Gibson begins: "Hacktivist collective Anonymous struck a gold mine with Operation Blitzkrieg - an effort to hack into and shut down White Nationalist (WN) websites and forums. Anonymous leaked thousands of emails and private messages from the white supremacist network American Third Position, which is defined as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center."
Portrait, Rep. Ron Paul, 06/15/09. (photo: Melissa Golden/TIME)
White Supremacists Love Ron Paul
05 February 12
Reader Supported News | Perspective
tick a fork in Ron Paul, he's done.
Hacktivist collective Anonymous struck a gold mine with Operation Blitzkrieg - an effort to hack into and shut down White Nationalist (WN) websites and forums. Anonymous leaked thousands of emails and private messages from the white supremacist network American Third Position, which is defined as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Anonymous also leaked the address, phone number, social security number and resume of White News Now owner and administrator Jamie Kelso on this website. But in leaking the emails and messages, Anonymous also discovered that a vast number of A3P members claim to be high-ranking members of the Ron Paul campaign. Ron Paul's campaign has some serious explaining to do if this is true. Read what the SPLC has to say about A3P:
The American Third Position is a political party initially established by racist Southern California skinheads that aims to deport immigrants and return the United States to white rule. The group is now led by a coterie of prominent white nationalists, including corporate lawyer William D. Johnson, virulent anti-Semite Kevin MacDonald and white nationalist radio host James Edwards. David Duke's former right-hand man, Jamie Kelso, helps with organizing. The party has big plans to run candidates nationwide.
The SPLC also has quotes from Kelso and Johnson, in detailed profiles from their website.
"No person shall be a citizen of the United States unless he is a non-Hispanic white of the European race.... Only citizens shall have the right and privilege to reside permanently in the United States." - Bill D. Johnson, 1985
"... in a mixed-race environment, altruism towards other sub-species, like Jews, Mestizos, Blacks, and Asians, is always damaging to our own kind's survival ... The non-Whites, who don't share these White traits, must be doubled-over with laughter at times as they watch, in astonishment, as we help them in every way we can to give away our lands, our women, our savings, our safety, our happiness, and our lives for their benefit." - Jamie Kelso, 2006
In leaked private messages, Kelso claims that he and Johnson are top organizers for Ron Paul's campaign.
"I'll give you some more real-life examples of WN folks like us who are very successfully navigating back and forth between great White Nationalism and full mainstream activism. I'll introduce you to folks like William Daniel Johnson, the chairman of the A3P, who is simultaneously Ron Paul's #1 man in Southern California. When Ron has VIP get-togethers at $2,000 a plate they are in Bill's dining room on his 80-acre estate."
Kelso also boasted repeatedly about meeting with both Ron and Rand Paul during the 2011 CPAC for three consecutive days.
"Then I'm heading to DC to meet up with Ron Paul and Rand Paul, personally, at CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Conference Feb. 10-12.
"Bill and I will be meeting with Ron and Rand Paul. I'm in a teleconference call with Bill (and Ron Paul) tonight. Much more later. Things are starting to happen.
"We'll be meeting with Ron Paul and Rand Paul. Bill and I got to talk with Ron tonight by phone."
In private messages, Ron Paul organizers in A3P forums essentially admitted to each other that Ron Paul's base was overwhelmingly white, and ripe for inclusion in their own network. They even spoke of being the bridge being the White Nationalist movement and Ron Paul supporters.
"All of us who have helped organize events among these Ron Paul millions are keenly aware that 98% of these folks are White (look at any photo of a Ron Paul rally ... look at my photos of the crowds of 15,000 each on the west lawn of the Capitol on July 12, 2008 and at the Minneapolis counter-convention on September 2, 2008), and that almost all of these White folks want the non-White invasion of our White lands stopped yesterday."
"Anyone who can't see that Ron Paul is the best viable candidate from a pro-White perspective is not bright enough to be of any value to the pro-White movement."
"The most important of those innovations is BRIDGING from our tiny EXPLICITLY pro-White movement to the huge IMPLICITLY pro-White revolution that has been gathering ever since Ron Paul started it rolling in mid-2007."
Even when confronted with any of the ugly, bigoted remarks in his newsletters, or the more recent evidence that Ron Paul actually signed off on each newsletter before they went public, or when shown the picture of Ron Paul posing with campaign donor Don Black of Stormfront, Ron Paul's campaign has soldiered on. But his campaign owes the people and the media a direct response to A3P's claims that Ron and Rand Paul met in private at CPAC with a former Klan leader's right-hand man.
