PDA

View Full Version : Atlanta Progressive News: "The Ron Paul That Ron Paul Doesn't Want You To Know"




angelatc
06-04-2007, 08:56 AM
From the Atlanta Progressive:

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/views/0024-views.html

(June 03, 2007)

Presidential candidate US Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), a Republican with Libertarian views, is making a name for himself by emerging as an antiwar Republican in the 2008 race for the White House.

While those of us who oppose the mindless US Invasion of Iraq welcome all voices of opposition, there are some troubling questions arising about Mr. Paul.

US Rep. Paul has been consistent in his opposition to the invasion, but he hasn’t been very vocal or visible about that opposition. Most Americans knew nothing about Mr. Paul before this election season or had no idea such an animal as an antiwar Republican even existed.

Where was he years ago when his voice of opposition would not only have been more appreciated, it would have been much more beneficial to this nation, before being antiwar was popular and carried far more political risks?

Being that he’s an antiwar Republican, which makes him somewhat of an anomaly, surely he could have found and exploited opportunities to be more vocal and visible with his stance.

There were other politicians such as former US Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), the late US Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-MN), US Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Ralph Nader, and others who were known for their opposition to the US Invasion of Iraq.

Why didn’t Mr. Paul stand with any of them? Why didn’t he appear at antiwar demonstrations or stand with other non-politicians who were against the Invasion?

Even more troubling are his past comments on racial minorities and his association with the John Birch Society. Paul is the only Congressperson to receive a 100% approval rating from the Birchers. His MySpace page links directly to the John Birch Society.

He has also been attributed to comments such as these which appeared in his newsletter, the Ron Paul Survival Report:

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action"

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal"

"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."

"We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."

He called former US Rep. Barbara Jordan (D-TX) a “fraud” and a “half-educated victimologist.”

Paul also claimed former President Bill Clinton not only fathered illegitimate children, but that he also used cocaine which "would explain certain mysteries" about the President's scratchy voice. "None of this is conclusive, of course, but it sure is interesting,” he said.

When challenged on those remarks he blamed them on an aide that supposedly wrote them for his newsletter over a period of years. Are we to assume that he hadn't read his own newsletter?

His newsletter with his name on it.

When challenged by the NAACP and other civil rights groups for an apology for such racist remarks, Paul simply said his remarks about Barbara Jordan related to her stands on affirmative action and that his written comments about Blacks were in the context of “current events and statistical reports of the time.” He denied any racist intent.

Lock up Black children, only Black children, but he meant nothing racist. Sure.

It isn’t just Blacks that Paul has a problem with; it’s also Asians, homosexuals, Jews, women, fornication, gambling, and the stock market.

I have a 13 year-old nephew and I certainly wouldn’t want the President of the United States trying to convince America that he’s dangerous simply because he’s Black and can run fast.

The Ron Paul Express needs much closer and thorough examination before those who champion his antiwar stance jump on-board.

Richard Searcy is a Staff Writer and Columnist with Atlanta Progressive News. Searcy was previously a press spokesperson for US Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA).

ARealConservative
06-04-2007, 09:02 AM
anybody find an email for this "journalist"

angelatc
06-04-2007, 09:09 AM
No, perhaps the magazine has a "contact us."

Cynthia McKinney, his former employer, has consistently accused the government of being "too secretive" on the issue of 9/11.

She was also frequently accused of being anti-sematic, apparently because of some misguided actions of a staffer. From Wikipedia:

McKinney's 2002 campaign and statements had been characterized by some as anti-Semitic, and controversy erupted again when one of her "supporters" blamed "Jews" for her defeat. McKinney maintains that she opposes anti-Semitism and responded to the controversy with this statement:

"The people who made those remarks were not associated with my campaign in any formal way, and I want to make clear from this hour that any informal ties between me and my campaign and anyone holding or espousing such views are cut and renounced."


There is also speculation that McKinney might run as the Green Party Candidate in 2008.

austinphish
06-04-2007, 09:13 AM
on here again. as an ex-Georgian, I can firmly state that she is HATED by anyone who knows her. if there was a poll for the congressman with the worst attitude - she would win by a landslide.

