Daily Kos

Ron Paul: The Radical Right's Man in Washington

Thu May 17, 2007 at 06:27:11 PM PDT

In my last diary, I explored some of the vicious racist sentiments that Rep. Ron Paul has expressed in the past to demonstrate why no self-respecting liberal should be caught dead saying nice things about him, let alone supporting him. This time, let's turn our attention from Paul's words to his actions, and see how the congressman from Texas has, for the past quarter century, systematically built a support network for himself among the worst far-right crackpots, racists, and neo-Nazis in America.

THE RON PAUL EXPERIENCE - A Diary Series

  1. Ron Paul, In His Own Words
  2. Ron Paul: The Radical Right's Man in Washington
  3. Ron Paul: Dude is Wack
  4. Ron Paul Hates You

THE STRANGE CASE OF LARRY PRATT

In 1996, presidential candidate Pat Buchanan got in hot water when the Center for Public Integrity revealed connections between Buchanan's campaign co-chairman Larry Pratt and Pastor Pete Peters, a leader of the white supremacist Christian Identity movement. Pratt, the  executive director of Gun Owners of America, had been a frequent guest at meetings and on radio and television programs hosted by Peters, who inveighed against "Talmudic filth" as Pratt looked on. On February 15, 1996, Pratt took a leave of absence from the Buchanan campaign, so as to avoid causing a "distraction."

The very next day, reported the San Antonio Express-News on February 18, Ron Paul distributed a press release touting Pratt's endorsement of Paul's candidacy for the U.S. Congress. Pratt's endorsement of Paul was anything but pro forma; the February 22, 1996 issue of Roll Call noted that Paul and Mike Gunn, a Republican candidate for Congress in Mississippi who had done some work for David Duke in the latter's 1991 Louisiana gubernatorial campaign, were the only two candidates formally endorsed for office that year by Pratt's organization. Paul's opponent in the Republican primary, Rep. Greg Laughlin, called upon Paul to repudiate Pratt; Paul declined to do so, with his spokesman saying that Paul opposed racism but that "nothing has been proven against Mr. Pratt. He has denied it." (Pratt's enthusiasm for Paul continues to this day, as this quasi-endorsement of Paul's 2008 presidential campaign makes clear.)

THE COMPANY RON PAUL KEEPS

Paul's disinclination to separate himself from the Larry Pratts of the world is part of a pattern that over the last 20 years has seen him snuggling up to some extremely questionable characters on the far right fringe. Like, for example, secessionists, who gathered at a conference in April of 1995 to hear Paul speak about the  "once and future Republic of Texas." Or the beady-eyed listeners of The Political Cesspool. It's the unofficial radio program of the Council of Conservative Citizens--you know, the repainted White Citizens Council that got Trent Lott into a bit of trouble a few years ago. (Tune in tonight for their special program on "the disastrous Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education decision, one which ushered in an era of radical leftist ideology upon the American citizenry.") Paul has been a guest on the program; you'll find him listed under P, right above Prussian Blue, the white supremacist teenage singing duo.

Or the crazy-as-fuck John Birch Society, to which Paul is more than happy to grant the occasional interview and even speak at their dinners (the podcast, I am sorry to report, no longer seems to be available). In fact, Paul is the only member of Congress to receive a perfect 100 from the John Birch Society in its most recent member ratings.

THE KLAN'S MAN IN WASHINGTON

Like many members of Congress, the prolific Paul posts his speeches, columns, and statements on his House Web site. He allows anyone to republish and distribute them, and many do. For example, our old friends the Council of Conservative Citizens occasionally publish Paul in its newsletter, the Citizens Informer (warning: PDF). And then there's David Duke, who can't get enough of Ron Paul; you can find his columns on davidduke.com here and here and here and here and here. If you're more of a dead-tree fan, you can find Paul's thoughts on foreign policy reprinted in the January 2007 issue of the National Times, a white supremacist newspaper that apparently gets distributed through the time-honored neo-Nazi method of throwing the thing onto unsuspecting people's porches in the middle of the night and scurrying away.

