Tempted to admire Ron Paul? Take a second look.

[marmar]

from OurFuture.org:


St. Paul
Submitted by Rick Perlstein on November 12, 2007 - 10:44am.

Ron Paul, the Republican presidential candidate, has received the respect of many a progressive for his brave and very un-Republican truth-telling about the Iraq War. I just met one of these progressives—a Vietnam-era draft resister—at a party last week. Usefully, Big Con contributor David Neiwert has reminded us why progressives might wish to take a second look, by pointing to the actual legislation Congressmen Paul has sponsored, including bills "to provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception," blocking citizens' access to the federal courts for redress of religious discrimination, and getting rid of the minimum wage and Occupation, Safety, and Health Act. And that's just the beginning. It's a stunning list:



Ron Paul's record in Congress
Sunday, November 11, 2007

-- by Dave

In the comments thread to my previous post on Ron Paul, the indispensable Trefayne compiled a series of posts on Paul's track record as a congressman, particularly those bills he sponsored or co-sponsored.

Here's Trefayne:

What's more, consider Ron Paul's record in Congress. Not that he'll ever occupy the Oval Office, but what would he do after pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq? His past legislative proposals will provide some clues, and they are not friendly to progressive ideas. Here are some bills that Ron Paul has proposed, not merely voted on, but sponsored. And you can see that he tries repeatedly on certain issues, which suggests they are important to him.

INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
-- He opposes the right of women to be free to control their own reproductive systems if they happen to live in particular states or other countries, or if they work for the Peace Corps.

Ron Paul introduces three pro-life bills

H.R.1095: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.

H.R.777: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.

H.R.1548: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.

H.AMDT.1003 (A024): Amendment no. 17 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit the use of funding for abortion, family planning, or population control efforts.

H.AMDT.380 (A022): An amendment no. 9 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit funding for population control or population planning programs; family planning activities; or abortion procedures.

H.AMDT.312 (A011): An amendment, printed as amendment No. 32 in the Congressional Record of July 16, 1997, to prohibit the use of funds appropriated in the bill for Family Planning, birth control or abortion.

H.R.4984: A bill to prohibit the use of funds for the Peace Corps to be used for travel expenses of individuals in order for abortions to be performed on those individuals.

-- He wants to erase the distinction in U.S. law between a zygote and a person

H.R.2597: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.

H.R.1094: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.

H.R.776: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception

H.R.392: A bill proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States guaranteeing the right to life.

-- He would deny the use of the Federal court system -- and even Federal precedent -- to people discriminated against because of their religious beliefs or sexual orientation. This would also limit the cross-state recognition of same-sex marriages. Some of these bills he cynically calls this the "We the People Act".

H.R.300: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.

H.R.4379: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.

H.R.5739: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.

H.R.3893: To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes.

H.R.1547: To restore first amendment protections of religion and religious speech.

H.R.4922: To restore first amendment protections of religion and speech.

H.R.5078: To restore first amendment protections of religion and speech.

-- This includes limits on courts' hearing cases related to abortion, and he has introduced bills specific to these kinds of cases. He also uses the deceptive term "partial-birth abortion".

H.R.1545: To prohibit Federal officials from paying any Federal funds to any individual or entity that performs partial-birth abortions.

H.R.1546: To provide that the inferior courts of the United States do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases.

H.R.2875: To provide that the inferior courts of the United States do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases.

H.R.3400: To provide that the inferior courts of the United States do not have jurisdiction to hear abortion-related cases.

H.R.3691: To provide that the inferior courts of the United States do not have jurisdiction to hear partial-birth abortion-related cases.

H.R.15169: A bill to eliminate the appellate jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court with respect to certain abortion cases.

-- Even though he claims to be a "libertarian", he opposes people's freedom to burn or destroy their own copies of the design of the U.S. flag

H.J.RES.80: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the States to prohibit the physical destruction of the flag of the United States and authorizing Congress to prohibit destruction of federally owned flags.

H.J.RES.82: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the States to prohibit the physical destruction of the flag of the United States and authorizing Congress to prohibit destruction of federally owned flags.

