Ron Paul: Slanders Exposed [paul is a racist]

Posted by Brewskie on January 28, 2008 : 02:01pm (685 views)
Filed Under Politics, Racism, Ron Paul

NOTE: This is a work in progress. As I update this article I will post the changes here.

You can find the main page for these papers here.

———————————————————————————————————————

Slander [slan-der]
noun
1. defamation; calumny: rumors full of slander.
2. a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report: a slander against his good name.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/slander

———————————————————————————————————————

This slander has been going around since people first started posting the distortions from the newsletters and is directly tied to those distortions and slanders. The quotes from the newsletters have been going around a long time before tnr.com posted the actual newsletters. Just as the quotes from the newsletters are being distorted and misrepresented so too is the slander that Paul is a racist. If it weren’t for the distorted quotes from the newsletters, claims of racism would be absolutely laughable.

There is absolutely no proof that Ron Paul is a racist. There are no videos of Paul saying anything remotely racist and there are no papers, known to be written by Paul, that would show that he is racist. Quite the contrary, there are many videos and articles by Paul that show him to be the exact opposite; a man fighting racism by pointing out the racist policies of government.

Even Paul’s biggest detractors admit that Paul is not a racist. Kirchick even admitted this, and he is the one who released the newsletters that he claims are racist. Eric Dondero, a former employee of Pauls and currently running against him for his Congressional seat, has never said that he knows Paul to be racist, and Dondero would have the most to gain in proving that he is. There is no one, not a single person, who has come forward to prove that Paul is racist.

The only way to show whether someone is racist is by looking into their past. If these newsletters were racist, and they were written by Paul, there would be evidence of racism all over the place. Ron Paul is a prolific writer. He’s written numerous books, articles and columns, and there are hundreds of videos of him. Yet not one of them can be shown to be racist.

—————————————————–
“Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called “diversity” actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.

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.

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 our sins, we should understand that racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty.”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul381.html

Here it is plain to see that Paul is against racism and blames the current state of racism where the blame belongs, at the foot of Government.
—————————————————–

Here is a video of Paul talking at a forum where he talks about his position on racism caused by government. How everyone should be treated equally and how the drugs laws and Justice system causes racism.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Om12vNSbW9k

In this interview Paul discusses money donated to his campaign from a known neo-nazi:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Om12vNSbW9k

Paul has a very deep belief that if government were to keep out of the affairs of the People they can work out their differences. He is a Federalist, he believes that States are the ones who are supposed to have the ultimate power and that most powers being used by the Federal Government have been usurped from the States. That whenever the Federal Government gets involved people lose their Rights and States lose their sovereignty.

Therefore, Paul believes that legislation that usurps States Rights are unconstitutional. Even if the laws are popular. As an example, he was against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. His opposition to the act wasn’t for racist means, it was because the act, he believes, actually did not do what people claimed it would do. That it was a failure in stopping racism. Paul said “the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.” These aren’t the words of a racist, they are the words of a realist.

“Paul was against the 1964 Civil Rights Act”

“The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business’s workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge’s defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.”

Ron Paul on the problems in forced integration:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html

“Paul refused to give a medal to Rosa Parks”

There are also claims of Paul being racist because he stood against giving a golden medal to Rosa Parks, the civil Rights icon. While agreeing that Parks deserved a medal, he was against spending tax dollars to pay for the $30,000.00 gift. But Paul wasn’t only against this medal for Parks, he was against using tax dollars to give this gift to anyone, including his close friend Ronald Reagan. Being a devout Constitutionalist Paul is against anything that is not expressly allowed by the Constitution, even when it pertains to close friends of his. He even offers to pay for these medals out of his own pocket if the rest of Congress pitched in, offering $100 of his own money if others would do the same. However, the other Congressmen refused to pay with their own money and opted to pay for the medals with tax dollars.

In summation:

Ten second sound bites and one liners won’t tell anyone anything until they put on their thinking cap and do some research. It is so rare to see a true intellectual politician that one can hardly blame people for being stumped by much of what Paul says and stands for. He expects people to learn that what he says is true. Being a libertarian he won’t try to force things down everyone’s throats. Ron Paul is not a racist, he’s an individualist.

Ron Paul truly is a thinking mans politician.

To return to the main page for these papers click here.

Changes to this article:

None yet

[?]