Sounds like a real racist there…???  People blindly believe what the MSM tells them.  When you can’t win an intellectual argument, call them racist.

Truth always wins out eventually.

” It’s a compelling spot, but the Ron Paul of that anecdote isn’t mutually exclusive with the newsletter guy.”

Only because of slanderous pieces of garbage like you Tommy Christopher of New Jersey.

This was a lazily written article.

At least Tommy is providing a somewhat balanced view of all this B.S.  It’s been nothing but slander for the last week when it comes to Ron Paul and the mainstream media.

If “Dr.” Paul hadn’t been a racist, the child would have been delivered alive.

I hope to God this is a joke, else you deserve the politicians you have today!

Fact Check: “Ron Paul can’t win” – FALSE
Short of the economy tanking, carving off chunks of Obama’s support is the only way to win.

THE YOUTH VOTE
The youth vote which Obama won by 34% in 2008 is abandoning him. Ron
Paul has proven strong appeal with the young voters. He is by far the
best candidate capable of not only appealing to this demographic but energizing it towards defeating Obama. Anyone who thinks the youth vote
will abandon Obama for one of the other candidates is kidding
themselves. This is one of Obama’s Achilles heals and ONLY Ron Paul can not only exploit it – but use it against Obama.

MILITARY
Most Americans think that with Bin Laden dead, our job is done and we
should bring the troops home. Obama is vulnerable on this issue against
Ron Paul. Any other GOP candidate will galvanize these supporters to
Obama. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who appeals to these voters
disenchanted with Obama – carving away votes.

DRUG WAR
76% of Americans agree with RP that the federal war on drugs is a
failure, in fact, only 8% think it has been a success.  89% of the
people who voted for Obama 4 years ago believe the war on drugs is a
failure. It is time to end the racist war on drugs. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who is positioned to cleave off  a chunk of these Obama supporters. Any other GOP candidate will
galvanize these supporters to Obama.

POLITICIANS
A record number of Americans do not trust politicians. Obama is a status
quo politician, Romney is the poster child of insider politician. Ron
Paul is the anti-politician and a doctor – and Americans have a high
level of trust in doctors. Ron Paul is the candidate who can appeal to
these voters and most effectively take votes from Obama while taking on
Obamacare. Consistent on opposing mandates and ObaMass-care.

ENERGIZED ARMY OF SUPPORTERS
Obama is not going to be defeated by a slick DC Beltway campaign alone.
It is going to take a nationwide passionate, energized army of
supporters. Ron Paul has clearly demonstrated that he can energize his
base of supporters like no other candidate can. You and I both know that
if Ron Paul isn’t the nominee, this army of energy disappears.  But
with Paul as the nominee, this army will mushroom.

FALSE – “Ron Paul Can’t Win”.
When you look at what it will take to beat Obama (assuming the economy
doesn’t tank), Ron Paul is the only candidate that can beat Obama.
Ron Paul’s message isn’t engineered to win a GOP beauty contest – it’s engineered to beat Obama.

I believe the quote was taken out of context.  Ron Paul has the impression that big government, isn’t able to do anything effective, he has been consistent on this idea since day one.  

In this case, he’s attacking the NCIA and the criminal just system.  Stating, that the reports are flawed, that if anyone read them, they could make the same assumption.  

He read those reports and made a sarcastic statement about them.  The hint here is that he calls the criminal justice system: inefficient and laughable. 

Why are you looking at Ron Paul as the racist, when clearly, he is stating that the NCIA and criminal justice system is?  Are that ignorant to say they aren’t?

” People who think that black people are mostly criminals (or insert stereotype of your choice) have no problem being nice to “one of the good ones.”——Tommy Christopher

This doesn’t apply in this situation, because a nurse had already called the police on this man. Ron Paul showed compassion to a man who had allegedly been harassing the nurse.

To see the GOP play the race card now is embarrassing. This from the same group that toleated Limbaugh for years and recently the tea party phonies.

