Sunday, January 13, 2008

THE RON PAUL REVULSION PART II

THE RON PAUL REVULSION - PART II



By Nicole Nichols



I've never been much of a fan of soap operas, people who try to put words in my mouth, or those who are incessantly trying to convert me to something that I would never be able to embrace. I don't much care for superficial people or those who hide behind the label of "Christian" while beating their wives, lying to the public, and generally being all around assholes. What I really can't stand, however, are wolves in sheep's clothing - especially those seeking positions of power - enter Ron Paul.




Last November, I wrote the first "Ron Paul Revulsion" article which has been widely read and cited on the internet. In that article I exposed some of the close connections of Paul with the racist movement and promised another installment.




As I write, the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary are over. Now, Ron Paul has a passel of bucks, and his supporters have become increasingly aggressive in furthering his campaign. Yet, the "Dr. No" of the House of Representatives has yet to break into double digits in the polls, and only pulled 10% of the vote out of the Hawkeye State and 8% of New Hampshire's votes. Go figure.




A couple of nights ago, I watched the Republican debates out of South Carolina and could not help but laugh at the stammering and often off-topic answers given by Ron Paul. Several have raised the question, "Why is he even there?"




He's there because his rabid supporters, with their gang-like mentality, throw such huge tantrums, and use mob tactics to insure his participation and because there are some very heavy hitters on the extreme right who are supporting him and throwing their weight around. And...because we happen to be a nation that believes in freedom of speech and equal opportunities for all no matter how whacked out they might be.




Now you may ask why I would even care about Paul who doesn't appear to have a prayer of winning the Republican nomination for President of the United States. You may question why we, at Citizens Against Hate and Eye On Hate have devoted so much air and print time to a probable "also-ran." So…I'm going to clear that up right now.




While Paul may not reach the brass ring, he is still a person in a position of power. He still has a constituency and he still has the ability to influence policy making in this country. Additionally, there are many young people who have been impacted by his campaign.




Under normal circumstances, I would be delighted to see our young voters getting involved with the process, but these are not "normal circumstances." As a matter of fact, these are troubling times and Ron Paul and his handlers are attempting to capitalize on that. They are, in my opinion, trying to exploit the misery that this nation has felt for the last seven years. They are preying on the worries and fears of the American people while running their own heinous agenda in the background.




You see, if Ron Paul were to be elected President of the United States of America, the favors he would have to grant to those paving the way, might not be exactly what the American people have in mind for the future. Many of his supporters who are currently working so diligently behind the scenes are either unaware of his "ties," or in complete denial. They are always quick to denounce such claims as "lies made up to smear a good man." They deny any such thoughts as they blindly follow the man they really want to believe in…as their rose colored glasses hide the ugly truth.




This past Tuesday, James Kirchick, an assistant editor at The New Republic, dropped a bombshell on Ron Paul and his supporters. In an article written by Kirchick, even more ties to individuals and organizations on the extremist right were unveiled along with, not only quotes, but the complete articles straight from the elusive, early newsletters by Ron Paul. Those articles have cast a giant pall over the campaign of the presidential hopeful.




In wading through the documentation provided by Mr. Kirchick, it became very evident that Ron Paul is in bed with, and has been in bed with some very nasty extremists. These documents, along with information that is now forthcoming from libertarians themselves, who do not wish to see their party tarnished by and of this, clearly and solidly place Paul in a whole other realm of political craziness.




I have been tracking and monitoring extremists within American society for a good number of years. The very possibility, regardless of how remote, that someone with such ties just might hoodwink enough people to be voted into the highest office in the nation is truly chilling.




According to Kirchick:



"To understand Paul's philosophy, the best place to start is probably the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Auburn, Alabama. The institute is named for a libertarian Austrian economist, but it was founded by a man named Lew Rockwell, who also served as Paul's congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982. Paul has had a long and prominent association with the institute, teaching at its seminars and serving as a "distinguished counselor." The institute has also published his books.



"The politics of the organization are complicated--its philosophy derives largely from the work of the late Murray Rothbard, a Bronx-born son of Jewish immigrants from Poland and a self-described "anarcho-capitalist" who viewed the state as nothing more than "a criminal gang"--but one aspect of the institute's worldview stands out as particularly disturbing: its attachment to the Confederacy. Thomas E. Woods Jr., a member of the institute's senior faculty, is a founder of the League of the South, a secessionist group, and the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, a pro-Confederate, revisionist tract published in 2004. Paul enthusiastically blurbed Woods's book, saying that it "heroically rescues real history from the politically correct memory hole." Thomas DiLorenzo, another senior faculty member and author of The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, refers to the Civil War as the "War for Southern Independence" and attacks "Lincoln cultists"; Paul endorsed the book on MSNBC last month in a debate over whether the Civil War was necessary (Paul thinks it was not). In April 1995, the institute hosted a conference on secession at which Paul spoke; previewing the event, Rockwell wrote to supporters, "We'll explore what causes [secession] and how to promote it." Paul's newsletters have themselves repeatedly expressed sympathy for the general concept of secession. In 1992, for instance, the Survival Report argued that "the right of secession should be ingrained in a free society" and that "there is nothing wrong with loosely banding together small units of government. With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, we too should consider it.""



It is important to remember that Dr. Paul labels himself a "Strict Constitutionalist," and as such maneuvers through all of the political ramblings in Congress to determine the Constitutionality of each bill proposed. Thus, Paul considers himself to be a patriotic American in the truest sense of the phrase. Yet, as late as 1995, Ron Paul supported the break-up of the nation governed by that same Constitution.



