Showing posts with label The Ron Paul movement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Ron Paul movement. Show all posts

Jul 15, 2012

Ron Paul Is a Lunatic

Ron Paul - Still nuts and not finished

Presidential candidate Ron Paul is not done yet.

Rep. Ron Paul is the recipient of recent loads of accolades from folks hoping Paul will lay down some kind of interference at the August 2012 GOP convention in Tampa, which will anoint Mitt Romney.

Others have suggested Paul is a man of independence and liberty who would stand up to the American military-industrial complex and the neocons eager for more war after Iraq and Afghanistan, adventures not sating their thirst for empire stamping out any challenge to the huge publicly financed interests running our country—that annoying plight of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans suffering aside.

And the GOP's war on the coming Islamic caliphate nonsense, Ron Paul will stop all that.

That would be nice.

Forget it. Does anyone wonder why Ron Paul is running—such as he is—to be the GOP's nominee for president?

For one thing, Paul is an anti-choice fanatic, whose libertarian pretense is belied by Paul's asserted belief "that life begins at conception;" Roe v. Wade should be repealed; and Planned Parenthood and other "family planning" programs should be defunded.

That's Paul's conception of liberty divined by him from "God" and Thomas Jefferson. Paul is handsomely rewarded by his anti-choice commitment by the religious right fringe, reported by Sarah Posner last month, as Paul and the religious right renew their vow that women are vessels for American children in the worst traditions of American misogyny.

You might be tempted to engage in hyperbole and say Ron Paul sounds like some kind of John Bircher. You need not joke, Paul is firmly committed to the John Birch society and its conspiracy-minded, anti-Semitic, racist, Joe McCarthy-supporting whacks. Paul is perfect for the Birchers, having published racist political newsletters that fit in well with today's Grand Ole Party.

So Paul pays lip service to what even the hawks, Thomas Friedman and Andrew Sullivan, say is AIPAC's influence on banging the drums for more war? Wow, what integrity.

Ron Paul says states, but not the federal government, should be free to outlaw gay marriage. Does anyone see a problem with that position?

It should come as no surprise that Paul has openly said the death penalty for gays is just and other enlightened statements. Last year Paul argued, "Difficulty in implementing Biblical law does not make non-Biblical penology just. But as we have seen, while many homosexuals would be executed, the threat of capital punishment can be restorative. Biblical law would recognize as a matter of justice that even if this law could be enforced today, homosexuals could not be prosecuted for something that was done before." (Marshall. December 29, 2011)

Any unwavering commitment to privacy and liberty on Paul's part vanish when one looks his peculiar notion that states can do anything to individual rights, just not that federal govment, especially now that it's run by a black man.

State nullification, the South's ole time religion.

Come on. Those placing their hopes in Ron Paul are lending support to the nightmare vision of today's GOP and none of the details are pretty.

Racism, authoritarianism, misogyny and anti-Semitism are safe positions to hold today among many Americans, but they are repugnant as hate always has been, and this lunatic Ron Paul should be seen for what he is.

Jan 25, 2012

To Ron Paul Apologists: Racism is Never OK

Ron Paul will not win the Republican nomination for president, though I think he'll launch a third-party run this year.

But his racism is not a disqualification for his candidacy in the Party.

The GOP candidates love racism as a tool, and they love their states' rights. [States' rights to take away a woman's right to choose; states' rights to gerrymand voting districts; states rights to obstruct voters, and so on.]


Paul's racism is a disqualification from the more civilized members of our community and Paul's apologists deserve a knock-down.


By Phil Scarr


Ta-Nehisi Coates takes Ron Paul to the woodshed over his position on the abolition of slavery. It’s a thing of beauty.

For those who don’t know, Ron Paul was not OK with freeing the slaves through the Civil War. It represented an illegitimate theft of private property from the southern plantation owners (property the rest of us casually refer to as “people”).

Here is Ron Paul speaking with Tim Russert and blaming the Civil War on Lincoln.

MR. RUSSERT: I was intrigued by your comments about Abe Lincoln. “According to Paul, Abe Lincoln should never have gone to war; there were better ways of getting rid of slavery.”

REP. PAUL: Absolutely. Six hundred thousand Americans died in a senseless civil war. No, he shouldn’t have gone, gone to war. He did this just to enhance and get rid of the original intent of the republic.

MR. RUSSERT: We’d still have slavery.

