Ron Paul: Rasist? Tröttsamma anklagelser

Tror att jag har en här. Annars så är det ingen större skillnad mellan tryckt och inspelad media. Samma åsikter kan föras fram i de olika medierna, bara under helt olika förutsättningar. Men det är inte relevant. Det är 2008 och rasism är mer än väl förlegat. Rasisterna kan ha sina egna rasistklubbar. Hos liberaler har de inget att hämta. Vaddå? Det går väl att vilja införa inskränkt yttrandefrihet på frivillig grund på samma sätt som konservativa anarkister kan fantisera om att folk vill på frivilig grund leva på samma efterblivna nivå som i hobernas Fylke i århundraden? Nej. Frihetsfronten fulade ut sig själva rejält när det om lördags- och söndagsmorgnarna såg ut som fan utanför Tritnaha. Mig veterligen så håller i stort sett alla knegare det rent och snyggt omkring sig. Jag kan även sortera in liberaler efter deras finhet. Visserligen så har Timbro gjort mycket gott, men sorry grabbar och tjejer - ni kommer inte att bygga liberalismens H&M och är alltså inget att satsa alltför mycket på. Sedan så har vi Folkpartiet som blev förnärmade och gömde sig ännu längre in i elfenbenstornet när folk påpekade att de inte pratade rent. (Som t.ex. deras valaffischer 1994, jag blev personligt förolämpad. Drev dom med mig?) Du jämför äppen och päron. Även om du så hade en fanatisk Saabägare som anser att alla andra bilar är dödsfällor åt idioter så är det inte på långa vägar en lika korkad och farlig inställning som rasistens, för vem som helst kan i teorin skaffa en Saab. Det liberala idealet är att döma folk efter deras karaktär, inte efter deras hudfärg.

Nu är du bara fånig. Det har inget med det vi diskuterade att göra. Du är nog ganska ensam om att tro att Paul är rasist, om du ens tror på det själv. Fram med dina motiv nu! Varför denna hetsjakt mot Ron Paul? Har någon Paul-anhängare varit dum mot dig?


Varför skulle jag inte acceptera att ett företag råkar anställa folk med tveksamma värderingar, och sedan inse misstaget och ta konsekvenserna? Blir Apples produkter dåliga och fula av att de haft en socialist på utvecklingsavdelningen?


Tack för den upplysningen du store läromästare.


Paul är antirasist både privat och offentligt, så jag förstår inte ditt argument.

Du driver med oss?

Man förstår att de måste förvränga ljudet och lägga in 'jew' själva i texten.


Sant. Hitta någonting, i skrift eller tal där Paul själv yttrar något rasistiskt. Han har skrivit över tusen artiklar etc. och det finns tusentas ljud- och bildklipp på nätet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvFLS...eature=related
NAACP President: Ron Paul Is Not A Racist! (Radio clip)

NAACP är kända för att skrika rasist efter alla vita människor i princip, men inte Ron Paul, tvärtom försvarar denne NAACP:are honom i den här radiosändningen, vad kan det bero på


















Hint: HAN ÄR INTE RASIST!!!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2svQ...eature=related samma kille i en annan intervju

Aha. Det är där skon klämmer, att han vill att USA ska sluta blanda sig i konflikter i mellanöstern, säg det då istället för att spela ut rasistkortet.

Den ljudupptagningen är ungefär lika oredigerad som:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQsIXMszP_w

Min poäng var att man kan vara rasist och trots det anse att alla människor har negativa rättigheter. Negativa rättigheterna är viktigare än ditt liberala ideal ty om alla hade erkännt dem hade inte du behövt ha något som helst samröre med varesig rasister eller annat pack (tex. SAAB-ägare).

Ett ganska välformulerat svar i frågan (som jag alltså stulit från någont forum):

If you're relying on the "mainstream media" for your news coverage, I can understand the source of your opinion about Ron Paul and the newsletters, produced by ghostwriters (apparently without any oversight by Dr. Paul) after he had left politics and returned to his ob/gyn practice full-time.

