Oh, he’s not REALLY a white supremacist; He just happens to support them, take their money and advance their goals. But he’s not ONE of them!!! He’s all about freedom!!!
The freedom to legally discriminate against minorities, at any rate.
Oh, right! I forgot, he’s also the chosen candidate of white supremacists.
From The Michigan Messenger:
Stormfront.org, a white supremacyweb site, as well as others, such as WhiteWorldNews.com, have actively supported Paul’s bid for the presidency, including directing donors to his campaign. Stormfront has also endorsed Paul for president.
“Once in a great while a presidential candidate is presented to us. A candidate who not only speaks to us, but for us…I am supporting Ron Paul in his run for the presidency,” the Stormfront endorsement says. The endorsement praises Paul’s plans to reduce taxes, close the borders and eliminate trade deals, such as NAFTA.
Riiiiight. Because no other Republicans support ANY of those particular goals. Now, granted, this article is from the 2008 election cycle. One might be tempted to dismiss it. after all, the KKK simply adores Obama as a recruitment tool. But this is not a recent phenomena.
Ron Paul is a hard core racist. This is a known but little reported fact. He has published a newsletter for over thirty years that puts forth a steady stream of stunning racism:
Paul’s alliance with neo-Confederates helps explain the views his newsletters have long espoused on race. Take, for instance, a special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report,published in June 1992, dedicated to explaining the Los Angeles riots of that year. “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,” read one typical passage. According to the newsletter, the looting was a natural byproduct of government indulging the black community with “‘civil rights,’ quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.” It also denounced “the media” for believing that “America’s number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.”…
“Oh, but that was just ONE article at a very emotional time for the country!” you say?
This “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism” was hardly the first time one of Paul’s publications had raised these topics. As early as December 1989, a section of hisInvestment Letter, titled “What To Expect for the 1990s,” predicted that “Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities” because “mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’” Two months later, a newsletter warned of “The Coming Race War,” and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, “If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.” In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” “This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,” the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter’s author–presumably Paul–wrote, “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” That same year, a newsletter described the aftermath of a basketball game in which “blacks poured into the streets of Chicago in celebration. How to celebrate? How else? They broke the windows of stores to loot.” The newsletter inveighed against liberals who “want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare,” adding, “Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”
Well, how about that? It seems like Mr. Paul’s publication has a long history of really nasty racism.
“But he says he never wrote those articles and did not realize what was going into the newsletter…” you say?
You’re right! He does say that! Dozens of racist articles over several years and somehow nobody ever mentioned it to him? That’s his excuse? Spare me! That’s about as plausible as Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin converting to Islam and donning burkas.
But nowhere is Ron Paul’s barely concealed racism more evident than in his full throated rejection of the Civil Rights Act. Because it infringed on people’s “freedom.”
From the May 13 episode of Hardball with Chris Matthew:
MATTHEWS: But you would have voted for the — you know you — oh, come on. Honestly, Congressman, you were not for the ’64 civil rights bill.
PAUL: Because — because of the property rights element, not because it got rid of the Jim Crow law.
MATTHEWS: Right. The guy who owns a bar says, no blacks allowed, you say that’s fine. … This was a local shop saying no blacks allowed. You say that should be legal?
PAUL: That’s — that’s ancient history. That’s ancient history. That’s over and done with. […]
Discrimination based on race is ancient history? I wish I could live in that world! That would be awesome! There would be no Tea Party, no GOP, no Fox News. What a nice place that would be…
But for those of us still connected to reality, Mr. Paul’s assertions are that of a lunatic. Right Wing fanatics protest the building of a mosque in their town and that is a Constitutionally protected right. What kind of person can see that and thinks “Eh, nobody would ban Negroes from their establishment if they were allowed to. People just aren’t like that anymore.”?
The freedom to discriminate is not the kind of freedom this country stands for anymore. In that, at least, Mr. Paul is correct. It’s ancient history and we will not allow Right Wing bigots to turn back the clock to “The Good Ol’ Days.”