The Skeletons in Ron Paul’s Closet
Last week, someone posted in the comment section of one of the Hillbuzz articles that we had turned into a Ron Paul site so I thought I would chime in and make a correction. I am not a fan of Ron Paul. I have never taken him seriously as a GOP contender and always just thought of him as an annoying distraction. Until now. If the polls are to be believed, he could very well win Iowa. Disturbing. It would most likely end there for him (hopefully) but it does make you sit up and take a healthier look at him and what he believes and some very disturbing things are bobbing to the surface. Like any candidate that is taking a lead in the polls…media scrutiny is part of the territory. I have to say that I agree with his general theory that less government is ideal. I know that Ron Paul wants to get rid of many (or most) of the government agencies and for that I applaud him but his foreign policy views scare the hell out of me. Islam is a very big threat to the United States…Iran is a very big threat to the United States…we can’t ignore them and leave them alone. A nuclear attack from Iran would change life as we know it. Like it or not, the world counts on us… and our current president wants to weaken us to the point that we are no longer able to protect those who want to live free. In the words of the great Ronald Reagan…
“You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.”
So, like all the other candidates, Ron Paul is having to answer questions about his past and there’s plenty of skeletons to dig out of his closet. Here are a few things you may (or may not) know about Congressman Paul.
1. Did you know that Ron Paul endorsed Cynthia McKinney in 2008 as the Green Party candidate? Yep…you read that right. Instead of endorsing McCain/Palin (or remaining silent) he actually endorsed one of the looniest humans to ever walk the Earth…Cynthia “I love Muammar Qaddafi” McKinney.
2. I know this has been covered on here before but did you know that Ron Paul thinks that Bradley Manning is a patriot? Yep…the Bradley Manning who gave stolen classified military documents to Wiki-leaks to be exposed to the world? How could an American presidential candidate actually voice support for someone who knowingly put our troops lives in danger?
3. Did you know that in the 70′s, 80′s and 90′s, Congressman Paul had a monthly newsletter called Ron Paul’s Freedom Report? This newsletter made very controversial anti-gay, anti-Semitic and anti-black statements. One newsletter claimed that gays were trying to infect other Americans with AIDS by compromising our blood supply. Another stated that order was established during the LA riots only because the blacks had to go pick up their welfare checks. Paul has tried to distance himself from the newsletters by saying that he did not write the articles but they were written in the first person (as if by him) with no other name in the byline and Mr. Paul profited over a million dollars from the newsletters. Whether he wrote all the newsletters or only some of them, he should have been aware of what was being written in his name. He has been given a free pass on these newsletters because no one has taken him seriously as a presidential candidate but in light of his poll numbers in Iowa…he has some explaining to do.
Whether you love Ron Paul or hate him…you have to ask this question…
If Ron Paul is so libertarian that he won’t even police people who use his name, if his movement is filled with incompetents and opportunists, then what kind of a president would he make? Would he even check in to see if his ideas are being implemented? Who would he appoint to Cabinet positions?
For the record…Kevin and I have discussed at great lengths the current GOP field and agree that currently Newt Gingrich would be the best man for the job (unless Sarah decides to jump in and save the day…how wonderful would that be?). Rick Perry is also a good man but may have done too much damage to himself during the debates to recover fully. We both were greatly disappointed by the demise of Herman Cain, who clearly was not ready for prime-time. I am almost completely burned out by this political roller coaster and we haven’t even begun the primaries yet. The people that I used to admire and respect (Charles Krauthammer, George Will, Ann Coulter, Nikki Haley etc.) have really let me down and have proven to all be establishment cocktail party hacks. I’m not sure where the Tea Party is in all of this mess. Who are they supporting? Have they made any statements? Will we be stuck with Romney? Will Ron Paul launch a 3rd party bid should he not be the GOP nominee or will he accept defeat so as not to damage his son Rand’s political career?
What are your thoughts?
© 2011, Bridget. All rights reserved.
Also Recommended:
- The skeletons in Charlie Crist's closet wear ballgowns. How can he run a scorched Earth campaign against anyone?
- A Tale of Two Pauls
- Federal Reserve’s Secret Bailouts Totaled Nearly $8 Trillion
- Question of the Day: Do you think Barack Obama will ever come out of the closet?
