Saturday, October 27, 2007
More on why I can't stand Congressman Ron Paul
Once again, I am urging readers of my blog to leave my blog and visit another one. This time, I want you to check out Adam Holland's incredibly well-research, thorough expose of the ties that exist between the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign and far right/neo-Nazi groups. You can find Adam's blog at http://adamholland.blogspot.com/, and the post is one of the entries that Adam wrote on Friday, October 26, 2007. Please, please, PLEASE check it out. It will either (hopefully) open your eyes if you are a Ron Paul supporter (not too many of those reading my blog, I imagine), or confirm your darker suspicions about the Texas Congressman.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I am sure some gays have donated to Ron Paul too.
Does that make Ron Paul gay?
Your argument is ridiculous, at best.
Hi Bald-Headed Geek!
Ron Paul's a disaster. I wrote about him this morning, and I'm getting all types of attacks from the Paulites.
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/can-ron-paul-win-new-hampshire.html
Hope you're doing well.
I'm heading over right now to check the Holland post.
Take care!
Disinter:
First of all, I checked out your blog, and now understand completely where you're coming from.
Second, people are frequently judged by the company they keep. I have never heard word one out of Congressman Paul or his campaign either refusing support from these racist wackos or condemning their views. You analogy is both specious and ridiculous. Congressman Paul has a serious problem with Jews in general and Israel in particular. His voting record on these issues is a matter of public record.
Third, I believe that the Congressman is seriously misguided in terms of his foreign policy view. his "world views" would seem to me to involved sticking our collective head in the sand and pretending that the rest of the world will just go away. Sorry, that's NOT reality.
BHG
BHG: The more I read about Paul, the worse he gets!
Holland's post was very comprehensive. My only problem is that he's a little unsure on states' rights doctrine. One can oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and amendents to these laws, without being considered racist.
Still, the fact that Paul's attracting all the wild types is just unbelievable - I'm mean, really, hard left, hard right, he gets them all.
Thanks for visiting my page. I post daily so keep in touch!
To Donald Douglas:
With respect to your comment, it is correct that one can oppose all federal civil rights legislation for non-racist ideological reasons. My point was that Ron Paul's agenda is agreeable to racists precisely because he advocates the same sort of radical states rights agenda that they do. Its safe to say that, were all the federal civil rights laws (such as those you cited) repealed, and all the associated case law nullified, the civil rights of minorities would be endangered. If those laws had never been enacted, as Paul would have had it, states could still segregate public facilities, employers could discriminate based on race, voting rights could be denied etc.
Paul may advocate what he does for "strict constructionist" or libertarian reasons, but he shows a remarkable lack of concern for the harm this would do to minorities, and suggests nothing to mitigate that harm. That is where the question of his racism must be raised.
Post a Comment