Rand Paul Reaches Out to Black Voters...

Rand Paul Reaches Out to Black Voters at Howard University

There are 91 comments on the KVOR-AM Colorado Springs story from Apr 10, 2013, titled Rand Paul Reaches Out to Black Voters at Howard University. In it, KVOR-AM Colorado Springs reports that:

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul conceded he had a "daunting task" Wednesday when he set out to woo black students at Howard University, and proceeded to tell them that the Republican Party was the party of the civil rights movement.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at KVOR-AM Colorado Springs.

Mayela

Atlanta, GA

#71 Apr 25, 2013
Rand Paul wooing black voters with condescension and dishonesty

On Wednesday, Sen. Rand Paul continued his outreach effort to appeal to minority voters, speaking at Howard University, one of the most prestigious historical black colleges in America. While Paul admirably spoke about the folly of the federal Drug War and the toll it has taken on the African-American community, most of the speech consisted of a horribly condescending lecture on black history that assumed his audience — of intelligent young college students — would somehow be ignorant of.

Another insulting aspect of Paul’s speech was that he blatantly lied when asked about his previous questioning of the Civil Rights Act (which he did on both “The Rachel Maddow Show” and in an interview with The Courier-Journal in 2010, before he switched to saying he would have supported it after facing serious backlash).

If you want a group of people to vote for you, the way to do that is present why your policies are best for them, not insulting lectures using selective history and lying about your past statements. Nor does it help to characterize speaking in front of black college student as “brave”… that’s what elected public officials are supposed to do. Well, that and not lie to them.

This week, Jon Stewart of “The Daily Show” and Rachel Maddow gave Paul the roasting he deserved:
http://fatlip.leoweekly.com/2013/04/12/rand-p...

“A wise man changes his mind, a fool never”

Spanish Proverb
http://thinkexist.com/quotation/a_wise_man_ch...

Rand Paul=“a fool never”
TLOL

“KONA, baby!”

Since: Jul 08

Jacksonville, FL

#72 Apr 25, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Despite all his wobbling and word twisting, Rand and Ron Paul are both opponents of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I'd not be surprised if they were opposed to the 13th Amendment.
I'm sure that you have facts to back up your claim, right? Just because your liberal handlers tell you something does not make it true.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#74 Apr 26, 2013
Mayela wrote:
Rand Paul wooing black voters with condescension and dishonesty
On Wednesday, Sen. Rand Paul continued his outreach effort to appeal to minority voters, speaking at Howard University, one of the most prestigious historical black colleges in America. While Paul admirably spoke about the folly of the federal Drug War and the toll it has taken on the African-American community, most of the speech consisted of a horribly condescending lecture on black history that assumed his audience — of intelligent young college students — would somehow be ignorant of.
Another insulting aspect of Paul’s speech was that he blatantly lied when asked about his previous questioning of the Civil Rights Act (which he did on both “The Rachel Maddow Show” and in an interview with The Courier-Journal in 2010, before he switched to saying he would have supported it after facing serious backlash).
If you want a group of people to vote for you, the way to do that is present why your policies are best for them, not insulting lectures using selective history and lying about your past statements. Nor does it help to characterize speaking in front of black college student as “brave”… that’s what elected public officials are supposed to do. Well, that and not lie to them.
This week, Jon Stewart of “The Daily Show” and Rachel Maddow gave Paul the roasting he deserved:
http://fatlip.leoweekly.com/2013/04/12/rand-p...
“A wise man changes his mind, a fool never”
Spanish Proverb
http://thinkexist.com/quotation/a_wise_man_ch...
Rand Paul=“a fool never”
TLOL
Good post. Some of my Howard U students were there. Needless to say, they were not impressed with Rand Paul's shallow performance.
spud

Bangor, PA

#76 Apr 27, 2013
Paul is pretty good except on two VERY big things. His support of free trade and amnesty are terrible for this country. He needs to realize that SOME protectionism is good for Americans. But even though he leaves a lot to be desired, he's still much better than that other phony Clinton.

