1. “Order was only restored in LA when it came time for the blacks to collect their welfare checks. The ‘poor’ lined up at the Post Office to get their handouts (since there were no deliveries) — and then complained about slow service.” -Report on LA riots, June 1992posted by empath at 5:55 PM on December 31, 2011 [159 favorites]
2. “I’ve been told not to talk, but these stooges don’t scare me. Threats or no threats, I’ve laid bare the coming race war in our big cities. The federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS (my training as a physician helps me see through this one.)” -Direct mail ad promoting Paul’s newsletters, written from Paul’s perspective, 1993
3. “It is human nature that like attracts likes. But whites are not allowed to express this same human impulse. Except in a de facto sense, there can be no white schools, white clubs, or white neighborhoods. The political system demands white integration, while allowing black segregation.” -‘The Disappearing White Majority,’ January 1993
4. “I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities. They could also not be as promiscuous. Is it any wonder the AIDS epidemic started after they ‘came out of the closet,’ and started hyper-promiscuous sodomy?” -June 1990
5. “Whether [the 1993 World Trade Center bombing] was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.” -‘The New York Bombing,’ April 1993
6. “An ex-cop I know advises that if you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example).” ‘Blast ‘Em’, October 1992
7. “The opposition will do its best to provoke some precipitous action on on our part to discredit us and our cause. Follow the orders of Captain Parker at Lexington: Stand your ground. Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.” -Militia’s 10-point advice to other militias, January 1995.
8. “When the New Money is imposed, every American family must have a Survival Kit of highly liquid, small-denomination silver and gold coins for hand-to-hand use. The Ron Paul Survival Kit — now an industry standard — comes in an official World War II US Army ammo holder.” -Ad for ‘The Original Famous Ron Paul Survival Kit,’ undated
9. “[Martin Luther King, Jr.], the FBI files reveal, was not only a world-class adulterer, he also seduced underage girls and boys…And we are supposed to honor this ‘Christian minister’ and lying socialist satyr with a holiday that puts him on par with George Washington?” -December 1990
10. “It turns out that the brilliant [Bobby Fischer], who has all the makings of an American hero, is very politically incorrect on Jewish questions, for which he will never be forgiven, even though he is a Jew. Thus we are not supposed to herald him as the world’s greatest chess player.” -November 1992.
Except for the part about the coming race war.Blazecock Pileon, it's fear-mongering for the Democrats to say this? Paul says this himself. We're going to play "Bush = Obama" now? Really? That's ping-pong at best and disingenuous at worst.
furiousxgeorge: This was a perfect time to not RTFA and prove its pointYeah, no kidding. I read this earlier today (it was linked from some other article I'd read that was linked from a MeFi thread I think) and the fact that empath's hysterics were the second comment pretty much proved Greenwald's point. The point being that, in lieu of admitting that Obama's stances on the issues cited is fucking abominable, or at least being honest about the "Obama is complete shit on toast on most issues, but he's better than Ron Paul on these other issues" compromise of liberals and progressives... we'll instead be treated to a list of all the ways Paul is a nightmare, as a way of scaring progressives into voting for Obama again- and not allowing anyone to point out that Obama's stances are piss-poor in many ways. There's an old saying in Texas: fool me once, shame... shame on you. Fool me twice... can't get fooled again!
even though I don’t support him for President, Ron Paul is the only major candidate from either party advocating crucial views on vital issues that need to be heard, and so his candidacy generates important benefits.Greenwald goes very far out of his way to say that he's not endorsing Paul as a candidate, but he spends a LOT of time talking about how specific instances of Paul's discourse about certain narrow policies are better than Obama's, complete with video exerpts. If that's not an example of holding up Paul as an example of how things should be done, then I'm completely misunderstanding the point of both this article and this thread.
Whatever else one wants to say, it is indisputably true that Ron Paul is the only political figure with any sort of a national platform — certainly the only major presidential candidate in either party — who advocates policy views on issues that liberals and progressives have long flamboyantly claimed are both compelling and crucial.
...
The parallel reality — the undeniable fact — is that all of these listed heinous views and actions from Barack Obama have been vehemently opposed and condemned by Ron Paul: and among the major GOP candidates, only by Ron Paul. For that reason, Paul’s candidacy forces progressives to face the hideous positions and actions of their candidate, of the person they want to empower for another four years. If Paul were not in the race or were not receiving attention, none of these issues would receive any attention because all the other major GOP candidates either agree with Obama on these matters or hold even worse views.
...
Still, for better or worse, Paul — alone among the national figures in both parties — is able and willing to advocate views that Americans urgently need to hear. That he is doing so within the Republican Party makes it all the more significant.
But (you might say) if the result is the same–if, whatever the twisted origins of his position, Ron Paul takes is on the side of the angels on certain narrowly framed issues–does it really matter how he gets there?posted by gerryblog at 7:19 PM on December 31, 2011 [28 favorites]
Short answer: yes. Slightly less short answer: hell yes. Longer answer: of course, because his opposition to (Federal) government overreach is inseparable from his opposition to Roe v. Wade and equal protection enforcement and environmental regulation and…well, every single goddamn thing that matters to liberals except the tiny set of narrow issues on which, in stopped-clock fashion, Paul has arrived at the right position through the wrong process.
Kid Charlemagne: While there is no physical law preventing Paul from doing those things, I suspect the best you're going to get is a blanket pardon for all non-violent drug offenses committed by white heterosexual men who could afford an equity stake on someone's giant floating concrete island pipe dreamBut even that would be a win, Kid Charlemagne; unless you're talking only of a "Marc Rich" style pardon- and why would he do that, those people aren't even in jail for drug offenses- then if he actually did pardon tens of thousands of white people explicitly by race for their drug offenses, the political pressure would shift for him to issue a similar pardon for other black and hispanic drug offenders. I'm fairly certain once a pardon is issued, even the President can't "undo" that (I'm assuming, although I suppose that's never been tested).
Sailormom: I am not posting in a Ron Paul thread on new years eveHa ha, jokes on... oh wait, you were probably being funny.
"I want to clarify that my administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens," Obama wrote. "Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My administration will interpret section 1021 [of the bill] in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law."posted by empath at 1:35 PM on January 1
"While this law technically allows me to detain American citizens indefinitely without trial, I promise my administration won't abuse it! Scout's honor! Also, it doesn't expire when I leave office."posted by indubitable at 1:46 PM on January 1 [14 favorites]
« Older It's New Years Eve (or already the first day of th... | Murray Siple, a snowboarder an... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Ironmouth at 5:53 PM on December 31, 2011 [33 favorites]