It is little wonder that Paul has garnered an endorsement from the League of the South, a nefarious neo-Confederate group whose members often embrace the Sons of Confederate Veterans, who also endorse Paul and in which Paul has been an honorary member for the past twelve years. The membership in both of these organizations also often overlap with the Council of Conservative Citizens, a hate group which is also behind Paul and on whose radio program, "Political Cesspool," Paul has appeared.



The League of the South grew out of the Southern League and boasts about 10,000 members. Michael Hill is the President of the League of the South. After the September 11, attacks on this country Hill is reported to have called them "the natural fruits of a regime committed to multiculturalism and diversity."




Hill claims that the League wants an "independent nation." As a matter of fact, they have an ongoing petition for secession on their website. Additionally, when Hill was asked where black people might fit into this Southern Nation, his response was. "Southern culture under attack today is the Anglo-Celtic culture of the South . . . People should be free to socialize or not socialize within or without various ethnic groups with no government intervention." That sounds a lot like some of Ron Paul's answers.



Another close ally to the neo-Confederates is Charley Reese. Reese is a favorite at League events. He writes a column which is published in the Orlando Sentinel and at kingonline. Reese is a Christian Reconstructionist who made the following comments in one of his articles:




"The scriptural condemnation of homosexual behavior is explicit and unavoidable. The fact that the Rev. Gene Robinson paraded around the convention with his partner on his arm says about everything you would want to know about liberal Episcopalians."




"Had the liberals been born in another time, they would have tripped over each other in a rush to kiss the rear end of the Roman emperor. No martyrs they."



Thomas Fleming is President of the paleo-conservative "think tank" The Rockford Institute which has been highly supportive of Pat Buchannan in the past. The monthly magazine, edited by Fleming, "Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture," is written toward a more scholarly White Nationalist audience and until his death, featured articles by both Sam Francis as well as Fleming.




Thomas Fleming has gone so far as to characterize the 19th Century Ku Klux Klan as a "national liberation army." Given his association with the likes of Pat Buchanan that comment isn't too surprising. Fleming is also a favorite among the League of the South.



Kirk Lyons - an extremist with a law degree. In the past, Lyons has been directly involved with people like Adreas Strassmier, Timothy McVeigh, and Dennis Mahon, all complicit in the Oklahoma City Bombing case. He is a disciple of Louis Beam. Lyons has devoted his practice to representing those on the racist right.




A one-time member of the National Alliance, Lyons developed what is now called the Southern Legal Resource Center. His intention is for the SLRC to be be the racist right's answer to the Southern Poverty Law Center.




Lyons frequents events held by the Council of Conservative Citizens, the League of the South and recently ran (unsuccessfully) for the leadership of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. In the past, Lyons has attempted to deny ties or membership with the National Alliance, but finally gave it up when documents started to surface proving him a complete and utter liar.



He, along with Neill Payne, were both married in a double wedding ceremony by none other than Richard Butler, now deceased leader of the Aryan Nations. They were married on the Aryan Nations compound in Idaho.



These are but a few examples of the neo-Confederates who currently contribute to the League of South and other neo-Confederate groups that are backing and supporting Dr. Paul and, make no mistake, Ron Paul supports them and favors them with his presence and his speeches.



Within that realm, there also resides a common thread which has even further reaches into militant extremism as well as deep pockets. The Christian Patriot Movement and the militia movement have much in common, and Ron Paul is friends of both.



Christian Patriots are generally Protestant fundamentalists, and are decidedly apocalyptic in either ascribing to the second coming of Christ, or believing in the revocation of the Constitution, the implementation of martial law, and the revoking of all liberties. Some adhere to the Christian Identity doctrine which considers itself to be a religion for white people who are superior and the true "chosen" people. Many are conspiracy theorist.



In general, Christian Patriots are strict constructionists, that is, they strictly interpret the Constitution of the United States, just like Ron Paul. They are closely associated with the tax protestors and hold to the same ideals, often encouraging others to stop paying taxes and providing legal authority on their belief that the Sixteenth Amendment is illegitimate. They hold the Federal Reserve in contempt and advocate for a return to the Gold Standard - just like Ron Paul.



Presidential hopeful, Ron Paul, caters to the Christian Patriots and to the militia-minded individuals and has done so for years. While during the debates in South Carolina on January 10th, Paul claimed to no longer hold to his previous conspiracy theory beliefs, he still maintains a strong support base from those who do hold those views. Among the tax-protestors, neo-Confederates, and Christian Patriots, Paul is revered for his stands on states rights, abolition of the IRS, return to the gold standard, individual liberties, and revocation of affirmative action.



Chuck Baldwin is a Christian Patriot and militia advocate out of Pensacola, Florida. As Pastor of the Crossroads Baptist Church, Baldwin hosts a weekly radio show and writes columns for his website and for the anti-immigration and racist website VDARE. Baldwin is a huge supporter of Ron Paul. Virulently supportive of gun owners rights, Baldwin recently told his congregation "...to help keep your family safe and your country free, go buy a gun."



To put all of this in the proper perspective, Chuck Baldwin, in the early 1980's was the Florida state chairman of the Moral Majority organized by Jerry Falwell. However, he considered George H. W. Bush "too liberal" and eventually left the Republican Party and joined the Constitution Party. In the 2004 U.S. presidential election, Baldwin was Michael Peroutka's running mate and candidate for Vice President of the United States. The two ran on a platform of "God, Family, and Republic." The Peroutka/Baldwin campaign publicly spoke out against abortion, women in the military, and the Iraq War.



