not even considering he has a chance by your own words yet you devote pages to defame him. Why do you think the man has been elected by large margins so many times? If he were all these bad things you insinuate he is wouldn’t he have lost by now?

    “Ron Paul would weaken hate crimes legislation, work against the civil rights act, send federal rights packing to the state level, and create a legal environment that fosters hate crime and prejudice.”

    And do you have any evidence that he would do this? No.
    Did he do it in his congressional district? No.
    Are you psychic? No
    Do you have the slightest idea how his positions are within the confines of his oath of office? No. You don’t care about the oath of office as you have stated in the past. And you have stated that you don’t have confidence in the constitution. So if the constitution is as useless as you say then why is the practice still to this day that you swear an oath to uphold it when you take office.

    I can be sure that you are chomping at the bit to dismiss all this as the “old and tired” again but that really applies to the lies and broken promises that all your democratic candidates and most of the republican ones make. Do some comparisons look back at the records and progress of each candidate and the good they do for their constituents and areas surrounding, Ron Paul shines where the others make excuses.

    It really strikes me as a fools errand to make such a fuss about a candidate that you feel has no chance of winning. Or are you just riding the wave and looking for hits to the site by using Ron Paul’s name? I don’t think you’re that desperate are you?

  10. http://themedium.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/24/the-ron-paul-vid-lash/?ex=1199163600&en=7b25470d94ea3b8b&ei=5070&emc=eta1

    The NY times had the good sense to retract this unsubstantiated smear. Will YOU, Dan? Or is this just so “politically convenient” for you to stop spreading the lies?

    People like you have NO integrity and lose credibility every day. In my opinion labelling someone a racist simply to destroy them is WORSE than having racist tendecies in the first place. You have been doing this from the very beginning, regardless of the VERY clear message of individual liberty (that means liberty for ALL, not just “whitey”) that Ron Paul has been saying for years and years and years.

    Somehow, calling him a racist is just “politically convenient” for you and nothing you say can be trusted. Not about Ron Paul and not about YOUR candidates. For if you will stoop this low and lie and smear and label a good man a racist simply to destroy him because you do not agree with his positions on OTHER issues, then you will lie to promote YOUR candidate.

    Your opinion is NOT to be trusted. I knew that long ago. Now the rest of your audience does.

  11. “$*#@_*& Arrrrgh! Yet in the frustration a part of me wants to just “soak in all that delicious stupid” just floating about.”

    Heh, part of you, heh.
    This is a seemingly monumental and impossible task for you as a whole as you appear to be saturated with the deliciousness already.

  12. Commenter,
    Ron’s position on hate crimes legislation at the federal as opposed to the state level is nonsensical. If its a free speech issue at the fed, it would be at the state level as well. (But it isn’t. The free speech canard ignores the actual text of the law).

    I’ll take a look at the economic hitman book, its been recommended before (by a friend who’s an economist, no less). I won’t deny the banks have a horrible power, but one must tread consciously when speaking against it (which is absolutely the right thing to do).

    Scott McDonnell,
    This isn’t being politically convenient, its being accurate.
    I did not link to the NYTimes story, although they were obviously right to retract any false information. I’m going off the original sources, which as far as I can see have yet to be disproved.

    What “the rest of my audience” can see is how desperate Ron Paul supporters are to ignore his flaws.

    Michael D,
    From my earlier comment:

    His rhetoric also, and this is an important point, moves hate groups closer to the mainstream, and increases their political power.

    So its a pretty big issue, even if he hasn’t the smallest chance of winning.

    I think that makes it pretty clear.

    I know you discount what I say because I am a liberal. Fine, bury your head in the sand.

    You walk around in the same circles Michael. Every position or troublesome idea you don’t like is off less political importance than the one’s you are comfortable with. So racism, homophobia and such just don’t matter for you. They do matter for a lot of people, so don’t expect these issues to go away until we face them down with clear eyed resolve.

    “Ron Paul would weaken hate crimes legislation, work against the civil rights act, send federal rights packing to the state level, and create a legal environment that fosters hate crime and prejudice.”

