Topic: Presidential Campaign 2008
If Ron Paul Hates Blacks and Jews, Count Me In Too. If Ron Paul jumped off a bridge, so would I.by John Armstrong
(libertarian)
Saturday, January 12, 2008
I can't watch a major "news" network without hearing something about whether or not Ron Paul is a racist. Interestingly enough, I can't watch the same networks without constantly hearing about whether "black" voters should support Obama or if "women" voters should support Hillary.
Since these major networks seem to want to group people into categories and pretend that each individual has no choice of his/her own, it really made me stop to think. You see, I was under the assumption that I was supposed to research a candidate's issues and then cast my support behind the candidate I felt best addressed the issues I held as most important. It seems I was wrong.
I really hate that I wasted hundreds of hours over the last few months trying to decide who I supported when I was doing it wrong all along. I am such an idiot. Thank goodness I turned on the debates on Fox the other night and happened to catch some CNN post-debate comments so I could learn how I am supposed to vote. Since I am a White, Protestant-Christian, Male I now understand that I should also support someone also fits these categories. Which makes perfectly good sense if you are a major news network since that same thought process leads to the logical conclusion that every Muslim in the world obviously supports Terrorists.
Remember--it's Islamofascists and Muslim Extremists that did us harm on 9/11, not just 19 really angry guys supported by a couple of thousand more (tops) pretty angry ones. Angry at what? Who cares? Kill 'em all--let Allah Sort 'em out. Jihad this, bin Laden. America--F--Yeah. Yeeehawww. You get the point. This has to be said. Why don't we want to fight them over here? There are 300 million of us, who at least for the time being have a right to bear arms. Even if there are a million of them, at 300-1, I like their odds even less than Fox News likes Ron Paul's. I digress. No I don't. When did this country become so damned afraid of a band of angry nomads? Somebody needs to stand up and say, HEY TERRORISTS!!!!! YOU DON'T SCARE US ANYMORE!!!! AND LAUGH AT THEM. WE need youtube videos going out to al Jazeera with people rolling on the floors laughing and pointing at bin Laden--not at muslims, but at the "terrorists." Here's something funny I've talked with my friends about. Watch a bin Laden video and turn the volume down. You do the voice, but do it with a real deep-redneck accent (I'm from the South so I can say that). You won't die from "Terrorist" attacks, but you may die laughing. These dudes didn't "terrorize" the badass Americans on Flight 93 (save it conspiracy people, I've been planning an article for you). That day they were just hijackers speaking some strange language that those brave guys on United 93 thumped because they weren't "terrorized". But now they are scary "Terrorists." What a joke. They had their 15 minutes, let's move on. And if one kills me tonight, I don't take a word of this back. Your money, your friend/relative who died for no reason, your Constitutional Rights, heck even your TSA confiscated tube of toothpaste is more important to me than being safe from Radical (meaning lying far outside the norm, thus relatively few) Islamic Extremists. We need some cartoons about these guys. They are a joke compared to us. I don't care where bin Laden is. The last time one man could have destroyed our country, he had an office in the Kremlin with a button he could push to do it. Stop being so pusillanimous (great word by the way) America. Okay that was a rant, now back to the article.
So by this logic, I guess that rules out Hillary; and what a shame; I really wanted the leader of the free world to be someone who had to cry and realize that it would be a good idea to run her own campaign and make her own decisions instead of having people tell her what to say and do. Sorry, Obama; no soup for you. And so much for Romney, but man is he good lookin', and although I'm not sure exactly what he reads, it certainly isn't Ahmadinejad's press releases. And Rudy is about as Christian as I am a respected journalist so that rules him out. I had no idea it was so easy to rule out candidates. Thanks major "news" networks for making this so much easier for me.
But you see I don't just want a candidate who is my color and religion; I want a candidate who hates the same things I do. Since I'm not "terrorized" by terrorists since my brand of Christianity taught me to fear no evil, and my Savior taught me to turn the other cheek instead of sending some crazy guys in off-course speed boats to the Gates of Hell (thanks for that one, Huck), because I actually trust my God to protect me and have faith that He will even when the storms come more than I trust the god (read: Federal Government) of most Sunday Christians, I can't support Edwards, Huckabee, McCain, or Thompson either.
I guess that leaves me with that ole kook Ron Paul. Good thing he only hates Blacks and Jews since I am neither and that's how I'm supposed to vote according to the media.
But wait, does he really hate them? This is important. As a Christian I know I heard something in church three times a week about how I was supposed to hate people. And if they hated me first, that really made it okay. Or am I getting the Bible confused with a transcript from every White House press release for the last 7 years? Who knows? But I know I am supposed to hate someone so we need to make sure Ron Paul really hates these guys.
