What concerns me about Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is not the man people pretend he is. I've had it with all the worship of a man who has a long trail of issues people tend to brush off.

Permalink

The dangerous isolationism of Ron Paul

On the one hand, Texas congressman Ron Paul, Republican candidate for the presidency, is a zealous champion of limited government, free markets and low taxes. On the other hand, he reportedly thinks the U.S. should not have gone to war against Nazi Germany. What to make of this heresy? In a word, a great deal – for it may define Mr. Paul’s isolationism.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/neil-reynolds/the-dangerous-isolationism-of-ron-paul/article2302229/

Permalink

Huffington Post Points Out What A Hypocrite Ron Paul Is, Once Again!

“Ron Paul Defends First Class Flights”

WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has been spending large amounts on airfare as a congressman, flying first class on dozens of taxpayer-funded flights to his home state. The practice conflicts with the image that Paul portrays as the only presidential candidate serious about cutting federal spending.

Paul flew first class on at least 31 round-trip flights and 12 one-way flights since May 2009 when he was traveling between Washington and his district in Texas, according to a review by The Associated Press of his congressional office expenses. Four other round-trip tickets and two other one-way tickets purchased during the period were eligible for upgrades to first-class after they were bought, but those upgrades would not be documented in the expense records.

Paul, whose distrust of big government is the centerpiece of his presidential campaign, trusts the more expensive government rate for Continental Airlines when buying his tickets. Paul chose not to buy the cheaper economy tickets at a fraction of the price because they aren’t refundable or as flexible for scheduling, his congressional staff said.

“We always get him full refundable tickets since the congressional schedule sometimes changes quickly,” said Jeff Deist, Paul’s chief of staff. Paul might have to pay out of his own pocket for canceled flights in some cases if he didn’t buy refundable tickets, Deist said.

But records show that most of the flights for Paul were purchased well in advance and few schedule changes were necessary. Nearly two-thirds of the 49 tickets were purchased at least two weeks in advance, and 42 percent were bought at least three weeks in advance, the AP’s review found.

Paul charged taxpayers nearly $52,000 on the more expensive tickets, or $27,621 more than the average Continental airfare for the flights between Washington and Houston, according to the AP’s review of his congressional expenses and average airfares compiled by the Department of Transportation.

The more expensive tickets have other benefits as well, including allowing Paul to upgrade to first class when his staff reserves a flight because his frequent government travel gives him membership in an elite class of Continental customers who earn travel perks. Upgrades to first-class with cheaper fares are possible, at times limited to available seats days before the flight. But those upgrades are not guaranteed and some require ticket changes at the airport, according to the airline’s frequent flyer rules.

The AP reviewed congressional travel before the Iowa caucuses for the two members of Congress running at the time – Paul and Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. Bachmann later ended her presidential campaign.

House records show Bachmann, like most other congressional members, also paid the more expensive government rate for airfare. But her staff would not provide access to more detailed expense records that show when and what type of tickets were purchased.

Paul’s congressional staff provided access to all expense records requested.

Congressional members don’t have to pay the government rate for travel, but most do, including many like Paul and Bachmann who advocate cuts in federal spending.

“You could almost always beat the government rate,” said Steve Ellis, vice president of the Washington-based Taxpayers for Common Sense, a federal budget watchdog group. “They need to be walking the walk, and one of the ways they can do that is to be fiscally responsible for how they spend their member office money.”

Jesse Benton, Paul’s campaign manager, didn’t respond to a written request to explain how Paul’s use of more expensive airfare, which allows him to fly first class, corresponds with his commitment to cut federal spending. Instead, he sent a statement that started, “No one is more committed to cutting spending than Dr. Paul.”

But Paul’s congressional travel conflicts with claims in campaign appearances that he’s the most frugal and serious deficit hawk in the race.

“The talk you hear in Washington is pure talk, because there is nobody suggesting, the other candidates are not talking about real cuts,” Paul said in a speech to supporters last week after his second-place finish in New Hampshire.

He has proposed cutting $1 trillion from the federal budget during his first year as president, and has confronted other candidates in public forums as “big government conservatives.”

“You’re a big spender, that’s all there is to it,” Paul told former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania during a GOP debate in New Hampshire.

Paul boasts on his website about declining other congressional perks, such as a pension and all-expense-paid travel “junkets” that other lawmakers take. And he says he regularly returns money from his congressional account to the treasury.

But when it comes to his congressional travel, Paul has opted not to search for cheaper airfares that could mean returning more of his office account to the treasury, which uses any money returned by House or Senate members to help reduce the federal deficit.

