Kirchick's article is totally convincing , No wonder Paul opposes American blood and treasure being expended to win the security and freeedom of the brown people of Iraq
Andrrew Sullivan meet Ron Paul- anti black anfti-gay. And you abandoned Bush and Iraqi moderates and embraced this idiot. Over gay marriage. Andrew Sullivan, you are a fool,
And why did it take this long to expose Ron Paul. He has caused significant damge to the coherency of the superior GOP message on defense.
AH_C
· 1 year ago
And why did it take this long to expose Ron Paul. He has caused significant damge to the coherency of the superior GOP message on defense.
Cause he was hiding in plain sight of his long record. And to think the NH GOP ragged on Fox for leaving him out of the debate last Sunday. Sheesh!!!
Ditto on AS ditching W for RP -- what an a** indeed.
billhennessy
· 1 year ago
I said one unfavorable thing about Ron Paul on my blog (something mild like, "he'll sell nukes to terrorists,") and the Paulines wanted to hang me from a tree. It's cult, not a campaign.
KW64
· 1 year ago
Sounds like the "Perils of Paulines" to me.
bikerken
· 1 year ago
I still say Ru Paul will get elected president before he does.
Christoph
· 1 year ago
January 8, 2007
Dear Ron Paul Supporters,
If you're not racist anti-Semites yourself, take a good hard look at your candidate, shake your head sadly, and choose a different one. If you are, carry on and let us have it.
Best wishes,
Chris
P.S. I am not responsible for the content of this comment. It may have been written by a member of my ghost-commenting team.
get_a_clue
· 1 year ago
yeah he must be an anti-semite when he has worshiped Von Mises (a jew) and Rothbard (a jew) for years.
Jim,MtnViewCA,USA
· 1 year ago
Pity this is Andrew Sullivan and The New Republic. Would like to see a better source. OK, just kidding :)
AH_C
· 1 year ago
I remember RP back in the day when I lived in TX. He was a fringe kook then as now, guised up under the banner of Libertarian/Constitutionalist. He and Lyndon LaRouche are twins of different mothers.
essucht
· 1 year ago
He and Lyndon LaRouche are twins of different mothers.
Actually, speaking of LaRouche, he seems to have been pretty inspirational for the anti-war movement. Pretty much any boilerplate moonbattery you hear from your average leftist today, you could hear from him 4 years ago.
mmebrady
· 1 year ago
I have thought he was somewhat unhinged since the first moment I saw him, and this just adds to my conviction.
harlemghost
· 1 year ago
tighten that chinstrap ... the Paul Bots are coming ...
davod
· 1 year ago
What happens to the over six million dollars he hs collected if he gets out of the race.
TerryGain
· 1 year ago
He gives it back to Soros.and the koskids.
Marc
· 1 year ago
He and fellow nutcake Kucinich buy a ticket on one of them UFO thingys and fly off into the sunset.
On a more serious note, both Kucinich and Paul, both now fully exposed in the media for what they are, will both lose their next home state elections never to be heard from again.
At least in polite society.
jpm100
· 1 year ago
I'm don't think Paul is a racist as much as an opportunist. He panders to groups no other politician would touch and some no serious Republican Candidate would touch. In addition to the groups here, he appeals to 9/11 truthers, an assortment of other conspiracists, and anti-Iraq War/Blame America First groups (although this last on in restricted to Republican hopefuls).
By pandering to those groups, you can get money, much of it pent up for decades, that other candidates can't tap. Why would Paul support groups that makes him unelectable? I have to believe its purely about the money. I don't know how, but I believe a huge campaign warchest is really what Paul was ever after.
You normally can't get very far supporting those groups. At least under normal circumstances. The media gave him a pass because he attacked the Iraq War & Bush and generally was an entertaining pain in the ass for the Republicans for them.
The media switched to elevating Huckabee to exclude others they dislike more and as such a better tool. Now they've picked McCain as the one to elevate probably from here on out. So since Paul is no longer useful, as I predicted, he'd be thrown under the bus. If anything the last thing they'll get out of Paul is to remind everyone he's a Republican.
bikerken
· 1 year ago
JPM, you may not think that he supports those groups but there has to be a reason they have supported him so solidly. Look at the link below and see what it says in big blue letters at the bottom. I think a lot of people who are supporting Ron Paul are just anti-war, anti-everything types who don't really care about the man behind the man, they just like what he says. Personally, I think everytime I see him, he looks like hes aftaid the men in the white coast are after him. They should be.