For a real look inside the tiny, demented mind of the neo-Nazi, though, we need to go to Stormfront. Stormfront is the oldest and largest white supremacist site on the World Wide Web; its discussion boards provide an unequaled opportunity for eavesdropping on the thoughts and plans of the racist underground in America and around the world. And you don't have to visit for very long before one thing jumps out at you: they positively adore Ron Paul. (Please note that links in this paragraph go to a hate site and should probably be considered NSFW.) An "Is Ron Paul the One?" topic is currently stickied in Stormfront's Newslinks & Articles forum; another active topic on Paul's candidacy has received 446 posts and 12,040 pageviews since late March. A topic called "Ron Paul's Race Problem" (hey, Wonkette musta read my diary!) was just started today and already has 17 replies. They're busy little racists over there.

DOES ANY OF THIS STUFF REALLY MATTER?

Politicians can't choose their supporters, after all. Isn't it a bit unfair to tar Paul by association to these lunatics? No, it isn't. This stuff matters because Paul makes so little effort to disassociate himself from the racist, anti-Semitic, crackpot groups that support him. Whether he shares these groups' beliefs or not, the fact that he doesn't care enough to do anything about them speaks volumes. I'll wrap up by turning the floor over to Eric Dondero, a senior aid to Paul from 1997 to 2003, who had this to say in a blog comment in May:

Ron Paul has had some ties that are nothing to be proud of in the past to far-right groups. My former boss IS NOT AN ANTI-SEMITE. However, he is grossly inattentive in dealing with groups who are blatantly anti-Semitic.

...Whether they are using him to gain in credibility, or whether it’s just coincidence doesn’t matter much. It’s the image that counts. No doubt this will all come to haunt him in his race for the Presidency.

Tags: Ron Paul, 2008 Elections (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 101 comments

  •  But, but, but, but, but he's against the war! (10+ / 0-)

    So's David Duke. How d'ya feel about him?

    •  Honestly, I like seeing Paul in the wingnut race. (4+ / 0-)

      I mean, come on...he's in it for the vanity.

      And he does chip away at those civil liberties violations--sometimes, when it's convenient.

      Baffle 'em with B.S., I say. The more 'Thug debates he's in, the better.

      Go, Paul, go!  

    •  Introducing levity - Prussian Blue Comedy bit (0+ / 0-)

      Great diary.  I understand Paul is a far right wackjob.  If he'd vote with Democrats to get us out of Iraq, I'd take his vote in Congress though.  I also agree with his non-interventionist foreign policy.

      Anyway, speaking of Prussian Blue, there was a funny comedy bit (by "Sammy the Stem Cell") on Morning Sedition on Air America a year or two ago.  Listen to it here:

      http://www.thesnotgreensea.com/...

      American overseas? Register to vote at www.VoteFromAbroad.org

      by YoyogiBear on Thu May 17, 2007 at 07:29:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I like that neocons (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      retired, Oothoon, wondering if

      have officially started their campaign on dailykos to get rid of support for libertarians in an effort to save the neocon republican candidates from embarassing poll results.

      If you want to split the Republican Party, continue to vote for Ron Paul in any online poll you can find.

      It is embarassing to the establishment candidates, and will split the party if we remain dedicated enough.

      Paul is the key to the death of neoconservatism, and we definitely have to se this through as the attacks from neocons like phenry are going to continue on this site under multiple aliases for the forseeable future.

  •  Indeed (5+ / 0-)

    I've been trying to mention that, though Mr. Paul often sounds like the only sane Republican around, his politics don't really stand up to scrutiny when you start looking at some of the statements that he has made.

    Welcome to the Great Foreclosure.

    by bink on Thu May 17, 2007 at 06:20:42 PM PDT

    •  Kurt Vonnegut wrote in (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Meteor Blades, lazybum

      Mother Night about a Nazi whose mind was like an alarm clock with a partially stripped gear.  It seems to be working but it suddenly jumps ahead and then resumes running normally, but hours ahead of where it ought to be.  The cycle keeps repeating itself and the clock gets farther and farther out of whack.  The clock appears to be functioning normally and occasionally tells the correct time but is nevertheless hopelessly screwed up.

      Say it loud, say it proud: "I'm voting for the black guy!"

      by ruleoflaw on Thu May 17, 2007 at 07:04:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Fundamentalist libertarians (4+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Meteor Blades, jxg, phenry, lazybum

      always sound sane when standing next to christian fundamentalists, but they're not.  There just a different kind of weird that we don't see often enough to understand their particular form of distorted reality.

      What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

      by Marie on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:43:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I really don't think (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    mcfly, ruleoflaw, libertynow

    Anybody on dKos is going to vote for him come election day, regardless of what positive things are said about him. All you're really doing is giving ammo to supporters of Guliani, Romney, etc.