Baldwin believes in a "global elite" which plans on bringing "the rebellious colonists under their power and control." Railing against this "global elite," Baldwin claims:



"2010 seems to be a banner year for these designers of despotism. That is the target year for the implementation of the North American Community, which will unite the United States with Canada and Mexico. The global elite suffered a minor set-back when the U.S. Senate failed to pass the Bush/McCain/Kennedy/Graham amnesty-for-illegal-aliens bill. But if you think that George W. Bush is going to let that bill lie on the floor of defeat, you don't understand these people. President Bush will do everything he can to implement some kind of amnesty law before he leaves office. I would not be surprised if he attempted some sort of Executive Order or Presidential Directive in order to accomplish it. You see, it is absolutely essential to the designers of despotism that our southern border be eliminated. Absolutely essential.

"Yes, I am saying it: George W. Bush is part of the global elite that seeks America's entrance into an international New World Order. In fact, all of the "top tier" presidential candidates from both major parties will offer zero resistance to this obstinate oligarchy. That is why it will not matter to a hoot in Hades if it is Hillary, Obama, Edwards, Giuliani, Romney, Gingrich, or Thompson who is elected. (Forget McCain; his presidential goose is cooked.)



"About the only presidential contenders who seem to have a spirit of resistance to these scheming scoundrels are men such as Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter, and Tom Tancredo. Forgive me for saying it, but while Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback seem to be nice guys and may not be directly involved in this collection of crafty clowns, they appear to be either too naïve to understand their subterfuge or too weak to oppose it. The result is the same either way.



Baldwin's public advocacy for militia groups is long-standing. In a 1995, state-by-state report furnished by the Anti-Defamation League, it was stated:



"In Pensacola, militias are promoted by Chuck Baldwin, the pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church. Baldwin hosts a radio show on the Christian Patriot Network and invites listeners to call in: "We're talking about citizens' militias, federal government's encroachment on individual rights, New World Order, United Nations, gun control, it's all related." Militias are also promoted on the public access channel in Alachua County, which airs a pro-militia video produced by the North Florida Patriot Association."



While Baldwin may seem a little extreme, especially for a man of the cloth, Clay Douglas embodies the real extreme of the militant and extremist, whacked-out, head-case of the militia-minded set. And...guess what? He supports Ron Paul.



Clay Douglas publishes a militia magazine entitled "Free American," and has been under the close scrutiny of law-enforcement for years. The magazine pretty well speaks for Douglas with it's survivalist tips and it's anti-Semitic rantings. Douglas is a paranoid conspiracy theorist who rails against the "New World Order," and claims that drugs are all part of a government plot. He served seven years in prison back in the 1970's for possession.



Douglas airs an early morning radio show where he touts the virtues of Ron Paul while speaking about a UN takeover, the New World Order, and other, often anti-Semitic, conspiracy theories.



A few years ago, Clay Douglas made it to the Southern Poverty Law Center's "40 To Watch" list. This was not too surprising since Douglas had been blasting the SPLC and its' founder, Morris Dees, for years. According to the Center, "He sold tracts of the anti-Semitic Christian Identity theology at his November 2002 expo in Georgia and, this May, blamed Jews for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks while attending a conference put on by Media Bypass, another anti-Semitic magazine."



In his own defense, Douglas states the following on his website:



"He [Douglas] believes that all Americans of all races and religion should stand together, be proud of their race and practice their religion without fear, harassment, or discrimination.



"To prevent this message from reaching and striking a chord among the majority of Americans, these foreign controlled organizations and their corporate backers have tried to demonize, denounce and silence him by slandering him, intimidation of advertisers and distributors with false charges of Racism and anti-Semitism. It is not anti-Semitic to expose and try to stop a criminal organization trying to seize control of your nations resources, currency, manpower, with the intent of using those resources to dominate and enslave other countries. This is the stated goals expressed in the Protocols of the Learned Elders Of Zion and being carried out by the plans such as the Project of the New American Century and the North American Community in the US, implemented and staffed by the NeoCons in Washington, just as the Bolsheviks infiltrated Russia, killed the Czar and his family, formed the Soviet Union and subsequently killed more than 50 million Russians before joining two other Communist dominated countries to go after the German people. Who Killed the Jews in Germany? Hitler? The Nazis? Or the Zionists?"



In support of Ron Paul, Douglas claims, "IF AN ORGANIZATION REFUSES TO SUPPORT RON PAUL OR THE FREE AMERICAN, THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A FALSE FLAG FRONT OR A SUBVERSIVE OPERATION!"



All wrapped up in this militia and Christian Patriot movement are the anti-tax people. In order to see the big picture, it is imperative that we understand that membership and support overlaps between all of these groups. The League of the South, the Sons of Confederate Veterans, the Council of Conservative Citizens, Christian Patriots, Christian Reconstructionists, Christian Identity, the Militia Movement, and the Anti-Tax Movement all mesh pretty well together when it comes to political ideology. All of these groups comprise a very large part of Ron Paul's support.



Robert Clarkson is a tax protestor out of South Carolina. Six years after graduating from law school, Clarkson was brought up on charges of preparing fraudulent tax returns and presenting false claims to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Two years after that, Clarkson was disbarred.



After being convicted of several felonies, Clarkson was given five years probation which he violated and was then sent to federal prison. Shortly after being paroled, he was sent back to prison for violations of that parole. It just seemed that Robert Clarkson could not stay out of trouble.



In 1994, he started a group called the Carolina Patriots and taught classes on how to evade taxes. It wasn't long until he was caught and sent up on conspiracy charges and served almost five more years in prison.



Once released, Clarkson set up the "Patriot Network" where he held tax protestor meetings and sold books on how to avoid paying taxes.



Clarkson is still active today and is the subject of several court injunctions under which he is required to abide by certain requirements.



