[Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul and Racism
Sunil Ramalingam
sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
Sat Dec 31 19:15:21 PST 2011
Here's are a couple of excerpts from Glenn Greenwald's column today. As I read it I thought of the discussion we've been having here about Ron Paul. I think the whole thing is worth reading, so here's the link:
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/31/progressives_and_the_ron_paul_fallacies/singleton/
The links in the excerpts don't work, but those in the actual article do.
First:
"The thing I loathe most about election season is reflected in the
central fallacy that drives progressive discussion the minute “Ron Paul”
is mentioned. As soon as his candidacy is discussed, progressives will
reflexively point to a slew of positions he holds that are anathema to
liberalism and odious in their own right and then say: how can you support someone who holds this awful, destructive position?
The premise here — the game that’s being played — is that if you can
identify some heinous views that a certain candidate holds, then it
means they are beyond the pale, that no Decent Person should even
consider praising any part of their candidacy.
The fallacy in this
reasoning is glaring. The candidate supported by progressives —
President Obama — himself holds heinous views on a slew of critical
issues and himself has done heinous things with the power he has been
vested. He has slaughtered civilians — Muslim children by the dozens — not once or twice, but continuously in numerous nations with drones, cluster bombs and other forms of attack. He has sought
to overturn a global ban on cluster bombs. He has institutionalized the
power of Presidents — in secret and with no checks — to target American
citizens for assassination-by-CIA, far from any battlefield. He has waged
an unprecedented war against whistleblowers, the protection of which
was once a liberal shibboleth. He rendered permanently irrelevant the
War Powers Resolution, a crown jewel in the list of post-Vietnam liberal
accomplishments, and thus enshrined the power of Presidents to wage war
even in the face of a Congressional vote against it. His obsession with secrecy is so extreme that it has become darkly laughable in its manifestations, and he even worked to amend the Freedom of Information Act (another crown jewel of liberal legislative successes) when compliance became inconvenient."
Of course this is exactly what is happening in our V2020 discussion about Ron Paul. I think it's worth noting that the Establishment Right does not oppose Obama on any of these atrocities, as they would do the same. Now here's the next excerpt:
"It’s perfectly rational and reasonable for progressives to decide
that the evils of their candidate are outweighed by the evils of the GOP
candidate, whether Ron Paul or anyone else. An honest line of reasoning
in this regard would go as follows:
Yes,
I’m willing to continue to have Muslim children slaughtered by covert
drones and cluster bombs, and America’s minorities imprisoned by the
hundreds of thousands for no good reason, and the CIA able to run
rampant with no checks or transparency, and privacy eroded further by
the unchecked Surveillance State, and American citizens targeted by the
President for assassination with no due process, and whistleblowers
threatened with life imprisonment for “espionage,” and the Fed able to
dole out trillions to bankers in secret, and a substantially higher risk
of war with Iran (fought by the U.S. or by Israel with U.S. support) in exchange for less
severe cuts to Social Security, Medicare and other entitlement
programs, the preservation of the Education and Energy Departments, more
stringent environmental regulations, broader health care coverage,
defense of reproductive rights for women, stronger enforcement of civil
rights for America’s minorities, a President with no associations with
racist views in a newsletter, and a more progressive Supreme Court.
Without my adopting it, that
is at least an honest, candid, and rational way to defend one’s choice.
It is the classic lesser-of-two-evils rationale, the key being that it
explicitly recognizes that both sides are “evil”: meaning it is not a
Good v. Evil contest but a More Evil v. Less Evil contest. But that is
not the discussion that takes place because few progressives want to
acknowledge that the candidate they are supporting — again — is someone
who will continue to do these evil things with their blessing. Instead,
we hear only a dishonest one-sided argument that emphasizes Paul’s evils
while ignoring Obama’s (progressives frequently ask: how can any progressive consider an anti-choice candidate but don’t ask themselves: how can any progressive support a child-killing, secrecy-obsessed, whistleblower-persecuting Drug Warrior?)."
I hear my friends say that they'll vote for Obama again, and he's the lesser of two evils. Well, I don't know how 'lesser' he is. I know when Bush was doing these things, I railed against him. Till now I've held my tongue about Obama, but I'm done with that.
If you think what I've posted above is wrong, and does not describe what we've seen from this administration, please show me how I'm wrong. I would very much like to be wrong.
Here's a link to the article.