LAWS IMPROVING THE LOT OF THE WORKING CLASS

-- He has tried to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act:

H.R.2310: A bill to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.

H.R.13264: A bill to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970

-- He would like to make it much easier to decertify labor unions:

H.R.694: To amend the National Labor Relations Act to permit elections to decertify representation by a labor organization.

-- He opposes the Minimum Wage:

H.R.2962: A bill to repeal all authority of the Federal Government to regulate wages in private employment.

-- He would deny the prevailing wage to employees of federal contractors, and remove prohibition on kickbacks in Federal projects:

H.R.736: To repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act.

H.R.2720: To repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act.

-- He wants to severely weaken Social Security:

H.R.2030: A bill to amend the Social Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to make social security coverage completely optional for both present and future workers, to freeze benefit levels, to provide for the partial financing of future benefits from general revenues subject to specified conditions, to eliminate the earnings test, to make changes in the tax treatment of IRA accounts, and for other purposes.

H.R.4604: A bill to repeal the recently enacted requirement of mandatory social security coverage for employees of nonprofit organizations.

VOTER ISSUES

-- He has come out against attempts to make the United States more democratic, including the idea of eliminating the Electoral College, even *after* the debacle in the 2000 Presidential election:

H.CON.RES.48: Expressing the sense of the Congress in reaffirming the United States of America as a republic.

H.CON.RES.443: Expressing the sense of the Congress in reaffirming the United States of America as a republic.

-- He wants to repeal the "Motor Voter" Act, which has made it easier for people to register to vote.

H.R.2139: To repeal the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.

CORPORATE POWER

-- He would repeal significant portions of antitrust law, including the Sherman Antitrust Act, the Clayton Antitrust Act, and others.

H.R.1247:
To ensure and foster continued patient safety and quality of care by exempting health care professionals from the Federal antitrust laws in their negotiations with health plans and health insurance issuers.

H.R.1789: To restore the inherent benefits of the market economy by repealing the Federal body of statutory law commonly referred to as "antitrust law", and for other purposes.

-- He would gut the regulatory power of Federal agencies, forcing Congress to micromanage all decisions:

H.R.1204: A bill to an Act to restore the rule of law.

DISCRIMINATION

-- He has tried to make it easier for racial and ethnic discrimination in our society:

H.R.3863:
A bill to provide that the Internal Revenue Service may not implement certain proposed rules relating to the determination of whether private schools have discriminatory policies.

H.R.5842: A bill to make all Iranian Students in the United States ineligible for any form of federal aid.

H.R.4982: A bill to provide for civil rights in public schools.

-- He would propose an amendment to the Constitution to gut the Fourteenth Amendment by denying citizenship to people born here whose parents aren't already citizens "nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States". That latter part could produce some serious political discrimination, especially if radicals can have their citizenship revoked:

H.J.RES.46: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.

H.J.RES.46: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.

H.J.RES.42:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to deny United States citizenship to individuals born in the United States to parents who are neither United States citizens nor persons who owe permanent allegiance to the United States.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

-- He would limit or try to repeal various environmental protection laws and regulations, including the Clean Air Act, the Soil and Water Conservation Act, and the use of devices that protect the "bycatch" of sea life:

H.J.RES.104: To disapprove a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to proposed revisions to the national pollutant discharge elimination system program and Federal antidegradation policy and the proposed revisions to the water quality planning and management regulations concerning total maximum daily load. ......(Even more at: http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-congress.html )

[jgraz]

1. I admire many things about Ron Paul. And I'm scared shitless of many more things about him.

I'd love for him to stay in the race, though. The stuff he's getting attention for saying is stuff that needs to be said, even if it is coming from a wack-job.

[Mojorabbit]

4. I agree

he is a voice on the right calling for a return of constitutional rights re the patriot act and against the war. If enough people on the right and left call for this maybe it can be righted. That said, he would be an awful president in othe regards.

[jgraz]

6. Another reason I like him is that he'd NEVER win in a general

He's just too much of a nutcase. The Repubs hate him, so I doubt they'd be willing to pull out all the stops (i.e. theft) to put him into office. It's great to have a completely safe agitator to stir up the Rethugs' shit. Fun fun fun.

