Putting an END to the 'Ron Paul is racist' claims right here and now. Who will challenge me?

Let's get real, would a racist doctor treat black patients?


Would a Texas NAACP President (Nelson Linder) come out in the open in defense of a racist?



I'm getting tired of all of the BS some people are purposely putting up here on ATS to back up a false assertion of Ron Paul being a racist. Prove me wrong with facts, I dare you.

This thread is the continuation of proving Ron Paul's innocence, if the accusers want a thread to throw BS up, that leaves us with the OBLIGATION to tell the truth.





Some of you might've seen or heard about the CNN interview where Ron Paul refused to answer the same question that was asked to him more ways than anybody could handle. Was it Ron that couldn't handle the interview even when he answered the question patiently several times before excusing himself? or Gloria Berger, the one that couldn't go home proudly without harassing him on cable news?

CNN Interview - Gloria Berger v Ron Paul

Gloria Borger is married to LANCE MORGAN. Lance is the chief communications and crisis strategist of POWELL TATE.Powell Tate is a D.C. firm that represents every part of the very same MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX that Ron Paul wants to reduce. SURPRISE SURPRISE!

www.powelltate.com...

This is a total conflict of interest. Her husband's firm includes overseeing a coalition to support congressional funding to parts of the U.S. Military.

In the 35 years and THOUSANDS of public speeches, of his political career, Ron Paul has never been heard speaking in such ways. You'd think SOMEBODY would've personally heard him make a racist remark if he was INDEED racist.

Make up your own minds people, don't just believe exactly what you hear and see, there is more to every story and there is a reason why the MSM and ATS trolls insist on digging 20 years into the past of Ron Paul where a ghostwriter write a few discriminatory remarks in the newsletter that he owned.

DESPITE his praising of Martin Luther King Jr throughout his entire career.

DESPITE his fighting against the war on drugs, that damages the black community and keeps them oppressed.

DESPITE his endorsement of Cynthia McKinny in 2008.

DESPITE his unwillingness to use tax payer's money to fund a medal for Rosa Parks but instead INSISTED on using his own money to start a collection pot with the rest of congress to purchase this award. GUESS WHAT? Nobody wanted to use their own money, they wanted to use the tax payer's money. RON PAUL was the only one.

Would a racist do all of the above? Hell no.

Blacks for Ron Paul

Ron Paul DEFENDING the BLACK community and gets the crowd ROARING.

A Black man's view on Ron Paul

If you believe this thread to be true, keep it bumped and active so ATS can know the truth. Don't give the baseless accusations even ONE SECOND of your time.

Now someone should go on cnn and ask that hag about this! She deserves to be made an example of! You guys should make vids and post this online for these people asking them the questions. If you get enough people in the know.....you never know?

good post!

Interesting facts about Gloria Borger, good to know - thanks for sharing. I did see part of the interview earlier today, the 5 minute block of time I decided to see what the MSM was up to and there she was asking Paul about the newsletters... But it says a lot that after so many years, that's the only dirt they can come up with on him here in 2011.

I appreciated the fact that he said if they (CNN) won't report on the wrongdoings of the other candidates, he will. Of course Newt wants to keep the campaign "positive", he wants to keep the skeletons in the closet. Paul abruptly ended the interview which might look bad, but if one realizes for how long and how many times he has directly addressed this to CNN and other networks, you'd do the same if you were in his shoes.

reply to post by eLPresidente


Damn straight brother!

Anybody buying into this crap, even without the knowledge of Dr. Paul's past that you mentioned, is an ignorant fool. These biased, media smear campaigns are completely transparent to anybody with a brain. After seeing the information that you posted about the conflicts of interest and history of the doctor supporting minorities, anyone who continues to spread these malicious lies will show themselves for what they truly are: not only willfully ignorant pathetic fools, but disinformers and shills.

Thank you! It seems that the shills are coming out bright and hard as they can. OP, you are so blessed and I knight thee. Of course I have no power to do so. However, ye are knighted my me!

reply to post by eLPresidente


I didn't know of his endorsement of McKinney. That right there raises my eyebrows.

She is, to put it mildly...quite crazy in my view. But then again, she is not my Rep.

Kucinich is.

reply to post by eLPresidente


In addition to what you have in the OP, here are a few more things I posted in another thread

Lets see what Rick Sincere thinks about this.

ricksincerethoughts.blogspot.com...

The campaign took place during the period that, according to Kirchick, "Ron Paul" was making derogatory, anti-gay remarks in "his" newsletters. As it happens, I was running as an openly-gay candidate for the Virginia General Assembly. (It was my second run for that office after a previous attempt in a special election in January 1991. The same district currently has an openly-gay Democrat representing it in Richmond.)

During that 1993 campaign, Ron Paul issued a letter on my behalf, soliciting funds from libertarians and votes from constituents. (We sent the letter to both groups.) Dr. Paul (then a former Congressman) was aware I was running as an openly-gay candidate and he raised no questions, concerns, or objections. I hardly think a homophobic bigot would have sent out a fundraising letter over his own signature, endorsing (as the Washington Times stylebook would have it) an "avowed homosexual" for public office.

Lets see what Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder (yeah, he's black) say about Paul

NAACP President: Ron Paul Is Not A Racist

Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder, who has known Ron Paul for 20 years, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist in light of recent smear attempts, and said the reason for him being attacked was that he was a threat to the establishment.

Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

ETA - You could also add this video to your OP

Welcome to the Republican Party, Mr. Paul.

Republicans always get targeted unfairly by the media.

As soon as he inevitably fades away, so will the scrutiny.

reply to post by eLPresidente


You have to understand that Paul is now the frontrunner or the next (R)authority. Since many on this board has beef against authority, its legit from them and a good thing. Its a good thing because Ron Paul is starting to make people nervous. .