    And do you have any evidence that he would do this? No.
    Did he do it in his congressional district? No.
    Are you psychic? No

    Apparently clicking the links in my post is too much work for you. Yes, there is evidence. He worked against laws regarding cross burning. He has stated, as have his supporters, that he would move many rights (such as a women’s right to privacy) to the state level. You can’t do that without assaulting Roe v. Wade. The list goes ON, but there is no point repeating it when you will shut your eyes and hum.

    This is a seemingly monumental and impossible task for you as a whole as you appear to be saturated with the deliciousness already.

    ….hmmmmm. Food for thought.

  13. “I know you discount what I say because I am a liberal.”

    You almost nailed it. I discount most of what you say because you are liberal first. Before a citizen of the U.S, before a conscientious objector, before an informed opinion, and before a human being, you place your liberal loyalty above all else. I have the same position on anyone that puts their party loyalty above human necessity whether you are conservative or moderate or liberal.

    Your links are not evidence of your conjecture they are more of the same “blah look out for this bogey man” attitude that people will smear and fear because it doesn’t matter if the majority of Paul’s positions are good for the majority of citizens it only matters if they are in accordance with “your” important issues. If it is pointed out that his position is in accordance with the constitution it is touted as old and tired instead of worthy of the oath. It’s completely beyond your ability to appreciate life it seems because you are so worried that the federal government should take care of us from cradle to grave with everyone else’s money.

    “Every position or troublesome idea you don’t like is off less political importance than the one’s you are comfortable with.”

    Perhaps you may have more respect for life if you had had a near death experience. I have had two in my life and I know what becomes immediately apparent is how insignificant most of your “pressing issues” are vs. the reality of what is truly important and that is individuality and freedom. I appreciate life more following my meetings with death and have a much simpler view than you apparently.

    I imagine that you are not a great philanderer or community service lender, or in touch with lower class (poor) people. I seriously doubt you work as hard in one week as I work in one day. I also seriously doubt that you are teetering on the edge of bankruptcy due to the inflation and manipulation of the money that the banks have doing for years and the resulting effects of the illegal immigration population.

    I think you still have a lot to learn about real life Dan. otherwise you wouldn’t downplay the issues that are important to others because they don’t agree with yours.

  14. Michael, I put my liberal values right up front where they belong, but I obviously do not put them before my humanity. They are a part of it.

    You have this gross misconception (or poor argument) that one must ignore all issues save those of life and death. A world that thought like that would still have Jim Crow laws, women would not be allowed to vote, and a host of other rights and privileges we all take for granted, such as a decent education, would not exist.

    It is preposterous and insulting that you would associate caring about issues like racism and gay rights with a disrespect for life. No one with a working mind will accept that argument, their body will reject it as the toothless piece of wingnuttery it is.

    The fact is I am very well attuned to real life, and in real life one works to solve problems that impact people, and problems that matter to you and those near you. But everyone can focus on the issues they choose to.

    I think you still have a lot to learn about real life Dan. otherwise you wouldn’t downplay the issues that are important to others because they don’t agree with yours.

    I don’t think you could have said anything more ironic. That is precisely what you are doing. What issues of yours have I downplayed? Individuality and Freedom are vital issues, and they are issues I address in life and on this blog. You are the only one casting issues like bigotry and hate aside.

    But one central fact you are ignoring is that the very bigotry you dismiss as central, is the precursor to some of the worst violence humanity has to offer.

    Deal with the difficult while it is yet easy;
    Deal with the great while it is yet small;

    Lao Tzu

    So take another look at issues of individuality and freedom. What is their opposition? How does it start?

  15. Apparently anything I have said on this site has not been heard.

  16. Or at the very best misunderstood.

  17. Michael D, Its been understood quite well, and pointed out to you by various commentators in various threads. Its up to you how to take that.

  18. Understood by you that I am a racist, homophobic, liberal hating, anti Semite, xenophobe. Yea that’s how I take what you have pointed out. Too bad you attempt to shut down 90% of the conversation by erroneously calling names.