REP. PAUL: Oh come on, Tim. Slavery was phased out in every other country of the world. And the way I’m advising that it should have been done is do like the British empire did. You, you buy the slaves and release them. How much would that cost compared to killing 600,000 Americans and where it lingered for 100 years? I mean, the hatred and all that existed. So every other major country in the world got rid of slavery without a civil war. I mean, that doesn’t sound too radical to me. That sounds like a pretty reasonable approach.
Ta-Nehisi Coates points out the gaping flaw in Dr. Paul’s logic (the same Dr. Paul who thinks the gold standard is just ducky, he shouldn’t have to share a toilet with gay supporters and that the Federal Reserve should be abolished):

When Ron Paul claims that Lincoln “shouldn’t have gone to war,” he is deploying a convenient and erroneous frame which necessarily holds that the inciting aggression was not in raising an Army, seizing federal property and arms, urging revolution among ones neighbors, and then firing on a federal fort, but in democratically electing a president with whom slave-holders disagreed.

Throughout the War, Lincoln attempted to bring about a peaceful and magnanimous end. He pitched compensated emancipation, and was rebuffed, not by the Confederates, but by slave states still loyal to the Union. When Union armies brought states back under federal control he urged easy paths to regaining citizenship.
The racist states-rights advocates have been advancing the same, tired argument since 1865.

Some things never change.

Jan 20, 2012

Republican Racism is an Air Raid Siren, Not a Dog Whistle

Damn blacks.

From Ron Paul's phony libertarianism [incursions on liberty and equality are fine if done by state governments, but not by the federal government] to Newt Gingrinch's naked plays to states' rights and racism, the South Carolina GOP primary campaign has marked an ugly demonstration of America's original sin continuing unabated today—racism.

Think AIG, outsourcing and corruption caused the Great Recession; nooo, it was the blacks, says the GOP.

Republican candidates are overtly signaling that whiteness and American identity are intertwined.

By Chauncey DeVega

On his MSNBC show Hardball, Chris Matthews called out Newt Gingrich and other Republicans for what he described as their "dog whistle" appeals to white racism during the South Carolina debate on Monday night.

He was correct in identifying the work that racism does for the Tea Party GOP and its candidates in their efforts to win over white conservative voters. However, Chris Matthews was too generous and kind. Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and other Republican candidates are not engaging in subtle dog whistles to their faithful, where racism and white racial anxiety hides in the background, masked and hidden by other language.

Definitions matter: dog whistle politics are based on a signal or cue to the in-group, and one so subtle that those not in the know will overlook it as no more than quixotic background noise, a blip, a comment without context or meaning.

For example, during the 2004 election, President Bush's mention of the infamous Dredd Scott Supreme Court decision had nothing to do with African Americans and slavery. Rather, it was a wink to a rabidly anti-choice conservative Right-wing audience that Roe vs. Wade would be overturned by his administration.

In 2008, McCain-Palin featured a negative campaign ad which borrowed from the movie The Ten Commandments and suggested that Barack Obama was the Anti-Christ. If one was not part of the Left Behind Jesus Camp Christian Nationalist Dominionist crowd, the visuals and narrative of the commercial were odd, bizarre, utterly strange, and devoid of context. The ugliness of these symbols and metaphors were so covert, that they made sense for those outside of the targeted audience only after Time magazine thoroughly deconstructed the campaign adand its malicious intent.

In 2012, Republican candidates are using overt signals, what are for all intents and purposes blaring air raid sirens and signal flares that race, whiteness, and American identity are deeply intertwined. The appeals to white racism by the Tea Party GOP during the primaries are not background rhythms or subdued choruses. They are the driving guitars of Blue Oyster Cult's "Godzilla," the chorus of Jay-Z's "99 Problems," the opening moments of the Notorious B.I.G's "Kick in the Door," or the flipped samples of Justice's "Stress". You feel it. You know it. To deny the obvious is to close one's ears to a driving drum line and cadence that travels up through your shoes...and to your bones.

Jewish family in NAZI Germany
How else can a fair observer excuse away Republican arguments that blacks are lazy parasites, whose children should live in work houses and pick up mops and brooms to learn a work ethic, that "illegal" immigrants should be killed by electric fences, or Muslim Americans should be subject to racial profiling, marked like the "Juden" of Nazi Germany?

In all, the Tea Party GOP's campaign for the presidency rests upon marshaling white anger and rage at The Usurper, a perpetual Other, and one not fit for the presidency by virtue of his birth and skin color--he who we know as President Barack Obama. If Birtherism is not based on this calculation, on what else does it rest?