[rodeodance]

7. yes.

[donsu]

2. Ron is for forced pregnancies

Ron's nose is in women's wombs

[Tejas]

3. did you have something to say?

What a mess, a simple link would've sufficed.


That said, I wish Ron Paul had chose to run as a Democrat.

[marmar]

8. .......

:eyes: :eyes:

[Tejas]

9. I guess not

Looking at your gb of copy/paste, among other things, blocking the IRS from meddling in local school affairs might not be such a bad idea.

State's rights, ring a bell?

[marmar]

11. Umm, being an anti-government, anti-tax, anti-choice, anti-civil rights protection nutcase....

who's known for his racist meanderings about young black men.....Sorry, not such a good idea.

[jgraz]

16. Yep. He'd never fit as a Democrat. Never get into a single debate.

As a Rethug, he gets a platform to rail against the war and Bush's rape of the Constitution. As long as he doesn't get anywhere near the White House, I'm happy to have him rant as much as he wants.

[Tejas]

27. step away from the spin...

"who's known for his racist meanderings about young black men....."

links please?

[marmar]

41. por vous:

http://www.latestpolitics.com/blog/2007/05/ron-pauls.html

24 May 1996

CongressDaily/A.M.
English

Copyright (c) 1996 National Journal Inc.

A 1992 political newsletter by former Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, included portrayals of African-Americans as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about political issues, the Houston Chronicle reported Thursday. Paul, a former Libertarian Party presidential candidate who defeated Democratic-turned-Republican Rep. Greg Laughlin in the March primary, in November will face Democratic attorney Charles (Lefty) Morris, whose campaign is distributing Paul's writings. Under the headline "Terrorist Update," Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and wrote, "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be." About blacks in Washington, D.C., Paul wrote, "I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." Paul said Wednesday that his comments came in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time," and that he opposes racism.

In later newsletters, Paul wrote that lobbying groups who seek special favors are evil, and that "by far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government."

***

[silverlib]

15. Yea - first thought

slavery

[Basileus Basileon]

18. Oh yes, States' Rights.

Today I have stood, where once Jefferson Davis stood, and took an oath to my people. It is very appropriate then that from this Cradle of the Confederacy, this very Heart of the Great Anglo-Saxon Southland, that today we sound the drum for freedom as have our generations of forebears before us done, time and time again through history. Let us rise to the call of freedom-loving blood that is in us and send our answer to the tyranny that clanks its chains upon the South. In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny . . . and I say . . . segregation today . . . segregation tomorrow . . . segregation forever.

[wicket]

25. "In Birmingham they love the Governor....

...BOO BOO BOO!"

[Beerboy]

52. That tune is too cool to use in a Ron Paul thread. n/t.

[wicket]

93. Good point

:thumbsup:

[wicket]

24. States Rights = code for white supremacy

Give me a break :eyes:

[orleans]

10. new in town? this is DEMOCRATIC underground. n/t

[Tejas]

26. I cheered Kennedy in '62, your point?

[wicket]

38. Was '62 the last time you supported a Democrat?

[Tejas]

46. nope...(sigh)

[wicket]

107. Well, welcome to DU then!

:hi:

[Tejas]

108. thank you...

wait a second, this is a trick right?

;)

[wicket]

109. Not a trick

You've passed the DU initiation :P

:hi:

[orleans]

101. didn't everyone cheer kennedy in 62?

YOUR POINT???

[cali]

12. Why? n/t

[donsu]

13. egads no! he is anti abortion

nt

[Basileus Basileon]

17. So do I. It would have been most gratifying

to be able to vote against that 19th-century cock in the primaries.

[wicket]

23. ROFL

:rofl:

[blondeatlast]

29. Zing! Great reply. We'll see his profile soon enough, I suspect.

:rofl:

[Forkboy]

20. Some people's kids.

:eyes:

[Beerboy]

63. Lol effin Lol! n/t.

[wicket]

22. He doesn't think women are responsible enough to make their own health decisions

Why should he be a Democrat much less President??

