Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Former Ron Paul staffer tries to defend Ron Paul. I believe the appropriate phrase here is "EPIC FAIL!"

"Hey, hey! Stop helping me!"
Courtesy of Balloon Juice:

Is Ron Paul a “racist.” In short, No. I worked for the man for 12 years, pretty consistently. I never heard a racist word expressed towards Blacks or Jews come out of his mouth. Not once. And understand, I was his close personal assistant. It’s safe to say that I was with him on the campaign trail more than any other individual, whether it be traveling to Fairbanks, Alaska or Boston, Massachusetts in the presidential race, or across the congressional district to San Antonio or Corpus Christi, Texas. 

He has frequently hired blacks for his office staff, starting as early as 1988 for the Libertarian campaign. He has also hired many Hispanics, including his current District staffer Dianna Gilbert-Kile.

(Well hell if he actually hired black folk and Hispanic folk, than he couldn't possibly be a racist right? Yeah right.)

One caveat: He is what I would describe as “out of touch,” with both Hispanic and Black culture. Ron is far from being the hippest guy around. He is completely clueless when it comes to Hispanic and Black culture, particularly Mexican-American culture. And he is most certainly intolerant of Spanish and those who speak strictly Spanish in his presence, (as are a number of Americans, nothing out of the ordinary here.)

(So he has no problem with Hispanic people so long as they don't speak their native tongue in his presence. That is not just "unhip" that is "intolerant.")

Is Ron Paul an Anti-Semite? Absolutely No. As a Jew, (half on my mother’s side), I can categorically say that I never heard anything out of his mouth, in hundreds of speeches I listened too over the years, or in my personal presence that could be called, “Anti-Semite.” No slurs. No derogatory remarks. 

He is however, most certainly Anti-Israel, and Anti-Israeli in general. He wishes the Israeli state did not exist at all. He expressed this to me numerous times in our private conversations. His view is that Israel is more trouble than it is worth, specifically to the America taxpayer. He sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs. 

(THAT is certainly NOT going to sit well with the Republican voters.)


Again, American Jews, Ron Paul has no problem with. In fact, there were a few Jews in our congressional district, and Ron befriended them with the specific intent of winning their support for our campaign. (One synagogue in Victoria, and tiny one in Wharton headed by a well-known Jewish lawyer). 

(WTF? He pretended to like some Jews so that they would support his campaign? And this is a plus?)

*** 

Is Ron Paul a homo-phobe? Well, yes and no. He is not all bigoted towards homosexuals. He supports their rights to do whatever they please in their private lives. He is however, personally uncomfortable around homosexuals, no different from a lot of older folks of his era. 

(That one speaks for itself.)


There were two incidents that I will cite, for the record. One that involved me directly, and another that involved another congressional staffer or two. 

(I am revealing this for the very first time, and I’m sure Jim Peron will be quite surprised to learn this.) 

In 1988, Ron had a hardcore Libertarian supporter, Jim Peron, Owner of Laissez Faire Books in San Francisco. Jim set up a magnificent 3-day campaign swing for us in the SF Bay Area. Jim was what you would call very openly Gay. But Ron thought the world of him. For 3 days we had a great time trouncing from one campaign event to another with Jim’s Gay lover. The atmosphere was simply jovial between the four of us. (As an aside we also met former Cong. Pete McCloskey during this campaign trip.) We used Jim’s home/office as a “base.” Ron pulled me aside the first time we went there, and specifically instructed me to find an excuse to excuse him to a local fast food restaurant so that he could use the bathroom. He told me very clearly, that although he liked Jim, he did not wish to use his bathroom facilities. I chided him a bit, but he sternly reacted, as he often did to me, Eric, just do what I say. Perhaps “sternly” is an understatement. Ron looked at me directly, and with a very angry look in his eye, and shouted under his breath: “Just do what I say NOW.” 

(Makes sense. Paul being a doctor knows that if he risks using the bathroom of a known homosexual he will emerge completely covered in the "teh gay."  Next thing you know he will be flaunting a feather boa and singing show tunes on the campaign trail.)