Featured prominently on the Patriotic Network website is the picture of Clarkson and Ron Paul together along with the following endorsement:



" AS many of you know, Congressman Ron Paul from Texas is one of the most conservative members of Congress and very sympathetic to the patriot's cause. Here we find Dr Robert Clarkson with Congressman Ron Paul in Columbia, SC at Libertarian-Patriot Banquet on April 2, 2004.



"If we stuck to the Constitution as written, we would have: no federal meddling in our schools; no Federal Reserve; no U.S. membership in the UN; no gun control; and no foreign aid. We would have no welfare for big corporations, or the "poor"; no American troops in 100 foreign countries; no NAFTA, GATT, or "fast-track"; no arrogant federal judges usurping states rights; no attacks on private property; no income tax . We could get rid of most of the cabinet departments, most of the agencies, and most of the budget. The government would be small, frugal, and limited." Congressman Ron Paul (1998)



Racists, neo-Nazi's, white-nationalists, neo-Confederates, secessionists, anti-government groups, anti-tax groups, Christian extremists and militias have all lined up behind presidential hopeful Ron Paul and the burning question has always been, and remains, "why?"



For the last few months we have had glimpses at the despicable comments that were printed in earlier Ron Paul newsletters. These comments were largely disparaging to African-American's and Jews. When questioned, Ron Paul always managed to side-step and, generally sweep them under the rug. Until, of course, James Kirchick made those documents and others public. Now, Ron Paul is forced into having to speak up and explain himself. The problem with that, as I see it, is that he can't.



Ron Paul is running as a "Libertarian-Republican" on the Republican ticket. He has long considered himself a Libertarian as he ran for President in 1988 for that party. Yet, I and others, have pointed out repeatedly that Ron Paul isn't a Libertarian. He does not meet that criteria. As a matter of fact, many libertarian leaders have been watching all of this unfold and cringing at the very thought that the unsavory writings in the newsletters and the equally unsavory characters being drawn to the Paul campaign might, somehow, taint the party. The Kirchik article sent them into damage control mode.



Paul brings his brand of libertarianism to voters from the Ludwig von Mesis Institute as noted above. The head of that Institute is Lew Rockwell who happens to be a very close friend of Paul's.



For the past several years, Rockwell has been publishing the works of those who can only be considered bigoted and often even racist. Branded a "paleolibertarian" by those active in the libertarian movement, Rockwell has been a loose cannon, to say the least. As testament to this, Steven Horwitz wrote the following on History News Network:



"What has surprised me, I must admit, is the fact that so many fairly prominent libertarian commenters are surprised by all of this. First of all, these newsletters have been brought up before, though perhaps not as many examples, nor as many really offensive ones. But more important, those of us who have been paying attention to the libertarian movement for the last 15 years knew that the paleo element was growing and was associated with all kinds of unsavory views from the ugly segment of the hard right. Did all of these supposed observers of the libertarian scene not pay attention to the appearances that Paul has made at all kinds of fringe events? Did they not pay attention to the links between people associated with Lew Rockwell and the Mises Institute (Paul's intellectual home) and racists, anti-Semites, Holocaust skeptics, homophobes, Confederacy praisers, and conspiracy theorists of all types, all of which have been ably discussed and documented by Right Watch and Tom Palmer, among others? Perhaps the under 35 crowd doesn't have the longer-run history that those of us in our 40s do.



"Those of us who have been paying attention knew of Ron Paul's first or second-hand association with all of these groups and we knew their odious ideas. We knew that people like Lew Rockwell were long-time associates of Ron Paul's and thus the recent speculation that his pen is prominent in those nasty newsletters comes as no surprise as well. (And, if true, explains why Ron Paul isn't naming names, as Rockwell is not just a "former aide" but a current advisor.) In my much commented-upon posts from last month, I tried to raise this warning flag in a more subtle way. My closing comment suggesting that the Paul campaign was not clearly a net benefit to libertarianism was my way of expressing precisely the fear that has now come home to roost and is so nicely captured by Balko: libertarians are going to have to spend more energy than ever explaining why we're not racists, etc. as we get linked to the nastiness in those newsletters. (Glen Whitman explains how a small sample problem can create this burden for libertarians. I think he's right, and these newsletters now make more people's "first contact" with libertarianism the sort that will make us have to climb uphill even more often.)



"Is there now any doubt about why Stormfront and KKK folks are supporting the Paul campaign? This is not an "accident" - his name has been used to cultivate their support, as these newsletters demonstrate. This is not guilt by association - it's reaping what was sown 15 years ago and since."



I agree that this is "not an accident." As the question continues to be put to Ron Paul, things seem to get even more unbelievable. When presented with the text and the quotes from the newsletters which contain homophobic, racist, sexist, and anti-Semitic remarks, Ron Paul denies not only writing them but of ever knowing about them. However, the evidence is mounting and it would say otherwise.



In a newsletter dated October 15, 1992, the following appeared...



"Car jacking is the hip-hop thing to do among urban youth who play unsuspecting whites like pianos."



That is followed by advise from others on how to avoid car-jacking. Then...



"I, frankly, don't know what to make of such advise, but even in my little town of Lake Jackson, Texas, I've urged everyone in my family to learn how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming."

It is important to note that Ron Paul lives in Lake Jackson, Texas and has for years.



In the same interview, Ron Paul claims that all of this is only "coming up now for political reasons," and that libertarians are incapable of being racist.



When asked how it was possible that this kind of thing could go on for so many years, in Ron Paul's name, his response was quite disjointed but transcribes as follows:



"Well...well...I have no idea. Have you ever heard of a publisher of a magazine not knowing every single thing...the editor is responsible for the daily activities...and people came and gone and there were some people who were hired and I don't know any of their names. I do not, absolutely honestly, I do not know who wrote those things.