[blondeatlast]

28. Nice form--31 posts and dissing a longtime poster. We'll be seeing your profile soon enough....

As for running as a Democrat: not just no, but hell no!

I'm gonna throw up now--and oh, yeah, no beer for you, mate.

[Tejas]

36. spin does not equal substance

much less when it's just droves of copy/pasted spin.

how in the world do you get this:
INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
-- He opposes the right of women to be free to control their own reproductive systems if they happen to live in particular states or other countries, or if they work for the Peace Corps.


from this:
H.R.1095: To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds for any population control or population planning program or any family planning activity.

Taken for face value, 1095 looks like an attempt to keep the Feds out of you/my/our personal business.

[blondeatlast]

40. I'll pay attention when you make a point without dissing a longtime DUer that I respect. Bye now.

Your profile will show up soon enough.

[Tejas]

50. sure

Please list your sacred cows, I'll be sure not to post opposing viewpoints to any of them...not.

I simply disagreed with a post that consists of nothing but a drove of copy/paste. No substance there, just (repetitious) inuendos in the form of spin.

[hiphopnation]

58. the baby flies are back

ACK!!

anyone got a flyswatter?

[LeftishBrit]

35. Why would an extreme RW-er like him choose to run as a Democrat?

[Tejas]

42. he probably wouldn't

as it is, Dodd and Biden are formidable opponents, still...

[LeftishBrit]

48. Dodd and Biden?

So far as I know they are not extreme RW-ers?

Do you want an extreme RW-er as a Democratic candidate? WHY???

[Tejas]

54. maybe...

I see Dodd and Biden as leadership material, none of the other candidates we have at the moment have a persona even close to matching them. To have Paul in the mix with those two would really bring things to bear. Paul is attempting to get down to brass tacks with the Repubs, I just think his efforts would be better utilized in the Democratic Party.

clear as mud? :)

[Basileus Basileon]

86. Paul may have issues with the Republican party, but he attacks them from the right, not the left. nt

[Bluzmann57]

5. Thanks for posting this

A guy at work is convinced that Paul is the second coming or something like that. Mostly because of his stance on the war and his wanting to leave pot smokers alone. Now I can just show him this to point out that Paul is just as wacky as opther Repubs. Especially disturbing are his stances against organized Labor. And he wants to dismantle OSHA? That is not a good thing.

[John Q. Citizen]

14. You might direct your friend to the Kucinich campaign. Kucinich is against the war

(and actually has the best plan to get the US out with out leaving a mess)is for decriminalizing pot, is for repeal of the patriot act and is also in favor of impeaching bush and cheney (unlike Paul)but he's staunchly pro-union and pro-choice.

[Beerboy]

19. I'd never really heard of him until I joined DU,

saw his name around a lot, then had to google it up.
He's good on one issue, so he proclaims, and on everything else he's a fuck. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Once you learn about him, you too will say
Ron Paul sucks, and more importantly, he's a Republican.
Thanks for the post marmar, this is pretty much the definitive one on why any admiration for this Paul guy is so bewildering to read on DU.

[Forkboy]

21. "..on everything else he's a fuck."

Well spoken! :)

[Beerboy]

51. Politicians are able to inspire We The People

to eloquence at times! :)

[blondeatlast]

31. And on that one issue, he's "good" for all the wrong reasons.

Purely an isolationist.

You summed him up rather well, I'd say. "Good on one issue and on everything else he's a fuck." Preach it brother! :rofl:

Can I repeat that to everyone I hear/see supporting the fuck? I'll credit you as I know you, I promise!

[Beerboy]

60. He may not even be "good", as in actually holding that belief,

He says he'll do this, do that, but look again @ what marmar posted. This guy is a fuck, through and through.
I don't know where you live, but if you encounter Ron Paul folks in your day to day life, and they try to get in your face, you could use something like..'You're good on Ron Paul, but on everything else, you're a fuck'!:)

[mdmc]

30. God Bless Ron Paul

What folks often forget is how authentic Dr. Paul is.
Folks don't like his anti-government & racists contacts.
They do like that he says what he thinks.