*** 

Ron Paul is most assuredly an isolationist. He denies this charge vociferously. But I can tell you straight out, I had countless arguments/discussions with him over his personal views. For example, he strenuously does not believe the United States had any business getting involved in fighting Hitler in WWII. He expressed to me countless times, that “saving the Jews,” was absolutely none of our business. When pressed, he often times brings up conspiracy theories like FDR knew about the attacks of Pearl Harbor weeks before hand, or that WWII was just “blowback,” for Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy errors, and such.

So to be clear, this is a Ron Paul SUPPORTER.

Let's face it, Paul is NEVER going to be the GOP nominee and for every moron who truly believes this intolerant, racist asshole has a chance to win going up against the President I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you right here in Alaska.

59 comments:

  1. Anonymous2:44 AM

    The man is too old and rigid to be president. When he walked onto the stage recently, I thought he was gay. He has a "mincing" walk. I do not care if he is or not, but I DO care that he regards a large portion of the population as "less than" A president is elected to represent ALL of us, not just straight, white, wealthy ones. He could never hold up to the demands of the presidency. He walked off the set during an interview when asked about his newsletter, the one he did not know about!! Too touchy to be president. Another far cry from presidential material from the far right. This is becoming a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  2. angela3:42 AM

    hahahahahahahaha

    I wonder what ex-staffers who wouldn't try to defend Ron Paul would say about his scary ass?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous3:45 AM

    Whoa there Nellie!
    Ron PAul is not as horrinle as you make him out to be. Of alll the candidates, he is the best. That is not saying much, but he is. Iwent to a Ron Paul rally afew years ago as part of a 9/11 truth event. I keep telling everyone that therer were NO TEABAGGERS at this event.This is before teabaggers took over his following. He promised a new independent investifation into 9/11. Look, as americans this IS important. We should be spending money on infrastructure and education like Paul says, not wars. We need to audit the Federal REserve. You can't print money out of thin air...but we do.
    And this will piss alot fo people off, but I qork in a major metropolitan inner city....and there are abuses by minorities - African Americans that must be addressed if we are to survive economically. I'm talking welfare scams and disability scams...a dime a dozen. If that mkes me a racist for pointing it out, then on this topic I am a racists. I guess someone will tell me thst in KY or WVA there are white people pulling these same scams. Then I am racists against them too!

    ReplyDelete
  4. In defense of Ron Paul, he might have wanted not to use the homosexual bathroom because of concern re HIV.

    The idea that WWII was "blowback" from Wilson's policies and the terms of the Treaty of Versailles is a very reasonable one, in my opinion.

    In general, though, these remarks about the candidate are not going to make him more popular, so I see why you use the term "epic fail."

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous4:03 AM

    Didn't Ron Paul have some KKK involvement as a much younger man? I know that some of these white supremacist groups support him now and that he has never disavowed their support.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AJ Billings5:04 AM

    I have to say I used to be interested in Dr Paul as a candidate, as I am all in favor of using the US Constitution as the authority on government.

    SO many "conservative" politicians want to ignore two sections of it, namely:

    1st Amendment) "the congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion"

    and

    Article 6, paragraph 3) "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

    There's no doubt Dr Paul is in favor of separation of church and state.

    What is very disturbing is his recent signing the "Personhood pledge" along with Bachmann and Santorum

    http://tinyurl.com/cfymkt5

    He's crossed over in favor of legislating to the extreme position of making all abortions illegal, even in cases of rape, incest, life of the mother

    He lost many supporters by doing so, and much credibility.

    He can join Sharron Angle with her intolerant claim to fame about forcing 13 year old rape victims to endure a 9 month pregnancy because of someone's prejudice.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/29/sharron-angle-opposes-abo_n_629371.html

    She calls pregnancy after rape "God's plan"

    These people have never studied exactly how big a health risk pregnancy is to young girls, never mind the emotional trauma.

    Their positions on this are untenable, and utterly despicable

    ReplyDelete
  7. While I consider Paul to be a bit of a nut, and totally unelectable, I love how he shows up for every election cycle to mess with the GOP. While I think President Obama will probably be easily reelected, it doesn't hurt to have a GOP spoiler in the wings. I still despise Nader from the bottom of my heart for the spoiler role he played. I'd like to see Paul do the same for whoever the GOP nominee is.