Ron Paul had no problem working and living in a county filled with racist cracker doctors. There’s no evidence that Paul did anything to end discrimination in his county. In fact, he supports the right of cracker doctors and hospitals to deny treatment based on race. If people die, f u c k ‘em.

Again I urge Paul and his supporters to stop lying.  Honesty and contrition would work much better.

“A friend of mine forwarded this video to me, in which Paul makes several compelling arguments about race and justice. They can be viewed cynically as an attempt at damage control, but that’s not how it strikes me:”

Tommy would believe Ron Paul if he said he was a woman whose children had been exposed to Anthony Wiener’s dick.

These comments must be psyops. I can’t believe how far we have fallen as a nation. The Alex Jones show on prisonplanet.tv will try to interview Mr Williams. It brought me to tears. Dr Ron Paul in the most racist place and time in US history worked in his free time in hospitals and never used it for political gain, because he believed in helping people as a doctor and keeping goverment out of healthcare. He walked the walk. The more I learn about the man, the more humbled I am. RevolutionPAC will be airing more videos about Dr Ron Paul because he simply won’t use his incredible human record for political gain.

Come clean about what??? Geez, this was 20yrs ago, how many of you lived through the riots? It was a messed up time, blacks were burning down their own city, dragging completely innocent white motorist ouf their cars and beating them, stealing from small business owners and destroying their property. So, OK, maybe some writer Ron had at the time wrote some stuff in bad taste, trust me, I heard much worse back then.

I don’t even mind that the media brings this stuff up, it’s just the fact that you guys intentionally print the stuff out of context, you show a few sentences out of thousands of pages of articles and you do everything in your power to only show this in the most negative light. Ron is not racist, trust me, if he was he’d admit it, that man has no problem speaking his mind, if you watched any of the debates you’d know that.

Fact: Ron Paul can’t win.
Ron Paul’s support comes from democrats and independents primarily.  According to RCP, his average across the spectrum of republicans is currently at 12.2%.

Fact: no one is going to win an election with 12.2% support.

Fact: responding to anymore of this nonsense is a waste of time and energy that could be better spent staring at a wall.

Rand Paul got his racism from somewhere, looks like it was from daddy Ron.

Really, guess you must be looking at another Ron Paul than me, any evidence of this? Funny you judge him yet use the term “cracker” in your post, but I guess as usual racial slurs are OK as long they are against whites right?

I’d quit lying if I knew what I was supposed to be lying about?

The media can’t defeat us.  Fight back against the smear campaign.

“Bombs and drones may break human bones but only ‘insensitive’ words can truly hurt us.”
William N. Grigg

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/

Just admit that Ron Paul at the very least WAS a racist at one time.  He obviously was, since he defended some of the ugliest parts of his newsletter.  If he/you admit it, you can take a lot of the the sting out of this scandal.

Exactly,by saying these things about the think tank’s figures he was poking a bit of fun at them,and at the same time being anti-racist.This is old news to me because it was debunked in 2008.Funny how Tommy Christopher put a larger portion of the writings into print and could not figure that out by himself.

What candidate are you espousing?

when fellow libertarians are asking questions.  Answers must be provided.

http://reason.com/blog/2008/01/11/old-news-rehashed-for-over-a-d

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/27/reasons-nick-gillespie-ron-paul-needs-to-explain-controversial-newsletters/ 
http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/who-wrote-ron-pauls-newsletter

I just typed in Rand Paul racist,read everything there and found no evidence of him being a racist,just like his father.Nice political hit jobs from the opposition,but lacking in evidence and contrary to their actions.

Seeing as how I didn’t know the man at the time how on earth could I admit as to how he was? BTW, would that “racist” time in his life be the same as when he was treating low income minorities for free at his clinic? I’d still like for you to show me where you even read THE ENTIRE article where that “racist” stuff was printed, I’ve read most of them in context and I wouldn’t even call them racist, if he was defending them it was likely from people like you who read them out of context and blew them into something they weren’t. Bottom line tho, he didn’t write them, so no, he is not, nor has he ever been a racist, and neither am I and I don’t appreciate the accussation.