Race matters to the Tea Party GOP. It matters overtly. And it matters to the white populists of the Republican Party without apology or subtlety. This leads to the following practical question: how do we separate the subtle dog whistle from blaring conservative racism? What are the elements of the racial appeal? How can we identify it so that reasonable folk can neuter and castrate it? Is this even possible?

Knowing is half the battle. To that end, let's work through elements of the puzzle:

The speaker effect. Using one of the most gross examples, when Newt Gingrich talks about lazy blacks on welfare and food stamps who do not know the meaning of hard work he is mindful of his audience. Remember, politics is ultimately about the creation and reinforcement of imagined communities. Gingrich, Santorum, Perry, and Paul know exactly how to talk to their respective audiences in order to get a response. To point: white conservative populists have disdain for non-whites, see them as lazy, outside of the polity, and as rightful targets for appeals based on symbolic racism. In the eyes of the Right, "those people" are not "real Americans." They never can be.

The audience as a public who receives, internalizes, and circulates the Tea Party GOP message about race, white racial resentment, white oppression, and hostility to people of color. The folks in the audience and on the stage during the Republican primary debates "get" the terms of the conversation. In fact, they are deeply attuned to the language and rhetoric of the New Right, as anyone who either goes to one of these events, or votes in a primary election, are deeply invested in its outcome, and a return to white American normality. In all, they are chasing nostalgia and a Leave it to Beaver vision and lie of America. This audience is also "tuned in" to politics. Gingrich and his peers are sending signals to a group primed and ready for his racial appeals...without a need for explanation.

This reality speaks to why there should be no surprise when Republican audiences cheer the death penalty, dying people without insurance, or heckle soldiers who happen to be gay. There are unstated rules, a script, which govern social norms and behavior. The outliers who go to political debates are intimately familiar with this language. Like marks at a professional wrestling event they know when to boo and when to cheer.

Context matters. In isolation, perhaps it would be a more difficult case to suggest that Gingrich's appeals to white audiences about lazy blacks are predominantly and clearly about white racism. However, given that communities are created through speech, and that "discourse" is about a sense of shared meaning with unstated assumptions, any argument for conservative colorblindness is judged to be insincere.

In South Carolina, where the Confederate flag still flies, there was Ron Paul (a bigot whose newsletters continue to suggest that African Americans are ravenous, craven, criminal, stupid beasts); Rick Santorum (a man fascinated by bestiality and the idea that blacks are parasites who only want to live off of white people); and Newt Gingrich who sees all African-Americans and Latinos as being on welfare and the public dole until proven otherwise. In total, these candidates are a rogues gallery where white supremacist attitudes towards non-whites is a standing rule, one only to be disputed after the fact.

Juan Williams is an object of abuse, a means to prove a point. Juan Williams is a paid pinata for white conservatives. I do not know if he was legitimately hurt and surprised by their reaction to him, or if his pain was not feigned, and rather sincere and real. In understanding the logic of Republican racism and naked appeals beyond the dog whistle, Williams was the stand-in, the object of abuse through which to actualize rage and hostility. Barack Obama was not available. Any black body would do. The cheering, snide glee of Newt Gingrich dressing down uppity "Juan," and the audience's cheering of a "boy" being put in his place, would be missed by only the most in denial observer.

Juan Williams is/was a repository for the fecal matter of white conservative bigotry, and a need to maintain superiority over negroes who dare not to step off of the sidewalk when white folks pass. That in another life Juan Williams would be a critic of "negro agitators" during the Civil Rights movement is coincidental to his designated role on Fox News: he is exemplary of Joel Kovel's theories about white supremacy, and how it manifests as a White society which is collectively (and individually) stuck in the fecal phase of human psychological development--it is all over his face. Juan Williams smiles while cashing his checks at the prospect of his politicalcoprophagia at the ass end of conservative politics. He revels in playing the role of the human centipede.

The excuse of ignorance and a lack of memory. One does not need to understand the root of a thing in order to buy into its power. White conservatives (and others) who traffic in racism do not necessarily need to be able to explain how blacks came to be associated in the White racist mind with apes. Likewise, those who hate Jews do not need to be able to give an exegesis on Nazi propaganda in order to be expert anti-Semites.

This is one of the greatest tools and defenses of the contemporary white racist--I didn't know that, you are being unfair!; You are "playing the race card" for calling out my association of the Obama with watermelons and apes as "racist"; I never associated blacks with welfare or crime, people like you are the real bigots for calling attention to how Republicans talk about such things, we are really all Americans!; stop talking about slavery, my family never owned black people!; (and of course) whites are oppressed in America by Barack Obama!