Let's see, he hates Jews because he wants to let Israel make its own policy decisions without our interfering. Oh, and he also wants to stop sending Israel's enemies three times more American taxpayer dollars than he wants to stop sending Israel. And he supported the Israeli's decision to take out that nuclear facility in Iraq back in the 1980's when everyone else condemned them because he believed that they had every right to do what they felt was in their best interest as a sovereign nation. So I might be missing something here but I just don't see where he hates Jews. So my support may be getting a little shaky. Oh well, at least he hates black people. Right?
Let's see. Every other candidate bemoans the loss of the black family unit and readily cites it as an explanation for nearly every issue confronting the black community. But it's hard to keep a family together when 1 in 4 Black Men between 20-29 are in prison because of today's version of the Jim Crow Laws, popularly known as the War on Drugs. And Ron Paul has said he would pardon all non-violent drug offenders if elected. So he obviously doesn't hate black people. Maybe I should find a candidate who does. We can't have all of those dangerous criminals back home with their families getting treatment or learning how to actually do something productive since they wouldn't be able to sell drugs anymore if drugs were legalized. We need someone in office who will spend billions of taxpayer dollars to help people make better personal decisions. We need a leader who will deprive those dastardly blacks of their freedom and keep them from pushing drugs on the innocents. Just last night a crazed negro came up and tried to shove a crackpipe in my mouth without my consent so he could get me hooked and make more money. I need a candidate who will keep me safe from these dangerous people by locking them away forever. I also need someone who will make sure the other three-quarters of non-drug dealing black men stay in their place by keeping them guilty by pigmental association with all of these "criminals" instead of seeing them as individuals and recognizing their vast contributions to our society. We can't have this. It's not about the content of their character; it's about the color of their skin. Ron Paul is obviously not the man to get this done. So if he doesn't hate black people either, what am I supposed to do? I'm out of candidates.
Hmmm. What if I just picked a candidate based on who he was as a person, his character shown through his family life, his voting record showing a steadfast commitment to upholding his Oath of Office, and his trust in people as individuals (that runs so deeply that it sometimes allows his good name to be taken advantage of because of things they write in decades old newsletters with that same good name attached to it that he didn't inspect because he trusted them)? What if I didn't have to have a mutual hate partner in common with my candidate? What if I didn't need someone to be funny to deliver his message like Frank Luntz’ (explicit video) focus group said they did when explaining why Fred won after the S.C. debate? What if I voted on issues? What if I think 9/11 was a really bad thing, that going after Bin Laden and boys in Afghanistan was a good idea, but forgetting him to attack a country that posed no imminent threat to America and had exactly zero terrorists from there on those planes, spending over a trillion dollars to do it, without declaring war, and killing thousands of truly brave Americans (soldiers are Americans too) in the process might not have been a great idea and that saying so doesn't make you unpatriotic? Or what if I believe that looking for motives as to why it happened so that we can eliminate those if possible doesn't mean I'm blaming America any more than looking for a motive in a murder case means I'm blaming the victim who was murdered; maybe I'm just trying to understand a serial killer so I can stop him before he does it again? What if, despite graduating from UNC-Chapel Hill, I don't believe that Duke awards Medical Degrees to quacks or kooks? What if I actually did a lot of research and wanted a candidate who offered answers based on eliminating problems instead of reacting to and treating symptoms?
Well, he might not be perfect according to the media since he is my same Race, Religion, and Sex but he doesn't hate Blacks and Jews but he'd still be alright with me. I support Dr. Ron Paul because I can read polysyllabic words and because I believe a lifetime of actions far outweighs an editorial oversight from a decade ago caused by his trusting people who took advantage of his good name. I don't hate Blacks and Jews because Ron Paul does. I don't believe in anything simply because he does. But I am inspired to learn about issues that don't make sense to me when he brings them up. And even though I don't always agree with him, I usually do once I've read an article or two on the issues he's spent a lifetime studying.
Ron Paul may not be perfect since it turns out he doesn't really hate Blacks and Jews. Neither do I. But if you listen to the media which assumes you can't read; you would believe he does, and I would believe that I should.
America, we are better than this. Aren't we? It saddens me that I would even have to add that last question.
Your Fellow American,
.
John Armstrong
P.S. Your high gas prices support terrorists, too--you evil SUV driver.
New Addition: A reader below made a good point. While focusing on Ron Paul and his quirkisms, the media has been able to skirt addressing these major issues. While we must do all we can to elect Ron Paul, even he would likely say the bigger issue is making people aware of the real issues we are facing. Maybe Ron Paul can be our keyword search long after he is gone. I'll let smarter people than I decide that, but we need to stay focused on the issues. If you see an article that makes sense, send it in to your local newspaper. Edit it if you like. Say you wrote it (if it's one of mine I don't care--I don't do this for money or recognition). Print it and send it to people who don't use email. Make copies for your meetup groups to hand out. Whatever. Just spread the word like some other Patriots spread Thomas Paine's Common Sense pamphlets back in the day. I think I'll include a variant of this on every post I make from now on.