Now we get to see a lot of Ron Paul supports going into deep denial. Ru Paul has a better chance of being elected president!
Oh, my. What a surprise. Ron Paul turns out to belong to the violent, racist white-survivalist kook fringe. Who'd have thought it.
How many days until someone finds that he used the phrase "ZOG" in reference to the federal government, I wonder?
N. O'Brain
· 1 year ago
I did not have hood with that organization, the KKK.
quickjustice
· 1 year ago
Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs has been making this point for a while. Some of Paul's non-racist, non-truther policies are actually coherent, but this white supremacist, truther stuff just buries him.
terrye
· 1 year ago
The man is a Confederate. Why would a Confederate join the Republican party?
Lincoln would be so proud.
newton
· 1 year ago
Good point!
PersonFromPorlock
· 1 year ago
Interesting, and apparently damning... but I think I'll wait until Thomas Sowell has commented before I draw any conclusions.
Trochilus
· 1 year ago
We met Ron Paul in a restaurant bar named the Barley House, right across the street from the State House in Concord, New Hampshire. He gravitated over to a group of us four fellas who were having a beer. Three of the four of us were Viet-Nam Veterans, one of whom who was a McCain follower back in 2000, who voted for Rudy today. The rest of us (2 from out of State, and 1 a New Hampshire resident) were all Mitt Romney supporters. It was a pleasant conversation, and we agreed to disagree. He told us about his service back in '63 -- I hadn't realized the guy is 72. But he is in complete denial about what happened to South East asia after Congress forced us out in the mid-'70's. After a while, he also start to get into the details about the U.S. "mistake" of becoming involved in World War I, which really lost everyone. Regarding Iraq, we all urged him to consider the benefits of allowing the troops to finish the job, but he was having none of our arguments, and resorting to talking points. Very intense guy. Lots of supporters here, including waitresses who like the idea of not having their tips taxed. He has a NORML following, too. We wished him well, and he went in to have a bite to eat.
LadyLogician
· 1 year ago
Ed - the Houston Chronicle link is broken.
It pains me to say this, but Congressman Paul really needs to pull out of the race.
LL
kecker
· 1 year ago
I don't think the fanatics among his supporters are going to be bothered by this at all. If they support him knowing he's a raving lunatic, you think the possibility that he's a bigoted raving lunatic is gonna bother them?
Bishop
· 1 year ago
I don't know, I see footage of his cultis...er...followers and it gives me the creeps.
Half of them seem the sort who are always one inch short of rage, the kind of guys who snap on the freeway over a flicked cigarette butt. The other half seem inclined to have that glazed look which shows they have made up their mind and NOTHING will change it, no matter the damning evidence.
FOX is saying he got about 8% of the NH vote, that alone is scary.
unclesmrgol
· 1 year ago
I do believe that our large federal government is the result of the Civil War. Lincoln was on the side of a strong federal government, and his side won. What resulted is probably not what Lincoln intended, but I agree with his assertion that the final guarantor of every American's liberty is not their state government but the United States. As has been pointed out elsewhere, the result of that war was that we were no longer these United States but the United States.
My personal Paul supporter went further -- he castigated Lincoln as being a Constitutional dimwit. I had to point him to Lincoln's Cooper Union speech, after which the Professor of History became strangely silent.
Larry
· 1 year ago
cf. Lincoln's Cooper Union speech The issue being whether or not the Federal Government had the authority to control slavery in the Federal Territories.
unclesmrgol
· 1 year ago
After reading the full text of the newsletter you cite in May 2007, I think Ron Paul is channeling Brigham Young. Yup, them Affricans sure do bear the Mark of Cain....