    ReplyDelete
  8. angela5:46 AM

    Anon 3:45

    Really?

    Welfare scams by African Americans are destroying this country? And you work in
    a major metropolitan inner city? And if white people in KY or W. Virginia are doing it you are racist against them?

    There really are no words . . . . .
    Except, who the fuck let you out of psychiatric protective custody? STFU.

    And, stop typing in the dark you idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous6:15 AM

    I don't think this staffer knows the meaning of the word "trouncing." Perhaps he meant to say "flouncing" (that certainly would paint a very different picture).

    And, according to this staffer, Ron Paul is anti-Israel AND anti-Israeli. Well,

    anti-Israel...not necessarily anti-semetic.

    anti-Israeli...almost certainly anti-semetic.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Chella6:20 AM

    This makes me want to go to one of his campaign stops and shake his hand. Then I want to smile, lean in, and inform him that he has my queer cooties all over his hands, the cootie shot will not work on my super strain of homocooties, and that I hope he has a nice time passing my cooties onto all of those baby's he delivers.

    NOBODY expects teh ghey Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and love... Love and surprise.... Our two weapons are love and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are love, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to teh agenda.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as love, surprise.... I'll come in again.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous6:20 AM

    You can paint a person as a racist, or a homophobe, or anti-semite. Doesn't take much, just an opinion dropped here or there, and a phrase or old-writing misinterpreted here or there.

    It becomes what you make of it, but it is not true.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous6:26 AM

    Thanks, Gryphen.

    Ron Paul has no chance in hell of winning the Republican nomination much less be elected president.

    I wish I could enjoy the discomfiture his attempt to is causing the Repug establishment, but I can't, because I consider him just as much of a threat to the welfare of our country as I consider them.

    Thank dog Andrew Sullivan finally saw the light and withdrew his endorsement of the lying little bigot.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Chella6:28 AM

    Oh, don't forget about our nice red, commie uniforms.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous6:28 AM

    @3:45. Yes you're a racist and it's showing. Why not just automatically assume that it's Blacks who scam the system and educate yourself? If you took the time to do that you'd know that more Whites than Blacks are scammers of disability. Did you know about the Mormons who have gazillions of children that we taxpayers support? The AG shut down the welfare fraud investigation in Utah--would he have done so had the perpetrators been Black? What about the Appalachians in the border states getting welfare from two states? If you watch anything other than Fox News (whose viewers are 37% less informed) you should have heard about the Dr. and his wife in Seattle who lived in a million dollar home who scammed the welfare system for years. And last but not least, why is the budget for corporate welfare sooooo much greater than the welfare you denigrate? Racism and ignorance goes hand and hand, one feeds the other.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'm glad the truth is finally coming out about this hateful man. There's a poster on Twitter who is tweeting excerpts from RP's former newsletter: vile, vile, vile.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous6:58 AM

    Anon wrote:
    "You can paint a person as a racist, or a homophobe, or anti-semite. Doesn't take much, just an opinion dropped here or there, and a phrase or old-writing misinterpreted here or there.

    It becomes what you make of it, but it is not true."

    ------
    Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, allows the most vile, racist things to be expressed in his name like a duck...

    ReplyDelete
  17. Gasman7:05 AM

    I personally don't give a shit whether Ron Paul authored his racist serial screeds or not. However, since every single issue had his name emblazoned across the top, since many of the articles were written in his first person "voice", since he was listed as the publisher or editor on most editions, since his signature appeared on many of the letters, AND since he pocketed the MILLIONS earned from their sales, HE OWNS their content.

    At the very least, Paul saw fit to traffic in bigotry and the anti-government conspiracy theory bullshit that was all the rage in the GOP in the mid '90s. He was quite content to fear monger and race bait the ignorant morons and bigots who populated the lower ranks of the GOP.