Like this Article? Thumb it.
Or read some more random thoughts I was dumb enough to put into the public domain and into the blogosphere forever (or at least until the government censors them).
Digg it if you know how; I don't.
Want to send it to friends? Send it to yourself first using the link below and then forward it to avoid spam filters.
Comment, it’s fun.
Want a date or to assail me privately? Send pictures or comments to: strongarmedjohn@yahoo.com. Otherwise, post below.
As always, unlike the NFL, you have the author's permission to give accounts of, rebroadcast, retransmit, reproduce, or do anything else you'd like with this article to promote the Restoration of our Republic. Please post the link if you do repost this because I sometimes update the articles after their initial writing. But if you don't, don't worry about it--the message is more important than any minor corrections.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 212 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of John Armstrong only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. John Armstrong is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
john, you are absolutely correct. i couldn't have said it better myself (believe me, i've tried) what i don't understand is why everybody agrees the media is really biased when it comes to their own candidate but, then agrees with what the media says about the other candidates? i believe you either trust the media or you don't. if you decide that you do by eating all the bull they give you about candidates other than yours, you really have no reason to complain about your candidate being misrepresented. if you agree that the media lies/misrepresents your candidate why wouldn't you assume they do the same for others? it's like siding with a bully...it's worth a beating or two to agree with him than it is disagreeing and getting hounded everyday. i don't know about you guys but i'm all for sticking up for myself, no matter what.
if everybody interested in politics and voting would take the time and research the candidates they would think differently about the whole thing. i understand most people don't have time to sit and research for hours on end, this is very time consuming but, devote one hour a day to looking into the candidates. you will quickly see the difference/similarities in these guys/woman. it's a process of elimination, the media isn't gonna do it for you, your friend can't do it for you. you have to do it to know you have made the right decision. then, and only then will you be confident in your vote.
Posted By: Michael Burgos
Date: 2008-01-12 15:45:01
I think our biggest problem at this point is that we are allowing the media to focus on a man, and not on issues. If the Ron Paul supporters wouldn't end every article with thier endorsement, and instead consentrated on a compair and contrast of each canidate more American would see who is the best choice. Tell me another canidate that is willing say what needs to be said even if it does scare America.
Here are the true issues:
The War on Terrisom
The Economy
Protecting Our Borders
The government not doing what it was put in place to perform; provide a National Defense. I also believe that the government has no business providing social programs, but rather they should be providing guidlines, and laws to allow the private sector to perform these functions without allowing the private sector to take advantage of the situations and circumstances at hand. (ie Utilities: Enron, Mortgage Companies (Subprime crisis), and Banks with their Interest rate practices that target the young and ignorant to a life of debt) The government needs to govern, regulate, and provide oversight of Corprate practices to ensure the are providing the services needed in America but not taking advantage of the American People at the same time. That should be the limit of the federal government in my opinion.
Lastly National Defense is exactly that DEFENSE, I would say that border control/security would fall in that line. But the War on Terrorism? Great scare tactic but what true threat are Terrorists to the American way of life? If we have strong border control to include borders, loading docks, imagration, and airport security what threat would we truely have with terrorism? I believe it would be very little if at all. Aside from Canada and Mexico think about the actual difficulty in invading the USA? If a Country were to invade us, they would also have to hold the ground, like we have to in Iraq. I really don't think there is a nation in the world that could do it.
Thanks for the Article, sorry that I tend to rant.
enjoyed the article - nice rant - just watched that penn and teller Luntz video - amusing. my friend the american people are sheep for the slaughter - not a single person I know cares about the financial condition of this country - they're too worried about the 'terrorists' - boy, boy, boy most don't even know what inflation is.........and I'm talking about people in my own family - all of them - it's a shame, i've done quite a bit of educating the last few months. Yesterday I got an email from my fiance's mom - one of those that get's forwarded among friend - it showed a map of the u.s. and mexico and said - hey mexicans this is ours, that is yours, obey our laws etc. etc - really pissed me off and I sent a reply to everyone on HER list saying how ignorant they were - it's our corporatists and federal government which is causing this problem - get your blame in the right place! Lord it's like talking to a group of mindless zombies - our country has became the opposite of everything our founding fathers fought to establish - honestly I don't know what to do - feels like we are hitting our heads against a wall here. best regards
Absolutely precise one hundred percent accurate. I concur whole-heartedly. I also laughed so hard I could not breathe. Wow. It is a first class effort in my opinion. I have never heard this argument expressed as expertly as you have done. Enough said.
Posted By: Linda Inveninato
Date: 2008-01-12 16:42:37
"I support Dr. Ron Paul because I can read polysyllabic words and because I believe a lifetime of actions far outweighs an editorial oversight from a decade ago caused by his trusting people who took advantage of his good name."