Ron Paul supporters are always quick to dismiss accusations of racism when they point to his opposition to the drug war. Indeed, his pro-decriminalization platform along with his anti-war credentials and his advocacy for tighter regulation of the Federal Reserve have won supporters from the right and the left. But now, no mainstream American should be able to throw their support behind Ron Paul with a clear conscience until he openly disavows his associations with the white supremacist movement and returns all the money donated to his campaign from its leaders and members.
But as far as slugs like Kelso are concerned, feel free to do what I did - give him a call and tell him you're in a mixed-race relationship. Thanks to Anonymous, his phone number is easy to find.
Carl Gibson, 24, of Lexington, Kentucky, is a spokesman and organizer for US Uncut, a nonviolent, creative direct-action movement to stop budget cuts by getting corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. He graduated from Morehead State University in 2009 with a B.A. in Journalism before starting the first US Uncut group in Jackson, Mississippi, in February of 2011. Since then, over 20,000 US Uncut activists have carried out more than 300 actions in over 100 cities nationwide. You may contact Carl at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
 22 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 23 May 2012
|
 22 May 2012
|
 22 May 2012
|
 22 May 2012
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Hispanics, African American, immigrants and our latest 'punching bag scapegoat group' Muslims get little to no non-bigoted treatment from any current US politicians in the public eye. We are as racist a country as ever....along with too many quick on the trigger urban cowboys everywhere.
Lyndon Johnson stated correctly that Southern Whites would leave the Democratic party because of the positions it took to realize the promises of the Constitution.
What Lyndon failed to say was that the Southern Whites also left the Democratic Party because the Democratic Party had somehow gotten it into their Philosophy that the teaching's of Jesus, which had long been marginalized and ignored, were thrusted into the forefront of the American psychic by a Black Religious Leader, Martin L. King, many determined White clergy and Lay persons who took the words of Jesus seriously.
Greed is neither a Southern nor Northren strategy. It is a WRONG strategy which has craftly manipulated the personally insecure and finanically challenged mind to substitute hate, an illusion of empowerment and "Somebodiness", for Love.
This strategy is destined to destroy its adherents simply because it has continued to position itself against GOD Himself.This is a no win situation.
It just may be that their iniquity is now full.Yes, it does appear so.
No one is exempt, including Israel, perhaps especially Israel. Much is expected of the "Chosen", be they Jew or Gentile.
The racist charges, if true, would be quite troublesome, however I'm not so sure they're reliable. To what extent does Paul share the views of people he 'meets with' or has met? The fact that nutballs write to one another that they've met with someone prominent does not mean anything by itself other than an attempt at establishing 'legitimacy by association.' By the same token, a candidate meeting with or even receiving money from a racist of other lunatic may or may not be meaningful. Remember Obama's 'connections' with a few people on the 'far left'? I saw those things and was hopeful that he was himself ideologically on the left. But of course it turns out he's in bed with the bankers and other corporate thugs.
People who actually know Paul are unanimous in saying they've never heard or seen any racist terms or behavior from him. And of all the candidates, only Paul, with his drug proposals, offers anything substantive which would actually help blacks.
I like what Gibson and US Uncut does otherwise, but I wonder whether this is a thin charge. Politicians meet or are seen with people of all stripes; I'm not buying that it means what you think it means.
Eugenics was a more popular term used in the US...as well as most all other countries.
Eugenics was widely popular in the early decades of the 20th century. The First International Congress of Eugenics in 1912 was supported by many prominent persons, including: its president Leonard Darwin, the son of Charles Darwin; honorary vice-president Winston Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty and future Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; Auguste Forel, famous Swiss pathologist; Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone; among other prominent people. The National Socialists' (NSDAP) approach to genetics and eugenics became focused on Eugen Fischer's concept of phenogenetics and the Nazi twin study methods of Fischer and Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer. I guess it is an ideology that simply won't die.
Some samples: A December 1989 newsletter quoted by James Kirchick in the New Republic predicted "Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities" because "mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white 'haves.' "
Feel free to check for yourself...there are indeed other sources but all seem to deal with his newsletters...
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2011/1229/Racist-newsletter-timeline-What-Ron-Paul-has-said
"People who are racists do not suddenly change!" (quoting John Locke)
The principal manifestations of eugenics are racism and abortion. Eugenics is the driving force behind euthanasia, in vitro fertilization, and embryo and fetal research. It is the driving force in global population policy, and affects American foreign policy.
