Some observations from today...

[Chester Copperpot]

are you serious? you can look at the vid.


the people accusing him of being racist, at least the ones we got to talk to, were referring to the newsletter. One lady sounded like she was kinda interested him or at least knew about him and was concerned about the newsletter.

I didnt see anybody in that video talk about RP being a racist.. Did I miss something?

 

[Bloody Holly]

I agree. I actually supported his move then, but I knew it was risky if it could be combined with even the newsletter issues as I understood it at that time (which was that it was an isolated incident where the responsible party was fired).

I actually think Ron Paul did lie when he said he doesn't know who wrote the newsletters. At the minimum, I think we're left in a quandry by that statement, because if he's telling the truth it seems that he's either incompetent or too trusting, which are both bad, and add more fuel to the concerns about how he would govern considering the fact he can't seem to find people to manage his campaign properly, or else he's covering up by lying to the public, which is worse. Honestly, given his demeanor during the interview, I unfortunately believe that he was lying.

Notice he didn't say that he had no control over the contents of the newsletter.
Also that he didn't say he had never looked the contents of the newsletters.

Why would Ron Paul still not know the author after being smeared with this for 10+ years? It just doesn't add up.

I think Ron is toast. The general public thinks he's a racist, and alot of his supporters are conflicted about his response to this crisis.

I feel for freedom and liberty. But Ron has destroyed himself with this.

Ron has said that he didn't even read it. Out of curiousity, did you watch the you tube video or did you see it on TV? Someone claimed CNN edited Ron Paul's response.

Also, nobody even thought Ron Paul would address the newsletter but he did.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvzsiESqVss

 

[derdy]

We had a precinct captains meeting today at St. Louis Bread Company. As the meeting was wrapping up someone suggested we have a sign wave on the opposite side of the highway as this billboard:

There were 5 of us on the outerroad and I-70 was about 10 feet beyond that. We got CRAZY honks and thumbs up. We had truckers on the highway honking at us!!! Woot!

Here's the St. Louis billboard thread

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=85481

 

[Mark]

@Mark, I agree with what you're saying, but I think you're approaching it from the perspective of reason, which is not likely to be effective, even if the message is simple. As with my other responses in this thread, try approaching it from the emotional side. To a bus full of "average voters", you could say things like:

The government is reducing the value of your paycheck every week by printing boat-loads of money to pay for the occupation in Iraq, so your dollars can buy less and less

The government is slowly reducing the amount it pays you in social security -- not by giving you fewer dollars, but by making those dollars able to buy less by printing so many of them

Guess who benefits first when the government prints lots of new money? Wall Street. Guess who gets hurt most? The middle class and the poor.

When the government prints new money, it is robbing from the poor and giving to the rich.

Guess how health insurance companies make more money? By declining your claims. Do you really want all health care in this country to be controlled by insurance companies?


OK, maybe they're not all perfect, but hopefully you get the idea...

Noted: good "breaking down" of the issues. However -

This all started when I tried to give someone a "slim jim" type handout - he refused it.

He had heard of Ron Paul, and he thinks that "the government is SUPPOSED to take care of people".

I mention more war and the draft to mostly young people who WOULD be drafted - one person said - "all I care about is draft beer" -
and most of them laughed INSTEAD of thinking about being drafted.

I mentioned "wouldn't you like to not have to pay Income Taxes?".

I got - "I ain't voting for a Republican".

I broke it down into simple terms- these people weren't hearing it. At least not as a group.

Maybe after it sunk in it made some sense to some. But not in that "group think" scenario.

One older fellow was quiet and thoughtful, it may have reached him a bit.

 

[Duckman]

Ron has said that he didn't even read it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvzsiESqVss

Wolf: Did you ever read these newsletters? Congressman?

Ron: ...Not back then, there might have been at times I would, at times.
But, you know, I was in a medical practice, I travelled alot, I was doing speeches around the country,
So very frequently, you know, I never did see these.
in fact, some of the things you just read, I wouldn't have recognized them.

He doesn't deny reading the newsletter, he just says he doesn't think he saw these particular artles. He doesn't denounce their content. he doesn't apologize for their content.

I don't know, I'm not buying it. Ron Paul seems very defensive and edgy. Not like someone who is telling the truth, not like his demeanor in other interviews, even hostile ones. Trying to claim that this issue is "settled in the past" is not going to work for an issue that 95% of the public hasn't heard before. He seems to speak slowly and hesitatingly before actually answering the substantive questions. Very, very suspicious to me.