"But I do know there was a transition...there were changes around and...uh...to me, it's...it's been rehashed it's the politics of it all. If it were important enough why didn't the people in my district who've heard about them for at least 10 years or so it came up - and people believed me. Why don't you believe me and just say look it's in there, it's bad, I recognize that, I had a moral responsibility but it doesn't mean that you can, you know, indirectly charge me as being a racist. And that is being done, and yet I am the most anti-racist because I don't see people in collective groups because I practice...and you know...right know, even before this thing broke.
"Guess what is our next fund-raising day...our next super day...we raised 4 million one day - six on the next - the next one is on Martin Luther King holiday! I mean this is it! Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, and Gandhi...they're the heroes of mine in their practice of civil disobedience to try to get the burden of government off our backs."



Watching the video almost made me feel sorry for Dr. Paul - almost. It's never easy to have your skeletons unleashed from the closet - but to have it done so publicly has to be extremely painful.



If we are to believe the flailing and faltering Paul, he never wrote the articles, and he never read his newsletters. For years...Ron Paul would have us believe, racist, homophobic, and anti-Semitic rhetoric was published under his name, in his newsletter, with his banner heading - but he didn't know.



Initially, Ron Paul had made the assertion that the articles were written by a ghost writer and he didn't know what was being published. For the last couple of days, libertarians have been pointing their fingers at Lew Rockwell as the "ghost-writer" which would explain Paul's not wanting to spill the beans. To add validity to such a claim, Eric Dondero, former Senior Aide to Ron Paul, stepped forward and published the following:




American Libertarian

Published by Matt Monroe

Editor Michael Holmes



November 1988



Paul campaign ends on Down note


(Page 6)



"The first clue that something was afoot was missed by everyone. Paul campaign chair Burt Blumert and Paul campaign ghostwriter and direct mail fundraiser Lew Rockwell, Jr. arrived along with Ron Paul in Houston for a pre-election Saturday rally unannounced and unexpected by the Houston Paul campaign office..."



Certainly, it matters greatly to the libertarian party who wrote the egregiously disgusting things in these newsletters and they are trying to distance themselves from the tarnish that all of this might bring to those associated with Paul and friends. However, I am not going to be quick to believe the claims of Paul's innocence in all of this.



In the December, 1990, newsletter - the one accusing Dr. Martin Luther King of seducing underage girls and boys - Dr. Ron Paul sends a holiday greeting which reads...



"My wife Carol, and our children and grandchildren, join me in wishing you and your family a wonderful Christmas and a Happy New Year. May we start to confound the plans of Trilateralists and other big government types, making America freer, and thus truer to her own heritage in 1991."



In an undated solicitation letter written to his constituents and signed by him, (which demands a whole lot more scrutiny and discussion), Ron Paul writes:




"I've been told not to talk, but these stooges do not scare me. Threats or no threats, I've laid bare the coming race war in our big cities. The federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS (my training as a physician helps me see through this one). The Bohemian Grove--perverted, pagan playground of the powerful. Skull & Bones: the demonic fraternity that includes George Bush and leftist Senator John Kerry, Congress's Mr. New Money. The Israeli Lobby, which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica. And the Soviet-style "smartcard" the Justice Department has in mind for you."



So, according to those who believe Paul did not write these articles, the phrases "urban youth who play unsuspecting whites like pianos" and "who play Congress like a cheap harmonica" are not written by the same people? Additionally, we are to believe that references to an impending race-war and an AIDS cover-up do not represent Dr. Paul's views. Forgive me if I don't buy it.



Paul claims that he has taken "moral responsibility" for the articles. What the hell does that mean? Does it mean that his "morals" won't allow him to take real responsibility? Does it mean that he has prayed about it, confessed his sin and has nothing more to do with it? Or does it just make for a good sound-bite.



James Kirhcick has provided the articles in context for all to read - yet there are still those who question their authenticity as well as their authorship. Alas...there will always be those who are so blind they cannot see.

Ron Paul has been exposed - period. His supporters can spin it any way they want to, but their ride to Paulhalla is over. While having a candidate as repugnant as Paul is a real challenge to the Libertarian Party, and extremely unsettling to those of us who are searching for a leader, the real tragedy in all of this is that so many young people who have been awakened by the promise of real freedom have been awakened to something else altogether.



The youth in the Paul campaign have been energetically involved in the process. They have tirelessly worked on behalf of something that they really believed in only to learn that it was just a ruse...a lie. It is imperative that we, all of us, strive to keep them involved. Politics are dirty and frequently lay bare that which we would rather not see. But seeing is better than the alternative.



The very fact that Ron Paul and friends are planning a march and fund-raiser to commemorate that day should fly in the face of all those who see this for what it really is - an exploitation. But then, if you are Ron Paul and you have claimed Martin Luther King, Jr. as your hero - then no one will be the wiser, eh?

26 comments:

  1. WTF'd have the time to write "a never-ending story" like "the Ron Paul Revulsion prt ii" if they were
    gainfully employed?

    only some-one receiving funding from the SPLC, the ADL or MOSSAD that didn't hafta bother with a job of work!

    thatz who!

    i said it before & i'll say it agin': itz Ron Paul or the 'Turner Diaries'...take yr pick!

    (personally: i'm glad that lotsa young folk are involved in the Ron Paul for Prez movement; when Dr Paul gets "deep sixed" by ZOG, most of them'll prblby become radicalised white nationalists &, then, youse'll have A REAL fckn PRBLM on yr pawz!)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think we all know where the nonsense of "Ron Paul is a racist" is coming from. I cannot help thinking about pre-Iraq times, when Ron Paul spoke out against the war. Every morning I logged on, hoping the people and the MSM had come to their senses before it was too late. But neo-con thought had blossomed blood-red across America.