I really think that the 12.2% number is a bit dated. He has been surging and I myself have changed my mind about him. I consider myself an independent conservative but I registered a republican to have a say in primaries. I don’t care for republicans but like democrats less. I never gave Ron Paul a notice because “he didn’t have a chance” and I believed the lies that he would dismantle the military and legalized drugs as well as being a racist. His surge has caused me to go take an honest look at him and the libertarian party. I will vote Ron Paul and I think there are a lot of us taking an honest look at him of a sudden. Especially the young who are really tired of the crap from the two parties.

Ron Paul is a stupid man. Big government is why rich countries get rich. There has never been a single country which got rich and powerful with a small government. Countries with tiny governments are desperately poor. The man even thinks hurricane relief is wrong. He is a moron.

Provide free healthcare to interracial couple in the middle of a culture of prejudice. Must be a racist. 

Answers HAVE been provided. You don’t accept them. 

You do know that USA is bankrupt?  Just a few months ago we were about to default.

Are you serious?  Maybe if the other doctors would have treated this woman, THEN perhaps the baby would not have been born stillborn?  Or – Gee – she was already in distress and having problems so it is most likely that the baby was already stillborn long before Ron Paul stepped up to treat her.  Maybe that is why he didn’t charge them – because it is called Compassion!  It was bad enough they were treated that way much less losing a child and most doctors now-a-days wouldn’t bother with anyone that doesn’t have an insurance card and heaven forbid the person is out of network.  That isn’t how the medical profession is meant to be and has been corrupted by government involvement.  Go Ron Paul 2012!!

I don’t think this is really worthy of being called a scandal at all!  How about newt getting fined $300k for ethics violations, how about Perry and Romney having questions about the use of campaign money recently, the list goes on and on on real scandals.  Digging up some garbage from over 20 years ago that Ron Paul has addressed countless times over the years, is truly not worthy of being a scandal however the mass media would like you to think it is because it is pretty much the only thing they have to attempt to smear him with.  Do your research and look at speeches he was doing at the same time that totally conflict with those comments in the newsletters – which comprised less than 1% of the content between 3 newsletters over 20+ year span of time, weren’t written by him, and he has answered to it several times.  Don’t you get rather annoyed at being asked the same question over and over again by the same people?  I know I sure do!

If he is such a racist, then I don’t think we’d be hearing things like this:

“Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder, who has known Ron Paul for 20
years, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist
in light of recent smear attempts, and said the reason for him being
attacked was that he was a threat to the establishment…
…”Knowing Ron Paul’s intent, I think he is trying to improve this
country but I think also, when you talk about the Constitution and you
constantly criticize the federal government versus state I think a lot
of folks are going to misconstrue that….so I think it’s very easy for
folks who want to to take his position out of context and that’s what
I’m hearing,” said Linder.

“Knowing Ron Paul and having talked to him, I think he’s a very fair
guy I just think that a lot of folks do not understand the Libertarian
platform,” he added.

Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded “No I
don’t,” adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police
repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many
occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.”

Nah, it’s current 
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

He’s only doing good in Iowa(Maybe New Hampshire?).  I agree with you on political affiliation to some extent(I don’t like republicans, but care for democrats even less and consider myself a conservative and am generally disgusted with the entire political process).  The problem I have with Ron Paul wholly focuses on his foreign policy.  The President doesn’t have as much power over spending as he makes it appear.  The unfortunate reality is that he will have to work with others and he has shown no ability to work with them in the past unless they strictly adhere to his position which is why he has only one bill to his name passed in Congress having been in there for quite some time.

I’m still convinced he won’t win.  I’ll admit though, I already have my candidate chosen, Rick Perry.  Like him or hate him, he has the best record of any candidate running.