 

[alionbe]

I didnt see anybody in that video talk about RP being a racist.. Did I miss something?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=aCDcmpitc8E

i didnt tag ron. its only up because some people here thought i was making it up.
i say drug war when i meant to say war on drugs.

 

[Bloody Holly]

He doesn't deny reading the newsletter, he just says he doesn't think he saw these particular artles. He doesn't denounce their content. he doesn't apologize for their content.

I don't know, I'm not buying it. Ron Paul seems very defensive and edgy. Not like someone who is telling the truth, not like his demeanor in other interviews, even hostile ones. Trying to claim that this issue is "settled in the past" is not going to work for an issue that 95% of the public hasn't heard before. He seems to speak slowly and hesitatingly before actually answering the substantive questions. Very, very suspicious to me.

Don't know about that one. I've had several people try to use the whole he's a racist as the reason why they wouldn't support Ron Paul and then when they saw the video, their opinion changed.

He may be covering up who wrote them because maybe he doesn't want to bring the other person into it. He's said in the past he takes responsibility for not reading the newsletter and having something go out that he didn't say.

Also, it's not in his character. Wolf Blitzer even notes this. Do you personally think Ron Paul is a racist? Are his policies racist?

 

[Duckman]

Do you personally think Ron Paul is a racist? Are his policies racist?

I don't believe Ron Paul is a racist. But I believe he is or has been associated with racists, and/or sympathizes with racism, or seems willing to pander to racists and is slow to disavow them. (For instance, during the whole $500 donation scandal, he never explicitly said he didn't want donations from racists until the PBS interview, which aired after Ron Paul had several chances to explain the donation.

I do not believe his policies are racist, and he makes the good point that sensible drug policy would actually help blacks. However, libertarianism is idealogically opposed to affirmative action and anti-discrimination laws on the property rights argument that the government can't tell you, as a property (business) owner that you have to associate with people you don't want to choose to associate with, no matter what the reason. I oppose affirimative action, but I am hesitant to remove anti-discrimination laws depite their being un-libertarian because I definitely think the greater good of allowing a freer society for all must trump property rights in that case, but that is a divergence from "pure" libertarianism that I am not sure Ron Paul shares. This is the reason racists are attracted to Ron Paul, and I'm a little bothered that some people close to Ron might be more interested in that side of libertarian ideas than other sides.

 

[AceNZ]

Noted: good "breaking down" of the issues. However -

This all started when I tried to give someone a "slim jim" type handout - he refused it.

He had heard of Ron Paul, and he thinks that "the government is SUPPOSED to take care of people".

I mention more war and the draft to mostly young people who WOULD be drafted - one person said - "all I care about is draft beer" -
and most of them laughed INSTEAD of thinking about being drafted.

I mentioned "wouldn't you like to not have to pay Income Taxes?".

I got - "I ain't voting for a Republican".

I broke it down into simple terms- these people weren't hearing it. At least not as a group.

Maybe after it sunk in it made some sense to some. But not in that "group think" scenario.

One older fellow was quiet and thoughtful, it may have reached him a bit.

It sounds like you were talking to a group of people who pay little or no tax. If people are used to getting government handouts, you can't get through by talking about things like income taxes -- only "rich" people pay those. And "republican" is also equated to the rich. You have to put it in their terms: "did you know that the government is stealing from you and giving to the rich", etc.

I should also say that I'm afraid this is a very, very tough road. I'm not saying we shouldn't try, but most people probably won't get it until it's too late.

 

[BreakYourChains]

I didnt see anybody in that video talk about RP being a racist.. Did I miss something?

Yes, the original thread starter loaded another video to youtube, http://youtube.com/watch?v=aCDcmpitc8E

 

[AceNZ]

I am hesitant to remove anti-discrimination laws depite their being un-libertarian because I definitely think the greater good of allowing a freer society for all must trump property rights in that case, but that is a divergence from "pure" libertarianism that I am not sure Ron Paul shares.

The flaw in this argument is that anti-discrimination laws are themselves racist, because they define people according to groups.

Also, laws that exist "for the greater good" are the foundation of collectivism, which is the opposite of individualism. A person who believes in strict individualism like RP is about as far from a racist as you can get, because he doesn't see (or favor or criticize) the group -- only the person.

 

[libertarian4321]

Last week we held the huge RP sign (4'x8') on the overpass, and there was a white guy who walked past us and asked if he (RP) took money from a white supremacist. We had to answer yes, and tried to "clear it up" for him, but he said, "No, that's all I need to know..."

OTOH, someone was out signwaving in ATL today and noticed that there was a lot MORE support from African-Americans than there was last week. I have also noticed the the AAs seem to like him here in the suburbs.