It is the force driving much of our welfare policy and welfare reform, and health care. It is found in all the social sciences; anthropology, sociology, and psychology.
On June 9th 1969, Dr.D.M. MacArthur, Deputy Director of Research & Technology for the Pentagon, requested a sum of $10 million from the Congressional House Subcommittee on Appropriations to develop a new contagious micro-organism capable of destroying the human immune system - This resulted in a 'virus' discovered some ten years later in America which became known as 'acquired immune deficiency syndrome' (AIDS). It should be stressed that this virus first appeared in America. however the populatrion most affected were in Africa...
John D. Rockefeller III established the Population Council in 1952: Racism and eugenics are very entrenched in our political systemm. Believe it or not!
I'm aware of the newsletters from 20 years ago but I'm also aware that the racist remarks in eight of them (in thousands of pages) were written by other people, that Paul was simply negligent in not editing these publications, and that most significantly the people who know him and have worked with him for years –– including credible people on the left –– say that they do not believe that he's a racist and have never heard a racist remark from him.
I also believe that Dr. King, were he alive today, would be much closer to Paul's position on many issues, including war and civil liberties, than to any other candidate.
From my perspective, his economic ideas may be nuts –– I don't know –– but his foreign policy and his defense of the constitution make him the only candidate I can stand. And, as you may know, he has been quite outspoken in his defense of Bradley Manning –– and that takes integrity and courage.
He neither wrote or approved.
Fact is you are only willing to see what you want to.
30+ years of him personally publicly speaking and nothing to support what you choose to see but lots to disprove so you choose to refuse to see only a negative that he neither spoke or wrote or agreed(s) with.
Who was behind the "RON PAUL POLITICAL REPORT" and the "RON PAUL SURVIVAL REPORT"? If paul had nothing to do with these publications why didn't he mention it, or even sue them for slander when they were published in the early '90s?
How did "the other people" who wrote a thank you letter to a racist magazine in paul's name get hold of HIS stationary?
Rather than try to follow the maze of circular multiple negatives in your last sentence, I'll just guess what you're trying to say. My response is that YOU'RE the one who seems unwilling to look at anything that doesn't fit your agenda.
At least I responded to your "huston endorsement" and your "voter intimidation" comment (even though it was off topic). Could you at least TRY to respond to something in the article, or my SPECIFICS, or John Locke's (who was kind enough to even provide a few links)?
So, which is it? Is paul:
A) a racist?
B) a manipulative political opportunist?
C) an incompetent boob who has no idea what his own employees are up to?
D) all of the above?
If it's not "A", the only options left are "B" or "C".
Since the beginning of the epidemic, nearly 30 million people have died from AIDS-related causes. and 34 million have the early stages of the disease! (64 Million)
Keep in mind that the Pentagon, requested $10 million in 1969 to create this disease....AIDS. Why?
Sub-Saharan Africa 22.9 million people currently living with AIDS, 68 percent of all people living with HIV reside in sub-Saharan Africa, and carries the greatest burden of the epidemic. Since the beginning of the epidemic 14.8 million children have lost one or both parents to HIV/AIDS.
In Somalia and Senegal the HIV prevalence is under 1% of the adult population, whereas in Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe around 15% of adults are infected with HIV. Southern Africa is the worst impacted by AIDS; in South Africa the HIV prevalence is 17.8% and in three other southern African countries, the national adult HIV prevalence rate exceeds 20%, Botswana (24.8%), Lesotho (23.6%) and Swaziland (25.9%)
In many countries of sub-Saharan Africa, Average life expectancy is now 54.4 years and in some of the most heavily affected countries in the region life expectancy is below 49 years. Is something going on?
1. Paul on the fact that much of his support comes from white supremacists: “If they want to endorse me, they’re endorsing what I do or say — it has nothing to do with endorsing what they say,” (NOTICE HE NEVER DISAVOWS THEM)
2. Who was behind the "RON PAUL POLITICAL REPORT" and the "RON PAUL SURVIVAL REPORT"? If paul had nothing to do with these publications why didn't he mention it, or even sue them for slander when they were published in the early '90s?
