drexhex
12-06-2007, 02:43 PM
Mauling Paul
[Feedback, "Paul Mauls," Seth and Linda Soffer and Bill Faust, Nov. 29, 2007] excoriated me for not accepting the Ron Paul campaign's pathetic excuse for the appearance of a racist tirade in Paul's newsletter years ago: that the article was ghostwritten. As much as I hate to point out the obvious, here it is: If a candidate isn't fit to prevent appalling racial statements from appearing under his name, he isn't fit to run the country. I guess the letter writer had a point, though: I can't conclusively prove that Paul was behind that article any more than I can prove his mentions of "banking elites" and the "New World Order" aren't coded references to "Jews" - or that his long-term association with white supremacist groups like Stormfront are the same as endorsements.
What I can prove is that Paul is both a failure to true libertarians. He's opposed to abortion rights and gay marriage and supported the first invasion of the Gulf. And that he's a failure for true liberals. Paul's an eager participant in Bush's sideline domestic policy of deregulating all industry. Like Bush, Paul believes in small government - so small that powerful corporations can take the place of government, with far less public say in their operations and with far less security to the American people.
Matthew Sullivan
North Philadelphia
I'm probably going to be writing in myself (my first time!), but feel free to tear this apart and send your thoughts to:
[code]
Feedback, City Paper
123 Chestnut Street
3rd Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19106
or fax: 215-599-0634
or email: editorial@citypaper.net
[Feedback, "Paul Mauls," Seth and Linda Soffer and Bill Faust, Nov. 29, 2007] excoriated me for not accepting the Ron Paul campaign's pathetic excuse for the appearance of a racist tirade in Paul's newsletter years ago: that the article was ghostwritten. As much as I hate to point out the obvious, here it is: If a candidate isn't fit to prevent appalling racial statements from appearing under his name, he isn't fit to run the country. I guess the letter writer had a point, though: I can't conclusively prove that Paul was behind that article any more than I can prove his mentions of "banking elites" and the "New World Order" aren't coded references to "Jews" - or that his long-term association with white supremacist groups like Stormfront are the same as endorsements.
What I can prove is that Paul is both a failure to true libertarians. He's opposed to abortion rights and gay marriage and supported the first invasion of the Gulf. And that he's a failure for true liberals. Paul's an eager participant in Bush's sideline domestic policy of deregulating all industry. Like Bush, Paul believes in small government - so small that powerful corporations can take the place of government, with far less public say in their operations and with far less security to the American people.
Matthew Sullivan
North Philadelphia
I'm probably going to be writing in myself (my first time!), but feel free to tear this apart and send your thoughts to:
[code]
Feedback, City Paper
123 Chestnut Street
3rd Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19106
or fax: 215-599-0634
or email: editorial@citypaper.net