I agree with Ron that he shouldn't have returned the money to the white supremacist, who likely would have used the money to further his evil beliefs.

However, the campaign could have handled it better.

By keeping $500, they've generated a million dollars worth of bad publicity.

The first time Ron was asked about this, he should have said "I'm donating the $500 to charity"- that would have turned a million dollar NEGATIVE into a million dollar POSITIVE.

 

[losinglife]

Last week we held the huge RP sign (4'x8') on the overpass, and there was a white guy who walked past us and asked if he (RP) took money from a white supremacist. We had to answer yes, and tried to "clear it up" for him, but he said, "No, that's all I need to know..."

OTOH, someone was out signwaving in ATL today and noticed that there was a lot MORE support from African-Americans than there was last week. I have also noticed the the AAs seem to like him here in the suburbs.

i am pretty sure ALL candidates have, if one could dig it up that would be a great answer.

"Yes he did, and so did every single other candidate"

 

[Mark]

I agree. I actually supported his move then, but I knew it was risky if it could be combined with even the newsletter issues as I understood it at that time (which was that it was an isolated incident where the responsible party was fired).

I actually think Ron Paul did lie when he said he doesn't know who wrote the newsletters. At the minimum, I think we're left in a quandry by that statement, because if he's telling the truth it seems that he's either incompetent or too trusting, which are both bad, and add more fuel to the concerns about how he would govern considering the fact he can't seem to find people to manage his campaign properly, or else he's covering up by lying to the public, which is worse. Honestly, given his demeanor during the interview, I unfortunately believe that he was lying.

Notice he didn't say that he had no control over the contents of the newsletter.
Also that he didn't say he had never looked the contents of the newsletters.

Why would Ron Paul still not know the author after being smeared with this for 10+ years? It just doesn't add up.

I think Ron is toast. The general public thinks he's a racist, and alot of his supporters are conflicted about his response to this crisis.

I feel for freedom and liberty. But Ron has destroyed himself with this.

Here's his full response on CNN With Wolf Blitzer.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=u39z38xjraw

He basically says he didn't even see the vast majority of newsletters, and that's understandable given his schedule back then.

I can see him not even paying attention to them, even though with his name on them, in hindsight, he should have insisted on having final approval before anything was released.

Anyone not having 20/20 hindsight on some things in their life cast the first stone.

He's been answering these charges for over 10 years,
and this recent smear is OBVIOUSLY politically motivated by, I would guess, some people who truly ARE racist.

I don't believe Ron's lying about a thing.

And he was truly angry that this kind of tactic is being used by the media and those with ulterior motives .

He NAILED the answer on CNN.

If he didn't want to use campaign donation money to return it, he should have taken money out of his pocket
like he wanted to do with the medal for Rosa Parks from Congress.

I understand Libertarian views on "groups verses "individuals", but sometimes, you have to make a point.

There are few if not no "absolutes". Libertarian ideals included.

There are exceptions to the rules, this is one case where that's true. It could have been handled much better.

Ron's not finished by any means. We'll just have to take this lemon and make lemonade.

Use it as a platform to explain the prejudices against minorities in the wars both in Iraq and against drugs.

The same people making these claims are the same people who bribe economically disadvantaged minorities
to join the military with "bonuses" that the well-to-do don't need, and the poor desperately do need.

Onward and upward from here. Take the FUD and use it for good.

 

[Mark]

I don't believe Ron Paul is a racist. But I believe he is or has been associated with racists, and/or sympathizes with racism, or seems willing to pander to racists and is slow to disavow them. (For instance, during the whole $500 donation scandal, he never explicitly said he didn't want donations from racists until the PBS interview, which aired after Ron Paul had several chances to explain the donation.

I do not believe his policies are racist, and he makes the good point that sensible drug policy would actually help blacks. However, libertarianism is idealogically opposed to affirmative action and anti-discrimination laws on the property rights argument that the government can't tell you, as a property (business) owner that you have to associate with people you don't want to choose to associate with, no matter what the reason. I oppose affirimative action, but I am hesitant to remove anti-discrimination laws depite their being un-libertarian because I definitely think the greater good of allowing a freer society for all must trump property rights in that case, but that is a divergence from "pure" libertarianism that I am not sure Ron Paul shares. This is the reason racists are attracted to Ron Paul, and I'm a little bothered that some people close to Ron might be more interested in that side of libertarian ideas than other sides.

Are you serious?

Or are you just another dis-info agent? If you think he's sympathetic towards racism why not go and work for another campaign.

If you're not already.

I don't think Ron wants support from people who say he's sympathetic towards people he adamantly disagrees with.