The neocon media is terrified at the swelling Ron Paul support among blacks.
CNN Poll: Ron Paul Most Popular Republican Amongst Non-Whites
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fyRVa4lzRo__________________________
Ron Paul Will Free The Slaves!Are you aware of the ugly drug facts?12 times more American drug convicts are blacks.It’s a great plot. you see,To destroy the black familyAnd feed their men off to corporate wolf packs.There they labor in prison industriesTwo bucks a day is cheaper than Chinese!Today’s opium warsOpen modern doorsTo continue the elite’s slavery disease!Ron Paul knows that his policies can saveThis latest version of the American slaveThat prison – industrial thugsLure into prison with drugs,Then drown in a prison labor tsunami wave!_____________________Charles Ulysses Feney

Don’t be fooled by the mainstream media’s disingenuous disinformation campaign to marginalize Ron Paul’s pro-peace, pro-Constitution message.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/soHAOVZzXtA?rel=0

Do the votes in the Iowa Caucuses matter?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/ej5_rZof7MA?rel=0

http://www.youtube.com/embed/0fyRVa4lzRo?rel=0

What do grass-roots African-Americans really think about the “vicious racist” Ron Paul?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/WhxJ1XUGLR0?rel=0

What do active duty service men and women really think about the “isolationist appeaser” Ron Paul?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/dAVoYciURoU?rel=0

What do veterans really think about the “uncaring and uncompassionate” Ron Paul?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/f_qBSow4FrE?rel=0

What do women really think about the “hateful misogynist” Ron Paul?

If true, it is a genuine act of compassion that should be lauded.

It doesn’t, however, give him a blank check to then write racist articles in order to generate revenue from a fringe hate group.

 Iowa is where the focus is now, if he wins or does well there his popularity may surge in the other states then. His foreign policy concerns me a bit but I am for not being the worlds peace keeper at our expense both financial and with our young peoples lives. I like the stand to not go to war unless someone is threatening us directly. I also believe he is the most likely to really work at shrinking government and returning issues to the states. I also like Perry but believe his chances are too slim now and he may have an excellent record but he seems to be making some pretty big fumbles. I would be thrilled at Perry or Paul becoming President.

They expect Paul to throw someone under the bus like every other politician does.  They don’t understand why he hasn’t done so yet, so they keep whining about it like children. 

Many people supporting Ron Paul are naive about what libertarianism really means on a practical level.

Sure, libertarianism means very small/limited government.

But when you have that, it means that the government doesn’t take a stand on issues like discrimination.   

Likewise, the isolationist foreign policy espoused by many libertarians means that extremist dictators could slaughter their own citizens or threaten their neighbors without any intervention.

Even though I am a liberal who tends to be skeptical of military force, I think libertarian foreign policy is too isolationist and disengaged.

While limited government and isolationist foreign policy sounds appealing on many levels, it means that the government essentially becomes amoral.

“racist articles in order to generate revenue from a fringe hate group.
“WTF? This is ridiculous. Your making things up!

I guess they never taught you about the American revolution to begin with. Or worse, you don’t know much about Soviet Union or Nazi Germany; they believed in big government too. Small government, freer and prosperous individuals; big government, rich and powerful insiders and enslaved masses.

what answers?  The same type of non answers Obama gave regarding his long-time association with the unrepentant
terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, the race-baiting preacher
Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and other radicals.” Just because its occurred
20+ years ago doesn’t change those facts for Obama and neither does it for Ron paul. 

Freedom of speech and activism to spread the message of liberty is a double-edg­ed sword for Ron Paul. Those old newsletter­s are the baggage that results from his failure to police every word that goes out in the name of spreading the message of liberty. But if he doesn’t encourage veryone who basically agrees with him to go out and spread the word, the message dies. I don’t see any major corporatio­ns throwing money at a campaign for liberty, do you? It’s a conundrum. It’s a difficult message to sell, and it can’t be done in a sound bite or a 30-second debate question.

But if intelligen­t people don’t listen and think and respond to this message, we will find that our rights will continue to erode and our economy will only get worse. The whole premise of waiting for the economy to recover because the middle class will buy enough on credit to bring back jobs is bogus now. The middle class has been decimated and credit isn’t available. Our jobs have gone overseas.