Since: Feb 08

Hypoluxo Fl

#77 Apr 27, 2013
Mr Big Bad John Roberts wrote:
<quoted text>I agree. Paul would not have been that condescending at Yale or even Kentucky. He is clueless but not as bad as Romney.
I disagree, he's worse. The name "Rand" says it all for me.
Truthism

United States

#78 Apr 27, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Empty right wing rhetoric. The government, unfortunately, is largely an extension of the corporate structure.
Actually, one is then "shackled" by corporate power indirectly when one has a government job, and more directly in the private sector. It's a form of corporate serfdom.
The equating of the "left" (itself an often vague notion) with "plantation owners" is simple, mindless pish posh. There are no plantation owners in the 21 st Century, or so few you can easily count them.
When there WERE slaveholding plantation owners, it was mainly from the AMERICAN LEFT---the ABOLITIONISTS and rebel slaves themselves--that the staunchest opposition to the plantation owners came.
The plantation owners themselves were the most RIGHT WING element in American political life.
Hence your equating of the "left" with real or imaginary plantation owners is sheer fabrication.
But while the dominant class in America was once the planterrs, they are today the CORPORATE oligarchy. The corporate 1% are the nearest equivalent to planters of yesteryear. And BOTH parties are in bed with the corporate elite to some extent. But the Democrats are more like the corporate mistress, while the REpublicans are more like the WIFE.
It is from the LEFT that the main opposition to corporate power comes. And the largest single ethnic basis of progressive opposition to corporate power in the national Black Commmunity.
Ron Paul was/is the LOGICAL middle, not extreme right or left.

Only [real] intelligent people can see this; the simpletons keep fighting that old stupid war of "us" (left or right) vs. "them" (left or right), when really that is set up as a distraction, so as to keep the pawns ('voters') from seeing the actual truth: that there's a criminal elite manipulating all of this in order to keep power, no matter what side "wins" (is picked secretly) every four years, and/or those picked in Congress and Senate. One can see clear contradictions on BOTH sides (R and D) when we look at their ideal beliefs.

They called Ron Paul "Dr. No" in Congress because he'd say "NO!" to pretty much any bill which expanded or grew government power. His voting record, BOOKS written, and speeches verbally expressed speak for themselves; Ron Paul is one of the extreme few (or even only one I've ever seen in recent times) who seem to genuinely care about liberty, justice and true LIMITED government.

Did you vote for Ron Paul?
Truthism

United States

#79 Apr 27, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
He would do better forming a program which keeps loony racists like Masud sedated an under psychiatric care.
That'd be fascistic criminality to force someone against their will simply because they're "racist."

You're showing your true colors here, fascist Savant. Keep going.

One can disagree with racists yet let them have their freedom of speech, unless that speech turns to physical action in a criminal type of way, then it's logical to punish them by imprisonment and/or psychiatric evaluation.

Savant, you claim to be intelligent... so let's see if you're truly intelligent enough to agree with my post here.:)
Truthism

United States

#80 Apr 27, 2013
How The Government & Media Cheated Ron Paul

http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/TG4L1HJC3R8I0...

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#81 Apr 27, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
Ron Paul was/is the LOGICAL middle, not extreme right or left.
Only [real] intelligent people can see this; the simpletons keep fighting that old stupid war of "us" (left or right) vs. "them" (left or right), when really that is set up as a distraction, so as to keep the pawns ('voters') from seeing the actual truth: that there's a criminal elite manipulating all of this in order to keep power, no matter what side "wins" (is picked secretly) every four years, and/or those picked in Congress and Senate. One can see clear contradictions on BOTH sides (R and D) when we look at their ideal beliefs.
They called Ron Paul "Dr. No" in Congress because he'd say "NO!" to pretty much any bill which expanded or grew government power. His voting record, BOOKS written, and speeches verbally expressed speak for themselves; Ron Paul is one of the extreme few (or even only one I've ever seen in recent times) who seem to genuinely care about liberty, justice and true LIMITED government.
Did you vote for Ron Paul?
Ron and Rand Paul's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (except in Federal employment) puts them on the Right, even as it put Barry Goldwater on the Right during the 1960s. Rand Paul's opposition to the achievements of the New Deal and all the accomplishments of the 1960s, also put him on the Right.(Oh yes, there were also those racist articles that Ron Paul now claims to know nothing about, which would put him pretty squarely on the Right. LIke father, like son? I wonder). I think I can infer Rand's attitude toward universal healh care. I think that would put him on the Right.