3. Though Paul has denied his involvement with these statements and theories, a thank-you letter to Mr. Amos W. Bruce for an article in The American Mercury—an anti-Semitic magazine owned by well-known Holocaust denier Willis Carto—was written by the representative himself, on congressional stationery. TNR points out that the issue of the magazine Paul praises in the letter includes articles such as “You Can’t Escape the Kosher Food Tax,” “Are You Ready for the White Man’s Doomsday,” and “Racism—Black African Style.”
4. I personally watched paul speak out about the fact that he would NOT support the Voting Rights Act of 1964. That may be heresay and conjecture as well. I don't know. Afterall, who am I to believe: Ron Paul's handlers now that he's running for president, or MY OWN MEMORY?
IF YOU NEED FURTHER EXAMPLES LET ME KNOW. I HAVE A FEW I DIDN'T HAVE ROOM FOR.
"I wonder if YOUR personal memories are nothing more than "heresay and conjecture"...?
If you care then listen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKBlk1Vpeuw
Once again, if paul had nothing to do with these things, who wrote thank you letters to anti-semitic magazine using his stationary? How is it possible that ron paul "didn't know" about the RON PAUL SURVIVAL REPORT or THE RON PAUL POLITICAL REPORT? In fact, he OPENLY ADMITS he contributed to those newsletters. He just claims he didn't write the racist comments.
How can he be so incompetent?
factual information
and a humanitarian
view point to this post
in your reply to CARL GIBSON's excellent article
which belies bigotry & any "thinly disguised" excuses for it. Thank you!
The Republican's have gerrymandering and bogus voter ID campaigns in their corner to limit opposition votes. We have Ron Paul. Run Ron, run!
Well, no. Although I haven't decided yet, this lifelong Democrat (and left-winger) might vote for Paul but I would never vote for Romney or any of the other Republican candidates. The rest of them are merely crazier, more right-wing, versions of Obama.
My interest in Paul is based on his very strong and outspoken defense of civil liberties, the Bill of Rights, and whistleblowers. He's for revoking the Patriot Act and the NDAA. He's against attacking Iran, favors withdrawal from Afghanistan, and offers support to Bradley Manning –– calling him a hero –– and Julian Assange. No other American politician has the guts to do that.
His economic policies sound crazy to me, but at least he's not in bed with Wall Street –– and the others, including Obama, clearly are.
I think there was some glitch in getting the Justice Party on the ballot.
I would certainly consider voting for him, because he sounds really good, but i don't want to do a write-in vote. (I would be more confident that my vote will actually show up in the tally if i don't have any write-ins.)
I agree that both major parties are likely to nominate candidates who are militarists, war-makers, and Wall Street hookers, and we're left scrambling for someone, anyone with some integrity.
Personally, I don't know what to do. There's Jill Stein, from the Greens, who no one knows and no one will ever know, from a party which has nowhere to go. There's a possible Paul independent candidacy, which at least would get some media and maybe stir things up. There's Rocky Anderson if and where he gets on some ballots.
Maybe there's someone who has yet to emerge. All I know is that I've had enough betrayal from Obama and that whoever the G.O.P. nominates won't be any better and probably even worse.
He's a repuglican. If he wanted to run as an "independant", he shouldn't be running as a repuglican right now.
I hope the Democratic Party is scared into action soon.
Paul and strict constructionist on the Supreme Court do not believe that women and people of color are guaranteed equal protection or any other right or liberty guaranteed in the Constitution's Bill of Rights.
Just making accusations is not the same thing as asserting facts. Facts are those things which can be backed up. There may be sound reasons for opposing Paul, but try to stay at least reasonably close to the real world, okay?
These people are a dying breed and they need a champion like paul and his son rant to slip their ideas through the cracks.
Afterall, ron paul can't be held personlly responsible for the words, actions and affiliations of his own supporters can he? In fact, he can't even be held responsible for courting those supporters and closely alying himself with them either, right? It's hard to get repugnants to turn down money, even if the check is addressed from hell itself.
I think the RSN commentator catch phrase, "ron paul speaks truth to power", needs to be changed a bit...
How about, "ron paul is the mouthpiece for white power".
"Truth" vs. the HONEST truth...
The fact that jerks like Gingrich pretend that racism is the same as conservatism doesn't make it so.
The fact remains, Paul's actual policies are far more attentive to the real concerns of blacks and other minorities than any other candidate, including that fake in the White House.
Concerning who's more racist between paul and santorum or gingrich: WHO CARES? Personally, I'd like to vote against ANYBODY who panders to the white supremacist vote - EVEN IF HE'S AGAINST THE WARS.
