Thread: What's the dealio with GOP candidate Ron Paul?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I don't think he is sexist or anti-gay, at leat not based on what you linked. He is just a big time states' rights supporter.

It is misogynistic to strip women of their rights to make decisions regarding their own bodies - in favour of a clump of cells no less. Funny how Ron Paul's claims of an individual's rights to personal privacy ends at a women's right to choose (which is a private, personal decision). He's a woman hating hypocrite.

It is anti-gay to deny homosexuals the same rights to legal union. Ron Paul is very crafty and purposely avoids saying things like "I think gays are dirty and evil" but his actions in office and the fridge organizations in which he participates support that very idea.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

It looks like there is some question as to whether or not he really made the comment about 95% of D.C. black men being criminals. It would be surprising if a man in Congress actually said something like that publicly.

Red the links again. Not only did he make these racist comments on his own political newsletter, but he openly accepts support from Stormfront, a white supremicist website.

Please explain in detail how the following comments, made by Ron Paul himself, are not racist.


Ron Paul said:

"Regardless of what the media tell us, most white Americans are not going to believe that they are at fault for what blacks have done to cities across America. The professional blacks may have cowed the elites, but good sense survives at the grass roots. Many more are going to have difficultly avoiding the belief that our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists -- and they can be identified by the color of their skin. This conclusion may not be entirely fair, but it is, for many, entirely unavoidable.

Indeed, it is shocking to consider the uniformity of opinion among blacks in this country. Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action.... Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the "criminal justice system," I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.

If similar in-depth studies were conducted in other major cities, who doubts that similar results would be produced? We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."


Here's another link, just for good measure.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

If he thinks HIV does not cause AIDS or that the gay lifestyle shortens life expectancy by twenty years, then that is just what he believes as a medical doctor.

It is a scientific fact that HIV causes AIDS. Conversely, there is no scientific validity to the idea that who you choose to have sex with shortens your life.

By going against the proven scientific facts of medical science, while supporting unvalidated theories, his credibility as a doctor is seriously threatened and it is my personal belief that he should not be practicing medical science because his mere "opinion" becomes dangerous and misleading when dealing with patient's lives.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

He would not be a bad person for thinking that stuff is true. You can believe things like that and still think they are unfortunate.

If Ron Paul does think certain things are bad, that is fine as long as it stays his personal opinion. When he tries to bring about legislation that supports his fringe opinion and oppress the freedoms of the majority, then it is a problem.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

However, that is a very fringe view for a medical doctor to have, but it is not like I am any position to argue with him on it, and I'm not sure you are either.

I will always argue when someone tries to push their unsupported, fringe belief on the majority, and if you value your freedom, you will too. I am not saying that he should be censored, but I will gladly use my right to free speech to counter hateful, bigotted drivel.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

All we can say is that the vast majority of medical doctors disagree with him on those points.

Amen to that! Ah, sorry for the tl;dr but I think it is important that people consider the values that Ron Paul operates under, other than the fact that he is against the war in Iraq.

Originally Posted by Sekhmet

It is misogynistic to strip women of their rights to make decisions regarding their own bodies - in favour of a clump of cells no less. Funny how Ron Paul's claims of an individual's rights to personal privacy ends at a women's right to choose (which is a private, personal decision). He's a woman hating hypocrite.

It is anti-gay to deny homosexuals the same rights to legal union. Ron Paul is very crafty and purposely avoids saying things like "I think gays are dirty and evil" but his actions in office and the fridge organizations in which he participates support that very idea.

I am pro-choice for the first two trimesters because it is not possible to murder something that has never had consciousness. However, I do not think a person is automatically a hater of women for being pro-life. People are pro-life generally because they think abortion is murder, not automatically because they hate women.

Ron Paul did not say he is against same sex marriages. He said it should be up to the states to decide on the matter. That is because he believes in states' rights and a small federal government, not merely because he dislikes homosexuals. Personally, I think there should be a federal law that allows same sex marriages. Ron Paul disagrees, but it is because of his beliefs on where government power should be concentrated. He might be a homophobe too, but I know he is big on states' rights.