Two things which seem not to put him on the right is his stated opposition to the war on drugs and the military industrial complex (first denounced by Eisenhower, but now mainly opposed by the center left).
And, of course, Rand Paul like libertarians in general (at least in America), is very pro-capitalist. Which in REALITY means wealth and political power concentrated in the elite hands of the 1%. It certainly has nothing to do with "free enterprise." Again, that seems pretty right wing to me.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#82 Apr 27, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
Ron Paul was/is the LOGICAL middle, not extreme right or left.
Only [real] intelligent people can see this; the simpletons keep fighting that old stupid war of "us" (left or right) vs. "them" (left or right), when really that is set up as a distraction, so as to keep the pawns ('voters') from seeing the actual truth: that there's a criminal elite manipulating all of this in order to keep power, no matter what side "wins" (is picked secretly) every four years, and/or those picked in Congress and Senate. One can see clear contradictions on BOTH sides (R and D) when we look at their ideal beliefs.
They called Ron Paul "Dr. No" in Congress because he'd say "NO!" to pretty much any bill which expanded or grew government power. His voting record, BOOKS written, and speeches verbally expressed speak for themselves; Ron Paul is one of the extreme few (or even only one I've ever seen in recent times) who seem to genuinely care about liberty, justice and true LIMITED government.
Did you vote for Ron Paul?
Did you vote for Jill Stein?

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#83 Apr 27, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
That'd be fascistic criminality to force someone against their will simply because they're "racist."
You're showing your true colors here, fascist Savant. Keep going.
One can disagree with racists yet let them have their freedom of speech, unless that speech turns to physical action in a criminal type of way, then it's logical to punish them by imprisonment and/or psychiatric evaluation.
Savant, you claim to be intelligent... so let's see if you're truly intelligent enough to agree with my post here.:)
You are showing YOUR true colors, Nazi "Truthism", since you are noticeably SILENT about Masud's racist comments, but not about my indignant reaction.. Perhaps it's because his racism doesn't offend you, or even express your own sentiments. And I notice you put "racist" in sneer quotes. That itself is revealing since Masud's racist is BLATANT, as blatant as the racism in some of Ron Paul's articles.
Truthism

United States

#84 Apr 27, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Ron and Rand Paul's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (except in Federal employment) puts them on the Right, even as it put Barry Goldwater on the Right during the 1960s. Rand Paul's opposition to the achievements of the New Deal and all the accomplishments of the 1960s, also put him on the Right.(Oh yes, there were also those racist articles that Ron Paul now claims to know nothing about, which would put him pretty squarely on the Right. LIke father, like son? I wonder). I think I can infer Rand's attitude toward universal healh care. I think that would put him on the Right.
Two things which seem not to put him on the right is his stated opposition to the war on drugs and the military industrial complex (first denounced by Eisenhower, but now mainly opposed by the center left).
And, of course, Rand Paul like libertarians in general (at least in America), is very pro-capitalist. Which in REALITY means wealth and political power concentrated in the elite hands of the 1%. It certainly has nothing to do with "free enterprise." Again, that seems pretty right wing to me.
Ron Paul is for giving that kind of power back to individual States. He's about severely limiting federal government power because the federal government has made excuses, left and right, as for why it has to stick its big smelly nose into everyone elses business and this has screwed up a lot of things, including infringing upon many individuals' rights to do what they want, so long as it didn't hurt anyone elses body, rights or liberty.

So just because Ron Paul backs peoples right to be "racist" doesn't mean Ron Paul, himself, backs the racism which they hold in high regard. I can fight for your right to be free to spew Afrocentric nonsense, and I would, yet that doesn't mean I personally AGREE with that Afrocentric nonsense.