 

[manny]

This is getting very silly and is what the MSM hoped to do . I've read through most of this thread and just want to explain why I am still supporting Ron 100% and try to provide some perspective.

Ron is, as he himself said, the anti-racist candidate.

He has a huge number of articles on lewrockwell and ronpaullibrary, countless speeches recorded in congress, campaigning in two presedential elections, participated in numerous televised debates, written a dozen books, given many many interviews, been a congressman for 30 years and a locally very well known doctor before than ... and yet in all that there is not one racist thing/sentence/comment/word/idea anyone can find. Not one even remotely racist thing.

In fact he has spoken openly about ending the war on drugs and how it has hurt minorities most.

He has spoken out against the death penalty and the way it is used disproportionately against black americans.

He is the only major candidate running who will stop the bloodshed in Afghanistan and Iraq. Anyone want to take a guess on which ethnic groups are over-represented in the lower ranks of the armed forces?

He has spoken out against the sometimes overt anti-muslim hysteria whipped up by bloodthirsty politicians like Rudy and McCain (want to compare racist phrases used?) in an attempt to provoke more wars in the middle-east. Ron would single-handedly save hundreds of thousands of Arab lives, and US soldiers, by ending the wars.

And then, some crypto-communist finds a newsletter Ron lent his name to (while he was thousands of miles away working as a doctor saving newborn lives) where some nut writes terrible things about black people. Ron never wrote those things and nobody has the slightest shred of evidence to say otherwise. Indeed there are quotes out there to back up the fact that Ron was very angry and disappointed when he was eventually shown the articles - as he would be since there are diametrically opposed to what he believes in. Ron's a gentleman who isn't going to hang anyone out to dry even if he does know/could find out wrote the articles. (I'll agree with those who say it would be beneficial if the guy who wrote it owned up - but I think it's unlikely, which suggests it was written by someone not close/who doesn't care about Ron.) It is a complete red herring - and half the forum seems to have fallen for it?!

The MSM have tried. This is their best shot since as far as I can tell there is nothing else in Ron's biography they can latch onto. They've tried and they'll fail.

Ron has answered it and if we can let it go, the others will too. Hillary joked about Asian Indians running gas stations, McCain calls Asians "gooks" - And the best they've got on Ron is a newsletter he didn't write!! Come on! Please! We need to concentrate on foreign policy, economics, civil liberties, the constitution; those things that will win the election. And how to get those messages out there.

Sorry to rant. Just my 2 cents (equivalent 0.0002 cents courtesy of the Fed )

 

[Drea]

I was out with the meetup group waving signs at a busy intersection in Chicago today. It wasn't huge (maybe 20 people at one time) but i thought it was pretty successful.

Several times today I heard people calling Ron Paul a racist, yelling from cars or coming right up to us. Most of them wouldn't even let us clear it up for them which was disappointing. A lot of liberals around here would be receptive to Dr. Paul's message but it looks like the smear campaign was effective. Anyone else seeing this? I thought it might be a good idea to make a separate slim jim or some handout made to address this.

Another thing I thought was interesting was the disproportionately high amount of enthusiasm from cab drivers. I can't tell you how many were honking for us and shouting "Go Ron Paul" in support. A good number of them rolled down their windows and asked for our handouts. I'm curious as to if this is because of those tip cards people hand out. If so, this is very encouraging. What a great idea.

I took some video of the meetup members talking about their support...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN-XA100TF4

Hey! Thank you for all you are doing! This is my area too! (Chicago!)

Please ignore the 1st poster. Just go through and read his posts to see where he lies. That will explain it.

Great job and great vid!

Drea

 

[worldsupport]

this is what we need more of.

 

[Drea]

hhahahahaha... I don't know.. I just don't know..

cab drivers support? Liberals receptive? Racist?

hahha.. alot of keywords.... I smell something, not sure yet...

I have to say to you that I have read so many of YOUR posts that make me question your intentions. Not all of them do, but enough for me to be aware of your user name and doubt all you have to say.

And now this.

And now this thread has turned into something nasty (for a good part).

Drea

 

[manny]

I have to say to you that I have read so many of YOUR posts that make me question your intentions. Not all of them do, but enough for me to be aware of your user name and doubt all you have to say.

And now this.

And now this thread has turned into something nasty (for a good part).

Drea

Hi Drea - welcome to the forum.

I know that coming somewhere new it can be hard to figure people out online, but Xar has been here ages and is one of the hardest working supporters of Ron. You know that famous image of Ron 's face made of pics of supporters super-imposed over the constitution - Xar made that.

We're all on the same team - let's work together.