Ron Paul and Racism

[kylejack]

Does anyone know the background of these claims? How do we respond to them?


Texas congressional candidate Ron Paul's 1992 political newsletter highlighted portrayals of blacks as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about top political issues.

Under the headline of "Terrorist Update," for instance, Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

Paul, a Republican obstetrician from Surfside, said Wednesday he opposes racism and that his written commentaries about blacks came in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time."
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/aol-metropolitan/96/05/23/paul.html

[Gabecpa]

I think his claims, although politically incorrect, have reasonable statistical evidence. I have gotten into a similiar discussion before and the discrepancies between race and crime are undeniable.

the "fleet-footed" comment is impossible to defend, and not an uncommon thing for a 71 year old man to say.

The republicans won't bring his race relations up, and if he gets the chance to face-off with democrats they will have a whole hell of a lot more to go after.

[garywatson]

Does anyone know the background of these claims? How do we respond to them?
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/aol-metropolitan/96/05/23/paul.html

In our absurdly PC world, such scientific discussion of race and crime issues has to be filtered before publication so as to not hurt people's feelings. One can assume it will be brought up as a future debate question or comment from others on the dias, now that RP is gaining momentum. The press might let it go for a while as long as he is causing embarassment and consternation to the Republican (so-called) front runners, but rest assured they will make a big deal about this when he starts leading in the polls or when he gets the Republican nomination.

Maybe the best solution is to be proactive and publish the details of the controversy now, with full explanation maybe in conjunction with a sympathetic black leader, so that the opposition has nowhere to go with the story.

I of course deny that there's anything racist at all in the comments, which were taken out of context in the first place, but that's not how the media will run with it if you let them take the initiative.

[JoshLowry]

He said that those things were not written by him.

Refer to a previous thread here:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=353&postcount=4

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=70

[Korey Kaczynski]

I have read that they were misattributed to him by one of his staff members.

[swatmc]

That is a pretty weak attempt to discredit Ron Paul.

That's going to be the hilarious thing about those who are going to go after Ron Paul soon.

When it comes to politicians, my guess is that he has a cleaner record then 99% of them.

And every single little flaw in Ron Paul is going to be exploited.

It's just politics.

They have to do a little better if they want to stop the Ron Paul/Freedom movement.

[Exponent]

A claimed interview with Ron Paul by the Texas Monthly in October 2001 provided this: (text source here (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Ron%20Paul), date source here (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/124912/740))


In one issue of the Ron Paul Survival Report, which he had published since 1985, he called former U.S. representative Barbara Jordan a "fraud" and a "half-educated victimologist." In another issue, he cited reports that 85 percent of all black men in Washington, D.C., are arrested at some point: "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." And under the headline "Terrorist Update," he wrote: "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

In spite of calls from Gary Bledsoe, the president of the Texas State Conference of the NAACP, and other civil rights leaders for an apology for such obvious racial typecasting, Paul stood his ground. He said only that 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. What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U. S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this.

When I ask him why, he pauses for a moment, then says, "I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. It wasn't my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady." Paul says that item ended up there because "we wanted to do something on affirmative action, and it ended up in the newsletter and became personalized. I never personalize anything."

His reasons for keeping this a secret are harder to understand: "They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them . . . I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn't come from me directly, but they campaign aides said that's too confusing. 'It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it.'" It is a measure of his stubbornness, determination, and ultimately his contrarian nature that, until this surprising volte-face in our interview, he had never shared this secret. It seems, in retrospect, that it would have been far, far easier to have told the truth at the time.

[emphasis added]

[Gee]

I don't know, those quotes don't even sound like Dr. Paul's writing... And I can't seem to find the original article anywhere.

Libertarians, by their definition, cannot even BE racist. So it seems rather odd for him to make those statements. He'd have to know they'd be taken out of context, and a few are just absurd.

[4Horsemen]

People, this is just the start of the spin and lies the aristocratic establishment's little minions will produce to discredit RP.