As for me not countering Masud, or anyone else: you've obviously not read many of my posts concerning racism on this forum; well, I don't post TOO often, but if you look them up, you'll see I oppose "racism" on a moral and scientific foundation. But I know everyone has their right to be "racist" all they want. I put "racism" in quotations a lot because I do not believe any "race" exists. I think it's funny how they came up with such an idiotic word. Anyway, that's my personal belief.

As for wanting to keep a free market: that's wanting freedom; apparently, you don't believe in freedom, as your true colors have shown here.

So you think it's worse for someone to personally dislike others solely based upon their genetic background, yet they keep their hands to themselves and only troll on forums every day about it; yet you think it's "good" to have government fascistically bust down that trolls' door, put them in handcuffs and force them against their rightful will into a psychiatric ward, put them on some kind of [poisonous] medication(s)... all because you're too weak of mind to put up with said trolls' beliefs put in text on a forum?

Really, Savant?

I think anyone here can see who is the worst of these two offenders...

If you cannot respect freedom of speech, even offensive speech, then you might want to try looking at another fascist country to move to. You might like it there more so than over here... for now, at least. Who knows what fascist pieces of trash will make into law in the next 30-50 years, because the words "offended" the backboneless little crybabies so much, they drove the babies insane. lol!

I mean, really, if you want to live in a "free" (not totally, for now) society, you've got to get more of a backbone. Seriously.

I despise fascists way more than "racists" any day of the week... and I think racists are mainly just ignorant, insecure bigots. Fascists want to spread their criminality to the masses and that pisses me off. Racist fascists, they're even worse.
Truthism

United States

#85 Apr 27, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
You are showing YOUR true colors, Nazi "Truthism", since you are noticeably SILENT about Masud's racist comments, but not about my indignant reaction.. Perhaps it's because his racism doesn't offend you, or even express your own sentiments. And I notice you put "racist" in sneer quotes. That itself is revealing since Masud's racist is BLATANT, as blatant as the racism in some of Ron Paul's articles.
Nazi is basically short for "National Socialist" in German.

I'm not a socialist; nor do I believe in fascism as such - like the fascism you expressed in this thread toward Masud.

If I am not correct, let me know but, aren't you a socialist, Savant?

So you're pro-fascism *and* pro-National socialism.

Looks like you fit the label of "Nazi" here, kid; not I.
Truthism

United States

#86 Apr 27, 2013
By the way, there are so many racist trolls on this forum, I don't bother wasting my time in trying to respond to every single post they make. That'd take a while to do in just a few threads.