- Why doesn't Congressman Aaron Schock just come out of the closet already?
Latest Buzz:
Help HillBuzz by Shopping Amazon
"Bee" Advised!
I look forward to your comments. Please follow these simple guidelines:
- Please do not complain about your comment not yet showing up
- Stay on topic of the article ("This is OT, but..." = bad!)
- I will STING if you troll, spam, bait, swear or attack someone
Ron Paul…ummmm…no
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=110965
My thoughts?
They don't call the GOP the "Party of Stooooopid" for nothing, ya know.
Personally, I wouldn't support Gingrich. I see a lot of complaints that people like Ann Coulter are being the Cocktail Party wrt Newt. I'm not, however, seeing anyone contradicting the arguments she and her colleagues are making.
I also wouldn't support Ron Paul. He's too old, too crazy on foreign policy and immigration (to name just two) and has no executive experience. Frankly, I'd respect him more if he had built a wider movement and let someone else run on his ideas. He might have done more, practically speaking, if he hadn't allowed it to turn into a personality cult.
About time this Ron Paul craziness ends on this site!! Ron Paul is a NAZI and his family are all RACISTS anti Civil Rights and anti Israel.
Sarah Palin is another one who is raising this family up with her blind support to these racists.
The GOP has a once in a lifetime opportunity to raise to the occasion and nominate a proven Christian conservative woman in Michelle Bachmann, placing a WOMAN against the Dems first Black president . Let's keep praying that Michelle is the nominee because neither Mormon anti Christian Romney or Womanizer progressive Gingrich can defeat Obama.
Wow. Calm down.
You may have some good points, but all I'm seeing is that you're kuh-RAY-zee.
His family are all racists? Good god what must it be like to be a crapulent little liar like you?
http://www.infowars.com/cnn-poll-ron-paul-most-po…
Huh, Dr. Paul is the most popular Republican amonsgst the non-whiteys.
Carmelo, Im sure youre a smart guy, but using the racist card makes you seem like you know nothing smart to day. We can debate Dr. Paul's non-interventionist foriegn policy, but please don't use the "race" card.
"For the record…Kevin and I have discussed at great lengths the current GOP field and agree that currently Newt Gingrich would be the best man for the job (unless Sarah decides to jump in and save the day…how wonderful would that be?)." -Bridget
This is exactly why I hope Ron Paul wins Iowa. The stage is being set for Mrs. Somebody Else to get in. The primary/cacus votes are going to be split five ways to Sunday, with no one really coming out on top.
The GOP establishment must be freaking out that Dr. Paul will most likely win Iowa. They brought this on themselves by trying to force "it's his turn Romney" down our throats.
Sarah 2012!
If this NAZI wins Iowa Romney could be the nominee. This racist Paul is helping the man whose religion denies Jesus as our God. Ron Paul cannot win Iowa by any means. We need a true conservative Christian to fix this nation and make history in the process: Michelle Bachmann. This is once in a life time opportunity for conservatives. If they blow it, conservatism will be DEAD for alt least another 40 years.
Like or hate the Latter Day Saints (i.e., Mormons), they DO accept Jesus as the son of God. They just believe he came to the Western Hemisphere when his job was done in Israel. It's fair to question whether Romney will choose to side with his church in a conflict between church and state, but please QUIT CALLING PEOPLE NAMES! The tactic cheapens your comments.
I sincerely hope that ANY president would side with the U.S. CONSTITUTION in any discussion that involved church & state. People used this same nonsense when John Kennedy was running for President – that he would be taking orders directly from the Vatican. Well, now we all know that John Kennedy was about as far from a practicing Catholic as a man can possibly be – except for his murdering brother. Let's leave religion out of it – unless that religion has specifically stated a goal to rule the world by destroying the Western countries and Israel.
I was giving you credit. But you are a seminar blogger. I shall ignore you and wish you well.
I hope you're right
Ron Paul walks ot on a CNN reporter.
http://news.yahoo.com/ron-paul-storms-off-cnn-set…
Walks out? Hell, I would have decked her. But I’m not as nice as Ron Paul.
