Is Ron Paul a Bigot?
| Tue Jan. 8, 2008 2:37 PM PST
James Kirchick has the Paulites in a fuss. The onetime Marty Peretz assistant (and, some say, political doppelganger) is now a newly-minted TNR assistant editor, and his latest effort is a revealing investigation into Ron Paul's past.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
The basic story, according to Kirchick, is that a bunch of un-bylined newsletters published under Paul's name (e.g., "The Ron Paul Political Report") since the late 70s are filled with homophobic, racist, antisemitic, and otherwise distasteful invective; paranoia; conspiracy theorizing; and personal attacks.
(Mother Jones' own Josh Harkinson wrote a feature of Dr. Paul that we published online in December. Read it here.)
Dr. Paul, to his credit, quickly issued a response accepting "moral responsibility" for the newsletters but denying he wrote them:
The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts....
...This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.
When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publically taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.
So Paul denies actually writing the newsletters. "A lot of [the newsletters] he did not see," a spokesman told Kirchick. "Most of the incendiary stuff, no." That seems awfully convenient, and the argument that there are no bylines and the quotes don't "sound like" Paul sounds like wishful thinking. After all, the newsletters have names like "Paul's Freedom Report," "Ron Paul Political Report," and "The Ron Paul Survival Report," and a lot of them are written in the first person, which, as Kirchick points out, implies authorship. Kirchick's best point is that, whatever the source, the publications "seem designed to create the impression that they were written by him--and reflected his views."
I'm not sure what to think. It is of course quite possible that the newsletters were, in fact, being published without Dr. Paul's knowledge or oversight. But even that less-horrifying scenario is enough to makes me seriously question Dr. Paul's judgment. Combined with the stories about Ron Paul's connections to neo-nazis, it makes for a pretty scary narrative. Anyway, Kirchick was on MSNBC yesterday to make his case to Tucker Carlson that the Paul campaign's denials don't hold water:
Were you convinced?
Comments
Submitted by Marc Scott Emery (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 4:10 PM PST.
For the factual record however, Ron Paul has never been accused of saying a racist remark to anyone in his 20 years in Congress. There are no witnesses anywhere who have ever heard Ron Paul utter a remark that was racist in any way. He has never said a racist word in the Congressional Record nor has anyone ever recorded a racist remark from Dr. Paul.
No one in the Black Caucus in Congress has ever heard Ron Paul utter a racist remark.
For the words attributed to a 1992 newsletter, Ron Paul has apologized for these words that appeared in an issue of his newsletter, but he did not write them. He particularly regrets a remark made about Congresswoman Barbara Jordan, who Ron Paul very much liked and admired. Ron Paul has never referred to Martin Luther King, Jr. in any disparaging way, and regards MLK, Jr. and Rosa Parks as heroes of his.
Ron Paul has delivered babies to black families, hispanic families, illegal immigrants, and all people. He even did so at no charge for poorer black, hispanic, white and illegal immigrants.
No black person has ever made the claim Dr. Paul was ever unkind or racist in any way, and this man has led a very public life from 1974 to 2008, 31 years!
If you have watched Dr. Paul, you know he has never adhered to any racist beliefs, actions, words or statements, and no one has ever heard him utter anything like a racist remark.
After 31 years, if no one can say they heard it, or videotaped it, or were victim of it, then it doesn't exist. The "racist" label cannot apply.
Not only is Dr. Paul no racist, but quite the contrary, he is truly the presidential candidate that cares most deeply about African-Americans, moreso than any other candidate, without question.
Currently there are 600,000 African-Americans in US jails and prisons for crimes under the draconian drug laws, laws that Dr. Paul has always opposed, voted against and condemns today in his Presidential bid. Dr. Paul is well aware in his television speeches that African-Americans are being punished and targeted in the federal drug war.
Dr. Paul would pardon all non-violent drug offenders, release them from prison, restore their voting rights, and stop jailing any further African-Americans for their lifestyle. Over an 8 year Presidency, Ron Paul would save up to 4 million African-Americans from the awful fate that awaits hundreds of thousands of African-Americans each year!