I thought you'd understand that; I pick my battles here, not go after the usual trolls who mean nothing in real debate. You not understanding that only shows how much you lack in actual intelligence, or you lack such an argument on the point I brought up before, that you had to attempt (and fail, miserably) to twist it around on me, when you're clearly the bigger offender with your pro-fascist beliefs.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#87 Apr 27, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
Ron Paul is for giving that kind of power back to individual States. He's about severely limiting federal government power because the federal government has made excuses, left and right, as for why it has to stick its big smelly nose into everyone elses business and this has screwed up a lot of things, including infringing upon many individuals' rights to do what they want, so long as it didn't hurt anyone elses body, rights or liberty.
So just because Ron Paul backs peoples right to be "racist" doesn't mean Ron Paul, himself, backs the racism which they hold in high regard. I can fight for your right to be free to spew Afrocentric nonsense, and I would, yet that doesn't mean I personally AGREE with that Afrocentric nonsense.
As for me not countering Masud, or anyone else: you've obviously not read many of my posts concerning racism on this forum; well, I don't post TOO often, but if you look them up, you'll see I oppose "racism" on a moral and scientific foundation. But I know everyone has their right to be "racist" all they want. I put "racism" in quotations a lot because I do not believe any "race" exists. I think it's funny how they came up with such an idiotic word. Anyway, that's my personal belief.
As for wanting to keep a free market: that's wanting freedom; apparently, you don't believe in freedom, as your true colors have shown here.
So you think it's worse for someone to personally dislike others solely based upon their genetic background, yet they keep their hands to themselves and only troll on forums every day about it; yet you think it's "good" to have government fascistically bust down that trolls' door, put them in handcuffs and force them against their rightful will into a psychiatric ward, put them on some kind of [poisonous] medication(s)... all because you're too weak of mind to put up with said trolls' beliefs put in text on a forum?
Really, Savant?
I think anyone here can see who is the worst of these two offenders...
If you cannot respect freedom of speech, even offensive speech, then you might want to try looking at another fascist country to move to. You might like it there more so than over here... for now, at least. Who knows what fascist pieces of trash will make into law in the next 30-50 years, because the words "offended" the backboneless little crybabies so much, they drove the babies insane. lol!
I mean, really, if you want to live in a "free" (not totally, for now) society, you've got to get more of a backbone. Seriously.
I despise fascists way more than "racists" any day of the week... and I think racists are mainly just ignorant, insecure bigots. Fascists want to spread their criminality to the masses and that pisses me off. Racist fascists, they're even worse.
One day we will tell you what life was like, especially for Blacks, when power rested more in the individual states. Suffice it do say that indivicual states didn't voluntarily end De Jure Jim Crow or political disfranchisement. They didn't voluntarily end slavery either. In fact, some states (especially in the South) were/are far MORE REPRESSIVE than the Federal gov. As for Ron Paul, I'm not sure that he isn't a racist. But I'm not buying the line that he only supports peoples right to be racist, Imagine telling a Jew you support peoples (or individual states') right to be Nazi even though you're not a Nazi. Of course, I can't stop someone from having racist or nazi opinions. But I can prevent states from acting on them, which is what the Civil Rights acts opposed by Ron and Rand Paul were about. Opposition to such laws does amount to support for racism and oppression. I suspect even YOU know that. And I'm still waiting to see your reply to Masud, or even to Ron Paul's racist articles. You are going to have to grow a backbone and become a man rathern than a racist. That, too, is FREEDOM!

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#88 Apr 27, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
Nazi is basically short for "National Socialist" in German.
I'm not a socialist; nor do I believe in fascism as such - like the fascism you expressed in this thread toward Masud.
If I am not correct, let me know but, aren't you a socialist, Savant?
So you're pro-fascism *and* pro-National socialism.
Looks like you fit the label of "Nazi" here, kid; not I.
That's sort of like the Stalinists referring to East Germany as the "German Democratic Republic". Oh, do you believe in democracy.
Like most fellow citizens of the USA, you are a political ?lliterate. That shows how corrupt our political culture is.
The Nazis were no more socialist than the Stalinist were democratic. It's probably only in the USA among richer nations that such sophomoric errors as yours could be commonly made. Unfortunately, it would require another thread to instruct you about the principles of socialism and democracy.
Perhaps in the meantime you might read a book called BIG BUSINESS AND FASCISM.
Oh yes, NaZism and Fascism are extreme RIGHT WING ideologies. Just about everyone knows that Savant is a man of the left. I expect morons to call me a Communist, but it's a new kind of simpleton who call me a fascist--not to mention a Nazi given what I KNOW Nazis did to Black people.
Truthism

United States

#89 Apr 27, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
One day we will tell you what life was like, especially for Blacks, when power rested more in the individual states. Suffice it do say that indivicual states didn't voluntarily end De Jure Jim Crow or political disfranchisement. They didn't voluntarily end slavery either. In fact, some states (especially in the South) were/are far MORE REPRESSIVE than the Federal gov. As for Ron Paul, I'm not sure that he isn't a racist. But I'm not buying the line that he only supports peoples right to be racist, Imagine telling a Jew you support peoples (or individual states') right to be Nazi even though you're not a Nazi. Of course, I can't stop someone from having racist or nazi opinions. But I can prevent states from acting on them, which is what the Civil Rights acts opposed by Ron and Rand Paul were about. Opposition to such laws does amount to support for racism and oppression. I suspect even YOU know that. And I'm still waiting to see your reply to Masud, or even to Ron Paul's racist articles. You are going to have to grow a backbone and become a man rathern than a racist. That, too, is FREEDOM!
The federal government should only step in when an individual State clearly infringes upon an individual citizens' right as protected by the U.S. Constitution. Slavery was infringement upon an individuals right to freedom, so the federal government stepping in was correct on that issue, if a State made slavery "legal" there.