Math_Mage
· 1 year ago
Either he's a racist homophobic bigot, or he's too lazy to read the stuff he signs. That bit about Lincoln fits in with his comment about how Lincoln should have avoided the Civil War on MTP, but either way this shows him to not be presidential material.
hunter_123
· 1 year ago
Ron Paul needs a primary opponent. All he needs to do is to quote RP's newsletter and promise to be a true a conservative. RP's district is ready for a true conservative. RP can go into a well funded tax payer provided retirement. He can supplement his income by speaking at kkk and white supremacist and militia events.
Achillea
· 1 year ago
After a while, he also start to get into the details about the U.S. "mistake" of becoming involved in World War I, which really lost everyone.
It probably involved the gold standard in some way, to judge by his obsession with that topic in the NH debates. Didn't matter what the question was, his answer involved either that or OIF.
Trochilus
· 1 year ago
Yes, Achillea, you are correct. He blurted out a few gold standard talking points in the context of his comments about World War I. By that point, the four of us were honestly wondering when he was going to move on.
I can't imagine that at tonight's debate Chris Wallace will let some of the details of the TNR article go without directing a sharp question or two right at him. The interesting thing about tonight's debate in South Carolina could be how the other candidates may or may not choose to react. Caution might suggest don't get drawn into it.
But on the other hand, the guy who at least steps up and personally rejects out of hand the ugly content of so many of those news letters -- or better yet, who directly challenges Ron Paul to do so -- could emerge as the real leader.
Either he agreed with what was going out in a newsletter he had control over, or he was oblivious to it. In either case, what does that say about his ability to be President? Or even to be worthy of a vote for President?
diz
· 1 year ago
Please don't buy into this Ron Paul smear campaign headed by Tucker Carlson,(I can think of a word that rhymes with his 1st name) facts about Paul:
1. He has repeatedly written about how he thinks that the AIDS virus was engineered, and has purposely been put into vaccines to hurt the Black population
2. He always refers to Martin Luther King, and Ghandi as his heroes.
3. Ron Paul is a Libertarian at heart, but running as a Republican, Libertarians believe in ALL people as "individuals" with equal God-Given rights.
Recently a lot of neo-cons have accused Ron Paul of being racist, with no evidence, just saying that someone "said" some things about him. Some papers were written under his name falsely years ago, and he has personally retracted them and has stated that he didn't even write them. Please don't believe this, Ron Paul is a good honest person who loves all people and wants personal liberty for all people, thank you for reading my rant...
Please inform people of this, because I fear that Tucker Carlson airing this crap about him with NO evidence what so ever, and Paul has denied it, and its so ridiculous that I don't see Ron Paul, a gentlemen, saying this crap.
TW
· 1 year ago
I agree, as a strong supporter of Ron Paul's ideas, he is going to have to do a better job of explaining or its over. I know the words are not Ron Paul's. Like you, I've read and listened enough to know its not his 'voice' or ideas. My theory is that he is protecting someone, maybe a sad relative. Unfortunately his moral decision not to point out another's failings will be his undoing. He does need to explain the details so we can put this puppy to bed. What mistake allowed this to be published under his name and who published it.
B P
· 1 year ago
First, I've read most of the source material provided. Very little it of is actually racist crap and written completely differently than Ron Paul writes. It fits the explanation of a lack of oversight. The rest is just material some people would consider 'kooky', and to that, So What?
Tony Osio
· 1 year ago
This is a link to the official statement from Ron Paul regarding the article in the New Republic. I'll let you decide if the statement is sufficient or not:
First, I've read most of the source material provided. Very little it of is actually racist crap and written completely differently than Ron Paul writes. It fits the explanation of a lack of oversight. The rest is just material some people would consider 'kooky' much of it also clearly not Paul's writing and clearly not that of the person who wrote the first three listed as the racial stuff. Reading the news letters presented it was clearly from multiple authors and I didn't see anything that was like what I've read that was written by Ron Paul. And I've read a sampling stuff he wrote from the 80s to a month or so ago.
So, what we have here at the worst is that maybe Ron Paul toyed around with some ideas that people today think are kooky, like the militia movement in the 90s. Of course why do we think those people were kooks? The media told us, that's why. Why would the MSM ever lie to us? The Federal government stomped out those kooks in Waco and Ruby Ridge and then that (sheep-dipped looking given more recent info) kook McVeigh was involved in a bombing of a federal government building. That's why we think it's kooky today to be into not relying on a large, controlling parental government. So looking at it from the time, it amounts to at worst, at its very worst a mind open to different ideas. Not the sort of closed minds I see in some of the comments here and elsewhere.