Consider not just four million black men and women spared excruciating jail sentences for their non-violent association with drugs, but their family members, an additional 15 ? 20 million African-Americans, would not have their families torn asunder by these pernicious and unconstitutional drug laws that act as a toxic combination of the Jim Crow laws of the old south melded with the Inquisition and the witch-burnings.
Ron Paul will keep black families together by ending Prohibition and the federal war on drugs. Ron Paul as President will liberate and emancipate more African-Americans than even Lincoln did in 1863, in a way that Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, John McCain, and all the others cannot and will not.
Submitted by Marc Scott Emery (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 4:10 PM PST.
For the factual record however, Ron Paul has never been accused of saying a racist remark to anyone in his 20 years in Congress. There are no witnesses anywhere who have ever heard Ron Paul utter a remark that was racist in any way. He has never said a racist word in the Congressional Record nor has anyone ever recorded a racist remark from Dr. Paul.
No one in the Black Caucus in Congress has ever heard Ron Paul utter a racist remark.
For the words attributed to a 1992 newsletter, Ron Paul has apologized for these words that appeared in an issue of his newsletter, but he did not write them. He particularly regrets a remark made about Congresswoman Barbara Jordan, who Ron Paul very much liked and admired. Ron Paul has never referred to Martin Luther King, Jr. in any disparaging way, and regards MLK, Jr. and Rosa Parks as heroes of his.
Ron Paul has delivered babies to black families, hispanic families, illegal immigrants, and all people. He even did so at no charge for poorer black, hispanic, white and illegal immigrants.
No black person has ever made the claim Dr. Paul was ever unkind or racist in any way, and this man has led a very public life from 1974 to 2008, 31 years!
If you have watched Dr. Paul, you know he has never adhered to any racist beliefs, actions, words or statements, and no one has ever heard him utter anything like a racist remark.
After 31 years, if no one can say they heard it, or videotaped it, or were victim of it, then it doesn't exist. The "racist" label cannot apply.
Not only is Dr. Paul no racist, but quite the contrary, he is truly the presidential candidate that cares most deeply about African-Americans, moreso than any other candidate, without question.
Currently there are 600,000 African-Americans in US jails and prisons for crimes under the draconian drug laws, laws that Dr. Paul has always opposed, voted against and condemns today in his Presidential bid. Dr. Paul is well aware in his television speeches that African-Americans are being punished and targeted in the federal drug war.
Dr. Paul would pardon all non-violent drug offenders, release them from prison, restore their voting rights, and stop jailing any further African-Americans for their lifestyle. Over an 8 year Presidency, Ron Paul would save up to 4 million African-Americans from the awful fate that awaits hundreds of thousands of African-Americans each year!
Consider not just four million black men and women spared excruciating jail sentences for their non-violent association with drugs, but their family members, an additional 15 ? 20 million African-Americans, would not have their families torn asunder by these pernicious and unconstitutional drug laws that act as a toxic combination of the Jim Crow laws of the old south melded with the Inquisition and the witch-burnings.
Ron Paul will keep black families together by ending Prohibition and the federal war on drugs. Ron Paul as President will liberate and emancipate more African-Americans than even Lincoln did in 1863, in a way that Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, John McCain, and all the others cannot and will not.
First off, Kirchick's piece is riddled with basic factual errors. The major one being that he states that Ron Paul was an Army surgeon. A simple piece of research shows that Dr. Paul was an Air Force flight surgeon.
If Kirchick can't be trusted with simple empirical facts, I don't trust his conceptual thinkning.
Secondly, he made no attempt to contact Dr. Paul's campaign for any information.
Thirdly, Kirchick has made far more racist statements about Arabs and Muslims with his constant pushing of the Neocon 'Islamofascist' meme. It's the height of hypocrisy for a racist such as Kirchick to attempt to lay the label at someone else's feet.
This is a simple smear piece. Anyone that gives it credence is worse than what the smear is attempting to imply.
Ron Paul is not a bigot, but if he was a libertarian bigot is nothing to worry about, because they won't use the power of the government to enforce their bigotry. It is the Republican and Democratic bigots one needs to look out for.
Submitted by The Truth (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 2:53 PM PST.
Jamie Kirchick (author of the New Republic story):
"I don't think Ron Paul is a homophobe; I'm just cynical and enjoy getting supporters of political candidates riled up. If you were a Giuliani guy I'd have called him a fascist."
http://gays-for-ron.blogspot.com/2008/01/jamie-kirchick-i-dont-think-ron...