(I doubt HRC or any of the frontrunners really oppose gay marriage. The polls don't support gay marriage, so either do the frontrunners. If the polls said it was ok, they would be on board)

[donsu]

32. "authentic"? an authentic anti abortionist with his nose in women's wombs

nt

[mdmc]

39. I really feel like he opposes abortion

He stands his ground.

Edwards supports abortion, but opposes gay marriage on religious grounds. His religion doesn't support abortion, but the public opinion polls do.

[TwilightGardener]

33. An authentic Republican asshole. Much better than those fake Republican assholes.

[blondeatlast]

55. Actually, I'm not sure. there's a couple of those I'd favor over Dr. P if a gun

were at my head and I was told I must vote RRR.

I've seen enough of what an agenda driven nutcase can do to America.

[TwilightGardener]

59. Actually, Paul wouldn't be my pick of the R crop, either--the war will end, but

utter craziness can do some lasting damage. I'd sooner see Romney than Paul. But then, I'd sooner gouge my eyes out than see either as Prez.

[silverlib]

61. I called Ron Paul an asshole yesterday,,.

ironically, I did it in my Sunday school class.

No regrets -

[TwilightGardener]

64. Feels good, doesn't it? LOL!

[donsu]

65. lol

nt

[blondeatlast]

68. "I am blondeatlast, and I think Ron Paul is an asshole."

That IS therapeutic! :rofl:

[LeftishBrit]

34. The Ku Klux Klan probably says what it thinks too...

So did Hitler; so did Stalin.

Not saying that Paul is on that level; just that 'saying what you think' does not of itself make a good leader. One has to take into account what it is that they think.

[blondeatlast]

37. That's what they said about George Wallace. nt

[mdmc]

43. There are many local Paulis around here

None of them like all of his policies.
But they support him because they see him as authentic.

Since most folks think that politicians are opportunistic liars, when a politician is authentic, it is a revolutionary act.

[blondeatlast]

44. You want authentic? Support Kucinich or Gravel or Dodd.

Don't be pimping a RRREPUBLICAN on Democratic Underground. I don't think this is a great place to be pimping George Wallace-light.

[mdmc]

45. I am a liberal

I support Kucinich.
As far as the GOP goes, I can only jock Ron Paul.
I live in NYS, so my electoral vote will go to Hillary Clinton (IMHO I know that Hillary will be the next President. No one can stop her.)

I'm not pimpin Paul. Some here seem unable to recognize this phenomenon. I'm here to help people understand.

[cali]

47. How can you say that???

Ron Paul wants to get rid of OSHA for pete's sake, and environmental protections, and the weak regulations we have on business. And that's just for starters. Who the fuck would care that he's sincere in his hateful beliefs? So is David Duke.

[mdmc]

78. I am a big government liberal my friend

So Paul ain't talkin my talk at all.
Except the drug war and the Iraq war.
I posted just to help DU'ers understand what the Paul appeal is.

Peace and low stress to you and yours. Don't fear Ron Paul.

[TwilightZone]

67. Charles Manson is pretty authentic

Should we bless him for that characteristic, as well?

[baldguy]

49. Like most Republicans, Ron Paul is a die-hard libertarian...

until it comes to his pet issues. He'd be all for having stormtroopers strip & body cavity search women to insure they don't get abortions.

[Atman]

53. I laugh whenever I hear people say he's "Libertarian."

My left nut is more Libertarian. He's an extremist kook.

.

[Milo_Bloom]

56. Yes, I greatly admire Ron Paul!

Doesn't mean I would vote for him, send him money or support his candidacy; however, I respect his right to have a different position than me and admire the fact that he actually has consistent principled positions.

You can disagree with his positions, but he is one of the few principled politicans in DC and it is refreshing to see, no matter what side of the aisle you are on.

If there were more people like Ron Paul in govenrment, we could actually have REAL debates about REAL issues, instead of everyone trying to find nuanced positions that seeks poll approval.

