Muscatine

Ron Paul a Racist?
Monday, May 21, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com


The mainstream media has ignored the Ron Paul (R-TX) presidential campaign and cast the eight-term congressman as a ?“kook.?” Now the media may provide a platform for those who dredge up a smattering of texts that Paul has personally disavowed, according to those close to his campaign.

?“Paul is no racist,?” says one source. ?“He?’s been in the public spotlight for years. Wouldn?’t someone have noticed? They had to go back to the early 1990s to find something ?– and he?’s explained that he was not aware of what was going out under his name and publicly disavowed it. They?’re desperate and willing to try anything before he gains more momentum.?”

Nonetheless, Ron Paul's past writings on race are catching flak from right & left, according to the USA Today OnPolitics website:

Some things published in the past under the name of Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, especially about blacks, are getting renewed attention from bloggers on the left and right now that he's made something of a name for himself after his performances in the first two Republican presidential debates. From the right, Flopping Aces says Paul ''appears to have had a few racist viewpoints.'' From the left, Daily Kos calls him ''a vicious, contemptible racist who comforts the radical right wing like no presidential candidate since David Duke.''

Getting much attention: A 1996 Houston Chronicle story that says a newsletter Paul published in the early 1990s ''highlighted portrayals of blacks as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about top political issues.'' That newsletter was called the Ron Paul Political Report, and according to Kos, Paul told Texas Monthly magazine in October 2001 that ''I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. ... It wasn't my language at all.?” Kos points out, though, that the newsletter was eight pages long and ''whether he employed other writers or not, it beggars belief that Paul would not have had full control and approval over its contents.''

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/05/ron_pauls_past_.html

the rest

Ron Paul?’s own words on racism, circa 2002, are perhaps his own best rebuttal, according to sources close to the campaign:

?“The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence, not skin color, gender, or ethnicity. In a free market, businesses that discriminate lose customers, goodwill, and valuable employees ?– while rational businesses flourish by choosing the most qualified employees and selling to all willing buyers. More importantly, in a free society every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Rather than looking to government to correct what is essentially a sin of the heart, we should understand that reducing racism requires a shift from group thinking to an emphasis on individualism.?”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul68.html

Sources close to the campaign point out that Paul's message is one of liberty and individual achievement divorced from government giveaways and self-worth-sapping programs. These sources add that for Paul to espouse racism - the idea that one's physical characteristics are more important than his or her abilities and promise - he would have to run counter to the conservative libertarian philosophy that he espoused during a previous campaign for president as libertarian candidate.

Ron Paul's message, articles and dozens of major speeches on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives clearly portray his beliefs and perspectives. None of them are racist. None of them contain racist imagery. They deal with taxation, the federal reserve and focus on attempts to constrain the power and abuses of the federal government.

I'll agree-

On one thing. Some of the best people for the job are being swept aside and ignored by the media. Don't believe all the sweet talk coming from the front runners on either party.