What a shameful pack of lies. Most of this "proof" was not written by Dr. Paul, but by a staff writer who was fired for writing such hate-filled nonsense. These claims have been disproven and even the more liberal press has already admitted as much.
Regurgitating old lies on the eve of the New Hampshire primary is an obvious smear attempt by those lacking a modicum of integrity.
As usual, the whole story is much more interesting, but not nearly as sensational. The truth loses another round.
This slam has been brought up repeatedly over the years. It's consistently been proven false. Those who work closely with Ron Paul have repeatedly said these sort of remarks are completely out of character and go against all of Ron Paul's personal and political principles. I don't buy it for a minute.
This is depressing. Depressing only because this story has been rewritten repeatedly. But, so many actions Ron Paul has been taken are to the contrary, obviously there is a motive since it was released ON THE DAY of the New Hampshire primary, he's spoken out on racism before, Von Mises is a Jew, and he studies flippin' Ghandi. Please.
The fact that this has been brought up again is, actually, disgusting. He really, really is a peaceful guy and it's depressing as hell that America's hope is about to be smothered by America's fascism. It's easy to harass a guy when he's the only one saying something different.
- http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/01/08/ron-paul-race-smear-erased/
- http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/01/ron-paul-re...
Only The Mentally Minuscule Take Words Out Of Context To Bend Them To Their Preconceived Paradigm.
If you refuse to look at the actions of a man for temperance of judgment then you truly castrate you mind and make it easy to arrive at wrong conclusion.
The weak minded are easily led by the bridle of emotion.
Racism is not consistent with the philosophy expressed by Ron Paul. He has rebutted these accusations from the same distortions in previous days.
Ron Paul is the only candidate that I would trust with my money and my family's safety.
I Vote For Virtue; I Vote For Ron Paul !!!
Ron Paul is the black man's best friend. As a criminal defense attorney I see how the War on Drugs has damaged the inner city. The laws disproportionately imprison black men for non violent drug possession. Ron Paul will end the incarceration for what he believes is a medical problem, not a legal problem. In every way Ron Paul stands for liberty and equality. In case you guys have missed it, our next big fund raiser is on Dr. Martin Luther King's birthday in his honer as an advocate of non violent Revolution. We are not raciest or homophobes. I have always respected this publication, I now have second thoughts since you are spreading this propaganda!
I don't think that Ron Paul is a bigot, but as a big Ron Paul supporter, I'm really upset by the fact that he hasn't said who actually wrote the newsletter articles. I want to know who they are and if they were still connected to Ron Paul's congressional or presidential campaigns after they wrote those horrible articles. I get the feeling that Ron Paul is sacrificing transparency to protect his friends, which makes me nervous about him being president. The whole affair is a heartbreaking political hit piece, but I still want answers.
Lots of people that have their names on the front of newsletters and magazines don't write everything (or anything) in them. Every once in a while newsletters get out of control without their creators there and this is one of those cases. Does anyone assume that Steve Forbes writes all of Forbes magazine? Or that Oprah writes all of her namesake magazine? Paul is a civil libertarian, believing that all people are created equally and should be treated as such. These kinds of comments and smear stories are purely political.
ARLINGTON, Va.--(Business Wire)--In response to an article published by The New Republic, Ron Paul
issued the following statement:
"The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do
not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never
uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.
"In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that
we should only be concerned with the content of a person's character,
not the color of their skin. As I stated on the floor of the U.S.
House on April 20, 1999: 'I rise in great respect for the courage and
high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of
individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.'
"This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade.
It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the
day of the New Hampshire primary.
"When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a
newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several
writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have
publically taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention
to what went out under my name."
Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee
Jesse Benton, 703-248-9115
Submitted by Galileo Galilei (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 3:37 PM PST.
Those who support the racist war on drugs are the real racists. We have millions of young black men locked up for victimless "crimes".
Many more had their property seized, their families destroyed, and a life marred with a criminal record.
The war on drugs is unconstitutional, immoral, illegal, racist, and a waste of our taxpayer money.