Originally Posted by Sekhmet

Red the links again. Not only did he make these racist comments on his own political newsletter, but he openly accepts support from Stormfront, a white supremicist website.

Please explain in detail how the following comments, made by Ron Paul himself, are not racist.

Ron Paul said:

"Regardless of what the media tell us, most white Americans are not going to believe that they are at fault for what blacks have done to cities across America. The professional blacks may have cowed the elites, but good sense survives at the grass roots. Many more are going to have difficultly avoiding the belief that our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists -- and they can be identified by the color of their skin. This conclusion may not be entirely fair, but it is, for many, entirely unavoidable.

Indeed, it is shocking to consider the uniformity of opinion among blacks in this country. Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action.... Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the "criminal justice system," I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.

If similar in-depth studies were conducted in other major cities, who doubts that similar results would be produced? We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."


Here's another link, just for good measure.

Of course those statements are racist. I was just saying that according to your link's commenters, there is a certain degree of question over whether Paul actually said those things or if one of his workers got things screwed up somehow. It would be strange if that happened, but it would also be strange if a man with the political ability to become a Congressman and the intelligence to become a medical doctor would be stupid enough to publish comments like that. My bet is that he actually did say those things, so he probably is a racist. I was just pointing out something to consider.

Originally Posted by Sekhmet

It is a scientific fact that HIV causes AIDS. Conversely, there is no scientific validity to the idea that who you choose to have sex with shortens your life.

By going against the proven scientific facts of medical science, while supporting unvalidated theories, his credibility as a doctor is seriously threatened and it is my personal belief that he should not be practicing medical science because his mere "opinion" becomes dangerous and misleading when dealing with patient's lives.

If Ron Paul does think certain things are bad, that is fine as long as it stays his personal opinion. When he tries to bring about legislation that supports his fringe opinion and oppress the freedoms of the majority, then it is a problem.

It is definitely a fringe and bizarre conclusion that HIV does not cause AIDS. I would bet a thousand dollars against one dollar that it does. I was just saying I can't get into the biomolecular details of the argument I would have to have with Ron Paul over it. All I can say is that he is way out of the bounds of medical opinion normality on that stuff. I have heard a few right wing fanatics say gay people have much shorter life spans than heterosexuals. It sounds crazy to me, and I have never seen proof of it. However, if it is true, then it is true. People are not hateful for noticing the fact if it is a fact, which I would strongly guess it is not.

Originally Posted by Sekhmet

Amen to that! Ah, sorry for the tl;dr but I think it is important that people consider the values that Ron Paul operates under, other than the fact that he is against the war in Iraq.

I'm glad you brought this stuff to our attention. Nobody had mentioned it yet, and there are some very dedicated Ron Paul supporters who post here. I might have come across as one, but I am not. I don't agree with his views on terrorism, and I don't think he has a snowball's chance in Hell of ever becoming the president. And now I think he might be a total nut case. I was just saying I am not completely convinced yet, but I am not as far from it as I might have seemed. I just always challenge new ideas before I accept them. But I would say Ron Paul apparently probably is a racist with cuckoo land medical views and is most likely a homophobe.

Yes Ron Paul is anti abortion, but he is also pro states rights. Hes a big enough person to say, some time its best to leave it to the state to decide. There are many for and against it. I personally think he has the best opinion of, let the states decide. If your against it move to a state where its against the law, if your for it move to one where its allowed.

Now the idea that Ron Paul is a horrible person for using sweatshops, thats a silly claim. He uses a company, which uses another company which at some point once used a sweatshop. Saddly, the majority of companies probably do that now, and I am sure he isn't even aware of it.