    Sell a man a fish, he eats for a day, teach a man how to fish, you ruin a wonderful business opportunity.

    by Hannibal on Thu May 17, 2007 at 06:25:32 PM PDT

  •  Today Dondero says (5+ / 0-)

    Eric Dondero, a former senior aide to Paul (1997-2003), said in a telephone interview from Angleton that he thought Paul's comments were "deplorable" and that he was embarrassed by Paul's statements, explaining that Paul no longer represented the views of South Texas. He called on Paul to resign.

    "Sooner rather than later," said Dondero, who also served as a congressional campaign coordinator for Paul in 1995-96 and was a travel aide for Paul in 1987-88 when Paul ran for president as a Libertarian.

    Otherwise, Dondero said, if Paul doesn't leave, then Congressional District 14 voters from Victoria to Galveston "will appear to be endorsing his treacherous, and near treasonous views on foreign policy."

    Dondero said he is considering running in the 2008 Republican primary against Paul. He said he would wait to see whether a few other possible candidates run. If they don't, he will.

    Glad to hear that he'll face a primary challenge.

    If the conservative Victoria Advocate is publishing criticism against Paul, its own Congressional Rep, you know the guy is in bad shape.  That's not normal.  The worst he's gotten from the paper has generally been presentation of his racist comments without too much overt defending.

    Of course, the Advocate wants to be fair, so it talked to a Paul supporter who thinks the problem is that slanted left wing Fox news that must have distorted what Dr. No said.  I believe they were only able to find one person who really defended Paul.  

    Babe, you're just a wave, you're not the water. --Jimmie Dale Gilmore

    by rocketito on Thu May 17, 2007 at 06:43:59 PM PDT

    •  That Hannity...he's a lefty alright! (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      ruleoflaw
    •  Dondero also claims to speak 10 - 15 languages (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      libertynow

      you know, give or take, and called all VFW and American Hall meetings rinky dink.

      Among other humorous things.

      Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

      by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 07:20:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So you know Rocketito, when the dust clears (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      ohcanada

      I will be supporting Shane in Brazoria if he decides to run again.

      I am helping Paul because as an issue candidate on foreign policy he is the best thing going.

      Let me get the truth out, then I will wonder back to the reservation, okay?

      Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

      by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:39:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Notice what was the sticking point (0+ / 0-)

      his treacherous, and near treasonous views on foreign policy.

      In other words, not supporting Bush and the neocons.

      Paul serves the useful purpose of having someone from the far Right whacking the Bush Administration re Iraq invasion/occupation, wire tapping &ct, trying to make it illegal to help minors cross State lines for the purpose of getting an abortion, and a few other favorites of this Administration.

      He also attracts some of the no-tax crowd. Yet he'll never have enough support to be a serious contender for the Presidency.

      The longer he stays in the GOP contenders crowd the cracks there's be in the GOP base, at not cost the the Dems; which is why the GOP powers that by are muttering about banning Paul from the debates.

      He's entertaining in the debates, makes the rest of the field froth at the mouth, and causes a few GOP voters to reconsider their support of the current direction of their party. All things that give neocons reason to hate him, and if they want to expend energy doing that it's fine by me.

    •  Would You Trust Dondero After He Wrote This? (0+ / 0-)

      http://www.harrybrowne.org/...

      While all Anti-War libertarians are incredibly big losers in the recent successes of the Bush Doctrine — Democracy breaking out with lightening speed in Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi and even Israel/Palestine post-Iraqi Elections — it is Lew Rockwell of LewRockwell.com and Justin Raimondo of Anti-War.com and their allies who are the absolute BIGGEST LOSERS.

      Just think about this for a second. Rockwell and Raimondo have been saying for years that Bush was going to be a huge failure. That the entire Middle East was going to explode over our invasion of Iraq. That it would NEVER cause democracy and freedom to flourish in other Nations in the Region. (Some would say that it even has had coat- tails outside of the Region, witness Ukraine).

  •  THANKS FOR POSTING THIS (3+ / 1-)

    Recommended by:
    Meteor Blades, phenry, Mia Dolan
    Hidden by:
    ben masel

    RON PAUL IS A PIECE OF SHIT

    Anyone who votes for him is a stupid moron and a racist

  •  While I enjoy your astroturfing (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    retired, ohcanada, libertynow

    I might like to say one thing, Ron Paul has finally made questioning our foreign policy possible. Now when a member of the Democratic Party questions the war, or our foreign adventures and habit of overthrowing other countries, they will have insulation.