Ron Paul will pardon everyone ever convicted of a federal drug crime and end this insanity. Ron Paul is not a racist.
The real racists who support the war on drugs are Clinton, McCain, Obama, Edwards, Giuliani, Huckabee, Romney, and Thompson.
Submitted by capt (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 3:42 PM PST.
Are we really suppose to believe Ron Paul didn't write nor read any of the 20 selections from his newsletters and the stuff written on his letterhead?
The sign of a cult is when dear leader is faultless and any question of the figurehead is a smear, taken out of context or fabricated.
Go Figure.
Jamie whats-his-name has no credibility and can't even get his facts straight, so his allegations, long debunked, lacking actual evidence such as copies of the offending articles, have no credibiluty as well. There are plenty of Dr. Paul's words and actions over his life, personal, medical, and political, that back up the fact that Dr. Paul is no racist and no bigot. Teh same cannot be said for Jamie.
The "Paul is a racist" story was retracted by the New York Times (an unusual event in and of itself) as unsupported allegations by a white supremacist intent on damaging the Paul campaign. NYT investigated and found these claims to be false.
Submitted by capt (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 3:50 PM PST.
USAF,
Go look at the Pdf's yourself.
"The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments."
~ Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900), The Gay Science, section 191
The establishment will do anything to protect itself. How many times do we need to go over these "Newletters"? Thye have been investigated several times, yet they still get thrown out there in the same newscycle as the NH Primaries. Ask the man who was somomized by a broomstick under Rudy's tenure in NYC aboput racism, before trotting this old horse out again.
Submitted by capt (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 3:52 PM PST.
The most AMAZING feature:
All of those darned Ron Paul detractors were planning this since the mid 1980's.
That makes sense.
Submitted by NoMoreBlatherDotCom (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 4:01 PM PST.
In addition to the other problems with the article mentioned above, here are a few more:
http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/007378.html
Perhaps someone can leave a comment there with what we knew in 1990.
Submitted by Jason (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 4:03 PM PST.
From Thomas di Lorenzo: "Well, I was at that secession conference and presented a paper there. It was sponsored by the Mises Institute, which has nothing to do with Confederates, neo or otherwise, as anyone who surveyed the Institute's programs on its web site (www.mises.org) would know. The PFY (Pimply-Faced Youth) did not bother because he is only interested in slandering Ron Paul, not in being a serious journalist. "
Even Kirchik admitted, that Ron Paul has never, ever, not even once, said anything remotely racist. He also admitted that the inflammatory newsletters were written when Paul was NOT active in politics (when he was busy attending to his medical practice).
I hope no one buys into the fallacious arguments of racism. He just isn't that kind of guy. If he were, he'd say it, because he doesn't care what anyone thinks.
We only have one chance left for liberty and then it may be to late. Under the "Patriot Act" we have imprisoned individuals without allowing them to know what crimes they have been accused of. We have tortured them and deprived them of the Writ of Habeas Corpus. We have denied them access to an attorney. They can be imprisoned until the "war" is over. This can happen to any of you if the government calls you an "enemy combatant." Can the only candidate that intends to end these practices and restore these liberties be a collectivist, that disparages individuals according to their group? How can anyone give thought to this propaganda that contradicts the principals that this honorable man has stood for alone on the the hill for twenty years with the only voice that protected our Constitution? This Revolution is not for the week or simple minded. We knew as we gathered strength that these attacks would come. We know what kind of man we picked for our leader, let us not let him face these attacks alone!
Submitted by Marc Scott Emery (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 4:10 PM PST.
For the factual record however, Ron Paul has never been accused of saying a racist remark to anyone in his 20 years in Congress. There are no witnesses anywhere who have ever heard Ron Paul utter a remark that was racist in any way. He has never said a racist word in the Congressional Record nor has anyone ever recorded a racist remark from Dr. Paul.
No one in the Black Caucus in Congress has ever heard Ron Paul utter a racist remark.
For the words attributed to a 1992 newsletter, Ron Paul has apologized for these words that appeared in an issue of his newsletter, but he did not write them. He particularly regrets a remark made about Congresswoman Barbara Jordan, who Ron Paul very much liked and admired. Ron Paul has never referred to Martin Luther King, Jr. in any disparaging way, and regards MLK, Jr. and Rosa Parks as heroes of his.
