If China Attacks America
 

:2 cents::2 cents:

"Racist" Ron Paul talks about how drug laws and the death penalty are disproportionately used against black people.

Just curious if Ron Paul is so racist then how come his policies would be the best for african americans and minorities in general?? Would he not be into bombing brown people like Obama? Why is Obama such a racist against blacks? Why have them jailed for non violent drug crimes more so than whites?

Ron Paul Newsletter Wrongly Painting Him As Racist

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) has done the unthinkable this election cycle: He has injected libertarianism into the mainstream political debate and made himself a serious contender for the presidency. The fact that voters are taking him seriously means he can't be ignored, but he can be slandered. And this is exactly the route his critics in the media and the Republican Party have taken.

Twenty years ago, Paul supposedly authored a series of newsletters that contain defamatory comments about minorities. He denies writing them, but the questionable comments have naturally become the focal point of his campaign, and his critics have used them in an attempt to sink his campaign. But a racist Ron Paul exists only in the minds of his detractors. There is absolutely nothing racist about the man and his policies are incontrovertible proof.

People in a rush to commit character assassination rarely stop to think their way through their presentations. And if the allegations are to carry any weight, Paul's critics need to explain why he endorses a political philosophy that completely contradicts his supposedly discriminatory views.

A brief history lesson illustrates the point well. The 19th century abolitionists who decimated the arguments made in defense of slavery shared Ron Paul's views about liberty. The American Antislavery Society, for instance, argued in 1838 that an individual's right to his own life is ?a self-evident proposition, that a man belongs to himself ? that the right is intrinsic and absolute." Whatever the policy in question, the quoted statement is a perfect summation of the premise for every Paul position.

I've yet to hear any of the talking heads consider such an argument when grilling Paul about his newsletters. But if they did bother to crack open a history book before going on the attack, they would probably suggest that Paul has inconsistently stuck to this view throughout his career, much like the founding fathers who turned a blind eye to slavery during America's earliest years.

So let's consider his record. Every one of Paul's votes in Congress, books written, and speeches given since the beginning of his career has consistently preached the same message. While most of the political establishment enthusiastically supports our wars in the Middle East, for example, Paul is one of the few politicians with the sense to realize that stopping terrorism isn't as simple as denouncing the region as a bastion of radical Islam. A little cultural understanding goes a long way in explaining why America is so unpopular in the Arab World ? and it isn't because we're free. Again, when is the last time any defender of racism has been caught promoting cultural awareness?

A look at domestic issues reveals the same conclusion. Experts have argued for many years that America's war on drugs has disproportionately harmed racial minorities, and Paul, despite the stance of both major political parties, has said that we should quit incarcerating people for drug use. Interestingly, so does the NAACP. In October, Reason Magazine reported that the civil rights organization has come out against the federal government's drug policy, citing evidence that black Americans are ?... 13 times more likely to go to jail for the same drug-related offense as their white counterparts.?

The examples of Paul's policies contradicting his alleged racist comments go on and on. There is really no way to harmonize the two. One of the two doesn't really reflect his character, and everybody knows which it is if they're honest with themselves. As Andrew Sullivan pointed out at The Daily Beast, ?... you've now heard this guy countless times; he's been in three presidential campaigns; he's not exactly known for self-editing. And nothing like this has ever crossed his lips in public.? The simple truth is that the newsletter stunt is nothing but a cheap attempt to dismiss a candidate whose views have the potential to upset the status quo in Washington.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/29...-him-as-racist

@Mr Pheer thanks

here Coup, maybe you did not read this or slinked back into your hole but perhaps you can answer my question since you inexplicably go out of your way to post in Ron Paul threads even though you are an admitted anarchist who does not want any government. Can you answer this question?

Just curious if Ron Paul is so racist then how come his policies would be the best for african americans and minorities in general?? Would he not be into bombing brown people like Obama? Why is Obama such a racist against blacks? Why have them jailed for non violent drug crimes more so than whites?

