Posted on 12/23/2011 5:30:26 PM PST by mnehring
(The following is a transcript of a Ron Paul article from 1990 in his newsletter, The Ron Paul Survival Report. Links to the scanned copies are here:
http://i43.tinypic.com/2rylfv7.png
http://i44.tinypic.com/wgqgeh.png
David Duke received 44% of the vote in the Senate primary race in Louisiana, 60% of the white vote and 9% of the black vote!. This totaled 100,000 more votes that the current governor when he won.
Duke lost the election, but he scared the blazes out of the Establishment. If the official Republican hadn’t been ordered to drop out, he might have won. Certainly there would have been a run-off.
Duke’s platform called for tax cuts, no quotas, no affirmative action, no welfare, and no busing. “Tonight, we concede the election, “ he said. “But we will never concede our fight for equal rights for all Americans.”
To many voters, this seems like just plain good sense. Duke carried baggage from his past, but the voters were willing to overlook that. And if he had been afforded the forgiveness an ex-communist gets, he might have won.
Liberals like Richard Cohen of the Washington Post say he got so many votes because Louisianians were racists and ignorant. Baloney.
David Broder, also of the Post and equally liberal, writing on an entirely different subject, had it right: “No one wants to talk about (race) publicly, but if you ask any campaign consultant or pollster privately, you can confirm the sad reality that a great many working-class and middle-class white Americans are far less hostile to the rich and their tax breaks than they are to the poor and minorities with their welfare and affirmative-action programs.”
Liberal are notoriously blind to see the sociological effects of their own progress. David Duke was hurt by his past. How many more Dukes are waiting in the wings without such as taint?
Transcribed ping
It reads like Ron Paul is the author.
Gov. Jindal has had a significant impact, but until Sen. Landeau and her brother (Mayor of Nawlins) is removed that state and particularly that city will remain in Huey Long territory-Socialist to the core. JMHO.
He was obviously a racist and if he is no longer; then he should have been honest. He is burnt toast now.
You know how there are some thoughts that we have on a daily basis that probably shouldn't be put down on paper or on the interwebs? That was one of them.
Sorry you feel that way, my point, which I totally lost was I don’t think I am a racist. I have been called that on occassion, even in here (Cain threads). I’m pushing 60 with a short stick, raised in 50’s louisiana....Glad you can call it. Personally, I’ve got the flu, if I live through this I will apologize, another day.
PS: Like Mitt, David was the lesser of 2 evils.
It was just a joke. I do find it funny though looking back, how many were willing to sell out to Duke knowing his history and the fact he was a Democrat in the previous election cycle when running for Congress. What made anyone think he was to be trusted or the long term implications of his being associated with the Republican party if he won? That would have been one of those cases where I would have had to write in Donald Duck.
He has gotten a million times worse as well since then. He is all buddy buddy with Ahmadinejad... wait... he and Paul have that in common as well.
I had a choice-Vote/campaign for a lying stealing democrap or believe David Duke had turned a corner, I choose the latter.
PS: I knew I was moving back to Texas very soon, so I went with the Republican that would have no effect on me. What can I say???????
He also endorsed Occupy Wall Street.
David Duke won the Republican primary, The citizens had only one other choice - Edwin Edwards(D).....like Mitt against Obami - Duke was the lesser of two evils....besides I was bored.
Ron Paul will “show a little ankle” to get some Duke leaning supporters. He should be called on it, particularly when he plays dumb about the contents of his newsletter.
All the Ron Paul supporters are so far absent from this thread.
I wonder why.
He always was, and still is, a racist Southern Democrat, regardless of his attempt to smear Republicans with his KKK affiliation.
We’re both wizards in the sheets
On the similarities between David Duke and himself
Edwin Edwards......
As I mentioned Lousyana politics
This is breaking news?
I didn’t put it in breaking, just politics.
Yes, Ron Paul lying with documentation is Breaking, especially this close to the Iowa caucus.
“All the Ron Paul supporters are so far absent from this thread. I wonder why?”
Oh we’re here, but we have lives outside of FR.
I’m having a good laugh at this thread. This gets more over the top by the day.
So, where is the article showing indisputable evidence that Ron Paul was on the grassy knoll?
I put it in breaking news.