Paul paid $51,972 for his government-rate flights between Washington and Houston between May 2009 and March 2011, or more than twice the $24,351 average airfare on Continental for travel between Washington and Houston. The average airfare figure represents the price for all tickets purchased for Continental flights between Washington and Houston, including economy and first-class travel, according to the Transportation Department’s Domestic Airline Fares Consumer Report, which collects airfare information for the nation’s busiest travel routes.

Paul’s staff regularly booked him in first class on flights when tickets were purchased, according to expense records. His office paid between $1,217 and $1,311 for each round-trip flight, compared to the average airfare for that trip ranging from $528 to $760, according to the airline fares consumer report.

The period reviewed by the AP was the most recent period for which complete congressional expense records were available.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/16/ron-paul-defends-first-cl_n_1208495.html

Permalink

BOSSIP: In Idiot GOP News: Ron “Racist Old Head” Paul Called MLK Day An Outrage…Blames Ronald Reagan For “Hate Whitey Day”

http://bossip.com/523321/in-idiot-gop-news-ron-racist-old-head-paul-called-mlk-day-an-outrage-blames-ronald-reagan-for-hate-whitey-day/

We are all aware that Ron Paul is a certified racist.  Here’s an excerpt from one of his shady newsletters regarding MLK Day via The Root:

“Boy, it sure burns me to have a national holiday for Martin Luther King. I voted against this outrage time and time again as a Congressman. What an infamy that Ronald Reagan approved it! We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.”

… Paul’s supporters link to his Yea vote on this 1979 bill as evidence that he supported an MLK Holiday:

“TO AMEND H.R. 5461, MARTIN LUTHER KING HOLIDAY, BY DESIGNATING THE THIRD MONDAY IN JANUARY RATHER THAN JANUARY 15 AS THE LEGAL HOLIDAY.”

But this actually isn’t the bill for the holiday. The text doesn’t even claim that. More importantly, the date is wrong. This vote was taken on December 5, 1979. The vote for the King holiday was actually taken on November 13, 1979:

The bill was called up in the House on Tuesday, November 13, 1979 … When the final vote was taken, 252 Members voted for the bill and 133 against — five votes short of the two-thirds needed for passage.

I’m sorry to report that one of those Nay votes, as you can see here, was cast by one Ronald Paul. I’m sorry to further report that Paul again voted no on the 1983 bill that passed.

SMH.

FURTHERMORE: The website which they site is owned by a Ron Paul supporter who pledged a donation to his campaign. It’s NOT an official government webisite, and he even states on the page that he does it as a hobby. Ron Paul fans will go to extreme lengths to defend Ron Paul and his racism. They even FAKE his support online by doing things like making up quotes, and HACKING celebrity twitter accounts. Ron Paul and his fans are untrustworthy and not to be taken seriously.

Permalink

The many problems with Ron Paul

http://www.americablog.com/2012/01/draft-many-problems-with-paul.html

Can we talk? Ron Paul is not a charming oddball with a few peculiar notions. He’s not merely “out of the mainstream.” Ron Paul is a full bore crank. In fact he’s practically the dictionary definition of a crank: a person who has a single obsessive, all-encompassing idea for how the world should work and is utterly blinded to the value of any competing ideas or competing interests.

Read the article for the full list. 

The problem with Paul is not just the fact that he wrote a blatantly racist newsletter for many years and is obviously lying about it. Just as the problem with Cain was not just the fact that he was unable to give a credible explanation of the allegations of sexual harassment.

At least a Bachmann, Perry or Cain might be content to be (mostly) a figurehead. Paul would not be a figurehead.

None of the GOP contenders is an attractive nominee and that is not an accident of chance. It is a consequence of the politics that the GOP has been engaging in the past 12 years. Romney, Santorum and Gingrich are the very best, the finest that the party can produce. This is not a party fielding its B team while their superstars sulk in their tent, these are the best people they can put on the field.

Permalink

USA TODAY: N.H. newspaper: Ron Paul is dangerous.

DES MOINES — New Hampshire’s most influential newspaper says Ron Paul is a “dangerous man.”

Union Leader publisher Joe McQuaid wrote:

His defenders say they admire Ron Paul’s consistency. It is true, Paul has been consistently spouting this nonsense. It is about time New Hampshire voters showed him the door.

Jesse Benton, Ron Paul’s national campaign chairman, pushed back in an e-mail earlier today that suggests the Texas congressman is going to stay his course.

“It’s never going to happen. Ron Paul is not going to be the nominee,” she said. 

More: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/12/ron-paul-union-leader-dangerous-man-/1?csp=34news

Permalink

Ron Paul’s con: Using hatred of America to get rich

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/42581

Hypocrisy is the constant bedfellow of most — if not all — politicians and even afflicts Ron Paul, the so-called “savior of America” on the GOP primary ticket.

Yes, the grandfatherly doctor so revered by his followers is a flagrant hypocrite who evades the truth and preaches one game while practicing another.