Ron Paul has delivered babies to black families, hispanic families, illegal immigrants, and all people. He even did so at no charge for poorer black, hispanic, white and illegal immigrants.
No black person has ever made the claim Dr. Paul was ever unkind or racist in any way, and this man has led a very public life from 1974 to 2008, 31 years!
If you have watched Dr. Paul, you know he has never adhered to any racist beliefs, actions, words or statements, and no one has ever heard him utter anything like a racist remark.
After 31 years, if no one can say they heard it, or videotaped it, or were victim of it, then it doesn't exist. The "racist" label cannot apply.
Not only is Dr. Paul no racist, but quite the contrary, he is truly the presidential candidate that cares most deeply about African-Americans, moreso than any other candidate, without question.
Currently there are 600,000 African-Americans in US jails and prisons for crimes under the draconian drug laws, laws that Dr. Paul has always opposed, voted against and condemns today in his Presidential bid. Dr. Paul is well aware in his television speeches that African-Americans are being punished and targeted in the federal drug war.
Dr. Paul would pardon all non-violent drug offenders, release them from prison, restore their voting rights, and stop jailing any further African-Americans for their lifestyle. Over an 8 year Presidency, Ron Paul would save up to 4 million African-Americans from the awful fate that awaits hundreds of thousands of African-Americans each year!
Consider not just four million black men and women spared excruciating jail sentences for their non-violent association with drugs, but their family members, an additional 15 20 million African-Americans, would not have their families torn asunder by these pernicious and unconstitutional drug laws that act as a toxic combination of the Jim Crow laws of the old south melded with the Inquisition and the witch-burnings.
Ron Paul will keep black families together by ending Prohibition and the federal war on drugs. Ron Paul as President will liberate and emancipate more African-Americans than even Lincoln did in 1863, in a way that Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, John McCain, and all the others cannot and will not.
Dave Weigel at Reason has an interview with Paul from a couple of hours ago on the TNR hit piece:
Ron Paul: All it is--it's old stuff. It's all been rehashed. It's all political stuff.
reason: Why don't you release all the old letters?
Paul: I don't even have copies of them, because it's ancient history.
reason: Do you stand by what appears in the letters? Did you write these...?
Paul: No. I've discussed all of that in the past. It's just old news.
reason: Did the New Republic talk to you before they ran it?
Paul: No, I never talked to them.
reason: What do you think of Martin Luther King?
Paul: Martin Luther King is one of my heroes because he believed in nonviolence and that's a libertarian principle. Rosa Parks is the same way. Gandhi, I admire. Because they're willing to take on the government, they were willing to take on bad laws. So I believe in civil disobedience if you understand the consequences. Martin Luther King was a great person because he did that and he changed America for the better because of that.
reason: You didn't write the derogatory things about him in the letter?
Paul: No.
(Sorry for the double post. I wanted to say something and was using my mothers computer) The so called letters from 88 to 92 were written when Ron Paul was not in office. Around that time Ross Perot was running for president and I was involved in his groups. I spent time in Texas and heard of Dr. Paul and no one that ever knew him ever accused him of being a racist or bigot. He has more black supporters then any Republican. This is nothing more then Propaganda!
Submitted by rhys (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 4:28 PM PST.
"[Paul] speaks in code. He is a transmitter. He'll say certain things that don't appear overtly racist, but these communities know exectly what he's talking about." - Kirchick
Who's he conspiricay theorist?
Again Ron Paul stands tall....I am absolutely appalled at the lengths that network media and news outlets will go to in order to hurt this guy.
By God I hope that America is ready when the votes are tallied and Ron Paul is the next president.
It will be a great day for us!
BTW Ron--Everyone here in Colorado is pullin for ya! We dont want anymore liars and murdering treasonous scum in our midst anymore.
I can comfortably represent the views of over a hundred Coloradans who are with you all the way baby!
Does Jamie Kirchick do this to all the current candidates?
...or does he just have it in for Ron Paul?
The guy(Kirchick) trips over himself repeatedly. Almost giddy with his 5 minutes of fame.
...maybe he is secretly a Ron Paul supporter that has discovered a way to get Faux news to utter the name Ron Paul.
