The article mentions that Medved has made an open letter calling for Ron Paul to speak out against racists and 9/11 conspiracy people but so far he hasn’t responded. I recently registered Republican so I can vote for Paul in the primaries but if he doesn’t distance himself from these types of people I might just sit the election out.
Why should a political candidate denounce someone for their beliefs? Even neo-nazis have a right to their opinions, as long as their actions don’t hurt anyone. You’d let a candidate’s refusal to denounce someone solely for their beliefs prevent you from putting action to your “classically liberal” words?
Seems pretty clear to me. If you’re willing to sit out the election because a very small number of people as savory as moldy cheese are flocking to Ron Paul, then why bother supporting him in the first place? As they say, there’s one in every bunch, and Congressman Paul’s campaign is no exception.
I don’t mean denounce those people, I mean distance himself from their ideas. Shouldn’t he make it clear that he dissapproves of racism and crazy 9/11 conspiracy theories if he does? I by no means want the law to be used against anyone because of their ideas, but that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t point out ideas for what they are: irrational collectivist craziness.
I never said that racists don’t have rights. Everyone has the same rights. I said that if Ron Paul isn’t a racist he should say so. Is there anything about that you don’t agree with? Also I wouldn’t vote for someone who believes that 9/11 was carried out by the Bush Administration. Some supporters of Ron Paul believe just that. Shouldn’t Ron Paul make clear what he believes about these issues?
Ron Paul has already denounced racism as stupid collectivism, so there is no problem. And as for returning the money, I don’t see why this is necessary; if a neo-nazi gave a ton of cash to an orphanage, the orphanage should keep the money because it can do a great deal of good regardless who it comes from.
Do all the other candidates return funds originating from suspect sources? I doubt it. Probably because these sources are either low profile. There seems to be a sort of witch hunt going on with Paul.
Listen to what Ron Paul has to say. Can there be any doubt in your mind that this is a good, honest decent man whose views are diametrically opposed to these neo-*** extremists? Ron Paul has spent most of his adult life esposuing the virtues of freedom, tolerance and non-coercion. He has frequently denounced racism.
So, why doesn’t he specifically denounce these groups and try to distance himself from them? Well, the obvious answer is that if you know what Ron Paul stands for, it’s completely unnecessary. But I think there might be more to it than that. When members of these extremists groups first hear Ron Paul’s message of freedom, they mistakenly believe that a Ron Paul presidency will give them the poltical means to advance their agenda, not realizing that Ron Paul is in fact the last person in the world who would allow the presidency to be used in that manner. They fail to understand that the freedom they have under the Constitution to express whatever crazy intolerant views they may have, does not give them the freedom to impose those views on others. Their views are logically inconsistent, and their understanding of Ron Paul’s message, and what Ron Paul would do as president, is completely backwards, But here’s the beauty of the Ron Paul campaign: No matter how stupid, bigoted and intolerant you might be, you are still free to support him if you want, but the more you hang around Ron Paul, the more you listen to his message, his logic and his rational arguments, the less stupid, bigoted and intolerant you will become. That’s the power of Ron Paul.
You have misunderstood my argument. I am not saying his supporters determine his ideology, simply that if he is called out by prominent public figures and accused of something he should respond or else he looks like he is guilty. If someone accused me of being a racist or 9/11 troother because they gave me money I would respond and set the record straight. Is this unreasonable to expect?
What’s so special about racism and conspiracy theories that they have to be treated seperately from all other kooky ideas? Or would you want a candidate explicitly to “distance” himself from all kooky contributors?