Bradley in DC
06-04-2007, 10:16 AM
From the Atlanta Progressive:

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/views/0024-views.html
Richard Searcy is a Staff Writer and Columnist with Atlanta Progressive News. Searcy was previously a press spokesperson for US Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA).


Certainly a press flack for former Congresswoman McKinney would know that she and Dr. Paul stood together many, many times to oppose the bombing of Iraq under Clinton and against Bush's invasion. Hatchet job, plain and simple. I guess they're scared.

Brandybuck
06-04-2007, 04:14 PM
There were other politicians such as former US Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), the late US Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-MN), US Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Ralph Nader, and others who were known for their opposition to the US Invasion of Iraq.

Why didn't Mr. Paul stand with any of them?
He didn't stand with any of them, because they're all extreme progressives who want higher taxes, more spending, and more nannyism. He didn't stand with them because their ideologies are diametrically opposed to Ron Paul's.

Tim724
06-07-2007, 01:56 PM
I also saw that Atlanta Progressive Article and also wrote them an email to set them straight.


Sir,

The slime piece on you wrote on Ron Paul("The Ron Paul
that Ron Paul Doesn't Want You to Know") is full of
holes.

Ron Paul has always been vocally anti-war and has the
most principled and consistent record of anyone in
Washington DC. He voted against authorizing the
president to use force in Iraq in 2002. He has begged
and pleaded congress to recognize the harmfulness of
unnecessary war for years. Is he to blame that nobody
listened? If you had read the transcripts of his
speeches before making your accusations you would have
known this.

The way your article abruptly U-turns from discussing
Dr Paul's position on the war to some obscure comments
published in his newsletter years ago shows your true
agenda. You just want to find some way to slag Ron
Paul because his message about restoring freedom,
liberty, and the US Constitution does not jive with
your socialist agenda. Your views clash with Ron
Paul's, as there is no freedom or liberty in
socialism.

Ron Paul did not stand with McKinney, Wellstone,
Kucinich, or Nader because they are all big-government
populists or socialists. Dr Paul stands firmly for
individual liberty and is therefore against the
welfare/warfare state.

angrydragon
06-07-2007, 02:36 PM
http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=41822
You can also lead them here.

Sal Collaziano
06-07-2007, 03:06 PM
Either one of two things are going to happen. The media is going to jump ALL over this (and anyone listening will believe it just like the readers of that stupid Atlanta writer) and ruin Ron Paul's reputation - or they'll completely ignore it as it can be easily rebuked...

Honestly, it would seem very cheap and weak for the media to try and roll with this...

SAVEamerica
06-07-2007, 05:42 PM
Honestly, it would seem very cheap and weak for the media to try and roll with this...
That's never stopped them before.


Howard Dean: YAHHH!!!

They are going to try, I'm sure of it

Tim724
06-07-2007, 08:17 PM
This BS racism allegation has been out for a little while now...I first read about it on his wikipedia page about 2 weeks ago. It is totally frivilous (obviously Ron Paul is not racist). I dont think the allegation will go anywhere though because everyone is trying so hard to ignore him.

I got a reply from the Atlanta Progressive after emailing them:

My article was written from my perspective and was meant to not only discuss his antiwar position, which I acknowledged has been consistent, but also to alert liberals and progressives, which you do not seem to be one of, of the incredible amount of baggage that comes with supporting this man.

As you've said, why stand with "socialists" when he could be so much more effective on his own .. which he wasn't. Perhaps that's why he can't get legislation passed.

It wasn't some "obscure" article but comments from several of his newsletters. He and his spokesman have stated that he comments were his, but it doesn't sound like any of that would interest you. I have one of the newsletters and his comments claiming them, but why waste time with something you don't really care about?

I recognize that this is a lot of energy wasted on a man who doesn't have a chance in Hell of getting anywhere near the White House, except for a visit. In case it's escaped you, republicans don't like him and he's running for the REPUBLICAN nomination.

At some point he's going to drop out and run as a libertarian or something. I can't wait to hear him tell the American people that he wants to get rid of Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, FEMA, EPA, and the Department of Education. Sounds like that will be joy to you, but I'm pretty damn sure the American people aren't buying that.

You sound like a fairly educated man. In the time you took to write me you could have written your own article from your own perspective.