Ron Paul published racist newsletters

Glad you know whats best for black people. I'm sure they appreciate that

Obama is a racist so I guess they are perfectly suited to run against each other LOL

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremia...ht_controversy

Obama sucks almost as much as Ron Paul

Too bad Obama didn't publish Racist newsletters Like Ron Paul did. He may have appealed to you.

Back to the original point in the video.

The problem is being friendly to Governments is far less profitable than fighting them.

One of the things that the US still leads the world in is the production of military arms manufacture. So to keep this business thriving the US needs wars.

Being friendly to Bin Laden after he and the Mujaheddin had kicked out the Russians would of cost a few billion. not the trillions it has cost to fight a pointless and useless war.

Well the war in Iraq was such a success. Iraq news.

Yes Saddam was an evil man. But if the US needs that as an excuse, it would never not be fighting wars. Whoops, it seems they never have not been in some war somewhere in the world, since WW2. Well not for long. Then there was the cold war and the need to produce tons of arms to combat that threat.

Then Korea, then Vietnam, then ..................

All to keep the arms industry working hard. I wonder who sits on the boards of some of these companies and who gets contracts after the war to rebuild?

So much more profitable than building friendships, not supporting corrupt and often despotic dictators. Building trust, love and above all dependency. Yes some one who depends on you to build roads, schools, hospitals, power plants, water systems and other things we take for granted. Is no bloody use to an industry that depends on you going to these countries in trucks that cost millions, planes that cost billions, tanks that cost a small fortune, etc. To kill the people living there.

Who will fight back with AK47 and roadside bombs that cost a few hundred dollars. Because they are in the wrong. :upsidedow

Let's sidetrack it with the racist card. Much easier than discussing a solution.

Racist or not he's got my vote.

Ron Paul #Winning

If I was an American I would vote for Ron Paul.

I wish I could vote in the American elections. It seems the people most affected by the USA elections are other counties. And I consider myself smarter and more knowledgeable than the average American when it comes to history and politics =]

"Your next stop.... The Twilight Zone"

So you tell me terorists had been created by Gov?

Interesting nobody said anything about the vid except Paul. Everyone else is more concerned about politics... When the heck people will understand that politic is money driven. Nobody give a fuck on what citizen want. You only get what's necessary for to vote them again. And that mean lil things that doesn't bother their investors interests. :pimp

DVDTimes 2 ???

suits israel as well :2 cents:

This message is hidden because Coup is on your ignore list.

what? i did not hear you commie.

Man I think that was the plot of Red Dawn? Man what a great movie! I always wanted to stand on a rock and yell Wolverine while holding the dead body of my young cute compatriot in my arms.

there is actually a remake of that due in 2012. It was originally supposed to be chinese invaders but the studio changed it to koreans... but anyway, you obviously did not watch the video, thats not what its about LOL

you might be right unfortunately...

Taxes are theater tickets.

looks like he has a jizz wad in his mouth...

You make a few assumptions:

1. All wars are the same.
2. The US learned nothing from Vietnam.

I question both.

Iraq convinced the world it had WMD to intimidate Iran. Afghanistan was necessary to disable Al Qaeda.

Watch the documentary with Robert McNamara: The Fog of War.

Powerful video.

they just found an old document that says that my great great great great great grandparents bought the usa years ago.

so it looks like once the legal stuff is sorted out that i am in fact king of the usa.

China would never attack the U.S. They own trillions of dollars of our debt.

What a crock of shit.

Blame the dude who put the troops there to begin with and then left a massive mess for Obama to clean up. Cleaning up takes time.

Looks like the Chinese prefer cyber warfare to linking arms and swimming the Pacific Ocean.

China would not be successful attacking the U.S., we?re pretty much covered on all fronts. If they were to try anything it would most likely be from the REAR which we should have no problem shutting down tight while at the same time counter them with a strong Gas attack. As long as Grease stays out of it.