As a 9-11 truther myself I can understand why Ron Paul won’t distance himself or speak out against people like myself. It’s hard to speak out against something that
is so unclear and he doesn’t have all the data on. I’m glad not only is he not speaking against us, but he is not speaking for us either. This is a proper position for someone who doesn’t have all the information. He doesn’t pretend to know everything and he understands that our own government has carried false flag attacks in the past and wouldn’t put it past them to do it again. As he gains a better understanding about the issues of 9-11, he will be able to make more decisive decisions as to how much distance he gives himself on issues such as this. By the way Medved isn’t exactly the bastion integrity to be basing your decision on. I mean why not have Ron Paul speak out against child molestors and rapists. I mean what kind of campaign can somone run if he has to speak out against everything that is called for in open letters. I personally don’t care what his position is on 9-11. The fact that he is actually the only candidate who not says he will obey the constitution but has actually practiced what he preaches, he is a no-brainer choice for president. So please don’t sit out this election you may never have a chance to vote for a candidate with such integrity ever again.
As a 9-11 truther myself I can understand why Ron Paul won’t distance himself or speak out against people like myself. It’s hard to speak out against something that
is so unclear and he doesn’t have all the data on. I’m glad not only is he not speaking against us, but he is not speaking for us either. This is a proper position for someone who doesn’t have all the information. He doesn’t pretend to know everything and he understands that our own government has carried false flag attacks in the past and wouldn’t put it past them to do it again. As he gains a better understanding about the issues of 9-11, he will be able to make more decisive decisions as to how much distance he gives himself on issues such as this. By the way Medved isn’t exactly the bastion integrity to be basing your decision on. I mean why not have Ron Paul speak out against child molestors and rapists. I mean what kind of campaign can somone run if he has to speak out against everything that is called for in open letters. I personally don’t care what his position is on 9-11. The fact that he is actually the only candidate who not says he will obey the constitution but has actually practiced what he preaches, he is a no-brainer choice for president. So please don’t sit out this election you may never have a chance to vote for a candidate with such integrity ever again.
One thing to keep in mind, is that if Ron Paul is put in a position to speak out when every “prominant” person calls him out on something. He would be caught up in playing the back and forth game and never get anything accomplished. And if you have been following Ron for any period of time you will know, and these prominant people who call him out will know what his positions are. They just need to do a little research.
I read this article and thought this over myself. This is what I think.
If it were my campaign,I’d give the money back and denounce the guys organization. But maybe I’d be doing the wrong thing. If I take the money, I have financially weakened the racist, whose views are diametrically opposed to mine, and perhaps I may win an election because of it, which will bring anti-racist views into government and prominence. I have heard Dr. Paul state his views at least three times in public that racism is a form of collectivist thinking, in complete opposition to Libertarian individualism. If the other candidates return these donations, I believe it is completely for show. Dr. Paul is probably the only candidate who could take such donations, and argue a position that would make me think what he did was not invalid from his perspective. Also, it’s his campaign, not mine.
The other issue is why does the other side not vigorously repudiate its racists and their donations. I have never heard the leading candidates of the Democratic party demand that Farrakhan, Sharpton, and Carter, who has accepted about a million dollars from a Saudi racist who has published virulently anti-Semitic literature, be removed from the Democratic Party. When critics, like Alan Dershowitz, pointed this out and some demanded Carter return the money, Carter refused to give it back. I haven’t heard any Democrats denounce him at length on public television for this. Or Sharpton or Farrakhan. Do you think that’s more moral that Dr. Paul’s position?
I guess I just hold Dr. Paul to a higher moral standard than any of the Democrats who I know are simply rent-seeking statists. I noticed that he added a section about racism on his website which is helpful but I think a public response to the open letter would be much better even if he didn’t give the money back.
I think no matter who supports Ron Paul, it shows that we all want the same thing, freedom and liberty. We already know that this is a man who can’t get bought. He’s not going to change his principles because of certain donations that are voluntary to his message.
And if you watch Zeitgeist - The Movie: The Federal Reserve (5 parts but fairly short) on youtube, you may change your mind about asking Ron Paul to denounce the 911 conspiracy people. You see, it’s never been proven either way, except more investigation of facts has been done on the part of others than by the 911 Commission. If you are open-minded, and if you dare, check it out. History proves that governments have been using “false flag” operations for about 100 years so it wouldn’t be the first time.
Ron Paul stands for the Constitution, and so all of us get a chance to retain our freedoms. All American’s deserve that. Don’t you think?