Lastly the author of the NR article makes unfounded leaps and jumps and just plain twists everything and has huge gaps in his knowledge of basic history and the Mises org. Many of the comments on this article I find to be just as ignorant. In addition, the author of the NR article even said he just enjoys getting a rise out of people. ("I don’t think Ron Paul is a homophobe; I’m just cynical and enjoy getting supporters of political candidates riled up." -Jamie Kirchick)
On Ron Paul supporters, why is it that they are considered to be such a problem when they are just people with no more power than you or I? If you want to be concerned about supporters, I suggest you consider those of the media's acceptable candidates list. My favorite is how Rudy G is Cintra's representation in the US. If he's president expect Cintra to effectively own and toll one interstate after the next. (see what PA is trying to do with I80) Worry about supporters that want something more than the freedom have kooky views. Worry about the ones that want to benefit at public expense or seek to tell you how to live your lives. Isn't that why we are supposed to fear HillaryCare? Geebus watching Ds and Rs is like watching two different sets of control freaks butt heads. live and let live. Worry about something more important, like where the money for dozens of trillions of dollars of unfunded liabilities and debts and of course to pay for the wars is going to come from.
WHATEVER
· 1 year ago
i dont care ... im still voting for him so flame on flame thrower and by the way he still has 20,000,000 and even if he wrote that stuff is 15,000 times better then everyone else ....
so WHATEVER
Hanif
· 1 year ago
And you expect a guy who can't manage the contents of his newsletter to manage a country?
alex
· 1 year ago
Is this the worst you have on Dr Paul? A 20 year congressmen and this is all you can find?
Great, I am voting for Dr Paul compared to the others he is a Saint and a genius.
All Comments
Andrrew Sullivan meet Ron Paul- anti black anfti-gay. And you abandoned Bush and Iraqi moderates and embraced this idiot. Over gay marriage. Andrew Sullivan, you are a fool,
And why did it take this long to expose Ron Paul. He has caused significant damge to the coherency of the superior GOP message on defense.
Cause he was hiding in plain sight of his long record. And to think the NH GOP ragged on Fox for leaving him out of the debate last Sunday. Sheesh!!!
Ditto on AS ditching W for RP -- what an a** indeed.
Dear Ron Paul Supporters,
If you're not racist anti-Semites yourself, take a good hard look at your candidate, shake your head sadly, and choose a different one. If you are, carry on and let us have it.
Best wishes,
Chris
P.S. I am not responsible for the content of this comment. It may have been written by a member of my ghost-commenting team.
OK, just kidding :)
Actually, speaking of LaRouche, he seems to have been pretty inspirational for the anti-war movement. Pretty much any boilerplate moonbattery you hear from your average leftist today, you could hear from him 4 years ago.
On a more serious note, both Kucinich and Paul, both now fully exposed in the media for what they are, will both lose their next home state elections never to be heard from again.
At least in polite society.
By pandering to those groups, you can get money, much of it pent up for decades, that other candidates can't tap. Why would Paul support groups that makes him unelectable? I have to believe its purely about the money. I don't know how, but I believe a huge campaign warchest is really what Paul was ever after.
You normally can't get very far supporting those groups. At least under normal circumstances. The media gave him a pass because he attacked the Iraq War & Bush and generally was an entertaining pain in the ass for the Republicans for them.
The media switched to elevating Huckabee to exclude others they dislike more and as such a better tool. Now they've picked McCain as the one to elevate probably from here on out. So since Paul is no longer useful, as I predicted, he'd be thrown under the bus. If anything the last thing they'll get out of Paul is to remind everyone he's a Republican.
Now we get to see a lot of Ron Paul supports going into deep denial. Ru Paul has a better chance of being elected president!
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/
How many days until someone finds that he used the phrase "ZOG" in reference to the federal government, I wonder?
Lincoln would be so proud.
It pains me to say this, but Congressman Paul really needs to pull out of the race.