    I can see why you dislike, which is your want, but let's hope the crack in the armor of the Republicans owning military/foreign policy/terrorism can be exploited by a Democratic Party contender.

    Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

    by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 07:24:44 PM PDT

    •  Ron Paul is still a piece of shit n/t (3+ / 1-)

      Recommended by:
      phenry, pinche tejano, Mia Dolan
      Hidden by:
      ben masel
      •  At least Mr. Poo can stand up to bullies. (5+ / 0-)

        It is the lack of backbone of the current Democratic contenders and Paul's common sense on foreign policy that has me currently in his camp.

        He has done more to move the discussion forward on our antics overseas than the entire field of Democratic candidates.

        They are not progressing the discussion, he is. And yes, that is the saddest part of Mr. Poo.

        If someone at the next Democratic debate takes advantage of this, I will change my open.

        Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

        by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 07:36:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  And you are a shill account of phenry's (4+ / 0-)

        I knew neocons would infiltrate dailykos with lies about Ron Paul, but I didn't think they would do it with multiple accounts until today.

        Anyone can watch youtube and read the many papers Paul has written. The guy isn't a racist nor insane. He isn't a Democrat though, but he is the best wedge against the neocons that liberals have at their disposal.

        •  You have an active imagination. (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          Mia Dolan

          You may not have noticed that Shonakifala and I have very different writing styles, or perhaps you didn't think of that, or don't think it matters. In any event, the folks who manage dailykos have the ability to check contributors' IP addresses, so if you have any suspicions about the two of us being the same person they will be able to answer your questions forthwith. In fact, what are you waiting for? Go! Quickly! The East Coasters are probably already in bed! Wait any longer and you probably won't find out until tomorrow.

          •  It isn't hard to (3+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            emmasnacker, retired, pinche tejano
            cycle through IP addresses with software, or by using Tor, or any other privacy software.

            You both actually write in the same style, and you both have bizarre links to baldfaced smears in your signature.

            You are a neocon trying to prevent a Republican rift from liberal support of Paul, plain and simple.

            And there is nothing I dislike more than neocons.

            •  I think you struck a nerve. (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              libertynow

              You are getting troll rated.

              Think you got this possum cornered.

              Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

              by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:14:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Same offer's open to you. (1+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                pinche tejano

                If you'd like to produce any evidence at all to substantiate "libertynow"'s libel, I'm sure we'd all love to hear it.

                •  I really don't have time. (0+ / 0-)

                  If anything, let me help Ron Paul get the word out about the foolishness of our foreign policy.

                  Both you and I know he will not win the Republican nomination, and he has already promised not to run as an independent.

                  Plus, he has already handed the future Democratic Candidate a great commercial of Ghouliani saying he has never read the 9-11 Commission report.

                  Expect more favors in the future.

                  Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

                  by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:28:07 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Probably my favorite about Paul in the debate (0+ / 0-)

                    He sunk "america's wannbee mayor" like a rock by getting him to admit that he hadn't read the 9/11 report. Paul is somewhat sacrificing himself to nail that neocon, but man, he is going to do great things for us when it comes to the libertarian/neocon split which will come in a massive wave right before the general election. These are exciting times!!!

            •  Coward. (0+ / 0-)

              So what you're saying is that you'd rather spin increasingly bizarre theories than make any effort to back up your libel. Understood.

              You know what, I have a paper trail here going back years that proves my bona fides. Do you? I made a five-part spoof documentary ridiculing neoconservatives. Did you? Did it ever occur to you even once to actually check me out before libeling me? No. You're too busy writing increasingly passionate defenses of a radical right-wing Republican.

              Go find someone else's leg to bite, Fido. I'm through with you.

              •  If I was a plant, the first thing I would do (2+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                phenry, libertynow

                would be to write a five-part series showing that I am not what I am.

                Luckily, my postings prove one thing about me, I am chaotic neutral, but does not suffer fools.

                I have watched you google bomb Ron Paul for awhile, it's your right, but I think you are the one coming from the Right.

                Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

                by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:18:57 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  You're obviously a neocon Guiliani supporter (1+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                retired

                who has been building up a record on this site in an attempt to give you some sort of street cred to run bullcrap like this diary throughout the Republican primary... guess what phenry... you're through! And everyone is going to know it.