I wonder how many Faux employees are Ron Paul supporters? ...and how often they cringe when ordered to "cover up" any Ron Paul news.
Ron Paul supporters, be of stern stuff - of course, they will smear Dr. Paul with such charges - a conservative like Dr. Paul attracts adherents of all stripes and some of them will be racists.
Ron Paul is an adherent of Austrian economics; his economic gurus are Jewish. He clearly states that he believes that people should be viewed as individuals and not as a member of groups based on superficial physical characteristics. He has been very clear on this.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you...
When you run for office, be prepared that you will be held accountable for your statement that Dr Paul is a Racist, a Homophobe, and Antisemite. Hope you can back it in a debate with him. I wouldn't want to be in your shoes debating him on those issues.Having worked for an Israeli company (Feuchtwanger Industries), I know firsthand that there is more than a grain of truth in those quotes.
Submitted by Ron Lawl (not verified) on Tue Jan. 8, 2008 11:18 PM PST.
I get tired of dealing with the same Paultard talking points over and over again, so I created a FAQ that deals with the most frequent denials regarding Ron Paul and his newsletter:
http://ronpaulsurvivalreport.blogspot.com/2007/12/faq-ron-paul-and-his-r...
Ron Paul, as I have heard him speak on this matter, says that he believes that every person should be judged individually and on their own merit, not as part of a group, i.e. race, religion, etc. This view doesn't coincide with the label racist or bigot. Perhaps this concept is too large for some to grasp, given the way this country has put each of us in a group based on our sexual orientation, our sex, our age, our color, our religion, our political beliefs and income levels. So sad for America.
In this video, Kirchik comes off as an arrogant young punk. Give him another 20 years to mellow out and see that life isn't as simple as he thinks.
No way do I believe Ron Paul is a racist. And I absolutely believe Ron Paul will defend the 1st Amendment, no matter how much he disagrees with the content of what someone is saying.
"An obvious smear campaign designed to effect the election"
For something to be a smear it has to be untrue.
There's a reason that people who monitor extreme-right, racist and conspiracy theorist groups have noted everyone they monitor is behind Ron Paul.
There's a reason David Duke supports his candidacy and they have "get out the vote" calls for him on StormFront.
There's a reason racist groups have been throwing dinners in his honour for years.
Do you think that reason is they all predicted the future and wanted to provide support for the claims of 1 writer in 2008 ?
"our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists -- and they can be identified by the color of their skin."
The Ron Paul Political Report 1992
Just another quote (about African Americans) from the newsletter his friends put out under his name for several decades, from which the content comes as complete surprise as does his coincidental popularity with white supremacists.
Try naming a 2nd person you would let claim the same thing. A writer who would let their friends ghostwrite under their name, for decades, without being aware of the content, let alone approve of it. Just 1.
"Well, I was at that secession conference and presented a paper there. It was sponsored by the Mises Institute, which has nothing to do with Confederates, neo or otherwise, as anyone who surveyed the Institute's programs on its web site (www.mises.org) would know."
And I guess when Ron Paul writes for the neo-confederate Dixie Daily News it's also completely unrelated to their neo-confederate slant too.
You guys should get together and publish your own newsletter: "101 excuses for why you weren't a racist for attending a Klan rally".
I'm presuming that lame, laughable excuses can be enjoyed by all and not just Ron.
Submitted by capt (not verified) on Wed Jan. 9, 2008 5:37 AM PST.
"101 excuses for why you weren't a racist for attending a Klan rally"
HA! Too effin funny.
(possible excuse)
The neo-nazis have the best
food. . . .
Tee hee!
Submitted by Ron (not verified) on Wed Jan. 9, 2008 6:50 AM PST.
James Kweerdick is obviously a plant who's been paid to make up this crap. "he is a transmitter who talks in code?" are you f*cking kidding me? How can anyone take this crap seriously?
Wanda---you said that SO well!...it's the same reason I don't worry about little things I don't agree with Ron Paul, because he WOULDN'T use his power as President to force his personal beliefs on us UNconstitutionally (and, as you bring up, it is why people SHOULD be wary of personal beliefs of those who do NOT uphold the Constitution). THANK YOU, I've not heard this aspect off "what Paul thinks" written about nearly enough.