[cali]

57. What's principled about his desire to condemn people to death?

Because that's precisely what he advocates. How can you call wanting to dismantle OSHA, principled? How can you call wanting to destroy all environmental protections on a Federal level, principled? If he actually got his way, the poor, the elderly, women and children and minorities would indeed suffer greatly, and yes, many would die.

[TwilightGardener]

62. Yep--let's privatize everything, no government protections, it's all

about markets and money, may the richest man win. Boy, that's principled, all right. Ron Paul is no less about money than any other candidate, he just takes a different approach.

[Milo_Bloom]

70. Because it is based on his principles

That private companies can best benefit society.

It is the classic "greater good" argument that I see used a lot to justify the more risky vaccinations. It goes like this, even though some may have a violent or even deadly reaction to a vaccine, it is a greater benefit to society as a whole, thus the individual should take the risk on behalf of the many.

He believes that private companies can best regulate the system and he sticks to that belief, in ALL circumstances. That is a principled belief, because it is CONSISTENT. He doesn't believe private companies work in some areas, but government works best in others, etc... he believes that private solutions are the best. I disagree with that, but that doesn't make his stance any less principled.

[jgraz]

75. It's a sad comment on how starved we are for authenticity

The same thing happened with Ross Perot. We're drawn to these wack-jobs because they seem to be the only politicians who are speaking from the heart.

[Milo_Bloom]

81. Ron Paul is hardly a "wack job".

He has different beliefs based on his observations.

Having different beliefs isn't being a wack job.

Altering your beliefs depending upon what audience you want to appeal to, or claiming to be pro-choice, but against gay marriage because of a biblical principle... THAT is being a wack job.

Stating that you believe the states should have the right to legislate things like choice and marriage isn't "wacky" is a beautifully consistent. I can give you very good reasons why I believe it is incorrect, but at least there can be a rational discussion.

How can you have a rational discussion with someone who completely discounts the bible on one hand and then embraces it on another?

[jgraz]

84. Most wack-jobs I know are incredibly consistent

It's their inflexibility that makes them wack-jobs. Paul gets put in the wack-job bin simply for his racist comments.

[Milo_Bloom]

87. I have not seen ANY proof of that claim.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/15/to-his-dismay-ron-paul-b_n_68575.html

I have seen some out of context quotes, but I put as much credit in them as I do the "tip" stories, the $400 haircuts and other "gotcha" stories that don't have real legs.

I do not need to jump to "gotcha" politics to not vote for Ron Paul, the same way I don't need to jump to "gotcha" politics to not vote for Clinton or Edwards. Their records supply plenty for dicounting them as possible leaders.

[hiphopnation]

91. he's likely a nutcase

almost certainly a bigot

without doubt a racist ass

""Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action," Paul wrote.

""Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly 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 entirely criminal," Paul said.

Under the headline of ""Terrorist Update," for instance, Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, ""If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=1996_1343749

[Milo_Bloom]

96. Long ago debunked.

Those comments were all attritubted to a STAFFER who was FIRED for writing them.


http://dmiessler.com/blogarchive/5-ron-paul-quotes-that-scare-me

All that this shows is poor management of a newsletter, not the racist beliefs or non-racists beliefs of the person.

There are tons of reasons to not support Ron Paul, but stretching for the race card isn't one of them.

[hiphopnation]

97. god that is rich

so a blogger says he didn't say those things so obviously he didn't. :eyes:

i'm glad you're so comfortable being an apologist for a racist nutcase. if these quotes aren't enough for you, just look at the man's voting record to see how it shakes out on along race and class lines. the man is a bigot who could give a shit about the unwashed rabble.

There are tons of reasons to not support Ron Paul

at least we agree here.

here are some of mine:

he's a racist, a classist, a bigot, a nutcase. in short, a real nutfucker.

:hi:

[Milo_Bloom]

98. It was far more than a blogger.

Check out Huffpo on the subject and many others. It is accepted that he didn't write those things.


You want to bash Ron Pual, at least use a valid reason, such as his being against choice, not believing in a valid roll of government... attack his not wanting stem cell research or even against his not believing in the governments roll in fostering equality.

But you diminish it all when you play some unproven race card.