                Sorry your astroturf campaign isn't going to work this time, and that all of your hard work creating a phony account will be wasted.

                I will be here everyday putting down your neocon lies.

                •  seriously, cut this shit (3+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  jxg, phenry, lazybum

                  If you want to speak for Libertarian Republicans on this Democratic site, go ahead.  We'll see what happens with honest debate.

                  But stop throwing around fictions about lurking Kossack neocons.
                  That's not the way it works here.

                  Dispute his/her facts if you can.  Make the case for your candidate.  Don't play the bullshit accusation and smear game.  Leave that on the other side of the aisle.

                  •  I've been here for a pretty long time myself (0+ / 0-)

                    in fact all the way back to 2002. I now how it works here at election time. Take note that your advice will go unheaded. THis individual is a Guiliani supporting neocon and you can plainly see that in the diaries he has written in his two main alternate accounts... honestly, just look at each of their diary sections... I haven't seen two people which such similar patterns on dailykos, which is how I know for a fact that its a stunt. Sorry if that offends you.

                    I don't speak for all libertarian republicans on this site, I speak for myself, but I am voting for democrats in the short term, so I do have my place.

                    I would suggest that you put more effort on figuring out why anyone would be directly attacking Paul day after day, than in scolding me for my clear defense against a smear artist.

                    •  this is not a defense (4+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      phenry, pinche tejano, lazybum, Mia Dolan

                      You are inventing an ad hominem campaign against a Daily Kos diarist.  
                      When you play this card, you are not addressing the content of the allegations, or even countering with contradictory information-- you're just smearing.  Going with the cheap "Look out everyone, there's a secret neocon among us!" tactic is very poor form.

                      I don't have to figure out why someone is posting these things on Daily kos-- and you shouldn't either.  Ron Paul is a Republican.  

                      Setting aside any racist writings that he is being accused of authoring, he still promotes an agenda that is antithetical to many progressive Democratic ideals.  I'm sure you want this community to be open to a wide range of ideas and politics-- since you yourself do not share the dominant ideology of this community-- but the fact remains: this is a site specifically organized and maintained to elect Democrats, primarily progressive or liberal ones (and, by extension, to defeat conservative Republicans).  

                      Whether or not you believe that Ron Paul is guilty of aspousing these racist views, you should not be surprised or outraged that he gets some harsh press here.  
                      As a conservative Republican, Ron Paul is not at home on Daily kos-- and most of the Kossacks who celebrate his dissenting voice on the war will agree with that fact.

                      •  well... duh (0+ / 0-)

                        I'm not writing diaries denouncing Ron Paul unlike the writer of this diary, on a liberal website, when we all know for a fact that he won't win the Republican nomination anyways.

                        Why do you think this diarist is targetting Ron Paul on dkos? I'll ask you to fill in the blanks.

                        Keep in mind that he is using alternate accounts throughout the site to showcase his signature calling Paul a "racist scubag", and if you look in the history of these two, you will see he writes "shit" with his alias every other word.

                        Sorry to disappoint you but I am not going to stop targetting this person as a neocon when he has made it his mission to target Ron Paul on this site.

      •  Recommended to offset ratings abuse. n/t (0+ / 0-)

    •  Astroturfing? (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      pinche tejano, Mia Dolan

      For whom do you believe that I am secretly working?

      •  The Ghoul. (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        retired, pinche tejano



        The 4th Amendment: It's not just for dope dealers anymore.

        by ben masel on Thu May 17, 2007 at 07:48:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I see. (0+ / 0-)

          Would you like to provide any evidence to support this assertion?

          No?

          I see.

          •  You asked (0+ / 0-)

            "For whom do you believe that I am secretly working?"

            So I gave my suspicions. Not claiming evidence, just scent.



            The 4th Amendment: It's not just for dope dealers anymore.

            by ben masel on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:00:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I see. (0+ / 0-)

              So surely you'll be able to at least identify something, in my posting history or pattern of recommendations or whatever, that gave you this hunch in the first place, other than my strongly-expressed dislike for a radical right-wing Republican? Hmm?

              •  Dislike I'd understand. (0+ / 0-)

                You're going past that with guilt by association smear, and ignoring his repudiation of the remarks a subsequently fired aid put in his newsletter.



                The 4th Amendment: It's not just for dope dealers anymore.

                by ben masel on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:15:43 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  "Subsequently fired"? (0+ / 0-)

                  This is the second time you've claimed that the person who allegedly wrote Paul's racist remarks was "subsequently fired." Where did you read or hear this?