You're a good man.
ONE POSSIBILITY:
Since he didn't sue for defammation of character 20 years ago, let's just assume he's a POLITICAL OPPORTUNIST. At the time, it wouldn't have done his election bid any good to disavow racist remarks made (supposedly) "in his name without his consent". No. He lived in an extremely racist district, so it suited his purposes to keep his mouth shut (for a change).
Now, it no longer serves his purposes to do that, so out of nowhere he's against these comments made IN HIS NAME, including comments made WITH HIS SIGNITURE ON CONGRESSIONAL STATIONARY.
ANOTHER POSSIBILITY:
He's genuinely NOT a racist, but is EXTREMELY UNFIT to lead, since he has no control OR EVEN AWARENESS of the words, actions and political affiliations of HIS OWN EMPLOYEES.
So, which is he?:
A. a RACIST
B. a political OPPORTUNIST
C. an INCOMPETENT leader who doesn't know what his own staff is doing
There's no "D". "None of the above" just isn't a possibility here. SOMEONE is responsible for those MANY OVERTLY RACIST comments - and GROSS IGNORANCE & INCOMPETENCE is not a valid excuse for someone trying to prove he belongs in the White House.
"E" would be reserved for the non-existent "none of the above".
ROCKY ANDERSON
I just thought that if I printed it in caps you'd have to come up with another excuse to pretend he doesn't exist.
Perhaps these attacks on Paul are really due to some Obama partisans worried because the President's policies with which Paul disagrees –– wars everywhere, kissing Wall Street's ass, imprisoning Manning, vitiating the 4th amendment, spying on everyone, remote-controlled assassination –– are now so obviously indefensible.
Check him out, and if his message resonates, get involved and join up. It is a big job ahead of us, but together we can do anything. We are the grass roots, it's time the government we grew served we the people. Together we can occupy the ballot and get Rocky Anderson elected. http://www.voterocky.org/?recruiter_id=57374
Google the Ludwig Von Mises Institute and Rockwell.com and the Southern League or League of the South. You'll get the picture.
The big pull for Paul has been his anti-war stance. But the guy is not anti-war on moral or peace grounds but on budgetary and isolationist grounds.
Progressives in the Democratic Party, progressives outside the party, and the Occupy Movement need to support Obama for President enthusiasticall y in 2012. A Republican in the White House is unthnkable.
But electing true progressives to Congress and using that as leverage beyond is easily accomplished. With that leverage, the White House will have to respond in an Obama second term.
So try as you may, you're going to have to live with the fact that Ron Paul is bringing truth to politics.
The ongoing "guilt by association" misses the fact that Paul's policies against the death penalty or against the drug war or against governmental discrimination in regard to marriage or many other of his policies would have differentially beneficial effects on the very groups Paul is accused of hating.
Paul's actual policy positions are not those of a racist -- they are, in fact, the antithesis of what a racist would recommend. And the Nevada caucus for observant Jews (in which Paul easily outpolled all the other candidates combined) is finally putting the antisemitic charge to rest.
We shouldn't judge Obama by the company he has kept (Jeremiah Wright, prominent Communist Party leaders, self-professed bomb-throwing terrorists Dorn and Ayers, etc.) and we shouldn't judge Paul because some of his supporters have held odious views.
Lee Nason
New Bedford, Massachusetts
He can dig his own grave, he doesn't need others to do it for him.
If I were a racist, I'd be all for getting the guvunmint off the backs of "working Americans" (code for white people) so they didn't have to pay federal income taxes and support those lazy good-fer-nothin's (code for inner city n*****s). If I were a racist, I'd be all for gettin' the federal guvunmint off my backs and standing aside while state governments proceed to take away civil rights for minorities.
Tell me how paul's positions are the "antithesis" of that?
Now we know that when paul's supporters say it's because he "wants to end the wars", it's a BIG FAT LIE. It's about taxes and getting rid of the social safety net - AND IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
youtube search "NAACP Nelson Linder speaks on Ron Paul and racism "
"I'm not a racist because I have a black friend" defense.
WHO CARES. It isn't up to the NAACP to decide for me what I think of ron paul's OWN decisions, his OWN words and actions, and his own openly racist affiliations.
2. It's spelled "Houston", and you got the city wrong anyway. It was Austin. You got "Huston" from a blog that was mistaken.