    Anon @ 3:45,
    Fuck you. Paul is an obdurate bigot. If that sorry ass shithead is NOT a racist, then why has he kept the MILLIONS of dollars earned by the sale of his newsletters, money that is tainted by the stench of racism, homophobia, and anti-Semitism? He has given no less than 5 contradictory, mutually exclusive explanations for the newsletters and ALL of them have been laughably improbable in addition to being incompatible with the other explanations.

    And don't even bother trying to say he's not responsible, because he goddamn well is.

    Paul is a fucking bigot and since you blindly support him I must question the content of your character as well.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous7:20 AM

    Most Jewish voters are Democrats Gryphen and they support Israel. I think he is an anti-Semite. It's obvious he doesnt understand the history of Israel either.
    He is most certainly an anti-Semite and a racist.
    Many liberals are as ignorant as he is about the history of Israel. Why can't the Jewish people have one tiny spot to call their own in the universe? There are literally millions of miles of Arab land and they won't share it with the Palestinians. Before 1948 there were only Arabs and Jews in Israel, not Palestinians. They created that name when Israel was formed. The majority of "Palestinians" are from Jordan, who, by the way kicked them out of Jordan. Yet are they blamed? It's a very complicated situation and certainly the Palestinians deserve a home and to not have their human rights violated. I don't agree with all Israel does.
    But this was just sand with no economy before Israel. They are the ones who developed it.

    Most fervently anti-Israel people hate Jews and are anti-Semitic whether they admit it or not. And if you question them, you can see they have their own revisionist history in their minds. I'm NOT saying everyone who is critical of Israels policies is anti-Semitic.
    But people who outright say that Israel shouldn't exist it all typically do not know history and are completely unsympathetic to what Jews have gone through before the forming of Israel.

    Ron Paul hates anyone not like him and some of his supporters are as brainwashed as Sarahs.

    Please do not come at me with attacks anyone who is anti-Israel. This isn't the place to debate. I simply wanted to point out why most Jews (Democrats Gryphen) do not like Paul. Also if you watch Bill Mahrer who many of you like. This is exactly 100% what he says about the history of Israel. He even confronted the Queen of Jordan on why they kicked out the "Palestinians." That show is worth watching by anyone who doesn't like Israel and doesn't believe my version of history.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous7:26 AM

    Ron Paul does not support the American with Disabilities Act.

    As a disabled person, I find it reprehensible!

    Go read those newsletters he wrote. They are diagusting and filled with rants against blacks and Jews. He is trying to hide his KKK affiliations but these comments by this man are pure BS.

    The newsletters can be run. Not giving Israel money is one thing but saying it shouldn't exist is another. Warning of race wars and not supporting the civil rights acts is another. He thinks it's ok if a business owner will not allow blacks or gays into his business.

    He is a radical extremist with white supremacy beliefs and associations.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous7:27 AM

    Anon 6:28 AMEN

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anonymous7:28 AM

    READ HIS NEWSLETTERs.

    And you will see how disgusting they are.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous7:32 AM

    Paul seems to have gained a following for his free market economic theories, but there is no shortage of economists who are quick to shred many of his claims, including Paul Krugman (and the evidence backs Krugman). Paul's economic guru, Ludwig von Mises, an Austrian native, didn't dissuade his countrymen from implementing single-payer health and disability coverage, though his free market ideas are touted by conservatives here (most of whom can't explain any of it) as a reason not to. If more in Congress felt a bit more like Paul does about Israel, we'd certainly have better policies toward Israel that protect our interests, and we would not have enabled the Apartheid that exists there now. Coincidentally, our annual aid to Israel is equal to the cost to Israel of running their universal health care system, a scenario I now have to interpret as a covert action by sneaky Republican bastards to destroy Israel w/Socialism/Communism/Fascism while pretending to be their friends while waiting for JEEEEEEEEE-sus to come back and kill them. If you think Ron Paul is nuts, I agree. But wouldn't it be nice if that alone were enough to separate him from the rest of the Republicans?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous7:42 AM

    Dear Mr. Charley, Phd. (3:52): Do go back to school for yet another degree, this time in public health.

