Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
(What a laugh, watching someone who caters to the John Birch Society crowd attempt to distance himself from his past. For nearly 2 decades he knew of the racist, anti Semitic homophobic, and white supremacist bile that was being printer in the newsletter with his name on the front. However, in his redneck district Texas, that was a political boon. Now that he is on the big stage, he is trying to make excuses for his lapse of moral character. I know the Paulites will defend this fanatical joker the way they blindly do. I also got a kick out of how he views the whole thing as some kind of "conspiracy" against him, as if he is the victim for not distancing himself from the Newsletter a long, long time ago...you know, before he wanted to be elected president.)
Paul Calls Himself 'the Anti-Racist' in Responding to Bigotry Allegations
January 10, 2008 10:09 PM
ABC News' Z. Byron Wolf reports: Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, gave his first lengthy TV interview about those bigoted screeds from the early 1990s printed in a newsletter bearing the name "The Ron Paul Report" that were dug up by The New Republic and posted by that magazine Tuesday night (LINK).
First, speaking to CNN's Wolf Blitzer, he disavowed himself of the reports and admitted they are bigoted.
"It's in there," Paul said. "It's bad. I recognize that and I had a moral responsibility. But that doesnât mean you can indirectly charge me as being a racist."
"Everybody knows Iâm not involved in that kind of language," said Paul, before disavowing the writing in the reports, which he said he often did not read. (Which for you folks with a brain means that he did read the newsletters occasionally, and allowed them to continue with his name boldly on the title page.)
"That's not my language. That's not my life," he said. "I honor and respect the civil right movement."
Paul compared himself to a publisher of the reports and asked Blitzer if publishers always know every word in their magazines. (The publisher may not know every word, but when they find out what was in the magazine, if it is vile and violates their principles, they do something about it as soon as they find out. That is, if they have any moral character or are bothered by what was written in "their magazine." Hey Mr. RuPaul, where does the buck stop?)
But Paul, who called himself the "anti-racist," did not just defend himself. He also argued that his libertarian ideals do the most for minorities in the two wars most affecting them now, pointing to the war in Iraq and the war on drugs.
"In all wars, minorities suffer most," he said.
(So he is against the war because of its impact on minority groups? What a complete lie.)
"What other candidate will stand up and say, 'I will pardon all, black or white, anybody who is convicted of nonviolent drug acts?'" Paul asked Blitzer. "If you want to look for the real discrimination, its in the judicial system."
(Complete strawman argument. Again he is making an argument that he is not a racist, and his stand on drugs has nothing at all to do with race. Man, this guy is lost.)
"The real discrimination today has to do with the drug laws and the judicial system," he added.
"What I defend is the principle of libertarianism, where we never see an individual belong to a group," Paul said.
(Easily said by a white Christian guy who doesn't belong to a minority group. More BS.)
He also argued that Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. practiced libertarian ideals. (Total spin. MLK and Parks were supporters of freedom for all minority groups, fought for rights of minority groups, understood the need to protect such groups from the majority who abuse those groups simply because they have the economic or political power to do so...something Libertarians don't give a rat's ass about. MLK was called a communist by the right wingers and John Birchers, not a Libertarian.)
"Iâm not a racist," Paul said. "Rosa Parks is one of my heroes, Martin Luther King is a hero, because they practiced the libertarian principle of civil disobedience and non-violence. Libertarians are incapable of being racist because racism is a collectivist idea. You see people in groups. A civil libertarian like myself see everyone as an individual." (Apparently Paul isn't in touch with his "Libertarian" constituency and their view of Mexicans, Muslims, Blacks, Jews, people living on Welfare and other groups of minorities and/or opression, etc.)
Paul claimed his own support among African Americans is increasing and said someone (he did not say who) is trying to undermine that because he is the candidate that does the most to fight racism by not viewing people as part of a group. He did not offer data to prove his support among African Americans is growing. (Typical of Paul, to make statements lacking supporting evidence.)
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/01/paul-calls-hi-1.html
Are you serious about the issue of racism? It hardly exists today, and what does remain is never going away because there are differences between people. Find something more important to whine about! Blacks have had lots of assistance, and they've made strides. What hasn't changed by now, will not. And the Jews are hardly victims of racism here in the US. There are lots of very successful Jews everywhere, so refrain from painting them as being discriminated against just because their "plight" is not a candidates main focus. I will vote for Ron Paul, by the way.