There is a collective reservoir of symbols, assumptions, and narratives that individuals borrow from in a given society in order to make sense of their world. Knowing the wellspring helps; it is not a requirement to perpetuate common sense understanding(s) of the world.

Ultimately, Chris Matthews was correct in the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law. To defeat President Obama, the Republican Party is wallowing in white racism in order to win over racially and economically insecure white voters. However, Gingrich and company are doing this overtly. There is little subtlety. Looking forward, the 2012 Presidential season will make the infamous Willie Horton ad of the 1988 presidential election look like a celebration of Dr. King's birthday. The challenge for liberals, progressives, and reasonable conservatives, is how to make the Republican Party pay for their race baiting, and desperate reaching back to the Civil War, Redemption, and Birth of a Nation as playbooks in order to defeat the United States' first Black President.

Sadly, matters may be so dire that the white identity politics of years past are now "new school" rather than "old school." To marshal that fear, insecurity, and anger one does not need nuance, sophistication, or dog whistles. White conservatives can put such feelings on blast and gin up the psychological wages of white fear, white anxiety, and white rage to try to defeat Barack Obama.

As always, the past isn't even past. It is yesterday. Get ready folks. What occurred in South Carolina is only a warm up for what the Tea Party GOP is preparing to unleash in the months to come. What is coming to pass will be an ugly, wild ride.

Scott Walker friends at AIG January fundraiser during Recall


Jan 1, 2012

Iowa Poll: It's Romney, Paul, Santorum, Gingrich, Perry and Bachmann

GOP - Angry, racist, and authoritarian

Update: Romney, Santorum and Paul Top the Pack: What the Iowa Caucuses Reveal About the GOP Base

Murderers’ Row this line-up of Republican liars, shills and whacks is not.

The 2012 Republican field is the weakest slate of candidates offered up for president by a major party in modern American, political history.

Des Moines Register’s latest Iowa Poll Results

Mitt Romney - 24 percent
Ron Paul - 22 percent
Rick Santorum - 15 percent
Newt Gingrich - 12 percent
Rick Perry -11 percent
Michele Bachmann - 7 percent

From the Des Moines Register
The Des Moines Register’s latest Iowa Poll shows a surprise three-way match-up in contention to win the Iowa Republican caucuses: Mitt Romney, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum.

Dec 31, 2011

Ron Paul in Shot with KKK Grand Wizard, NAZI, Stormfront Goes Viral

Ron Paul with former American Nazi, Current KKK Grand Wizard
and Stormfront.org webmaster - Shot at the at the Values Voter Presidential debate
in Fort Lauderdale on September 17, 2007.

As "Ron Paul tries to scare the crap out of Iowans about the UN takeover and riots in the streets over the emerging dictatorship in America" (TPM), comes this charming shot (to the right) from the Values Voter Presidential debate in Fort Lauderdale on September 17, 2007.

The keynote speaker to the 50th anniversary of the Appleton-based John Birch Society? (Steven Walters in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel) Nice.

Publisher of the racist, and pathetically bigoted newsletters in which Ron Paul made $millions and tried to defend, and later attested he never read or approved, first reported by James Kirchick almost four years ago. Really nice.

Now, comes a shot (above) of Ron Paul pictured with former American Nazi Party member and the current KKK Grand Wizard and Stormfront.org webmaster, Don Black that is going viral.

Just maybe our neighbors to the Southwest have the wrong idea about Ron Paul. So Iowa, wise up.

And hey Paul, to win the GOP nomination or even the Iowa caucuses, you need to be subtly racist, not overtly racist.

Dec 22, 2011

Ron Paul's Racist Newsletters Costing Him—Again, with Assist from Wisconsin

Ron Paul - White and proud of it

In 2008 James Kirchick at The New Republic broke a disturbing expose about the anti-war, self-proclaimed libertarian candidate for president, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Lake Jackson, Texas; 14th District), now for the first time leading polls for the GOP nomination for president in Iowa, and who has a plausible path to the 2012 GOP nomination, to the utter panic of many Republicans.

Kirchick, whom many regard as a neocon writer, took a lot of grief from the many, loyal pro-Ron Paul fans. [So did I for merely applauding Kirchick in a piece that drew a lot of hits at the site, Uppity Wisconsin.]

By Michael Leon

Some of the political commentariat point out that Paul received a lot of support from veterans in 2008, though Ron Paul 2012 does not list Veterans Benefits as an issue in his webpage, and his anti-government benefits ideology makes this writer dismiss him as a veterans' advocates.