    Wild (and not afraid to poop) Tortoise

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous7:44 AM

    Gryphen, thanks for the additions.
    NOTE- Paul said saving the Jews was none of our business?

    Really?? What about human responsibility and decency?? So it's ok to let the Germans burn alive and gas six million Jews because it's " none of our business."
    Besides Jews, six million others were murdered including gays and the handicapped.

    Oh yeah it's not our business!! No wonder he didn't want the Jews having a safe haven in Israel.

    It's exactly because of selfish assholes like Paul that it took America too long to get into the war. As a result 12 million human beings were exterminated!

    Oh yeah he just loves Jews, blacks, gays and the disabled!!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous7:45 AM

    Thanks Gryphen. I appreciate your post.

    When a friend went all loco over Ron Paul awhile back, I needed to cut my friend off. Mostly as I couldn't get a word into the conversation nor be respected for my right to disagree (and my friend agreeing to disagree in a civil manner).

    I regret losing a friend, yet at least I'm not listening to his constant chatter about his political messianic fixation. Yuck.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I wonder, in this modern age, if anyone could be elected on his or her merits, with their past totally exposed for all to see and discuss?

    Does "free speech" which, most recently, probably saved us from Palin as Veep, also cost us a few potential saviors.

    I've never met Mr. Paul, so my opinion of him is less informed than I would like (but such is the case for most voters). He strikes me as a typical well-to-do white middle American personality carrying a firm belief in the virtues of Liberty- no Central Banks, no Affirmative Action, no Welfare, etc.

    In somewhat similar fashion to Mrs. Palin, Mr. Paul is a prisoner of his limited past. Community prejudices from one's youth can be tough to shake without a solid dose of experiences abroad (a difficult effect to explain fully to those who haven't had the opportunity- and even today, so few have).

    I don't see racism, homophobia or sexism in Mr, Paul, just reflections of his past and a lack of experience.

    Would I want a man in the White House without a solid sense of the various peoples and cultures of the world, even when that man promises (sincerely, I believe) a return to Liberty?

    Would you?

    It's a very good question. Worthy of a good hard think....I think.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Girl from NYC8:18 AM

    Intolerant. Racist. Asshole. Yeah, that sums up fork-tongued gramps.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous8:29 AM

    Disgruntled Ex-Paul Staffer Says Paul Wouldn’t Use Gay Man’s Bathroom

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/disgruntled-ex-paul-staffer-says-paul-wouldnt-use-gay-mans-bathroom.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous8:29 AM

    What Ron Paul Believes: USA, Canada, And Mexico Will Merge

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/what-ron-paul-believes.php?ref=fpa

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous8:30 AM

    Former Aide: Ron Paul Claimed ‘Saving The Jews’ Was Absolutely None Of Our Business

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/former-aide-ron-paul-claimed-saving-the-jews-was-absolutely-none-of-our-business/

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous8:41 AM

    Speaking of nutcases:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/27/victoria-jackson-muslim-brotherhood-fbi_n_1170790.html

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anne In DC8:44 AM

    No matter how this former staffer and others try to spin it, the fact remains that Ron Paul signed off on those horrible newsletters and profited from them. Either he was oblivious to the toxic nonsense in them or he agreed with it. My bet is on the latter.
    Either way, someone who signs off on something without reading it has no business being president, since the things a president is held accountable for dwarfs what any other politician is held to the fire for. His walking off the stage because he oidn't like the way the interview was going isn't presidential, either, since a president has to answer all kinds of questions and communicate with folks he or she doesn't like at all.

    Aside from these things, Israel is not entirely blameless in its interactions with Palestine. However, Israel has a right to exist, as does Palestine. As for the policies Paul espouses, he has a few good ideas but they are overshadowed and outnumbered by the monumentally bad ones he has. He would get rid of government agencies like EPA that hold companies accountable for damage they would do without regulations, and would interfere with women's reproductive rights to the point of forcing pregnancy and childbirth even under life-threatening conditions for mothers. Plus, he is 77 years old and too inflexible and reactionary to be president.