    I hear a lot of excuses for buying into the lies that were told at the time, but if I knew--me without connections or, at the time, even a BA under my belt--then how did so many not know? Now a good man is being smeared in an attempt to protect the status quo. If Ron Paul spouted the neo-con brand of politics, these same people that attack him over the newsletters would defend him to the death.

    I'm a little tired of Ron Paul and his suppoters being called kooks and crazies by the MSM and the neo-cons and their bedfellows. It doesn't do any good to say that I am sane, or that no one I know thinks I'm crazy. I guess Paul and I and others like us are crazy for opposing the war, since the war is such a good thing, right? And I guess the sane ones are those who persist in nation-building and premptive war, since this is the rational course for our country to take, right?

    Just this morning I read this on MSNBC: "'Iran's actions threaten the security of nations everywhere,' Bush said. 'So the United States is strengthening our long-standing security commitments with our friends in the Gulf, and rallying friends around the world to confront this danger before it is too late.'" Deja vu.

    And this from Clinton: "'We can have this Jesuitical argument about what exactly was meant. But when Chuck Hagel, who helped to draft the resolution said, "It was not a vote for war," What I was told directly by the White House in response to my question, "If you are given this authority, will you put the inspectors in and permit them to finish their job," I was told that's exactly what we intended to do.'" In defense of ignorance.

    Sorry, but I'd have to be crazy to buy into politics as usual; that's all the other candidates offer, and I want no part of it.

    Kate B.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The liberal attacks on Ron Paul, fueled by a recent hit piece in the New Republic, are so transparently cynical that it almost makes me smile.

    Almost.

    To quote James Ridgeway, liberals can be and often are the meanest motherfuckers around. Criticize any of their scared beliefs, then watch out. They'll come at you with anything they've got, doesn't matter if it's truthful, accurate, or even sane. American liberals truly feel that they are humanity's Final Word. If you dispute that, you're a bigot, a hater, a piece of slime that deserves only the nastiest treatment. And baby, you'll get it.

    At issue is Ron Paul's supposed racism and queer-phobia, reflected in newsletters that bore his name. Paul has distanced himself from the newsletters, saying that others penned the toxic rhetoric, without his direct knowledge or approval. Maybe Paul's telling the truth. Maybe he's not. Maybe he really does despise those of darker hue and same-sexers. Maybe he's like the worst racist you've ever seen. Maybe he eats black children for breakfast.

    Whatever Paul actually believes about minorities and queers is not the real concern here. What bothers liberals, TNR's James Kirchik among them, is that Paul is the only presidential candidate who is seriously running against the state. This includes anti-imperialism and calls to end the Drug War. Given that Hillary and Obama are nowhere near this mindset -- quite the opposite -- means that anyone who is must be a bad person. If those newsletters didn't exist, hit men like Kirchik and the libloggers who support him would find something else to smear Paul with. Because, at bottom, they oppose any dismantling of the war state (recall Kos' shitting all over Kucinich). They simply want their preferred candidates to run the machine instead.

    For TNR, there's another angle to its anti-Paul attack: Israel. Paul wants to end U.S. military aid to Israel, and is critical of Israeli aggression (he's also critical of Hezbollah and Hamas, but that doesn't count). This simply won't do for Democrats and many liberals, who either support Israeli violence and occupation, or are at best mum on the topic. When Israeli fighter jets were pounding Lebanon in 2006, it took weeks for leading libloggers to type the slightest negative word, which for them was "disproportionate." It was okay to bury Lebanese in rubble, just so long as it wasn't too much rubble. By opposing this and other uses of American tax dollars to kill and maim Arabs, Ron Paul shows that he's probably anti-Semitic as well.

    The funny thing about TNR attacking Paul for being racist is that TNR has published plenty of racist musings itself. Martin Peretz alone contributed much of this, his belief that the "primitive" Palestinians are genetically and culturally incapable of achieving peace (for which no one is to blame, added Peretz in a tender moment) merely one of many racist screeds that TNR had no problem pushing. Then there was former editor Andrew Sullivan inviting Charles Murray to explain at length his "Bell Curve" theory in TNR's pages, a decision that Sullivan defended by writing, "The notion that there might be resilient ethnic differences in intelligence is not, we believe, an inherently racist belief." Of course not. Ron Paul, on the other hand . . .

    I might be mistaken, but so far as I know, Ron Paul has not left the campaign trail to oversee the killing of a black man. Liberal hero Bill Clinton did in 1992, flying back to Arkansas from New Hampshire to witness Rickey Ray Rector take the lethal needle. (Since Clinton was our first black president, did that constitute black-on-black violence?) Clinton also expanded the police and prison state, in which a large number of African-Americans are trapped, and shredded the safety net for the poor, among whom reside many African-Americans. Does this make Bill Clinton a racist? Hush yo' mouf!

    Racism isn't Paul's only sin. According to Kirchik, those newsletters exhibited acute paranoia:

    "[S]pecifically, the brand of anti-government paranoia that festered among right-wing militia groups during the 1980s and '90s. Indeed, the newsletters seemed to hint that armed revolution against the federal government would be justified. In January 1995, three months before right-wing militants bombed the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, a newsletter listed 'Ten Militia Commandments,' describing 'the 1,500 local militias now training to defend liberty' as 'one of the most encouraging developments in America.' It warned militia members that they were 'possibly under BATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms] or other totalitarian federal surveillance' and printed bits of advice from the Sons of Liberty, an anti-government militia based in Alabama--among them, 'You can't kill a Hydra by cutting off its head,' 'Keep the group size down,' 'Keep quiet and you're harder to find,' 'Leave no clues,' 'Avoid the phone as much as possible,' and 'Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.'"