Not to me (Breaking News, I already knew this), but I’ve been called a racist b4. I love people so much I’m gonna go to the Lickher store and get some Jim Beam Devil’s Cut to try and break this flu and infect the poor slob selling it to me with the same. It’s New Braunfels Texas he is probably not Black but Hispanic like me.
“Yes, Ron Paul lying with documentation is Breaking, especially this close to the Iowa caucus.”
Which means that it’s policy.
Don't have that, but I do have a video of Paul cozeying up to some Kennedy Conspiracy types egging them on by stating things like it was 'doubtful Oswald did it'. You'll love that one.
“You’ll love that one.”
I probably will. So post it.
I’m enjoying transcribing some of these newsletters right now, but I will before Iowa. It is still on here somewhere from the 2007/2008 run.
Only because he tried to run as a Republican. If he was a Democrat he'd be fine, like Sen. Byrd.
“I’m enjoying transcribing some of these newsletters right now, but I will before Iowa.”
Please put the info out there. It’ll speak for itself. Or it won’t.
No, Jim sets the policy for FR, not the mods, EVER. This action was made by one mod although other mods agreed with it.
I don't see that the article is praising Duke, but rather analyzing his performance in the election. On several occasions the article notes Duke's "baggage" and "taint" and suggests that a future candidate who doesn't have that baggage and taint but has the same platform could succeed.
Put another way, the article can be summarized as "A candidate who wasn't a racist who ran on a platform of lower taxes, no welfare, etc. could win." How is that "praise" for Duke?
I guess you missed the part where he cheered ‘scaring the blazes out of the establishment’ and saying he made good sense?
If you are indeed a Paul supporter, it’s weird that you admit to “having a good laugh” when your candidate’s record threatens to torpedo his campaign.
Might want to sober up.
We all do the best we can at the time.
I would hate to have all my choices re evaluated years later on some Monday am quarterbacking.
Hope your flu goes away soon!
Green tea with ginger root shaved in is great for curing that too. don’t forget, a cap on your head will help too! Its scientific as 90% of our body heat leaves through our head.
Clinton was in the doghouse/WhiteHouse in 91, nothing made sense. Not even David Duke, but Edwin Edwards...Hell I would have voted for neone the Republican ticket of Louisiana put forth, unfortunately that was the Dukester. Disaster, Yes..I guess I’m trying to say-Ron Paul’s a Nut, not me.
Actually, Bush was in the WH, Clinton didn’t get elected until 92.
It doesn't to me. I've read some of Ron Paul's more recent writings, and the style of this piece looks different. For example, that one-word sentence "Baloney." looks like someone else's writing. Ron Paul doesn't write that way; he doesn't use one-word sentences for emphasis.
You know who should take a look at those letters? Jack Cashill. He's the expert in the matter, given how he exposed Billy Ayres. Some Paul-bashers will be disappointed, but there's a real scoop waiting for him if he does.
I have read some speculation that the real author was Murray N. Rothbard, but again I'm not the expert in the matter.
The trouble is, if you put out a newsletter you are responsible for what is in it. There is no big amount of material to lose track of here.
And he’s calling everyone in sight a racist.
You may want to look up the guy Paul is praising in this article and you'll understand.
You should look up the video on YouTube where he was on the Morton Downy TV program back in the late 80s (or early 90s). He certainly did speak like that, at least then. He practically cursed out Curtis Sliwa's wife and was screaming a lot of one-word epitaphs.
“If you are indeed a Paul supporter, it’s weird that you admit to “having a good laugh” when your candidate’s record threatens to torpedo his campaign.”
Not really. I’m not so blind a supporter of any candidate that I’m going to say that the moon is made of green cheese in order to support them. I already have a messiah, his name is Jesus Christ. I don’t need another one.
As for this thread, what I found so funny and continue to find funny is the unrelenting drumbeat of over-the-top criticism of Ron Paul.
Let me shock you all by criticizing Ron Paul in a way that no-one here has.
There's a pattern in his life which suggests strongly that he's easy to take advantage of. Yes, this is a criticism of him as a Presidential candidate. What would it be like to have a man in the White House that's easy to take advantage of? Wouldn't that mean America was going to be taken advantage of?
Per the previous note, here is a video of Paul around the time of the writing this article (just a few years before). He didn’t have the composed, old guy voice he has now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvVqDEQG8bY
Lots of one word for emphasis sentences in that, lots of ‘baloney’ type outbursts.
paultards suck. That’s my official policy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