  19. just cause this idiot has a blog doesnt make him right, anybody with a brain knows he isnt the racist some people will try to portray him as. even the nazi people who do support him know he isnt racist, but the jackasses like the writer of this blog will close their eyes put their hands over their ears and scream nu uh. please waste your time hating on the person using christian fundamentalists to get votes like huckabee. but no youd rather slander a man who actually has integrity.

  20. you deserve a shitty socialist as president.

  21. Yet he takes their money. They point as illustrated above is simple, those that buy politicians expect them to stay bought, at least until the next election cycle.

  22. Michael D,

    Understood by you that I am a racist, homophobic, liberal hating, anti Semite, xenophobe. Yea that’s how I take what you have pointed out. Too bad you attempt to shut down 90% of the conversation by erroneously calling names.

    Racist:
    Comment 1:

    First off Koreans are very intelligent and second off they have a great sense of self preservation. In addition they are very racist as are most Asians. That is not a racist remark that is first hand knowledge. I can elaborate if necessary.

    No need to elaborate. You go on:

    I wanted to be clear on my definition of racist so I’ll give the Webster’s: “Discrimination or prejudice based on race.”

    Do you understand what prejudice means? It means pre-judgement. You could have met 500 Koreans, and still be pre-judging every other Korean on earth when you make a racist statement like that.

    Homophobic… Actually, anti-gay rights works better:
    The entire thread here is pretty damning. You suggest we must ignore gay rights because there are homeless people. And you do it without a trace of irony or shred of awareness about the bald faced “logic” of such a red herring.

    I wouldn’t say liberal hating, although you seem to think by virtue of being liberal I am blind. For you I guess holding opinions contrary to Saint Ron Paul, or criticizing your beliefs, means I must be blinded by my own. You offer nothing to back that up.

    Anti-Semite:
    Comment 1:

    “the world is controlled by Jewish bankers”

    Do you deny that the central banking system is the most powerful business in the world?

    In other words, “Jews Control the Banks, so they control the world”. That is by the book anti-semitism sir.

    Xenophobe: Really? I said that?

    Michael, I am not erroneously calling you names. I am calling you out on your bullshit. I am all for open dialogue and debate, but I will challenge you when you say stuff like that.

    brian,

    just cause this idiot has a blog doesnt make him right, anybody with a brain knows he isnt the racist some people will try to portray him as.

    Crazy sentence structure there…

    even the nazi people who do support him know he isnt racist, but the jackasses like the writer of this blog will close their eyes put their hands over their ears and scream nu uh.

    Ironic for you to talke about closing one’s eyes and ears to the truth. So Ron Paul isn’t a racist?
    Explain his stance on Cross Burning.
    We all know what he means when he champions the anti-civil rights battle cry of States Rights.
    And then there are his nakedly racist comments (Pandagon):

    Verbatim Ron Paul:

    Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the “criminal justice system,” I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal. If similar in-depth studies were conducted in other major cities, who doubts that similar results would be produced? We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational.

    Ron Paul is a racist.

    and on a side note, I hope we don’t get a shitty socialist, although I don’t think that is a danger. We are more at risk of a theocrat, a dictator, or a slippery moderate.

    Rafael,
    What is more telling is that only under prodding, did he reluctantly start telling them to stop sending money. Although from a practical perspective, it would be impossible for him to background check every donor, as he correctly notes.

  23. Oh, and by the by, for any readers curious about quoting, etc, a basic html-that-works-in-wordpress primer:

    accepted html tags: blockquote, strong, em, a

    Be careful with your end tags, nothing makes a comment look all weird and garish like an unclosed “blockquote” or “a” tag.

  24. You’re too much.
    I’ll be you thought you were wrong once but found you were mistaken.

  25. So if I say that Jews are shrewd businessmen then by your standards I am an anti semite and a racist. By normal people I am correct but by liberal first all else be damned Dan I am being called out on bullshit.
    What a relief your so omnipotent otherwise I’d be offended.

  26. P.S. thanks for the html info.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: