Skip to comments.White Supremacists Rally Around Ron Paul's Newsletter Scandal
Posted on 12/22/2011 2:48:33 PM PST by TBBT
Ron Paul's latest flap over a series of racist newsletters has won him the support of a group no politician wants on their side: White supremacists. And it's not the first time, either. The Republican presidential candidate is a perennial favorite among those on the white supremacist message board Stormfront, where he's getting all kinds of unabashed support for his campaign, his newsletters, and his political persona in general. Paul has already said he doesn't want white supremacists' support. But like it or not, he's got it. And stories like the newsletter thing really seem to lock that support down even tighter.
For the sake of your browsing history, we're going to put a * next to links that will take you to Stormfront or sites like it. We could have used one of those from Slate's Dave Wiegel when he tweeted today: "Shockingly, Stormfront commenters believe that Paul's newsletters are right and awesome," with a link that led to a very white-power themed discussion* of how great Paul was when he walked off a CNN interview Wednesday. Take this for example, from a commenter named OneMan:
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlanticwire.com ...
We want the white supremecists to rally around Ron Paul, by the dozens. (There can’t be that many, can there?)
I bet wife beaters and perverts support Gingrich, I bet convicted criminals support Mitt Romney, I bet muslim hatters support Bachman, I bet homofobs support Santorum.
You can not judge a mans character by a miniscule minority of people who see something that is not there, and claim to support him for there misperseption.
This is getting better by the hour.
Spell check. It’s not just an idea, it’s a reality.
Part of the reason some Ron Paul supporters are so fanatical.
And nasty too.
Run Paul was bin Laden’s man too. Paul never tired of saying he understood and could rationalize why bin Laden killed Americans. Run Paul has also spoken out for the traitor who leaked to Wikileaks. He’s got a great record of having cranks and weirdos associated with him.
You may want to study English grammar too if you’re old enough.
(Yawn). Is this the best the Ron Paul opponents can come up with? I’ll give them this: they sure do stick to their talking points. Sorta like liberal democrats.
You’re comments are disgusting. None of the individuals you have mentioned are associated with those candidates. I’m a Santorum supporter and Rick is not a homofob, nor am I. I like Bachman too, but we don’t hate Muslims unless they are trying to take over our country or murder people. Gingrich never beat his wife or engaged in perversion. Don’t think Mitt has known criminals supporting him.
Now Ron Paul on the other hand has Aryan Nation and the KKK supporting him? Do you belong to one of them? Paul is dangerous because of his so-called foreign policy, ties to racist groups, thinking Bradly Manning is a hero, etc.
(Yaawwnn) Paulbots can’t face the truth. Oh wait, do you support White supremecist organizations?
And Paul supporters don’t have talking points? Sure you do.
Iran having the bomb
Bradly Manning revealing state secrets
Closing foreign military bases
Issuing Letters of Marq (a practice ended in the 1800s)
Making our military into privateers and mercenaries
Liked Osama Bin Laden
“Oh wait, do you support White supremecist organizations?”
LOL! Yeah. Sure pal. Whatever you say.
“And Paul supporters dont have talking points? Sure you do.”
Oh absolutely. Talking points like drastically reducing the overall size of government. Something a lot of “conservatives” embrace. So long as THEIR ox is not the one gored, of course.
“I was making the point there are despicable people of all stripes who support there candidate for some notion that the candidate reflects their point of view.”
That’s a valid point. But, it is a matter of record that Ron Paul receives donations from ‘despicable people’ and refuses to return the money. That isn’t a defensible ethical position.
Not mentioned in the article was the fact that Stormfront had a ‘click here to donate to Ron Paul’ banner on it’s home page during Ron’s last run for president. It was reported here on free republic that senior members of the paul campaign refused to return the funds passing through this banner and also refused to ask Stormfront to take it down.
If that doesn’t give you pause from an ethical standpoint, then at least consider whether these are the actions of a wise man. Suppose, Ron Paul becomes the GOP nominee. Now, “Imagine” the negative campaign ads that would stem from these ethical lapses. The campaign would be about ‘racist’ Ron Paul’ and the ‘racist’ GOP that nominated him. Does this seem consistent with man who has the wisdom to be an effective candidate for president?
My question was a yes or no one. You dodged. However, Ron Paul’s newsletter didn’t. He is a supporter of White supremecy. I’d never be associated with anyone who had ties to or was supported in anyway to WS.
Reducing the size of government isn’t my problem with him. His dangerous naivete with regards to foreign policy.
“My question was a yes or no one. You dodged.”
Some questions don’t deserve to be dignified by an answer. But as I happen to be in a good mood for reasons that have nothing to do with politics, I’ll give you one. I do not support or condone or in any way agree with white supremacist organizations. Nor black supremacist organizations, nor brown supremacist organizations for that matter.
I also strongly disagree with your premise that Ron Paul is a racist or supporter of said supremacist organizations. But as I’ve found on most of these threads, the anti-Paul faction on FR believes what it wants to believe.