As for one person not doing business with another based upon their genetic background? Well, that's their right to be racist. Don't do business with them and they'll lose a lot of money anyway.

If memory is correct: Ron Paul said that he did not write those letters all those years ago, nor did he approve of them before they went out.

Why would anyone be dumb enough to write such things and then blatantly deny it later on? They'd not bother, unless they're an idiot. Ron Paul is clearly not an idiot and he doesn't seem like an ignorant bigot to me. So, all I can go on is his word for now and his character, which speaks volumes if you've heard him speak on many issues and/or read his material on many issues.

As for Jews and Nazis: I support peoples' right to believe whatever they want, it doesn't mean I agree with all of their belifs. There's a difference. Once they put those beliefs into action, and those actions clearly infringe upon another persons' liberty, body or property, THAT'S when I draw the line. That's how government should be.

They can be a "Nazi" (National Socialist) all they want... just keep their hands to their own self and we're fine. Beliefs are different from physical action.

Didn't know you couldn't tell the difference...
Truthism

United States

#90 Apr 27, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
That's sort of like the Stalinists referring to East Germany as the "German Democratic Republic". Oh, do you believe in democracy.
Like most fellow citizens of the USA, you are a political ?lliterate. That shows how corrupt our political culture is.
The Nazis were no more socialist than the Stalinist were democratic. It's probably only in the USA among richer nations that such sophomoric errors as yours could be commonly made. Unfortunately, it would require another thread to instruct you about the principles of socialism and democracy.
Perhaps in the meantime you might read a book called BIG BUSINESS AND FASCISM.
Oh yes, NaZism and Fascism are extreme RIGHT WING ideologies. Just about everyone knows that Savant is a man of the left. I expect morons to call me a Communist, but it's a new kind of simpleton who call me a fascist--not to mention a Nazi given what I KNOW Nazis did to Black people.
You're a socialist, are you not?

You're pro-fascism, are you not? Yes, you are. I'll answer for you, since proof is already seen in this thread.

Nazi is short for National Socialist in the German language.

You fit the label much more than I EVER will. That's 100% fact.

If you don't want to accept the word, then don't use it against one who is not a socialist because I'm not a socialist, nor am I a fascist; nor do I agree with "racism" or shall we say "hate of others solely based upon their different genetic background."