    Yikes. Scary stuff. Sane people know that there is no American surveillance state -- or there wasn't one during the hallowed Clinton era, when all that crazy militia activity was taking place. According to liberal history, police state measures (torture, too) only occur during Republican presidencies, the past seven years being the most recent example. For Paul's newsletter to say otherwise is simple lunacy.

    I'll tell you this: I've studied various strands of American right wing political philosophy and beliefs, and have had many conversations with rightists of different temperaments, and when it comes to seriously defending First and Fourth Amendment rights (what remain, anyway), I'll stand with libertarians like Ron Paul. I may not agree with most of his beliefs, nor that of the anti-statist right overall, but I know that Paul and others like him aren't looking to tap my phone or break down my door in the middle of the night. Think the Branch Davidians were paranoid?

    Then vote Hillary or Obama. And sleep tight.

    --Dennis Perrin

    ReplyDelete
  4. If this line from Dr. Ron Paul (SC Fox debate 1/10/08) does not wake you up, then nothing else will!!

    Dr. Paul: “We need to borrow $10 billion from China, and then we give it to Musharraf, who is a military dictator, who overthrew an elected government. And then we go to war, we lose all these lives promoting democracy in Iraq. I mean, what’s going on here?”

    ReplyDelete
  5. You're a really dumb broad aren't you?
    Count me in…retired schoolteacher, age 60, 20-year member of the GOP. I'm with Ron Paul, all the way and none of your libelous smears will change that.


    No one gives a good hoot about those newsletters.

    We care more that Obama belongs to a black separatist church and that Hillary hired the racist LaRAZA operative as her campaign co-chair.

    Now THERE you have TWO HUGE RACISTS!

    You ought to spend more time on that than some old newsletter that is not even attributable to the flawless Dr. Paul..

    OH and did I mention, you're a really dumb broad?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Austin NAACP President says, "Ron Paul is NOT a racist"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtNUJ2vy_eo

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://www.nolanchart.com/article1134.html

    Yep, that is the president of the NAACP saying Paul is not a racist. Perhaps we should turn to someone like him for an opinion on this?

    ReplyDelete
  8. This seemed a bit like rambling, the length of which made me forget what your point was.
    Certainly one could argue there are positions which any candidate has which are difficult to stand by. Fine.
    The question becomes, then, which candidate broadly represents your ideals.
    Turn the TV off. Do some real research. Make an informed decision.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I love these articles. I almost forgot there were people like Nikki, who care nothing for the country but to see it crumble under the leadership of those who would try to drain the life from us, at every opportunity.

    Sorry Nikki, everyone sees through you. :-(

    ReplyDelete
  10. Good 'muck' however Dr. Paul is clean of it. Go vote for your social president who will bring social programs to this country and destroy it's economy. Write with your brain, not your bleeding heart! (a cold one)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Excellent article, Nikki!

    Directing a spot light on the Nazi policy wonks is a good balance to your the racist street thug coverage with the usual names.

    There is so much good info in this article I think I am going to print it out and read while doing my cardio it at the gym.

    Keep up the good work in exposing these harmful dregs of society this kind of information is most valuable.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Your spaces are larger than your paragraphs are, and contain superior content.

    I suggest you create a blog made entirely out of spaces, as this will undoubtedly delight your "unique" userbase.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 'NAACP President: Ron Paul Is Not A Racist'
    http://www.nolanchart.com/article1134.html

    ReplyDelete
  14. i certainly see thru nikki. yawn. isn't worth my time anymore.

    everything around me is all drama, hype and hyperbolic drivel.

    ugh.

    i'm disappearing and going back to the basics. i don't need anybody

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ron Paul is dropping in the national polls and isn't even polling at 10 percent in racist South Carolina.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I'm sorry but you are way off base on this one. All the things you say you stand for, Ron Paul does too.

    Yes, a newsletter was put out in his name some years back that had some bad remarks, but he didn't say those things nor does he agree with them.

    Ron Paul is perhaps the most open and REAL candidate out there. He is perhaps our last chance to restore our democracy.

    Please, please, please - do more research and digging before slandering someone.

    ReplyDelete
  17. like i said, there is NOTHING worse than blaming and accusing someone of something they've never done or accusing them of being something they aren't. especially when you've never even met this person.

    that's all i got to say on the matter.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Wow...I read through all of that and have come to a conclusion that I've found myself at before. History is a dizzying cirlce. If you replace the word "racist" or nazi" with "hippie" or "communist", you've got a typical right-wing reactionary article from the 1960's. And all the while, you've got jews who "stand in defense of freedom and democracy" now screaming "this damn democracy! We should get rid of it immediatly!" Its not that they abandon their retoric when things don't go their way, they abandon it when things don't go exactly the way they want them too.

    So then you've got Ron Paul and his apologist army of either backroom racist, tea-cups or racists-in-denial types. The man had every chance to stand up and say he was for his people and he didn't and won't. That poor leadership now and tells me he'd make a crappy president, pro-white secretly, publically or not at all.

    Well, the formula is all here for real revolution. Whites, most of whom are racist and racist by nature, are fed up. We've got a go-nowhere war filling up our cemetaries and hospitals for Israel (cheif rabbi recently thanked Bush for his "sacrifice to the holy land"). We've got an economy on the slide. We're sitting on a racial powder keg since our multi-racial efforts have failed and were bound to. Yeah, the multi-culturalist, be them neo-cons, communists, rabid jews, followers of the chosen or just anti-white pukes are failing.