    ReplyDelete
  33. angela8:49 AM

    Dude@7:57

    It is the totality of our pasts that make us who we are. Ron Paul does not have a limited past. He had been a physician who delivered over 4000 babies, a congressman for over twenty-something years and he is a seventy-seven year old man who is not middle class--but rich. He had the opportunities that many will never have.
    But he is still limited.

    Please don't talk about community prejudices. In all times in history when there were injustices there were always people who called them out. THOSE are the people we should have for leaders. I don't want close minded, parochial reactionaries like Palin and Paul. They have no more standing in a belief of liberty than any other person running for president.

    And no--I wouldn't want anyone in office who had no sense of the vast majority of the people he serves. And Dude—we have LIBERTY in this country. The day you can't walk out of your house and say the things you do without the government arresting you, we won't have liberty. Get it? Your false premise of a lack of freedom dooms your argument. And Paul.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Angela,

    I'm curious. What do you think my argument is?

    I noted Paul's parochialism, and even compared it to Palin's.

    I asked if I (rhetorically) or anyone else would want such a man in the White House. I didn't provide an answer, merely a suggestion that such questions might deserve a think.

    Other issues, considering your expressed views, might deserve further reflection. To wit, is Freedom an either or issue, defined by the ability to complain without fear of arrest, or might there be more to it?

    To be explicit, I'm not arguing one way or another, merely laying out potential avenues for further reflection.

    I'm just examining life, as another old guy might have put it 24 centuries ago in Athens, before he was sentenced to death.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Anonymous9:32 AM

    He's right about so many things (like the wasted $$$ supporting Israel), and dead wrong about a number of others.

    Were it not for his age and his social agenda, I might be able to vote for him. Can't say that about any other R.

    His son, on the other hand, is a total crackpot.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anonymous9:33 AM

    Oh how times have changed...NOT!

    Ron Paul Took Credit For Controversial Newsletters In 1995 Interview (VIDEO)

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/26/ron-paul-newsletters-1995-interview_n_1169886.html?ref=politics

    ReplyDelete
  37. Smirnonn9:42 AM

    Fucking hilarious! That's some defense from this paul supporter!

    Is paul a racist?
    Well, no. But also yes.

    Is paul an anti-Semite?
    Well, no. But also yes.

    Is paul a homophobe?
    Well, no. But also yes and he hates their toilets.

    The gop is absolutely IMPLODING under the weight of their own ignorance, hypocrisy and xenophobia.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Anonymous9:44 AM

    Can we add just one small fact to those of the anti-Israel persuasion? Israel is the only Democracy among the surrounding Arab nations and Israel has more than seven political parties. Netanyahu, the current President, represents one of the more strident right-wing factions.

    Imagine Palin and McCain running America and you will have a better understanding of why there is so much political division in Israel and why some of Netanyahu's decisions have caused much of the recent outrage with Israel.

    As a Jew I would like to remind everyone that we do not walk in any sort of political lockstep bound by our mutual religion. There are many right-wing Jews but far more liberal, progressive and left-leaning in the fold.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance10:11 AM

    Ron Paul is a racist, homophobic asshole! He has no chance of being President. I could care less about his views NOW because he is trying to distance himself from what we already know about his ass.

    His defenders are full of shit and ignorant. Good luck supporting an asshole.

    PS...Mister Charley...that HIV thing you said...PURE STUPIDITY and if you truly have a PhD...you need to give it back!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Anonymous10:29 AM

    In Case You're Wondering How Loathsome Ron Paul's Newsletters Were There Is Now A Twitter Feed

    Behold the Ron Paul Newsletter twitter feed (@RP_Newsletter): "Tweeting actual quotes from the Ron Paul Newsletters."

    The tweets are directs quotes unless indicated otherwise by the RPN signature. And yes, they are as appalling as you have been lead to believe.

    Even just this small sampling makes it nearly impossible to believe that Paul never read any of this -- at least a few of his more moderate supporters must have come across these and come calling (screaming) for an explanation.

    A selection below.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/ron-paul-racist-newsletters-twitter-2011-12

    ReplyDelete
  41. angela10:39 AM

    Dude@9:12

    I don't believe you have an argument. Indeed, your treatise was a series of statements.