[Jennifer C]

100. Yes - it's very well known it wasn't him

It was a staffer who wrote the newsletter 15 years ago. He was fired, and Ron Paul took moral responsibility.

Now this is interesting...

'Ron Paul is Highest-Polling Republican Among Black Voters'
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-releases/15/ron-paul-is-highest-polling-republican-among-black-voters

[hiphopnation]

104. Ahh yes

the old "cite my own page as proof" gag. i love that one!

ya know, after a few weeks of scouring the rasmussen website, i can't find any proof of this poll being taken, though i'm not a subscriber. but is it possible that this is just entirely fabricated? wouldn't put it past him.

perhaps you didn't read the shingle hanging out front on your way in. this is democratic underground, as a general rule we do not support republicans here. we also frown on bigots and kooks. :hi:

[hiphopnation]

102. ...

i don't have the energy or time to play the "cite" game.

i know that these are some hard pills of truth to swallow, but you and the other paul-ites are just gonna have to hold your nose and do it. if being an apologist for a racist is so chaffing, i suggest you approach paul and ask him to start by issuing a formal apology for racially insensitive comments circulated under his name.

- he concedes that he made the comments about barbara jordan
- he concedes that he made comments about inner-city blacks (specifically in washington d.c.) but that they were "based on statistics at the time" -- like that somehow makes it ok
- any proof the staffer was fired?
- any formal apology from paul?

But it's not just these comments that raise my ire or lead me to suspect that paul is a racist. It's a culmination of many things, you see. Accepting money from open neo-nazis doesn't help his case but if there is still doubt the proof is there in his voting record which has racist underpinnings, which, if you're not sensitive to issues of race, you don't even equate with being fundamentally racist in nature -- affirmative action and welfare come to mind.

so, just in case you think i'm forming my basis that the man is a racist kook on a few quotes which may or may not actually have been uttered by him, they are indeed just pieces of the larger puzzle.

[Milo_Bloom]

103. Sorry, I still don't see it.

I see tons of reasons to not vote for him, but labeling him a "racist" just weakens the argument.

Michael Moore had some fun with the candidates one year where he sent in checks from all types of wacky organizations and showed that the candidates accepted them. The reality is that most candidates do not vet through all their donations and accept or reject ones that they agree with personally, nor would I expect them to.

Finally, voting against affirmative action and welfare may be reasons to not vote for him, but NOT proof of racism. Just because someone is against affirmative action and/or welfare doesn't make them a racist, especially if their overriding belief is that the federal government shouldn't be involved in these areas.

What I am saying is that you marginalize your arguments against Ron Paul everytime you play the race card, in the same way you do so by labling me a "paulite" despite the fact I have made it clear I don't support him, give him money or plan to vote for him and have listed tons of reason why people SHOULDN'T vote for him.

[hiphopnation]

105. since you haven't read any of my post

i'll return the favor

[hexola]

99. He's no Ross Perot...

I think this whole "That guy is crazy...!!" routine is sort of backfiring...actually generating interest.

Like - "What dont 'they' want us to know?"

[baldguy]

69. unless Hillary is running against him.

[Milo_Bloom]

71. Wrong.

As I stated in that very thread, I would vote for a 3rd party before voting for Paul. However in a "gun to my head" scenario where Paul and Clinton were the only 2 choices, I would choose Paul.

I would also choose him over Edwards, Biden or Dodd as well. Luckily, we get more than 2 choices, so I will NEVER have to worry about that scenario.

[baldguy]

82. So, you wouldn't vote for Ron Paul

unless Hillary is running against him.

[Milo_Bloom]

85. Please read what I wrote.. I would ONLY vote for Ron Paul if...

He was running against Clinton, Edwards, Biden, Dodd or Obama

AND


There were 0 other choices on the ballot. (e.g No Green Candidate, no Unity candidate, etc..)


AND


Someone was holding a gun to my head forcing me to vote.




In that very unlikely scenario, I would vote for Ron Paul.

[baldguy]

88. So, you wouldn't vote for Ron Paul

unless he was running against any of the most likely Democratic candidates.