If one is to believe the self-righteous proclamations of Ron Paul and his fanatical followers, the long-time Texas Congressman is so clueless that he had “no idea” that newsletters bearing his name spewed out racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic bile during the 1980s and 90s.

Yeah, right.  And there will be pork in the treetops by morning.

But itt gets worse. Paul, if we are to believe his campaign spokesmen, also didn’t know that direct mail solicitations sent out over his signature encouraged Americans to “cash in” on the “coming chaos” by capitalizing on the misfortunes of others. He didn’t know that his direct mail pieces predicted a “race war” in big cities and claimed the Israeli lobby plays Congress “like a cheap harmonica.”

If this kind of behavior were attributed to Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney, Ron Paul supporters would be flooding web sites with their usual collection of obscenity-spouting comments and emails attacking Romney and Gingrich.  They also resort to such tactics when defending the leader of their cult.

In the end, Ron Paul is just another double-talking con-artist who bilks millions out of a gullible following by playing on fear, paranoia and ignorance.  He allows race-baiting comments to be sent out under his name while voting for a national holiday for Dr. Martin Luther King.  That way he can still appeal to the racists and homophobes who make up such a large part of his base while cultivating the grandfather figure who claims to be concerned about ordinary Americans and the Constitution.

Consider this:  If Ron Paul couldn’t control what was done in his name as an on-again, off-again Congressman from Texas, how can we trust him as a leader of America?

We can’t.  Ron Paul doesn’t love America.  He hates this country.

Capitol Hill Blue took a look at Ron Paul’s finances and finds he is another political con man who uses his office and campaigns to make money at the expense of those dumb enough to buy into his act.

Need to pull down close to a millions bucks a year?  Just publish The Ron Paul Political Report and the Ron Paul Investment Letter for $99 annually and then deny any involvement when the crap hits the fan.

It doesn’t matter if the story changes or the excuses run from “the comments were taken out of context” to “I didn’t see them, I didn’t read then and I wasn’t aware of them.”

According to his Congressional financial reports, Paul banked the money from the newsletters.  Are we to believe he put nearly a million dollars a year into his bank accounts and didn’t look or care about the source of the money?

Every time he runs for President, Ron Paul holds on to most of the millions raised and then coverts those funds for his own use after he loses — which is exactly what will happen when he fails in 2012.

Such is the art of the con. Paul knows that no matter how unbelievable or outrageous his actions, his ardent followers will still defend those actions and claim he is a modern political messiah.  That is how cults operate and thrive.

The bottom line is simple: Ron Paul is a crook. He took the money. He just can’t take the responsibility.  He knows he can’t win but he knows how to cash in.

Ron Paul is no better than any other candidate.  In too many ways, he’s far worse.  He’s a zealot with a fanatical following who blindly buy into the hype of Ron Paul while ignoring the reality of the con.

Thankfully, some don’t take a bite of the Ron Paul apple.  Even the right-wing Wall Street Journal, owned by Rupert Murdoch, isn’t fooled:

Dorothy Rabinowitz, a member of the Journal’s editorial board, calls Paul “the best-known of our homegrown propagandists for our chief enemies in the world.”  In other words, someone who gives aid and comfort to the enemy.”

Most people call that treason.  We call it using a hatred of America to get rich.

When you take a close look at Ron Paul’s finances you find that he sells the United States short and invests heavily in South African and Canadian gold.  Paul is a millionaire several times over but he doesn’t invest in U.S. companies.  Since 2002, the bulk of his investments have been in Canadian mining firms and South African gold.

The Wall Street Journal asked investment counselor William Bernstein to examine Paul’s investments.  Bernstein said Paul’s investment strategy is based on paranoia and bets heavily on failure of the United States.

”This portfolio is a half-step away from a cellar-full of canned goods and nine-millimeter rounds,” Bernstein told the Journal.

Which may explain why so many militia types, homegrown terror organizations and survivalists support Ron Paul.

Ron Paul hates America. He wants it to fail so he can get rich.

Just another con by just another con artist who cares only about himself.

Permalink

Ron Paul Is Still A Racist Crackpot

http://southernbeale.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/ron-paul-is-still-a-racist-crackpot/

I’m glad the national news media has finally, after nearly 20 years, decided to notice Ron Paul is a racist crank. Kinda took them long enough, but whatever.

I wrote about the racist newsletters causing Ron Paul so many headaches nowwaaay back in 2007. That post generated a slew of angry comments from Rondroids bent on proving that their savior was not batshit insane (unfortunately, all of my old comments got lost when I moved from Blogger to WordPress, which is a shame, because some of them were truly awesome).