    But your suggestion that the election of Ron Paul would invoke liberty where there (to your mind) is none, is a bit much. Now if you tell me that you believe we have been without liberty for decades or a couple of hundred years—your statement would be understandable within the confines of what you truly believe liberty in this country is.

    But if you, like many in this country believe that your liberty has been taken somehow by the current administration—then your statement is not only specious, but wreaks of mendacity.

    Of course, if you did not mean the latter . . . .

    ReplyDelete
  42. Well, I appreciate the honesty. It is rare that someone will come right out and say what they are thinking. And I would say that he is the most honest of the GOP about his position on gays and gay rights. I think it is fair to say that you support someone's rights, but don't feel comfortable around them. That to me IS tolerance (but it kind of gets killed by the anecdote in S.F.) But he will be destroyed by the American media for his Israeli positions alone. And he can kiss the Hispanic vote goodbye.

    But I also agree that if the GOP has the incredible bad sense to nominate him as their nominee, than this will be a landslide to make the Reagan/Mondale election look like a close contest.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Anonymous11:26 AM

    FYI, If you read the whole statement released to rightwingnews.com, you'll see that he actually is no longer a supporter at all and refers to his "outrageously horrendous views on foreign policy, Israel, and national security for the United States.":

    There is much more information I could give you on the sheer lunacy of his foreign policy views. Let me just concentrate on one in specific. And I will state this with absolute certainty:

    Ron Paul was opposed to the War in Afghanistan, and to any military reaction to the attacks of 9/11.

    He did not want to vote for the resolution. He immediately stated to us staffers, me in particular, that Bush/Cheney were going to use the attacks as a precursor for “invading” Iraq. He engaged in conspiracy theories including perhaps the attacks were coordinated with the CIA, and that the Bush administration might have known about the attacks ahead of time. He expressed no sympathies whatsoever for those who died on 9/11, and pretty much forbade us staffers from engaging in any sort of memorial expressions, or openly asserting pro-military statements in support of the Bush administration.

    On the eve of the vote, Ron Paul was still telling us staffers that he was planning to vote “No,” on the resolution, and to be prepared for a seriously negative reaction in the District. Jackie Gloor and I, along with quiet nods of agreement from the other staffers in the District, declared our intentions to Tom Lizardo, our Chief of Staff, and to each other, that if Ron voted No, we would immediately resign. ...If Ron Paul should be slammed for anything, it’s not some silly remarks he’s made in the past in his Newsletters. It’s over his simply outrageously horrendous views on foreign policy, Israel, and national security for the United States. His near No vote on Afghanistan. That is the big scandal."

    Course the only thing they are talking about in the comments there is about how the Civil War wasn't fought over slavery and there are no racists afterall. Silly conservatives.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Anonymous11:37 AM

    If he's a supporter, Ron Paul, Congressman Paul or Dr. Paul (as a lot of freaks like to insist upon calling him) doesn't need enemies.

    ReplyDelete
  45. "Would I want a man in the White House without a solid sense of the various peoples and cultures of the world, even when that man promises (sincerely, I believe) a return to Liberty?"
    7:57 AM

    What exactly is your definition of Liberty??

    ReplyDelete
  46. Anonymous11:40 AM

    Anon @ 3:45 a.m.

    You are a jackhole. The kind of Real American that thinks people should be tested for drugs in order to qualify for welfare, when in truth, less than 2% are found with drugs in their system. You are so convinced that there are culprits to the assbackwardness in our country falling solely only on the disenfranchised that need services to get by and maybe even progress, but the real bad guys in this country work on Wall Street, K Street and big corporations.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Angela,

    I can't, after some rereading, find my suggestion "that the election of Ron Paul would invoke liberty where there (to your [my] mind) is none."

    I did share my view that Mr. Paul believes in a version of Liberty presumed, by him and others, to be prevalent before the Federal Government took it away and that he is running on the platform of returning the country to those days and that he seems to me sincere in his approach.

    I didn't share my views on the topic of freedom, the performance of current President Obama (for whom I voted) or even the desirability and viability of Mr. Paul's platform.