Hey, I replied to your comment on the other thread! Let me know if you got it.

No point explaining this to Tommy.. He wouldn’t know a good honest man if one walked up to him and punched him right in the mouth…… And hopefully someday.. one will..

I must assume that statement is the way Tommy lives his life. First hand knowledge Tommy?

I agree that Ron Paul deserves plaudits for his principles and his forthrightness, the newsletters will always be a severe blot on his name, though. You just don’t let people publish things in your name without suffering the consequences of such irresponsibility. Ron Paul may not be racist; he is detached and tone-deaf when it comes to personal responsibility, though.

And what is this, “libertarians can’t be racist” claim? That is like saying Republicans can’t fail in business and Democrats can’t look the other way when they encounter someone in need. What difference does it make if the racist Ron Paul supporters aren’t true libertarians? Racists and homo-haters, etc. will join in Ron’s cause, supporting him and calling themselves “libertarian”. Paul can’t just make them or their influence disappear by saying they are not true libertarians.

Libertarians can’t be racist because libertarianism is the belief of individual liberty. It is philosophically opposed to collectivism, from which racism derives.

Libertarian racist is a contradiction in terms.

When Paul haters aren’t busy marinating in ignorance they are claiming how non-intervention is isolationism. Explaining how free trade and self defense is not isolationism, you say that sanctions and installing dictators is what isolates.

“Texas Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul is not a racist and is being smeared as one because he is a clear threat to the political establishment” – Nelson Linder, Austin president of the NAACP.”

http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/12/24/ron-paul-no-racist-naacp-austin-president/

Covering their ears while chanting ‘la-la, isolationist, I can’t hear you’ you remember to expect the same amount of intellect when responding to charges of racism: ZERO.

Ron Paul owes his economic philosophy (Austrian Economics) to Jewish scholars like Ludwig Von Mises and praises MLK for his libertarian principle of non-aggression. As a doctor, he treated patients of all colors for free:

http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2011/12/video-in-1972-ron-paul-helped-mixed.html

Either there is such a thing as a racist man with Jewish heroes OR corporate owned media is recycling smears in order to stop a man who’s very presence condemns the sellout politicians who own them.

They know that as President, the troops would be home day ONE, along with non-violent drug offenders which, sadly, many of whom are minorities. They know that if Paul is President, the party is OVER.

I suggest you do some honest research before you are fooled into empowering another fraud.

A libertarian is not at liberty to have dysfunctional, antiquated beliefs? That seems to to be an internal contradiction itself.

Racism doesn’t make much sense from a conservative or a liberal perspective either. Racism results in mypoic, incestuous societies, but that doesn’t mean it exists.

I’ve seen black guys say the same thing about it being impossible for black people to be racist. Their rationale was that being racist requires power over another race. Since blacks don’t have this in America, they can’t be racist. The problem is everyone has power in the moment. So a black guy can look down on a white guy and cut him out of his society in the moment. It may be a small thing, but he can be racist.

So, I still don’t see the justification for Ron Paul saying libertarians can’t be racist. It sounds naive.

You have it backwards.

“Many people supporting Ron Paul are naive about what libertarianism really means on a practical level.”

Libertarians believe that the federal government has a legitimate duty to protect individual rights and maintain national defense.

This is a far cry from forcing Americans to pay for the security of some countries while installing dictators in others and using government coercion to force property owners into serving people they do not wish to serve.

Libertarianism promotes competitive markets, meaning no individual or corporation can infringe upon the rights of individuals.

If a racist property owner physically harms someone, then the government has the legitimate duty to protect that individual from harm.

This action is legitimate because the individual harmed has a right to his or her life.

Any action taken to force the property owner to serve those they do not wish to serve, discriminatory or not, is illegitimate because that individual has no right to what was justly acquired by another individual.

This duty also extends into environmental circumstances – no one, individual or corporation, has the right to pollute anyone else’s land, water or air.