PERFECT...Thanks for saying it first.
For too many years now, leaders from both parties have foisted a" B & B" foreign policy upon this country. A "B & B" foreign policy consists of (first) bribing countries into doing our bidding and, when that doesn't work (second) bombing them into submission.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over, and over, and over, and over again and expecting a different result. Stop the Insanity! We have a chance to make a real change in this country by supporting a truly honorable statesman.
Sadly, not. About 75% of voters cast their ballot for the person that they believe will win. Of course, the presumed winner is announced by the major media, using charlatans like Frank Luntz to make it "scientific". My take on the pollsters:
Your commentary is excellent and makes my point that pollsters falsely assume that people vote on the basis of their own demographic characteristics. Sadly, many do.
Posted By: John Armstrong
Date: 2008-01-12 17:24:44
West,
I loved both of those articles. It is sad. It would be funny if it didn't affect so many people. My true hope in all of this is that regardless of what happens with RP this time around enough young people won't forget the message and over the next decade we elect leaders who will start to honor their Oath of Office (which I have written about several times) before I have to learn Chinese. America will never be defeated by external forces. Only we can defeat us. And we are well on the way.
Posted By: charles ranalli
Date: 2008-01-12 18:01:54
good one - right on target.
the media - the political spinners - and the guardians of political correctness are so friggin' boring and stupid. but i think a sizeable percentage of Americans are learning to just laugh at them. now the problem seems to be - to get the votes Ron Paul is receiving to be actually counted and reported. (search you-tube for "Alex Jones Bev Harris") i think we need to get every Ron Paul voter to testify to their vote via notarized affidavit. that may be the only way to break through the vote-stealing scam in America.
"And Rudy is about as Christian as I am a respected journalist so that rules him out."
What you said about Rudy is true but I think you made a mistake on the last part. I wish more journalist would take this approach of throwing it in our face. Nice job, you are respected!
How come the media is ignoring McCina's racism during the SC debates? John McCain was overtly racist in the SC debate, read it here:
McCain's racism in SC debates
CORRECTED LINK (sorry about the double post). How come the media is ignoring McCina's racism during the SC debates? John McCain was overtly racist in the SC debate, read it here:
http://www.nolanchart.com/article1084.html
[The latest testimonial on Ron Paul's true social and political sensibilities is perhaps the most authoritative one, and is based on irrefutable empirical evidence. I reproduce below, in its entirety, the story as published by the original source. –DT]
NAACP President: Ron Paul Is Not A Racist Linder says Paul being smeared because he is a threat to the establishment
Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet Sunday, January 13, 2008
Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder, who has known Ron Paul for 20 years, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist in light of recent smear attempts, and said the reason for him being attacked was that he was a threat to the establishment.
Linder joined Alex Jones for two segments on his KLBJ Sunday show this evening, during which he commented on the controversy created by media hit pieces that attempted to tarnish Paul as a racist by making him culpable for decades old newsletter articles written by other people.
"Knowing Ron Paul's intent, I think he is trying to improve this country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution and you constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot of folks are going to misconstrue that....so I think it's very easy for folks who want to to take his position out of context and that's what I'm hearing," said Linder.
"Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he's a very fair guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian platform," he added.
Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.
Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.
"I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him," said Linder.
"If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context," he added.
"What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear," concluded the NAACP President.
Conundrum. If I want to support the money bomb the kids are organizing for January, my support will be represented as honoring MLK. I do not see any reason to honor or respect MLK. I don't think this makes me a racist because I honor and respect Craig who works with me at the factory and I think history will someday resurect Malcom X and place him in the same league as Jefferson. MLK's gospel of passive acceptance is a repudiation of my Protestant inclinations and our nation's Protestant origins. Protestants, you know, protest. MLK preached a gospel of passive acceptance. That's why he is elevated to the status of sainthood in the church of political correctness and why refusal to honor MLK is heresey for which one pays so high a price. I might jump off a bridge if Ron Paul did but I can never honor MLK even if Dr. Paul, who owns my unreserved affection and respect does so. Reasonable men disagree. Nor will I repudiate Lincoln or Washington.
In my lifetime I've seen Lincoln's Birthday and Washington's birthday replaced by Martin Luther King day and I think new generations are getting short changed. Lincoln and Washington excite the imagination and challenge the political and ethical ruminations of the spirit. MLK is like marijuana. It gets you all emotional and vague and leads nowhere. Lincoln's great monument is the Gettysburg address. Compare its impregnable reason, respect and compassion to the theatrical emotionalism of "Awe Gawds chilln' gotta be free".
I don't think we'll be free until we depose the saints rammed down our throats by the establishment and restore the real heroes of the American dream to the seat of honor in our hearts and imaginations.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
![""]("http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/january2008/130108linder.jpg")