Why are you here on DU?

[Milo_Bloom]

89. Again, read what I wrote.

If one of those candidate becomes the democratic nominee, I will NOT be voting for them. I will be voting for a 3rd party option.

If you want me to explain why i have disqualified those candidates, I will be happy to do so.

[baldguy]

90. You don't have to explain anything to me.

I just find it disturbing - and a little amusing - that people who get their panties in a knot because the top tier Dem candidates are human and therefore ideologically impure, then turn around and support a fascist like Ron Paul.

(And considering that the GOP will try and steal 2008 like they did 2000 and 2004, voting for a third party IS supporting the GOP.)

[Milo_Bloom]

94. Its not a matter of ideological impurity.

It is a matter of the candidate being more dangerous in office than outside and the fact that some "solutions" are worse than not offering any solutions at all.

And again, hate to have to correct you for a third time, but there is a big difference between "supporting" someone and saying you would pick them in a completely ficticious one on one matchup.

Finally, if voting for a 3rd party IS supporting the GOP, then I guess that is what the democratic candidates have driven me to with their complete lack of principles and conviction.

[blondeatlast]

66. RP "admirers"--I DARE you. Let's say the evil doctor is elected.

We already have a precedent for "unitary executive" powers. If he's so "authentic" I assume that he means exactly what he says about phasing our Social Security, expanding states' rights, and expanding the death penalty, among others.

If he's so "authentic" he's all the more frigtening. So make your case--specifically.

What's he gonna do to (ahem, I mean, of course, "for") us?

Make your case. And for those of you registering right now, make a hefty donation to DU while you are at it! And thank you for upping our member rolls...

Edit: passion overcame my typing abilities.

[jgraz]

72. Is anyone seriously worried about this?

The chances are pretty close to zero. Unlike *, the establishment Rethugs seem to HATE Paul. I doubt they'd be willing to steal yet another election for him.

If we agree that he has ZERO chance of getting elected, what's the problem with letting him say a few things that need to be said? So what if he's a right-wing nutbag? The main points of his current campaign are things that EVERY candidate should be supporting.

[blondeatlast]

73. Not me, but much of his "admiration" comes from his so-called "authenticity."

If he means what he says, progressives shouldn't give him so much as a "bless you" if he sneezes.

[jgraz]

74. I can applaud a few of his ideas even though I'm wincing at all the rest

He's a strong constitutionalist who makes the rest of the Rethug candidates look like dumbasses every time he opens his mouth. Gotta love that.

The second he looks like a viable candidate, I'll turn on him like a rabid dog. But right now, it's great fun to have him in the mix.

[Milo_Bloom]

83. Well, for one.

He would do away with those unitary executive powers. Ron Paul does believe in restoring the constitution which would mean scaling back much if not all of the patriot act AND the power grab from the executive branch.



DISCLAIMER: I wouldn't vote for him, support him, or give him money; however, that doesn't mean SOME of his ideas aren't good.

[baldguy]

92. You wouldn't vote for him - Unless he was running against any of the major Democratic candidates.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2264406#2266143

Be honest, now.

[lazyriver]

76. A registered independent friend of mine insists Ron Paul

is synonymous with Dennis Kucinich. I've been trying to show him how wrong he is. He's the scariest kind of voter in that he votes every election but is always completely uninformed. I have plenty of ammo supporting Dennis Kucinich but had little hard stuff on Ron Paul. This helps immensely. Thank You.

[jgraz]

77. Everybody's got a friend like that

Mine voted for * in 2000 cuz he had heard that he was really compassionate. :banghead:

[lazyriver]

80. Mine voted for Nader in 2000 because he heard * and Gore

were exactly the same. He went with * in 2004 because the Swiftboater lies were about as far as he went in researching a candidate.

I've committed myself to educating him for 2008. I can't make his choice for him but at least I won't let him vote while informationally impaired.

[DeepModem Mom]

79. K&R

[tuckessee]

95. RP is really shaking things up.

The power elite of BOTH parties are alarmed by his success & genuine grassroots popularity.

This is good.

[BuyingThyme]

106. It is good.