3. Houston has its own LOCAL president of the NAACP. So do some other cities. What does the president of the NAACP in Chicago, or Detroit, or Philadelphia, or New York, or Baltimore, or San Francisco/Oakland have to say about ron paul? Does that matter to you? Nope. You got your "endorsement" from ron paul's token, so his own actual words, affiliations and actions don't matter to you.
CONT.
4. What do YOU know personally about Nelson Linder? Is it possible that one black guy in Austin (who disagrees with the majority) could be WRONG? I know one thing for sure, the militant paul presence on the internet acts as though the NAACP ITSELF "loves paul". Come to think of it, YOU SAID THAT. That's a baldfaced lie. Unless you think everyone in the NAACP agrees about everything, that would be a pretty crazy comment.
The Christian Coalition has endorsed Barack Obama!!!
How do I know that? Well a guy I know is a fundamentalist and HE LOVES Obama.
Remember, only 90% of blacks are liberal.
That doesn't account for the other 10%.
Also, got to say, I'm a liar because my support for Paul stems from economic issues and not because of his anti-war position? I'm not really a 'progressive'?
Listen, bud. I don't have to prove my credentials to you but I'm going to note a few things so that perhaps others who are following this thread and whose minds are not completely warped can make up their own minds.
I worked for Bobby Kennedy. I spent time with him. I was in 1968 the youngest delegate at the Chicago convention. I have been involved in politics for many years. I worked also for George McGovern and George Moscone, I have been actively involved in the anti-nuclear movement and chaired the nuclear free zone in my county. I was also involved in setting up the first women's center at the community college in the mid '70s, and was the only straight on the board of the first gay center. If I'm a racist, homophobic, or misogynistic, I've been fooling people for fifty years.
If you want to dismiss Ron Paul because you don't like or agree with his policies, that's fine, but don't smear him with the brush you use on others.
If you want to vote for Paul because of his foreign policy while not considering Rocky Anderson (where you'd get the WHOLE package) then you DEFINITELY ARE a liar. Paul is a right-wing conservative on domestic policy and claims to be left-wing regarding foreign policy. Anderson is left-wing on both fronts. If you're voting for Paul instead of Anderson, you aren't a liberal, but a pretender.
As someone else said, I don't need to smear him. His own words, actions and affiliations are doing a good job of that for me.
I have no problem with people failing to support him for real reasons, e.g. his deregulation of industries, the whole gold standard thing. Personally, I disagree with him on these things, although I think they're more nuanced than he's given credit for. But his appeal to someone like me, a long-time radical, is for his strong anti-war positions (which are moral positions, not economic ones... see his speeches on the issues), his opposition to the dangerous Patriot Act and NDAA, his belief in decriminalizing drugs, his support for Bradley Manning, his opposition to police state policies and government spying. Those are important as hell and he's the only candidate taking those positions. As I said, I like Rocky, but he barely exists on the horizon.
Something has brought that on. How dare you call someone posting true facts here a liar? I am disappointed in you, I thought from other posts of yours I have read that you had some class...You have a right to your opinion, but state facts when arguing facts.... Your "opinion" is not enough to overcome facts...and don't try to intimidate Billy Bob...it won't work...
Jimmy Venable provided effective legal representation in a few noteworthy cases for "nigras" while supplying wood for crosses and bonfires, fried chicken and greens for supper gatherings of racist gatherings and, at the very least, complicit actualization of lynching. Do we (or you) have a responsibility for seeking balance or imbalance in the juxtaposition of of such dichotomies?
So you'll just have to get used to hearing some truth from a statesman. Ron Paul is gaining support. Get used to it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGhv3paNz6U
"NAACP Nelson Linder speaks on Ron Paul and racism "
and get an informed black perspective on Ron Paul.
Maybe he's just misinformed.
If you want a black perspective, next time don't Google "ron paul's not a racist" to find what you're looking for. Next time, ask some black people what they think of the idea of cutting the social safety net. Ask them what they think of someone who disagrees with the Voting Rights Act of 1964 (that ended Jim Crow). Ask them what they think of the fact that paul, himself, has close affiliations with self-avowed white supremacists.
You might get "informed" as well.
Racism is necessarily collectivist - they are all like ____. The individual virtues or failings are ignored and instead some collectivist label is pasted on instead - say Black or White Or Jew or Muslim or Atheist or ...
Ron Paul stands for individualism - as one of Dr Paul's hero's mentioned people should be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin.