Kevin and I have discussed at great lengths the current GOP field and agree that currently Newt Gingrich would be the best man for the job
George Will (yeah, yeah, I know) has written a great article (no, really, come back) on Gingrich:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/gingrich-t…
Please read it. There is no way that Gingrich can be President. He's dangerous, and believe you me the Dems are going to scream from the rafters about it.
This article is just repeating lies told by others, fed to them by the desperate incumbent Republicans and Democrats.
Ron Paul did not endorse McKinney. He had press conference for all of the third party candidates including Bob Barr (who is now a Gingrich supporter) and Nader in order to give them publicity.
I also don't think the newsletters you are talking about were published from the 70s to the 90s, but were rather published from the late 80s to the early 90s, over a period of a few years.
It is clear that Paul critics, from Kirchik in TNR to everyone else are incapable of actually justifying the current policies of state controlled money supplies or world wide mlitar empire. Nor are they capable of criticizing Paul's actual alternatives, from competitive currencies and free banking (mis stated by Kirchik and by Dick Morris has a government currency backed by a gold standard), to a belief that we should only have military strikes in retaliation or to prevent imminent attack, not to rebuild nations.
If memory serves me correctly he endorsed several candidates and yes McKinney and Nader were two of them. But why would he even give McKinney any airtime on her vitriolic views are beyond my average intelligence of comprehension…so far though I hear no denials on what he's done.
Repeating things over and over again doesn't make them true, however not responding to them leaves the door open that they may be true.
actually…the first newsletter was published in 1978 and continued through 1995. The 1978 issues of the newsletter dealt heavily with conspiracy theories and the Trilateral Commission…he even accused Jeane Kirkpatrick and George Will of "being two of our enemies".
Really? Do you have these newsletters? Can you scan them and post them? If not, the you should make a retraction. Also, Ron Paul officially endorsed Pastor Chuck Baldwin in 2008. The Constitution party. Why are you lying about McKinney? You call yourself a Christian, but you are a liar. A christian wouldn't lie like you do- over and over and over again.
So, you've seen the newsletters, then? Please scan them and post them. Something no one has done before.
If you haven't seen them, then you are bearing false witness and should ask Paul's forgiveness. If you were a real Christian, anyway
Just an observation but up until this campaign I never paid much attention to Ron Paul. For some reason I thought of him as a cranky old loon who road around on a winged unicorn and dispensed his foes with a giant dobbie. Now my imagine of Ron Paul has shifted to the positive side. On the other hand a lot his detractors here in this forum are starting to sound nuttier than a salted nut roll.
Perhaps it should be noted that not everything on this site (such as the support for Ron Paul) is the belief of Mr. Kevin DuJan. Is it right to claim that everything in Ron Paul's newsletter should be applied as that which he supports when Mr. Kevin does not accept everything that is posted to his website?
As to his international policies, do you think we could even wage an effective war (whether in Iran or any other country, for that matter) if our economy collapses under us? Do you think that the war in Iraq was a "just" war, or that the war was of benefit to either us or the Iraqi people? Do you think that having military bases all over the world would truly benefit us in the event of war, or are they a waste and show of power (possibly antagonizing countries to actions/attacks)? And as far as nuclear capabilities, unstable countries have had them for almost as long as we have. Should we invade any nation that might use them? Perhaps we should focus on diplomacy as a nuclear deterrent as Ron Paul suggests. Perhaps we should research ways to defend against nuclear attacks, instead of attacking countries that might have them, pushing countries to develop nuclear weapons as a national defense. In the end, whether we like it or not, these nations will have nuclear weapons. We should focus on how to defend ourselves when they do rather than attacking nations left and right.
I'll respond to the troll. To answer your question: Yes, yes, yes, no, no, no, have been. There all fixed.
The difference between Hillbuzz and the Ron Paul newsletters is that we post under our names so that it is obvious that what we are saying is our opinion, not Kevin’s. The Ron Paul newsletters were written under his name…and his name alone and they were written in the first person so that you got the impression that the articles were Ron Paul’s statements. Also, Kevin has very strict guidelines for any Hillbuzz contributor and if we don’t follow them, we won’t be allowed to write for Hillbuzz. We don’t always agree on issues but as long as we keep it clean and truthful, we are free to state our opinions. It would stand to reason that anything that Ron Paul’s name was on and anything that made him money would be approved by him.