LL
Half of them seem the sort who are always one inch short of rage, the kind of guys who snap on the freeway over a flicked cigarette butt. The other half seem inclined to have that glazed look which shows they have made up their mind and NOTHING will change it, no matter the damning evidence.
FOX is saying he got about 8% of the NH vote, that alone is scary.
My personal Paul supporter went further -- he castigated Lincoln as being a Constitutional dimwit. I had to point him to Lincoln's Cooper Union speech, after which the Professor of History became strangely silent.
RP's district is ready for a true conservative.
RP can go into a well funded tax payer provided retirement. He can supplement his income by speaking at kkk and white supremacist and militia events.
It probably involved the gold standard in some way, to judge by his obsession with that topic in the NH debates. Didn't matter what the question was, his answer involved either that or OIF.
I can't imagine that at tonight's debate Chris Wallace will let some of the details of the TNR article go without directing a sharp question or two right at him. The interesting thing about tonight's debate in South Carolina could be how the other candidates may or may not choose to react. Caution might suggest don't get drawn into it.
But on the other hand, the guy who at least steps up and personally rejects out of hand the ugly content of so many of those news letters -- or better yet, who directly challenges Ron Paul to do so -- could emerge as the real leader.
Either he agreed with what was going out in a newsletter he had control over, or he was oblivious to it. In either case, what does that say about his ability to be President? Or even to be worthy of a vote for President?
1. He has repeatedly written about how he thinks that the AIDS virus was engineered, and has purposely been put into vaccines to hurt the Black population
2. He always refers to Martin Luther King, and Ghandi as his heroes.
3. Ron Paul is a Libertarian at heart, but running as a Republican, Libertarians believe in ALL people as "individuals" with equal God-Given rights.
Recently a lot of neo-cons have accused Ron Paul of being racist, with no evidence, just saying that someone "said" some things about him. Some papers were written under his name falsely years ago, and he has personally retracted them and has stated that he didn't even write them. Please don't believe this, Ron Paul is a good honest person who loves all people and wants personal liberty for all people, thank you for reading my rant...
Please inform people of this, because I fear that Tucker Carlson airing this crap about him with NO evidence what so ever, and Paul has denied it, and its so ridiculous that I don't see Ron Paul, a gentlemen, saying this crap.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-releases/125/r...
So, what we have here at the worst is that maybe Ron Paul toyed around with some ideas that people today think are kooky, like the militia movement in the 90s. Of course why do we think those people were kooks? The media told us, that's why. Why would the MSM ever lie to us? The Federal government stomped out those kooks in Waco and Ruby Ridge and then that (sheep-dipped looking given more recent info) kook McVeigh was involved in a bombing of a federal government building. That's why we think it's kooky today to be into not relying on a large, controlling parental government. So looking at it from the time, it amounts to at worst, at its very worst a mind open to different ideas. Not the sort of closed minds I see in some of the comments here and elsewhere.
Lastly the author of the NR article makes unfounded leaps and jumps and just plain twists everything and has huge gaps in his knowledge of basic history and the Mises org. Many of the comments on this article I find to be just as ignorant. In addition, the author of the NR article even said he just enjoys getting a rise out of people. ("I don’t think Ron Paul is a homophobe; I’m just cynical and enjoy getting supporters of political candidates riled up." -Jamie Kirchick)
Rather than go on, by far the best article I've read on this topic can be found here:
http://gays-for-ron.blogspot.com/2008/01/kirchi...
On Ron Paul supporters, why is it that they are considered to be such a problem when they are just people with no more power than you or I? If you want to be concerned about supporters, I suggest you consider those of the media's acceptable candidates list. My favorite is how Rudy G is Cintra's representation in the US. If he's president expect Cintra to effectively own and toll one interstate after the next. (see what PA is trying to do with I80) Worry about supporters that want something more than the freedom have kooky views. Worry about the ones that want to benefit at public expense or seek to tell you how to live your lives. Isn't that why we are supposed to fear HillaryCare? Geebus watching Ds and Rs is like watching two different sets of control freaks butt heads. live and let live. Worry about something more important, like where the money for dozens of trillions of dollars of unfunded liabilities and debts and of course to pay for the wars is going to come from.
so WHATEVER
Great, I am voting for Dr Paul compared to the others he is a Saint and a genius.