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#91 Apr 29, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
You're a socialist, are you not?
You're pro-fascism, are you not? Yes, you are. I'll answer for you, since proof is already seen in this thread.
Nazi is short for National Socialist in the German language.
You fit the label much more than I EVER will. That's 100% fact.
If you don't want to accept the word, then don't use it against one who is not a socialist because I'm not a socialist, nor am I a fascist; nor do I agree with "racism" or shall we say "hate of others solely based upon their different genetic background."
First of all, the largest opposition to fascism in much of Europe were SOCIALISTS. If you don't know the difference between socialism and fascism (even when a variety of fascism calls itself "national socialist"), then you're politically illiterate. I thought you'd see the analogy between considering Nazis (who KILLED socialists and other leftists)who CALLED themselves "socialist" (mainly to deceive workers) and Stalinists who CALLED themselves "democratic". If Nazis calling themselves "socialists" meant they really were, then Stalinist East German calling itself "democratic" would mean they really were. The important thing is not lexical meaning of the acronym "Nazi", but the actual SUBSTANCE of their ideology--militant reactionary nationalism and racism.
Now, socialism would involved democratic cooperative economy and democratic governance by the COMMON PEOPLE (especially working class folks). CLASS has a priority in socialist discourse even though they are aware of racism, sexism, etc. But socialism, a child of the Englightenment & democratic revolutions of the 18th & 19th Centureis, is in principle ANTI-RACIST, and considers its main adversary to be the privileged CLASS (or classes)
Nazism is COMMITTED TO RACISM, to the division of humanity into a MASTER RACE (Aryans, white and ideally blonde) and supposedly INFERIOR non-Aryan and slave races (including ALL Blacks, Jews, and many non-Aryan whites). The SLAVE RACES, according to the Nazis were to be exterminated (which was the intended fate of all Jews) or enslaved (e.g. Slavs and nearly everyone else nom-Aryan)
Search through the writings of socialists or communists like Marx, Bakunin, Rosa Luxemburg, Martin Buber, Martin Luther King, Jr, Emma Goldman, Erich Fromm, Fanon, Kropotkin, Albert Einstein, Oscar Wilde, or whatever socialist you choose. You will find that they are EGALITARIAN--in contrast to the anti-egalitarianism of Fascism and Nazism---and they are committed to a certain humanism. Which contrast with the anti-humanist ideas and sentiments of extreme rightists such as one finds among Italian, Spanish & German (Nazi) fascists.
It stands to reason, if you're not politically illiterate, that neither I nor any other socialist, could be at one and the same time FASCIST and SOCIALIST. A socialist might eventually become a fascist, as a liberal might eventually become a conservative, or a theist an atheist. One cannot be BOTH fascist and socialist at the same time.
Hence your claim that I, a KNOWN democratic socialist and anti-racist can be a fascist---even a Nazi fascist--is a patent absurdity reflecting either ignorance or mental incompetence.
And as an African-American I have as much chance of being a Nazi as I do of becoming a Klansman,even assuming I were mentally unbalanced enough to want to become such.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#92 Apr 29, 2013
Truthism wrote:
<quoted text>
The federal government should only step in when an individual State clearly infringes upon an individual citizens' right as protected by the U.S. Constitution. Slavery was infringement upon an individuals right to freedom, so the federal government stepping in was correct on that issue, if a State made slavery "legal" there.
As for one person not doing business with another based upon their genetic background? Well, that's their right to be racist. Don't do business with them and they'll lose a lot of money anyway.
If memory is correct: Ron Paul said that he did not write those letters all those years ago, nor did he approve of them before they went out.
Why would anyone be dumb enough to write such things and then blatantly deny it later on? They'd not bother, unless they're an idiot. Ron Paul is clearly not an idiot and he doesn't seem like an ignorant bigot to me. So, all I can go on is his word for now and his character, which speaks volumes if you've heard him speak on many issues and/or read his material on many issues.
As for Jews and Nazis: I support peoples' right to believe whatever they want, it doesn't mean I agree with all of their belifs. There's a difference. Once they put those beliefs into action, and those actions clearly infringe upon another persons' liberty, body or property, THAT'S when I draw the line. That's how government should be.
They can be a "Nazi" (National Socialist) all they want... just keep their hands to their own self and we're fine. Beliefs are different from physical action.
Didn't know you couldn't tell the difference...
Yes, it is true that Ron Paul SAID he didn't publish those racist articles written under his name (in HIS publication) over a number of years. But that's no guarantee that he didn't actually write them. And some poople who worked with his publication claim that he DID write or approve what was written. That this kind of drivel could be published FOR YEARS without Ron Paul noticing it seems a bit fantastic. It would suggest that he's mentally incompetent not to have noticed stuff published under his name in his own journal! Or perhaps he's suffering from Alzheimer. Or maybe Ron Paul is just lying.
But I doubt that those who are trying to defend Ron Paul despite those racist articles under his name, would be equally accomodating if let's say articles published from the perspective of the Nation of Islam appeared under the name of Barack Obama in an Obama newsletter or journal.
If you believe Ron Paul's story regarding those articles, then I will sell you the Chesapeake Bay at a discount.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Howard University Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The lesson your child can learn from Rachel Dol... Jul '15 Ray Buttler 6
News Fifty years after LBJ challenged the nation, th... Jun '15 Mr Amigo 26
News Alma Thomas' Earthly drawings and paintings on ... May '15 Will Dockery 1
News The Disproportionate Burden of Student-Loan Deb... May '15 Oh No You Di-nt 1
News From Hurricane Katrina to Howard University, a ... May '15 Le Jimbo 7
News Our History Makers: Toni Morrison (Feb '12) Apr '15 KnutesNiche 2
News Obama links climate change to public health Apr '15 serfs up 30
More from around the web