                  •  Wait, are we really talking about the pig fucker (2+ / 0-)

                    Recommended by:
                    retired, ohcanada

                    piece?

                    Where the plant from the other campaign sent out a newsletter with racists comments while Ron Paul was on campaign? That was a classic Texas dirty trick that the Houston Chronicle and the Austin Chronicle picked up, then felt dumb about falling for the clever opponent research.

                    Is that really what you keep referencing?

                    Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

                    by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:25:39 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I assume... (0+ / 0-)

                      ...that he is referring to the Alberto Gonzales that Paul pulled in Texas Monthly regarding his racist newsletter articles:

                      "I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. It wasn't my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady." Paul says that item ended up there because "we wanted to do something on affirmative action, and it ended up in the newsletter and became personalized. I never personalize anything."

                      His reasons for keeping this a secret are harder to understand: "They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them . . . I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn't come from me directly, but they [campaign aides] said that's too confusing. 'It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it.'"

                      Notably missing from this explanation: "I fired the guy who dunnit."

                      •  Also notably missing (0+ / 0-)

                        is 20+ years of racist propaganda amd legislation written by Paul because...

                        it doesn't exist!

                        Go back to neocon-ville, you might as well enjoy it because your philosophy will be coming to an end.

                      •  He did fire him. (1+ / 0-)

                        Was it a bad idea not to come out and say he fired the plant that very second? Yes.

                        Did he think people 10 years down the road would completely take the incident to carry out their own partisan agenda? No.

                        He didn't want to admit that his campaign had spies in it from the opposition because that would have made him look weak and stupid. And weak and stupid in Texas is a political death nail.

                        But I will grant you, he looks stupid for not coming clean that very day, and he was very sloppy in the way he handled it.

                        To bad he is not slick as oil politician, maybe more people would like him.

                        Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

                        by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:46:19 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  Got a source? (0+ / 0-)

                      You keep saying that, but that's not even Ron Paul's explanation for it.  You are just making shit up about it being planted by another campaign.  

                      •  Where is Paul's racist legislation? (0+ / 0-)

                        I imagine such a racist would have volumes of work to back up a claim of racism. Yet we supposedly have only one supposed newsletter that no one on the internet has seen in person, no scan of this supposed document exists anywhere online, but we are supposed to believe you in saying he is a racist.

                        Where's your first hand source document? And for that matter, where are the volumes on top of volumes of racist material Paul has written over the years?

                        Guess where? Nowhere, because it doesn't exist, and Paul is not a racist.

                        •  LOL (0+ / 0-)

                          Because Ron Paul acknowledged it.  I gave you the link to the Texas Monthly article.  

                          •  Wait, you believe he "acknowledged it" (0+ / 0-)

                            but you don't believe what he actually said in that article, which was that it was put into his letter by campaign staff while he was out campaigning? Funny what you choose to believe.

                            Again, if he is a racist, where is his racist legislation and volumes of racist writings?

                            Either show them, or admit that you are only attempting to defend neocons who are threatened by Paul. We both know the only group he hurts are the Republicans. He can't win the primary, and he certainly couldn't win the general, so why the bizarre attack?

                            •  OK (2+ / 0-)

                              Recommended by:
                              phenry, lazybum

                              Let me clarify:

                              1. Racist statements were in the newsletter.  Ron Paul acknowledges they were there.
                              1. In the Texas Monthly article, Ron Paul explains that the racist statements were put in by a staffer without his permission.  That is what I don't believe, but that is just my opinion.  I can't prove that either way.  
                              1. In explaining the racist statements in that article, Paul says nothing about the the staffer being a plant from a rival campaign, as Pinche Tejano claims.  If Pinche has something to back that up, I'd like to see that.
                              1. As I have made clear to you, I am all for Paul going after Republicans.  I think the comments he made about the blowback are right on.  My problem is the idea that Ron Paul's good attributes go much beyong Iraq and a few other issues, and the for the most part, he is not a good guy.  
                              •  OK.. I disagree (1+ / 0-)

                                Recommended by:
                                Mia Dolan
                                but primarily from one piece of evidence Paul mentions (and trust me, I can not stand actual racists and never would support an out and out racist), but apparently that newsletter made some nasty comments about a Barbara Jones, whom Ron Paul actually worked with and thought was a pleasant person. He said he didn't write that part of that newsletter either, and the proof is that, as he says "I never personalize anything", and if you watch the way this guy interacts with people in the youtube videos that you can see... it is quite clear that he doesn't ever personalize anything to any one person.