"News" of the newsletters was released on the day of the New Hampshire primary by a supporter of Rudy Guiliani, working for an avowedly liberal magazine, in a transparent attempt to harm Dr. Paul's campaign. ("News" is in quotation marks because the newsletters had been "old news" in Dr. Paul's district for years, and despite them, his constituents saw fit to return him to office for 10 terms in the House of Representatives.)

You may also want to do a Google search for "Ron Paul" and "NAACP." That search will lead you to radio interviews with Austin, Texas NAACP President Nelson Linder. As a black person who has known Ron Paul for 20 years. Mr. Linder is presumably in a good position to know whether or not Dr. Paul is a bigot. Mr. Linder refutes claims that Dr. Paul is a racist, and says he's being attacked because he's a threat to the establishment. This really IS news, but this story has received zero coverage in the "mainstream" media.

It may also interest you to know that Dr. Paul seems to have more support from minorities than any other republican candidate (also a legitimate news story, also unreported by the "mainstream" media.) (I apologize for not having a citation for this, other than an interview with Dr. Paul on CNN. And you seem to believe he's lying about the newsletters, so you may choose to believe he's lying about everything else.)

As a longtime supporter of his, I'm also disappointed that Dr. Paul didn't respond more forcefully to this character assassination. But that just doesn't seem to be his style. As a libertarian who practices what he preaches, Dr. Paul really doesn't care what you think! He believes that your thoughts and opinions are your business, and you have a right to them...no matter how ugly or disagreeable they may be to him or anyone else. I think this is probably why he hasn't "outed" the ghostwriters who worked on those newsletters (if he even knows who they are). He thinks they're entitled to their opinions. Why? Because freedom of speech and freedom of thought are the cornerstone of our political system. Dr. Paul is the only Constitutional candidate in the race...and the First Amendment protects the rights of figures like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. or Malcolm X or Al Sharpton just as much as it protects the rights of anyone spouting racist or bigoted nonsense. You can't get one without the other.

As a veteran of a number of political campaigns, I wish Dr. Paul had been more "politically correct" in his response. I wish there had been more "mainstream" coverage of the fact that Dr. Paul thinks economist Walter Williams (who, by the way, is black) would make a great running mate. Or the fact that he always votes against awarding Congressional Medals of Freedom (because such an expenditure is not authorized by the Constitution) but when Rosa Parks was nominated for one, he offered to chip in money from his own pocket so the taxpayers didn't have to foot the bill. (None of his colleagues took him up on his offer, and instead raided the Treasury (i.e., your pocketbook).

Unfortunately, the American electorate has been sufficiently dumbed down that it merely takes an accusation of racism to destroy a candidate. But again, that's just not who Ron Paul is. He's the Anti-Romney. He's non-slick and non-calculating. He's essentially a freedom-loving policy wonk who wants to strip power from an out-of-control, financially and morally bankrupt federal bureaucracy and return it to the individual American citizen.

It's tragic to think that the American electorate is so easily manipulated, and that political correctness has run amok to the extent that we can't even have an honest dialog about racism in politics and society...in this of all years.

And finally, from his website, www.ronpaul2008.com, here's his statement on racism: "A nation that once prided itself on a sense of rugged individualism has become uncomfortably obsessed with racial group identities.

The collectivist mindset is at the heart of racism.

Government as an institution is particularly ill-suited to combat bigotry. Bigotry at its essence is a problem of the heart, and we cannot change people's hearts by passing more laws and regulations.

It is the federal government that most divides us by race, class, religion, and gender. Through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, government plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails. Government "benevolence" crowds out genuine goodwill by institutionalizing group thinking, thus making each group suspicious that others are receiving more of the government loot. This leads to resentment and hostility among us.

Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism.

The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence - not skin color, gender, or ethnicity.

In a free society, every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty.

Ja, han måste ju vara en nazist, Paul, han som hela tiden vill argumenterar fär vad judiska tänkare har förespråkat ...