What's ironic is that a fairly rightwing writer, James Kirchick, may be dooming Ron Paul again and some believe throwing away the GOP's last, best hope to defeat President Obama in a GOP field dominated by lightweights and to be candid: Whacks.

Paul, who has a distinguished record as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force, also has a political past where he was the publisher of several racist, anti-Semitic newsletters uncovered by Kirchick who concludes, "Ron Paul is not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are backing -- but rather a member in good standing of some of the oldest and ugliest traditions in American politics."

Ron Paul is a radical, a politician who in the words of Gary Weiss "is a true friend of the 1 percent" engaging in a campaign of phony populism. In fact, just months after Kirchick's 2008 blockbuster, Paul traveled to Wisconsin (Steven Walters in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel) where it was reported the "(f)ormer Republican presidential candidate ... will keynote Saturday's session of the 50th anniversary of the Appleton-based John Birch Society." The John Birch Society, dating back to the 1950s, is infamous for its conspiracy-minded, anti-Semitic, and Joe McCarthy-supporting radicals.

From Jonathan Chait:

"As early as December 1989, a section of his Investment Letter, titled 'What To Expect for the 1990s,' predicted that 'Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities' because 'mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’' Two months later, a newsletter warned of 'The Coming Race War,' and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, 'If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.' In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, 'Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.' 'This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,' the newsletter predicted."

Below is a video from C-SPAN in which Paul discusses his newsletters [starting at the 1:40 mark] in which Paul, speaking in the first-person, ["I"], describes his racist nonsense as a business-investment, political-type of investment-monetary newsletter.

How panicked is the GOP? Here's some recent pieces indicating why even a nomination of Newt might bring Karl Rove and the Koch brothers better news than a potential Ron Paul nomination:
What did Kirchick expose in 2008 and for how long did this ugliness have Paul's assent?

Kirchick writes (Jan. 8, 2008):
Paul’s newsletters have carried different titles over the years--Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report--but they generally seem to have been published on a monthly basis since at least 1978. ... What they reveal are decades worth of obsession with conspiracies, sympathy for the right-wing militia movement, and deeply held bigotry against blacks, Jews, and gays. ...
[In a] special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report, Kirchick cites:
According to the newsletter, the looting (1992 LA riot) was a natural byproduct of government indulging the black community with 'civil rights,’ quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.' It also denounced 'the media' for believing that 'America’s number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.'
And these beauties, noted by Kirchick:
  • [L]iberals who “want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare,” adding, “Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”
  • One newsletter ridiculed black activists who wanted to rename New York City after King, suggesting that “Welfaria,” “Zooville,” “Rapetown,” “Dirtburg,” and “Lazyopolis” were better alternatives.
  • While bashing King, the newsletters had kind words for the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke. In a passage titled “The Duke’s Victory,” a newsletter celebrated Duke’s 44 percent showing in the 1990 Louisiana Senate primary. “Duke lost the election,” it said, “but he scared the blazes out of the Establishment.”
  • In an item titled, “The Pink House?” the author of a newsletter--again, presumably Paul--complained about President George H.W. Bush’s decision to sign a hate crimes bill and invite “the heads of homosexual lobbying groups to the White House for the ceremony,” adding, “I miss the closet.”
  • “The ACT-UP slogan, on stickers plastered all over Manhattan, is ‘Silence = Death.’ But shouldn’t it be ‘Sodomy = Death’?”
  • His adversaries are often described in harsh terms: Barbara Jordan is called “Barbara Morondon,” Eleanor Holmes Norton is a “black pinko,” Donna Shalala is a “short lesbian,” Ron Brown is a “racial victimologist,” and Roberta Achtenberg, the first openly gay public official confirmed by the United States Senate, is a “far-left, normal-hating lesbian activist.” Maybe such outbursts mean Ron Paul really is a straight-talker. Or maybe they just mean he is a man filled with hate.
Kirchick must have had to research long hours to dig up these Ron Paul newsletters housed at the University of Wisconsin-Madison's State Historical Society [a state agency in itself), which maintains a very broad and deep collection of political material dedicated to preserving American history for the benefit of people of all states.

The Wisconsin State Historical Society has been collecting political newsletters and other material since 1849, the year after Wisconsin became a state.

At the very top of Rep. Paul's Congressional site, Paul quotes Frederic Bastiat, "Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all."

Right about now, Ron Paul likely wishes that preserving his racist tripe were not done at all.



Ron Paul explicit race-baiting