                                That is why I believe him, because his daily actions and his many written articles I've read online prove that he is neither a racist nor a person who delves into personalization politics.

                                I am not trying to suggest that any Democrat vote for him in the general election either (because there is no way in hell he is getting there), but this racism thing is just so far off the mark of this guys actual character, that it is disappointing that it ever happened.

  •  I knew nothing about Mr.Pauls background (0+ / 0-)

    as you ascribe it, I will do my due diligence on google. He did, until I read this, sound like the only realist of the ten.

    He sounded like a leftie. I look forward to hearing him questioned about his ties to racist groups in one of the debates, it seems at odds with what he presents in the debate format. I would like to hear Mr.Pauls explanation.

    Think Tank. "A place where people are paid to think by the makers of tanks" Naomi Klein.

    by ohcanada on Thu May 17, 2007 at 07:36:59 PM PDT

    •  Simply watch his videos on youtube (0+ / 0-)

      He is a clear libertarian who believes government doesn't have the right to infiltrate the privacy of people's lives.

      The only reason white supremacists would support him is the fact that Paul won't force the government to censor these fringe psychos. He simply stands for freedom.

      •  That is interesting (0+ / 0-)

        perhaps someone needs to ask him about hate crimes, if he believes there are such things and such an act as incitement to hatred.

        He is certainly a bright guy and brave to say what he has on issues other than this "racism" issue label that the writer makes.

        It is always more difficult to be a lone person with an opinion, just like Barbara Lee  voting against war, doesn't mean they are necessarily wrong.

        Is Paul a racist, or does he just believe in free speech that strongly? I will google before I go to bed.

        Think Tank. "A place where people are paid to think by the makers of tanks" Naomi Klein.

        by ohcanada on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:42:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Definitely not a racist in my opinion (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          retired, ohcanada

          he actually does believe in freedom that strongly.

          He would probably say, as a libertarian, that he doesn't differentiate between hate crimes and actual crime. I doubt he would support "hate crimes" legislation, because he belives that crime is crime. I could be wrong on that, but I doubt it.

          His site is probably the best place to find out, and his articles appear frequently on lewrockwell.com

      •  Liar (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        phenry

        He's not a libertarian, at least when it comes to to abortion or gay rights.  

        •  Actually, to be clear (0+ / 0-)

          there is a libertarian division between pro-choice libertarians and pro-life libertarians. pro-life libertarians believe a fetus is a living being and therefore has rights under the constitution, pro-choice libertarians believe a fetus is not a living being and therefore not able to be defended through government force.

          On the matter of gay rights, Paul doesn't believe anyu person should have any greater rights than anyone else, and would get rid of government sponsored marriage and programs of any type. I don't exactly see how that would be anti-gay as he would oppose and legislation to put a ban on gay marriage in the constitution... so frankly, because of that, he is more pro-gay than most other Republicans in the Republican party.

  •  Dondero just declared for Paul's House seat (0+ / 0-)

    to challenge him in the Primary, because of Cong. Paul's opposition to the Iraq occupation.



    The 4th Amendment: It's not just for dope dealers anymore.

    by ben masel on Thu May 17, 2007 at 07:46:21 PM PDT

    •  Being from Angleton and this district. (0+ / 0-)

      If Dondero and Paul wind up tangling, this will hand the Republican ticket to Kyle Janek.

      Which would be good actually, handing the district to Shane Sklar, which is fine with me, but would make Rocketito very happy.

      Your Candidate/Hitler 2008

      by pinche tejano on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:23:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  R Paul may be a nut, but not as nutty as Guiliani (0+ / 0-)

    At the recent Republican Presidential debate, third
    tier candidate Ron Paul claimed that the 9/11/2001
    debacle happened, in part, because th US cannot keep
    its big nose out of the Middle East Arab countries
    affairs.

    Mr. Guiliani, who claims the titla of "hero of 911"
    and "America's Mayor" (why, I'll never know as a monkey could have done what he did),  in his infinite wisdom, claimed that he has heard many reasons for 911, but not that one, it is simply absurd.