Anyway, revisiting that old post from my blog’s earliest days, I was able to call up the Houston Chronicle’s original reporting about these racist newsletters. This story first surfaced when Paul ran for Congress way back in 1996; his Democratic opponent, a lawyer from Austin named Charles “”Lefty” Morris, uncovered the racist newsletters and released them to the press. Morris lost that election, amazingly, and Ron Paul has been unleashed on the American electorate ever since. Despite running for president numerous times and despite his son Rand’s Senate campaign and the attention his negative comments about the 1964 Civil Rights Act received , the national political media is just now noticing Pater Paul’s malodorous racism.

So let’s revisit that Houston Chronicle story, shall we? Here are some excerpts from the Ron Paul newsletter:

Under the headline of “Terrorist Update,” for instance, Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, “If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.”

And:

“Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action,” Paul wrote.

And:

Paul also wrote that although “we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”

And:

He added, “We don’t think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That’s true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such.”

Paul is now claiming that he did not write these statements, even claiming that he didn’t pay close enough attention to who was writing for the Ron Paul Report. To which I say: bullshit. That’s a very different spin on things than what he told the Houston Chronicle back in 1996:

Paul, a Republican obstetrician from Surfside, said Wednesday he opposes racism and that his written commentaries about blacks came in the context of “current events and statistical reports of the time.”

“The time” being 1992. Ancient history, you know! Way back in the bad ol’ days when the Uppity Negroes were so much more uncivilized. Riiight.

Note, there was no mention of “ghost writers” and apologies that he should have policed the content of his newsletters more. Nope, when it was just the Texas media paying attention to this stuff, Ron Paul was all, “have you read the papers lately, people?!”

Liberal bloggers have known about this stuff for years. The liberal media, of course, doesn’t pay attention to us. I’m wondering if my name were Andrew Breitbart how long it would have taken CNN to figure out Ron Paul is a racist old crank.

Permalink I sort of hope he wins because I just got through talking to Republicans who share this opinion and said they would vote for Obama if it was between them two.
I’m glad not all Republicans stand for racist extremist views.
Permalink

Ron Paul: Racist newsletters cause uproar in Iowa 2012 race

Everyone is coming to learn what a lot of us have known for a while about Republican Presidential hopeful Ron Paul for a while: that he has a segregationist past. The latest uproar over his racially insensitive newsletters is a direct result of his frontrunner status.

Even though this is Ron Paul’s third time running for president it’s his first time in the lead and on the verge of winning the Iowa caucus. That increased scrutiny is unearthing troubling detailsabout his views on race and civil rights.

In an interview with CNN’s Gloria Borger, Congressman Paul denounced the racially insensitive newsletters that said things like,

“Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”

“We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational.” 
On the Los Angeles riots: “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.”

On Martin Luther King, Jr.: “[T]he world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours” and who “seduced underage girls and boys.”

Ron Paul claims that he didn’t write the newsletters even though they are in the first person. Paul also claims he never read any of these statements in the newsletters he sent out under his name. Even though he made nearly a million dollars off of their distribution.

So now we are left with the denials of the libertarian Iowa frontrunner and a long documented history of racial insensitivity. It’s possible that Congressman Paul had a change of heart since the 1990s, but just this Fall his son and now Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) promoted the same controversial line of thinking with regards to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. A view which the father Ron Paul shares.

Even more disturbing than the content of the newsletters is Paul’s own feelings on the Civil War. Paul believes that it was an unnecessary war and that the United States should have “phased out” slavery like European countries did.

In 2007, he told NBC’s Tim Russert on Meet the Press that, “Slavery was phased out in every other country of the world. And the way I’m advising that it should have been done is do like the British empire did. You buy the slaves and release them. How much would that cost compared to killing 600,000 Americans and where the hatred lingered for 100 years? Every other major country in the world got rid of slavery without a civil war. I mean, that doesn’t sound too radical to me. That sounds like a pretty reasonable approach.”

Ron Paul may deny that he knew about or wrote any of the racist newsletters that went out under his name and from which he profited. But how does he explain this comment which he claims is a “reasonable approach” except he’s not nor would have been a slave?

It only sounds reasonable for the federal government to buy and sell African slaves as chattel if you are a rich white guy who would have never been bought sold, raped, beaten, and forced to perform back breaking labor for no money. Not to mention that any arrangement would have been very expensive and the political will to enact such a plan would have taken many years if it were even possible at all.

Ron Paul always likes to talk about the original intent of the Constitution as a guide for our modern lives except the founders didn’t intend for women, the poor, or any minorities to be included in the values set forth in our founding document.

Ron Paul is not ready for prime-time and it’s about time someone noticed.

http://www.thegrio.com/politics/ron-paul-racist-newsletters-cause-uproar-in-iowa-2012-race.php

Permalink