Richard

ChooseLiberty
06-07-2007, 11:04 PM
The article says-

"It isn’t just Blacks that Paul has a problem with; it’s also Asians, homosexuals, Jews, women, fornication, gambling, and the stock market.
............

That's just a blatant lie and attempted hatchet job. Maybe they are trying to imply that he is not a supporter of affirmative action - a very libertarian view. And the stock market? How could a free market libertarian be against the stock market. The author is obviously insane.

angelatc
06-08-2007, 08:27 AM
Very cool!!!!


I can't wait to hear him tell the American people that he wants to get rid of Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, FEMA, EPA, and the Department of Education. Sounds like that will be joy to you, but I'm pretty damn sure the American people aren't buying that.

You sound like a fairly educated man. In the time you took to write me you could have written your own article from your own perspective.

Richard[/I]

It troubles me that anybody can think that Dr Paul actually hates anything except big government. That's just not who he is.

I'd like to know where he got all the rest of the "hate" list from. Dr Paul would just as soon see the Feds not legitimize any marriages, rather than insist only hetero couples can get married.

Mabe you need to write back to him, and link to the statement in abother thread that explains that at least some of those aren't ssues he is running on.

The SS, Medicaid and Medicare issues are addressed here: "And you know, take some of the liberal welfare spending that Dennis might support more than I. But you know, I’m not hostile toward that. If I can save the money from overseas, put some of it against the deficit, end up with a net reduction in the size of the budget, at the same time stopping a war, I may well be very open to funding some of these programs. Because I’m not out to gut some of these programs that have taught people to be very dependant on the government, like medical care. I mean, that’s not my goal. I’ve never run for office with the goal of slashing [those programs] even though philosophically I don’t think it’s the best way to deliver services and prosperity to poor people."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/davis4.html (hat tip to coplinger.....)

It would be a miracle if you could write an article and get it published in that same magazine, but you could take him up on it ans ask if he would help you get it published.

Heck, invite him here to debate theory.


I have one of the newsletters and his comments claiming them, but why waste time with something you don't really care about?

I don't know about you, but I would very much like to see the scan.

I don't think he's insane, but I suspect he's just looking for a neocon. Politics are so polarizing, and it's not hard to believe that it's hard to believe Ron Paul is the last honest man in Washington.

jon_perez
06-08-2007, 01:20 PM
It troubles me that anybody can think that Dr Paul actually hates anything except big government. That's just not who he is.I think Ron can do a lot by just coming out and reiterating that he believes that liberty is for ALL Americans - black, white, yellow, brown, purple, green, pink, etc...

I have enough faith in Ron's honesty and straightforwardness that if he believes that liberty (his foremost belief) is not to be doled out in equal measure for different races/ethnic groups he would just come out and say it and in fact he would give a very thought-provoking and interesting answer. He would never give us an evasive answer just to avoid looking bad.

He strikes me as a very thoughtful person who has carefully examined his own beliefs and has good reasons to have such and not merely holds such beliefs because it would make him popular or create less friction.

Always remember how he (brilliantly, imo) explained his opposition to the civil war and also touched on its twin issue - slavery - in his first appearance on Bill Maher.

sunny
06-10-2007, 09:08 AM
hi folks!
this is obviously a smear campaign against dr. paul......there will be more, unfortunately!
thanks for whoever posted the e to write to this jerk!
i think that's what needs to be done......let em know that we don't buy into the bs....the more the merrier!

god bless dr. ron paul - the ONLY statesman is our congress!

thanks and blessings,
sunny

RJB
06-10-2007, 09:20 AM
US Rep. Paul has been consistent in his opposition to the invasion, but he hasn’t been very vocal or visible about that opposition. Most Americans knew nothing about Mr. Paul before this election season or had no idea such an animal as an antiwar Republican even existed.
[/I]

That's because the media ignores him, you phoney Journalist.

Rejoice my friends. They are now in attack mode because the media can't ignore him anymore. These hit pieces will become more and more common, but that just means were winning. Just always be prepared to fight back-- in a congenial manner of course.

RJB
06-10-2007, 09:25 AM
One thing about the racists comment. Anyone who has heard Dr. Paul speak or read his writings knows he is an intellectual, and anyone with any brain capable of critical thought should see that those racist remarks were penned by another hand.