You also asked “Do you think that the war in Iraq was a “just” war, or that the war was of benefit to either us or the Iraqi people?” and my answer to that is…you bet it was a benefit to the Iraqi people. Have you ever asked an Iraqi citizen if they are better off today than they were 10 years ago? I have. Their answers have always been a unanimous “YES”!
Hi Bridget,
I’ve just published a response to your article. I hope you read it with an open mind.
Kathleen
p.s. Many of the articles in the Ron Paul newsletters were published without bylines.
No on the third party run. Someone correctly stated that this could really damage his sons chances of rising.
Oh-oh, Briget, is Kathleen going to start deleting your posts or comments like she has been doing to other faithful Hillbuzzers who have been here for years? Since I have asked legitimate questions about Ron Paul, I get my comments deleted. It is shocking behavior from Hillbuzz actually.
Good article Bridget. The bright light is now shining on the RP campaign, just like it has done for everyone else who's taken the lead so far.
Bridget, if you think you're burned out try living in Iowa. We're bombarded with robocalls and every day brings anti-Gingrich mailings from Romney's PAC…three of them yesterday alone. Those mailings are so nasty I'm actually thinking of standing for Gingrich out of spite, even though I don't trust the man as far as I can throw him.
Take heart, though. Remember that the 2008 Iowa caucuses were won by Mike Huckabee. Where is he now?
I would HATE to live in Iowa with the election madness. I don't understand how you people get to go first. They should rotate the dates or something.
I am really sick of election 2012 already and have that awful sick feeling like I did in '08. Unofrtunately, this sick feeling is not about Obama. No, it is about he who shall remain nameless because I miss posting here.
Ugh!!! I hate those robocalls. They jam my answering machine.
So is everyone in moderation or is it just me? Have I ever posted ANYTHING to this blog to make me unworthy of being a user? Hell, I even sent Kevin a contribution a year ago. Why am I a second-class citizen here?
If it is anti-RP then that KG person will delete you.
Sad.
Whining about moderation is against the rules of the road. Please stop. Thanks.
Ahhhh…I seem to have kicked over the fire ant hill of Ron Paul supporters with my post. I knew it would happen. Ron Paul seems to bring out the worst in people
I do not see the attraction in RP, but I have to be careful what I comment or be censored.
Here, I'll only write nice things. Rainbows, sunshine, lollipops and puppy dogs. Cute little puppy dogs.
No censorship from me. Write on
That is good to know. I have lately been called a troll and then a Romney supporter and then a dem by that other poster. It really shocked me. Although I had, apparently, hit a nerve because I inquired how it was that Ron Paul could be expected to be anything other than another Obama. Since he has had many of the same complaints for a number of years, but not been able to rally others in congress around to his line of thinking, why should I expect he would now? It all sounds like the same hope and change we've had. and then I got banned, under 2 of my emails. Had to make a new one. Maybe I should not care. Although after I got banned, it did seem like a pro Ron Paul site and that is not right. I assume that others like me suffered the same fate.
Not to worry, I was called a troll by a newbie because I do not think very highly of Michele Bachmann. Mind, I have not changed my mind concerning Bachmann.
As an international person, I actually favour Newt Gingrich from the current field. I have probably had posts deleted too, because I do not have a positive view of RP. I do not trust him.
Thank you Bridget.
All candidates must be vetted, given how many times RP has run for office, this should have already been done by the media. From 1988 RP "debates" the legalization of drugs, what else will show up later, we need to get it out in the open before one vote http://www.thedailycandidate.com/video/2011/dec/p…
Is there an audio vault from RP's appearances on the Alex Jones radio show? What ties if any are there between RP and Alex Jones?
RP in 1988 http://www.thedailycandidate.com/video/2011/dec/p…
All candidates need to be vetted, do you think voters in Iowa would be interested in the "debate" on legalizing drugs? he comes across as unhinged to me, glad he has toned it down.
I wonder if there is audio out there from RP's appearances on the Alex Jones radio show, I read he has appeared there several times. We must do the job the media refuses to do, voters must be informed prior to voting.