Anyone who refers to libertarian foreign policy as isolationism do no understand what libertarianism is. I suggest you do some honest research before you lecture libertarians on what libertarianism means.

I find it remarkable, when reading down comments on articles, I find an overwhelming amount of ignorance on what libertarianism is. There’s no excuse for it, since we have so much information at our fingertips. All it takes is a few minutes, at the most, to read up on what libertarians believe in.

Not exactly. As a doctor, he treated people for free, regardless of race.

These attacks in the end will matter exactly zero. They have no basis in reality and are only believed by people who would never vote for Ron Paul no matter what. Not because they disagree with his policies but because they have the inability to separate lies from truth.

Coming together and supporting politicians who actually defend our constitutional rights is not a waste of time. Voting for a politician who will continue the same exact policies that brought us this disaster is a waste of time.

He didn’t write them and disavowed them.

I am Irish and went to california, loved it, but thought that blacks get a raw deal. I think if RP was talking about Blacks and saying that they are all criminals he is talking about looking at the histroy of why blacks have criminal records as opposed to whites…I really felt for the blacks in San Francisco…Not is a condescending way, but I thought the USA was this ideal of equality and freedom. I thoguht it was a first world country..But America needs to grow some more. Bush and the neocons have tried to push america forward to be the only super power but I think thats a dangerous move…..playing with fire..

Anyway RP is not racists just more of an academic, he sees why blacks are criminalised more than whites..The drugs war being the obvious one. Also the White man historically does not want the black man to get power and one way is to give him a criminal record, so no vote…Therefore a black mans best choice is Ron Paul……

In your defense of libertarianism, you’ve gone right to the core of what my problems are with it.

You said “Any action taken to force the property owner to serve those they do not wish to serve, discriminatory or not, is illegitimate because that individual has no right to what was justly acquired by another individual. ”

—This is a problem to me.   It is unacceptable that a government should stand by and allow paying customers to be turned away from a business that is open to the public due to the color of their skin (or any other reason).   Sure, you could leave it to “market forces” to counteract discrimination….but to me, that is completely devoid of a moral compass.  There are some things that are just basic human rights and the government should not permit such discrimination to occur. Somethings should not be left to simply majority rule.   Yes, the government should step in to prevent things like theft, etc….but when someone wants to be a legitimate paying customer at your business, there should be nothing to interfere with that.  That customer should have the individual freedom to shop where they see fit and to frequent any public place in a law-abiding fashion.

The second point you make doesn’t seem to line up with your first argument, so please correct me if I misunderstand.  You said “This duty also extends into environmental circumstances – no one, individual or corporation, has the right to pollute anyone else’s land, water or air.”

— I agree with you on this…but here’s the problem:  Air and water move around; it’s not possible to reduce this issue to an individual level.  If I dump toxic waste into the creek on my own property, that water will eventually flow onto someone else’s property.  If I burn something, the smoke travels to other places.   In effect, things like air and water are community property and, in my view, the government should have the authority to regulate that.  But many libertarians attack environmental regulations as a governmental overreach. 

And this sums up my overall issue with many facets of libertarianism (at least as articulated by folks like Ron Paul).  It takes individualism to an extreme level.   As a socially liberal person, I generally like the “live and let live” approach that it takes….but the problem is that sometimes one person’s exercise of freedom can interfere with another person’s exercise of freedom.  We don’t live in isolated bubbles.  Our actions affect other people.   

For example, if my neighbor burns toxic chemicals in their yard, that interferes with MY right to relax out on my back porch and use my property as I see fit.  

I don’t have the right to falsely yell “Fire” in a crowded theatre because that negatively affects many other people.

Based on the public positions that many libertarians have taken, they seem to overlook the purpose of a government in the first place.

In this country, we have government to create an orderly society and to protect basic freedoms.  AND the government has procedures to mediate disputes between parties, particularly as it relates to personal freedoms.

Ron Paul may not be a racist, but his policies would have the net effect of tacitly allowing discrimination to occur.