Anyways, do you think Cain would support a racist? Look what he did when he suspended his campaign.

Ron Paul isn't racist, the media is.

Evil Boss: "Guys, we need some major dirt on this guy, now! See if he has had his fingers in the cash register, had his penis where it shouldn't have been or had his mind in illegal places (drug use). Search everything as far back as you can, we need to paint a bad picture and stop this guy"

Employee: "Uh...sir, we have searched all our archives and can find absolutely nothing."

Evil Boss: "Goddamn it, I cannot believe you inept people, he must have something we can use!"

Employee: "I'm very sorry sir but there is just nothing we can find that meets your criteria"

Evil Boss: "Oh screw it, we'll just call him a racist based on the most flimsy of evidence for now..."

reply to post by Carseller4


This thread is in direct response to the completely ignorant threads on ATS claiming Ron Paul is a racist because of his call to amend the portion of the civil rights act that violates a business owners right to refuse service to whom he/she wishes and the FEW ghostwritten sentences in the newsletters that have already been denounced, debunked, explained, washed away, played out, burnt, withered, decayed, waned, faded, deteriorated, wilted...do you get the point now?

People are using pictures he took with a known racist and using that as evidence that he is indeed a racist himself.

I can google hundreds of thousands of pictures he took with supporters, fans, neighbors, co-workers right now.

He is a political superstar, he's going to be taking pictures with strangers for quite some time.

Lately I feel there is an incredible onslaught in an effort to discredit Paul, and with this final effort an ulterior motive of discrediting the libertarian movement all-together. They want to paint the most consistent libertarian/Constitutionalist we know as a racist, even though the ideology itself is the polar opposite of.

Liberty doesn't favor collectives; it treats every person as an individual with certain unalienable and equal rights. Are there some racist that are also [self-proclaimed] libertarians? Sure, as there are in any political affiliation. But the philosophy itself defies racism. And as we've seen throughout the years Paul has continually spoke against policies that discriminate against blacks/Hispanics. He's disgusted by the drug war's embodiment of racism & seeks to end it. This in and of itself is a proclamation against the very claims that they throw at him.

Lastly, he's repeatedly disavowed the remarks made by those ghostwriters & taken moral responsibility. He leaves it up to those who know him, his supporters, to decide whether or not they accept his repudiation & view him as anti-racism. Those who feel this disqualifying are entitled to their own opinion..... I know where I stand.

In that interview, CNN edited out the question that made Ron Paul end it.

This is terrible journalism, show the question! They edited out the last question she asked him, and all you could hear was her justifying why she asked it, then you see him take off his mic.

Watch this video again.

It could have been anything!

I heard Ron had a golly wog doll as a child.

Clearly, someone owning such a doll wouldn't be racist!

Ok

I challenge you to explain this link someone posted on a news site talking about the CNN interview:

www.criticalreactor.com...

Originally posted by BohemianBrim
Ok

I challenge you to explain this link someone posted on a news site talking about the CNN interview:

www.criticalreactor.com...

Black teenagers are fast, if you don't believe me turn it on a sports channel; put a ball in their hand and they are fast, actually faster than most white boys.

Put a purse in their hand, and they are probably faster; just saying.

Oh wait, does that make me racist?

Originally posted by xstealth

Originally posted by BohemianBrim
Ok

I challenge you to explain this link someone posted on a news site talking about the CNN interview:

www.criticalreactor.com...

Black teenagers are fast, if you don't believe me turn it on a sports channel; put a ball in their hand and they are fast, actually faster than most white boys.

Put a purse in their hand, and they are probably faster; just saying.

Oh wait, does that make me racist?

i meant, explain why hes talking about an article he wrote that appeared in a newsletter he said he never read or wrote for.

???

reply to post by BohemianBrim


Yes isn't it interesting how they CLAIM he was the one that wrote the newsletter when he wasn't?

Isn't it interesting how they CLAIM he SAID it was taken out of context but they didn't bother to quote that phrase? yet they bothered to quote other phrases they CLAIMED he said?


The article also went on to claim the NAACP was offended by the newsletter, which Paul did not write.

Why did the NAACP President of Austin branch come to Paul's defense? Do blacks, especially those that possess leadership roles, fighting for equality, come to the defense of racists? Do they make these statements off of nothing but assumptions?

This is what the article CLAIMS he ACTUALLY said "He said they were being taken out of context.
"It's typical political demagoguery," he said. "If people are interested in my character . . . come and talk to my neighbors."



Now imagine if you owned a newsletter but you didn't control it's daily operations because you were busy building and maintaining a medical practice that served people for free if they couldn't afford it (black people included )

Now imagine if you were in an interview and somebody asked you what was up with those discriminatory remarks in your newsletter and you had no idea what it was about. You'd assume somebody just wanted to make a big deal out of it. What are the chances you would say 'they were being taken out of context' not thinking it was a big deal or that 20 years later, the entire mainstream media would dog you for it?

And what are the chances you would say (if you were running for public office) that it was political demagoguery? And to maintain and prove your innocence, to ask the interviewer to visit your neighbors to find out about your real personality?

And did that interviewer do a follow up to check Ron's background, asking his neighbors about his character? Yea, I'll let you answer that.

reply to post by eLPresidente


but that doesnt explain him saying this : "Dr. Paul denied suggestions that he was a racist and said he was not evoking stereotypes when he wrote the columns"


if people are accusing you of being a racist for something you didnt write, wouldnt you make a point to say then that you didnt write it?

if you claim they are just lying and being deceptive, then why did they bother quoting him at all? and why didnt he hire a lawyer and sue them for libel?