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/31/progressives_and_the_ron_paul_fallacies/singleton/
Sunil
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
From: thansen at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul and Racism
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 18:26:54 -0800
To: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
I admit that there are some of Ron Paul's concepts to which I agree, such as those mentioned by Sunil. However, those concepts are insufficient to attract my support when weighed against those concepts with which I disagree.
He is simply not the individual I want answering the 3:00 AM call in the White House.
Seeya later, Moscow.
Tom HansenSpokane, Washington
"If not us, who?If not now, when?"
- Unknown
On Dec 31, 2011, at 6:12 PM, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:
Let's for one moment assume that Paul is a racist. I'm not saying he is, just assume he is so that issue doesn't need to be discussed for a minute.
Is he wrong on ending our wars? Is he wrong on cutting the defense budget? Is he wrong about the Patriot Act? Is he wrong about the Executive Branch seizing powers it should not have?
What say you, Keely, Wayne, Saundra, Tom?
Sunil
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 17:20:01 -0800
From: godshatter at yahoo.com
To: deco at moscow.com
CC: Vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul and Racism
He has admitted to putting out an investment newsletter that (as far
as I can tell) was not one of the newsletters that printed the
racist comments. It had all sorts of conspiracy theories about what
will happen to people trying to deal in large amounts of cash, most
of which have come true - just not in the way he thought. Try
taking a large pile of cash through airport security and see how
well that goes.
Another distraction attempt, supposedly a smoking gun, apparently
succeeds in its goals. Or maybe this is just jumping on the
bandwagon, since it is the Daily Mail, after all.
Paul
On 12/31/2011 04:44 PM, Art Deco wrote:
See:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2078217/Ron-Paul-racist-homophobic-newsletters-Video-taking-credit.html
Scroll down to see the videos
of Paul Himself acknowledging the letters, etc.
All javascript scripts must be
allowed in order to see the whole article including the
videos.
w.
From: Paul Rumelhart
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2011 3:52 PM
To: keely
emerinemix
Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul and
Racism
Does it matter whether or not the allegations are true? Or do we
just call them out anyway?
Here is an article from CBS News about the newsletters: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57345702-503544/ron-paul-disavows-racist-newsletters-under-his-name/
The article contains a quote by Ron Paul on the issue:
"When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a
newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit.
Several writers contributed to the product," he said. "For over a
decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying
closer attention to what went out under my name."
I'd hate to see the man dragged over the coals for something he
might not have deserved solely because (for example) Jon Huntsman
is losing to Ron Paul in New Hampshire and has staked his campaign
on a strong showing there.
I got that last bit from this article: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57349712-503544/huntsman-calls-ron-paul-unelectable-because-of-racist-newsletters/
And once again, this is only out there in order to distract us.
These people could care less if it's even true. It's just
convenient.
Paul
On 12/31/2011 02:44 PM, keely emerinemix wrote:
I don't think you're defending racism, racist
behavior, or even the wrongness of screaming "He's a racist!"
at the slightest apparent provocation. That said, I think
it's imperative that legitimate indications that an
individual's views on race/gender/class/civil rights/culture
are bigoted be called out, examined, and condemned -- and I
believe that the text of Ron Paul's newsletters are an
example.
Keely
www.keely-prevailingwinds.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Fw: On Ron
Paul and Racism
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 14:41:13 -0800
From: jborden at datawedge.com
To: kjajmix1 at msn.com; v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm;
vision2020 at moscow.com
I’m not *defending* racism,
I’m commenting on the mere finger-pointing and
accusations being so charged that it’s a nuclear
weapon in a political arsenal.
It’s used as a tool for distraction,
and hence, theatrics. (And, unless I missed the mark,
perhaps Mr. Rumelhart’s point).
Insert story of “crying wolf”.
Jay
From: keely emerinemix [mailto:kjajmix1 at msn.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2011 2:27 PM
To: Jay Borden; v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm;
vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul
and Racism
Jay, I would rue the day that
racist behavior and bigoted views become irrelevant
in how we choose our leaders. There are issues that
truly good people can disagree on; racism, however,
is never the view of a "truly good person," and in
fact ought to, by virtue of popular outcry,
immediately make a pariah out of the one who
embraces it.
Keely
www.keely-prevailingwinds.com
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 14:17:33
-0800
From: jborden at datawedge.com
To: v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm;
vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul and
Racism
I would agree with Paul’s
statement… but I would word it a bit differently
to deflect some of the immediate hatred I’m sure
will be heading my way.
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20111231/09dbfaaf/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list