Either he doesn’t get that…or he simply doesn’t care.

If I allow a restaurant owner to decide who he/she will and will not serve, there will inevitably be restaurants who will implement discriminatory policies….which is exactly what we had BEFORE the Civil Rights Act.  

Sure, you could say “let market forces punish businesses that discriminate.”    But we have ample evidence from our own US history that tells us that would not necessarily work. Before the Civil Rights Act, businesses could certainly choose….and many chose to discriminate (with little backlash in some areas of the country). That’s just plain wrong.  

“Market forces” might work in places where there are lots of minorities who could raise their collective voices….but what about in places that are heavily dominated by one group or another?

Ron Paul and his son may not be a racist, but their policies would have the net effect of tacitly allowing discrimination to occur.Either he doesn’t get that…or he simply doesn’t care.If I allow a restaurant owner to decide who he/she will and will not serve, there will inevitably be restaurants who will implement discriminatory policies….which is exactly what we had BEFORE the Civil Rights Act.  Sure, you could say “let market forces punish businesses that discriminate.”    But we have ample evidence from our own US history that tells us that would not necessarily work. Before the Civil Rights Act, businesses could certainly choose….and many chose to discriminate (with little backlash in some areas of the country). That’s just plain wrong.  ”Market forces” might work in places where there are lots of minorities who could raise their collective voices….but what about in places that are heavily dominated by one group or another?

Not being from the USA I might be mistaken, but aren’t your civil liberties at the lowest point in your history, Ron Paul want’s to give you them back so you have a choice, are you blind or obstinate.

Yes, I got it brother, thanks. Altosackbuteer and Dustoff are rejoicing that you can’t respond to them anymore, the cowards they are.

Wow, you have to be kidding Alto and Dustoff, but they always seemed so smart and honest.LOL!

Oh well, hey I want to send you my email address so we can keep in touch.
JohnsonICDA919@yahoo.com If anyone else gets it, I will spam the hell out of them. When/If you leave a message put Capt. Ahab in the subject box so I know it’s you.

Later.

Even back in the 1970s, Paul was working the photo ops.

Even back in the 1970′s, Paul was working the photo ops.

Do you truly support the troops? Ron Paul overwhelmingly leads in support from the troops! Support the troops by helping this pro-Ron Paul article go completely viral! Spread it all over the internet and social networks! Denver Conspiracy Examiner’s, “Support the Troops by Supporting Ron Paul”
http://www.examiner.com/conspiracy-in-denver/support-the-troops-by-supporting-ron-paul

Do you truly support the troops? Ron Paul overwhelmingly leads in support from the troops! Support the troops by helping this pro-Ron Paul article go completely viral! Spread it all over the internet and social networks! Denver Conspiracy Examiner’s, “Support the Troops by Supporting Ron Paul”
http://www.examiner.com/conspiracy-in-denver/support-the-troops-by-supporting-ron-paul

There is one newsletter, not a series of them with racist comments in it.

30 years of public record vs 8 paragraphs he has denied writing for years.  If he was a racist there would be more than one bit of evidence.  Ron Paul treated some poor black people for free as a doctor.

There is one newsletter, not a series of them with racist comments in it.

30 years of public record vs 8 paragraphs he has denied writing for years.  If he was a racist there would be more than one bit of evidence.  Ron Paul treated some poor black people for free as a doctor.

Bottom line every white person is a racist.  And so the racist label for every black person.  Only difference is he’s a doctor and he has a code to follow no matter who the patient is.  So not impressed at all with this story.  And by the way just go to any hospital in Texas and white patients there will not and repeat not let a black nurse give them medication or assist them in any way.  Don’t let 1972 fool you.  Racism is alive and well in Texas today.       

http://ronpaulflix.com/2012/01/ben-swanns-reality-check-the-story-behind-the-ron-paul-newsletters-jan-4-2012/

Hence why Communist china is so rich and it’s people work 30 cents a day making ipods. Moron!!