    Ron Paul is just a harmless bi-product of all that. You can blame a terrible storm on some angry god who is mad at your neighbor---but truth is, nature will be nature, regardless. Race is and will continue to be and like a plant growing through the rocks, it will find a way.

    I have no idea what is going to happen at this point. It might turn into a war even. It might be nothing more than a lesson to be learned for white people in America concerning weak leadership. Put that lesson right next to letting Bush hand our country's foriegn policy over to israel and our domestic policy to his local jewish handlers.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Nice try Nikki, but I sense more paranoia and fear than fact.

    www.frankfortpost.org

    ReplyDelete
  20. So you're a member of 'Citizens Against Hate', yet you publish this hateful slander? Hypocrite, much?

    You're either totally ignorant about Ron Paul (in which case you have no business writing this garbage about him), or you're a despicable slanderer. Which is it?

    People who really know Ron Paul are clear that he is no racist.

    Anonmous nailed it: "To quote James Ridgeway, liberals can be and often are the meanest motherfuckers around. Criticize any of their scared beliefs, then watch out. They'll come at you with anything they've got, doesn't matter if it's truthful, accurate, or even sane. American liberals truly feel that they are humanity's Final Word. If you dispute that, you're a bigot, a hater, a piece of slime that deserves only the nastiest treatment. And baby, you'll get it." Was Ridgeway referring to you? Sure looks like it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I'm starting to wonder what he is and what people define as racist. One minute I read about how he had the courage to speak out against something anti-white, then I read how he went off on one of his "I'm not a racist..." and apologies for being white. Its sickening too to see how lots of people who are active in the pro-white movement are embracing this say one thing and say another strategy of Ron Paul.

    Thats another reason the anti-white (called anti-racist) movement in America has failed. Its anti-white. It started that way, carried on that way and is dying that way. If you call any of them anti-white, they sound just like Ron Paul. "Oh, I'm not against whites! I love Christmas! I'm just for race-mixing, tearing down borders to white lands, giving money to enemies of the white race and creating laws to make sure white never are allowed to speak out!" Ourselves as a people, that isn't our nature. We need to break from it or we aren't any better than the anti-white movement.

    We're white power. I, Chris Drake, am white power and my photo can been seen all over. I'll live for it, I'll die for it. I'm pro-white all the way, no apologies, no acceptions. Try it sometimes, Tea-cups. It feels oh so good.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Chris,

    You're types are complete cowards when it comes to fighting for your cause.

    What the Palestinians are doing, now that is how you fight for a cause.

    Tell me Chris, when is the last time someone died for your cause??? Tim McVeigh???

    Your just a coward, all you do is cry on the internet or show up in public with a police escort.

    All words and no action.

    And Chris, how many WN organizations are you going to join and quit this year? Let's see, you've joined and quit the National Alliance/National Vanguard/NSM several times/ANSWP/White Revolution/ and countless skinheads groups.

    How can anyone rely on you when you have no honor or discipline to stick with a group? Personally I think you have joined so many groups in order to gather information.

    And you claiming that your side has won against the anti-racist? Please.... You idiots can't even get a single person elected to any office in the United States.

    Like I said, you're nothing but a coward. What the Palestinians are doing, that is a movement. You aren't willing to give your life for your cause and you know it.

    I suspect that you are an informant by your actions. I was right about Hal Turner being one.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I love it. Hey everybody, here is a member of "Citizens Against Hate" saying that the pro-white movement in America isn't violent enough. So much for a kinder, gentler world, huh Nikki?

    Anyhow, Harry knows that and pretends I don't know that the situation concerning jewish supremacy in the middle east is far worse than it is here. What a jew takes here in America, he does it with propaganda, lies and laws, not the from the muzzle of a gun, like he does more close to his homeland.

    Speaking of lies! Harry, you've got to be Billy Roper or at least the anti-white equivelent of him (thats almost an oxymoron!). You can't just make things up, God's Chosen or not, and expect proof to sprout from the earth! I've been a member of the NA until it pretty much folded, then I joined the NSM. Its that simple. I spent about 3 years in the NA and about the same with Jeff and company. Big deal. If Bill ever wastes his time posting here again, he can clear up the ANSWP membership lie of yours. I've never been a member of the ANSWP but the thought has definately crossed my mind. I've never had to be a member of White Revolution or joined National Vanguard. As far as the skinhead thing goes, I've been a member of one non-local crew in this century.

    So Harry, got anymore expertly obtained private investigator info? I tell you one thing, you make your side look weak and foolish with your bizarre claims. Thats why I think you are actually someone in the movement. If you take your targets, who you hide behind the internet (no one has ever seen you in real life) and the fact you don't seem to care at all if your info is accurate, it lends to that theory.

    Now lets talk about who's a coward, Harry. What have you done for the anti-white movement/jews other than get a few people fired from their jobs? What is that? The movement has grown twice it's previous size under your watch and the anti-white movement has srunk drastically. Kids hearts aren't in it like they once were. Who knows?

    I go to rallies, sure. I also normally go stand in the protest section until its my time to speak. I guess your deap research didn't produce that info, huh? Got anymore made up bullshit my friends can laugh at?

    ReplyDelete
  24. So, basically your objection to the Paul campaign is: Citizens Against Hate hates a lot of people, and they also hate Ron Paul because he doesn't seem to hate those people as much as they do.

    ReplyDelete

All comments must remain civil. No threats, racist epithets, or personal attacks will be tolerated. Rational debate, discourse, and even disagreement are all acceptable as long as they remain on point and within the realm of civility.