    I was, ironically enough, trying to halt a rush to judgement as I believe, even if the eventual considered conclusion concurs with that rushed judgement (I'll assume the virtues of avoiding a false judgment are obvious) it seems wiser to think on solid ground, to mix a metaphor.

    Blog comment thread imitating life (or at least the dramatic retelling thereof)- I'm being accused of promoting ideas I didn't promote, merely by engaging in a bit of Socratic questioning.

    I'd better make sure my supply of hemlock is ample.

    ReplyDelete
  48. lwtjb,

    As this blog normally discusses (quite commendably, in my view) Mrs. Palin's character flaws including her lack of sincerity, I was contrasting that with my sense of Mr. Paul's sincerity in promoting Liberty (as he sees it).

    I guess I should have been a bit more explicit.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Anonymous12:23 PM

    Ron Paul delivered a belief in Eugenics to the "alternative lifestyle" crowd in Girdwood, Alaska.
    No, it's not racism. See, it's not that Natives and minorities are _inferior_. It's just that Natives are biologically and genetically _different_, with different talents and skills. That's why Native children are no good at math and science. Which is okay. And to be celebrated.
    Dr. Paul's research proved it. If the public would understand and embrace this, these concepts and philosophies could help education and training programs in Alaska schools.

    That's the idea, anyway. This is what they OPENLY believe.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Anonymous2:00 PM

    The libertarian upstart isn’t just stirring controversy; he’s threatening to expose profound divisions within the GOP. How Paul will change the Republican Party in 2012.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/26/peter-beinart-how-ron-paul-will-change-the-gop-in-2012.html

    ReplyDelete
  51. Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance5:08 PM

    12:23PM

    "no good at math and science."

    I guess you are "no good at english"
    Dumbass.

    ReplyDelete
  52. He named his kid Rand. As in Ayn.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Wonder why Evan Bayh of Indiana, a Senator who was Senator Barack Obama's 2nd choice for running mate upon securing the presidential nomination of the Democratic Party in 2008, left the Senate?

    Well, Rand Paul of Kentucky was elected there, that's all you should need to know about that. ("Stomp this, snakes!" is all I say.)

    Obama's 1st choice, by the way? The respected novelist who said deposing Saddam in Iraq would be "[T]he biggest blunder in American history." (Added hint: the 1st ever Marine to be the United States' Naval Secretary--t'was in Insane Anglo Warlord's Administration no less, and it didn't last.)

    ReplyDelete
  54. Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance7:18 PM

    Nasty Liberal, is this a pop quiz or do I have time to study?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Anonymous10:02 PM

    Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance, 5:08 PM:
    "I guess you are "no good at english"
    Dumbass."


    No idea what that means.
    Does that mean you believe that 'Eugenics' is real? Or the opposite - it's ridiculous and racist?

    My point was that enlightened educated "hippies" invested in World Peace, with rainbow stickers on their Subarus and big fat degrees from elite academia, can still somehow be taken in by this kind of nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  56. lwtjb,

    As this blog normally discusses (quite commendably, in my view) Mrs. Palin's character flaws including her lack of sincerity, I was contrasting that with my sense of Mr. Paul's sincerity in promoting Liberty (as he sees it).

    I guess I should have been a bit more explicit.

    12:07 PM

    Thank you. I found what you said confusing.

    ReplyDelete
  57. The senior and now retiring Senator from Virginia Jim Webb, who holds the Navy Cross as well as Silver and Bronze Stars, was then-Senator Obama's preferred choice for Vice President. No pacifist he, but a lover of peace. His son is a veteran of the Iraq War.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance8:42 AM

    My point was that enlightened educated "hippies" invested in World Peace, with rainbow stickers on their Subarus and big fat degrees from elite academia, can still somehow be taken in by this kind of nonsense.

    10:02 PM

    Then why didn't you just say that? If that was your point.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Anonymous10:16 AM

    Sounds like one of the 'Ascending Path' boys from Girdwood, promoting Ron Paul.

    Where are you guys from, anyway? Keep your weird twisted anti-minority Nazi shit out of our school. 'Kay?

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.