[Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul and Racism

Sun Jan 1 17:54:18 PST 2012

Obama repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".

Ron Paul stated more than once, during the debates, that he would not repeal DADT.

Seeya later, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Spokane, Washington

"If not us, who?
If not now, when?"

- Unknown

On Jan 1, 2012, at 5:47 PM, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:

> So currently is his position any different than Obama's? Is the only difference that Obama's position is 'evolving,' perhaps with the benefit of polling?
> 
> Sunil
> 
> From: deco at moscow.com
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2012 14:25:02 -0800
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul and Racism
> 
> Kelly,
>  
> Here in a nutshell is Ron Paul's position on gay marriage:
>  
> As a lifelong Christian, he is personally against it.  He is against any federal legislation on this issue, but for allowing each state to decide the issue themselves.
>  
> Needless to say, besides most likely leading to the denial of gays to marry in many states, the legal morasses created by allowing gay marriage in some states and not allowing it or not recognizing it in other states are horrifying to contemplate.
>  
>  w.
> 
> From: keely emerinemix
> Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2011 10:14 PM
> To: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul and Racism
> 
> Being a racist doesn't mean he's wrong on these issues, Sunil -- but it means that, as Ron Paul (if he is, in fact, a racist), he should be applauded for those views he holds that are correct and challenged on any that you, I, or anyone else disagrees with.  It doesn't mean he ought to run for office, or that we ought to vote for him.
> 
> There are plenty of people, I imagine, who are right about the issues you mention below who aren't bigots, and who -- perhaps more germane to the conversation -- wouldn't gut the social services that make this country not only habitable (imperfect and imperfectly delivered as they are), but moral.  I think you and I see the defense/national security issues fairly similarly, and we likely also applaud Paul's views on legalizing marijuana, gay marriage, and maybe a couple of other issues.  Nonetheless, even those areas on which I agree with Paul -- the ones I just mentioned and the ones you did -- aren't enough for me either to vote for him, or overlook what at least the most fervent Paul supporter would acknowledge was carelessness in letting bigots crank out his newsletter.  
> 
> The cumulative effect of Paul's economic and some of his social policies will harm more people -- people already marginalized and suffering -- than the hundreds of thousands this and the previous war-courting administrations have.  Do I take any comfort in that?  
> 
> No.  Not at all.  But I have to vote for the man who seems to have more, better answers than the one who has one or two good ones.  And I can't afford to combine the worst of both Obama and Paul by risking the horror of, say, a Perry or Bachmann presidency.
> 
> Thanks, Sunil.
> 
> Keely
> www.keely-prevailingwinds.com
> 
> 
> From: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 18:12:36 -0800
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Fw: On Ron Paul and Racism
> 
> 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
> 
> =======================================================
> 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/20120101/291458ba/attachment.html>