As for evolution, I couldn't care less what he believes. It has nothing to do with him being president. Hes never going to take any kind of stand for or against it, its really not an issue in anyway. Though to point out, thats a very vague answer he gave, even if he is leaning towards saying he doesn't believe it. It wasn't an extreme view he had.

As for saying that stuff about the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, thats not exactly fair. Who is to say he agrees with them on everything? People rarely do follow groups 100%. Its far more likely he is apart of the group because hes is against Universal health care and wants the government out of the medical field. Its also against medicare, which I am very much against. So they promote some good issues, and hes likely with them because of that.

As for the link saying Ron Paul is horrible because he is pro gun, well I can't disagree there more. Thats a reason to vote for him! I want someone who is pro gun. No restrictions on any guns, is perfectly fine with me. He thinks there a war on religion, duh! There is. Hes against affirmative action? Well so am I. Its totally not right, its institutional racism. That site reads more like reasons to be pro Ron Paul, than it does for being against him.

Originally Posted by Alric

Yes Ron Paul is anti abortion, but he is also pro states rights. Hes a big enough person to say, some time its best to leave it to the state to decide. There are many for and against it. I personally think he has the best opinion of, let the states decide. If your against it move to a state where its against the law, if your for it move to one where its allowed.

Now the idea that Ron Paul is a horrible person for using sweatshops, thats a silly claim. He uses a company, which uses another company which at some point once used a sweatshop. Saddly, the majority of companies probably do that now, and I am sure he isn't even aware of it.

As for evolution, I couldn't care less what he believes. It has nothing to do with him being president. Hes never going to take any kind of stand for or against it, its really not an issue in anyway. Though to point out, thats a very vague answer he gave, even if he is leaning towards saying he doesn't believe it. It wasn't an extreme view he had.

As for saying that stuff about the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, thats not exactly fair. Who is to say he agrees with them on everything? People rarely do follow groups 100%. Its far more likely he is apart of the group because hes is against Universal health care and wants the government out of the medical field. Its also against medicare, which I am very much against. So they promote some good issues, and hes likely with them because of that.

As for the link saying Ron Paul is horrible because he is pro gun, well I can't disagree there more. Thats a reason to vote for him! I want someone who is pro gun. No restrictions on any guns, is perfectly fine with me. He thinks there a war on religion, duh! There is. Hes against affirmative action? Well so am I. Its totally not right, its institutional racism. That site reads more like reasons to be pro Ron Paul, than it does for being against him.

Pretty nice and compelling argument, you addressed pretty much everything except the blatant racist remarks he "allegedly" made.

Originally Posted by Jeff777

Pretty nice and compelling argument, you addressed pretty much everything except the blatant racist remarks he "allegedly" made.

Exactly, the one "allegedly" made quote. Now if you can point to other quotes, or show where there is some kind of history of him saying that kind of stuff, then thats something. One quote, which you can't even prove he actually wrote doesn't mean a thing. I mean, theres thousands of youtube videos of him talking. I seen videos of him in a debate back from before I was born! Yet I never seen him say anything like that. Not once. So if he is so racist, why not give us some real proof?

Originally Posted by Alric

Exactly, the one "allegedly" made quote. Now if you can point to other quotes, or show where there is some kind of history of him saying that kind of stuff, then thats something. One quote, which you can't even prove he actually wrote doesn't mean a thing. I mean, theres thousands of youtube videos of him talking. I seen videos of him in a debate back from before I was born! Yet I never seen him say anything like that. Not once. So if he is so racist, why not give us some real proof?

I never said he was racist. And I'm not going by anything except what the poster above stated and the links I clicked. It sounds pretty harsh and if Ron did indeed say those things, it would seem he is asking for trouble (or less votes)...which is why I'm on the fence about the issue. Has Ron shed some light on those racial remarks btw?

Well, here's what he has to say about the issue itself:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/racism/

Whether he said what Sek claims or not - if it were to come out that he did (and proceed to behave in a racist manner), it would surely come back to bite him in the ass later.