If a klansman was doing what Shabazz was doing I'd want to see the maggot in jail - why does Shabazz get a free pass?
'Stuff happens".....
Seriously marty, If you're too busy to read other people's comments you're too busy to make remarks about them.
Anderson's name has only popped up in this conversation about 15 times, so far. You're making yourself look unwilling to pay attention and doing your own argument no good. WAKE UP!
No Progressive should want to see any Republican be it Ron Paul or Mitt Romney etc elected President because they all have horrible agenda's that would hurt the most vulnerable in our society as well as the middle class!
Lets not forget two things, whoever gets elected will be filling two seats on the Supreme Court after two of them retire and we certainly can't afford another Republican who would make decisions like the Citizens United decision this , remember these are lifetime positions . Second the President does not make the laws Congress and the Senate do and it is there where we should concentrate on finding true Democrat's to give our votes to so that if Obama is re-elected he will have the majority in both the House and the Senate . With a majority in the House and Senate Obama would have no choice but to lean further left because he alone does not make the laws he can not pass a bill without the votes in the Senate and Congress ! Get rid of the Bluedogs and replace them with either left leaning Independents like Bernie Sanders or true liberals!
Cont.
Third party candidates have not been viable because they are not visible enough . They need to start by campaigning in thier states for local office and move their way up the ladder so that they are known to the general population and we have a record to look at to judge whether we want to vote for them or not .
Throwing their hat in the ring for President late in the election season isn't going to give them the name recognition they need to be a viable candidate .
Rocky Anderson is an example of waiting too late . I never even heard of him until a friend in Canada mentioned his name . All I know about him is he is a Morman and claims to have a liberal leaning agenda but I have no record to look at to see if that really is true . His site gives a UK address to send donations to his campaign ,which kind of throws up a red flag for me. Why the UK address ? I know the Justice Party started in the UK but Anderson is suppose to be an American so why not an address in this country for the Justice Party ? Its all a bit too cloudy for me !
BTW whoever said Ron Paul didn't want to end Social Security and Medicare needs to watch all the video's not just the pro-Paul ones ! He did say it on video when asked by a reporter !
If you want to find any of Ron Paul's policies that support your claim that he's a racist I wish you all the best of luck but don't use a very small fringe of his supporters to draw the inference that he's fronting a racist organization- you won't get away it.
Now how many of Ron Paul's policies promote racism? Name one. I rest my case.
Anyway, a few things to see/read in your own media if you still think that:
1. Ron Paul has not disavowed these newsletters.
2. Ron Paul wrote the racist comments in these newsletters.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57345702-503544/ron-paul-disavows-racist-newsletters-under-his-name/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE9VXaRYbFI - Ben Swann Reality Check: Author of "Racist" Newsletter Revealed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGH77lZsglU - Ben Swann Reality Check: The Truth About Ron Paul's "Racist" Newsletters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rv0Z5SNrF4 - The Compassion of Dr. Ron Paul Ad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4bEvqMXmM8 - Ron Paul Reacts to "Compassion" Ad on CSPAN
Or just read his book Liberty Defined (2009) where he has an ENTIRE chapter on racism and how he finds it an abhorrent form of collectivism and argues that everyone should have equal rights regardless of race, religion or any other false division that humans make.
There is also tons of other evidence to prove this is just a load of crap. If you're too lazy or ignorant to do a tiny bit of research (it isn't hard nowadays - it's called the Internet. You're using it right now) then continue to believe Ron Paul is a racist/white supremacist/conspiracy nut/any other label smear campaign against him - these campaigns happen against most politicians. Just do some damn research.
And I'm sorry. This leak by anonymous seems pretty thin. I've downloaded some of the files and can find very little that would show me support that he is secretly a white nationalist.
I'm not saying he's perfect or that I agree with every single one of his opinions. His views on abortion, gay marriage, etc I don't really agree with, but overall I'd like to see the constitution re-eestablished in the US, along with Liberty across the west/globe. I would also like to see the repeal of terrible acts of government such as the Patriot Act, NDAA, etc, that completely defile your bill of rights - very similar to how I would like to see much of our legislation that curtails civil liberties here in the UK repealed. You guys really do not know how lucky you are to have a written constitution. Keep it alive! Even if Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination - the generation he has inspired must fight for liberty and force some of these important issues - foreign and monetary policy to be debated and reformed.
RSS feed for comments to this post.