    Well, I guess truth may then be stranger than fiction, and Mr Guiliani had better get his head out of the sand.  Any student of history from the 1930's to the present knows the stories of how the USA raped and pillaged Middle East lands for natural resources, propped up illigitimate governments to keep the flow of oil coming our way, thumped king james bibles through every middle eastern country we could enter, and shoved our customs down the throats of the fundamentalist islamists.

    Now, I may believe in my heart that some of the Islamic customs are a bit extreme and 12th century,
    but that is their country, not ours, and we wouldn't want them coming here, dropping korans
    like dollar bills all over our landscape.

    So, you see Mr. Guiliani, either, you have forgotten our pre 911 history, (and its not like we've stopped after 911, we've only gotten worse)
    or you have shown yourself to be a bigger moron than the misbgotten clown who currently has the audacity to call himself "President".

    •  Wait.. you mean we wouldn't be better off (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Oothoon

      with a psychotic, torture-loving, habeas corpus embracing totalitarian neocon elected to the presidency? Do tell.

      The neocons will be out in force trying to shame liberals out of supporting Paul to split the Republicans, but of course they don't seem to realize that the 9 other neocon Republican nominees are actually truly racist and psychotic in a visible way, at least ten times more than Paul could ever be (if he actually was, which is a complete fabrication).

  •  I don't care that Ron Paul (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ohcanada

    is this that or the other thing on any other issue.  Hearing him finally talk about "gee, maybe the past 60 years of mucking in the Middle East had some consequences" is awesome.  And to hear guiliani, and the rest of our "press" think Americans are stupid 5 year olds is worth it.

    "Cynicism is a sorry kind of wisdom" - Barack Obama

    by pacified on Thu May 17, 2007 at 07:59:48 PM PDT

    •  And that is the point if you ask me (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      ohcanada

      we have a chance, with the power of the internet, to absolutely undermine the Republican Primary, simply because the media have been sucking up to the internet in an effort to preserve their future business plans. The media can't turn against the internet itself because it will come back to bite them financially in the future, which means we have an open lane directly into the heart of the GOP primary.

      We have to use this opportunity to split the REpublican Party between the one lone anti-war dissenter and the 9 other neocons. Without Paul, we would have 9 completely similar idiot neocons to attempt to differentiate between, and would end up with a strengthened neocon candidate. What would be the point of that, split the party in half and guarentee a Republican loss in the general election.

  •  Once again, (5+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    jxg, phenry, pinche tejano, lazybum, Mia Dolan

    thank you for shining a light into the cave of libertarianism.

    Ron Paul isn't peculiar when it comes to Libertarianism (or for you hairsplitters, liberatarianis, either).

    Hopefully, as people see more of this, the claptap of "libertarian democrats" will stop.

    No more Republican rule.

    by HarveyMilk on Thu May 17, 2007 at 08:09:13 PM PDT

    •  The funny thing (0+ / 0-)

      is that Paul isn't even a good libertarian.  When it comes to abortion and gay rights, Paul is just fine with goverment intervention.  

      •  He is a doctor who has delivered 4000 babies (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        Oothoon

        He has every right to be pro-life just as many democrats are. A living being has rights, in his view, and he considers a fetus a living being. It isn't inconsistent with who he is as a person.

        He isn't against "gay rights" anymore than any other Republican presidential candidate, and why you would hammer Paul to support a Neoconservative Nationalist such as Guiliani is the real shame.

        •  LOL (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          phenry

          He isn't against "gay rights" anymore than any other Republican presidential candidate

          While that may be true (it actually isn't true) but no other Republican presidential candidates are getting praised on DailyKos.  

          If you want to support a nutty, anti-war candidate, support Dennis Kucinich.  

          •  He'd being praised on dkos (0+ / 0-)

            because he can be used to forcefully split the republican party... nothing more and nothing less.

            That is what is seriously missing in your consideration. This guy needs liberal support to guarentee his stand within the GOP primary. He is throwing the neocons off their game and position, and that is the whole damn point.

  •  The Fact that Paul Is a Republican (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    libertynow, Oothoon

    or even a racist nut isn't the point.

    The point is that you're spending a lot of time on a fringe Republican candidate who has absolutely no chance of winning.

    Well, I'm sure it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he outed Rudy Giuliani the terrorism war profiteer and blew open a huge space in the debate over 9/11.

  •  Thanks (0+ / 0-)

    Phenry, obviously some people won't be convinced, and you shouldn't worry about it.  I think that most Kossacks intrigued by Ron Paul can recognize what a piece of shit he really is.  

Permalink | 101 comments