Paul's strong views and the integrity of his political record [29] have won him supporters from many different camps, and reporters often dismiss his followers as a mix of geeks, weirdos] and conspiracy theorists.
As Matt Labash wrote in the Weekly Standard: "For me, the Ron Paul Revolution is like a cozy winter fire. From a distance, the crackling flames of individual liberty and free-thinking libertarianism take the chill off sterile two-party politics. But get too near the searing embers, and they will cause blistering, profuse sweating, and all-around general discomfort."
While there's plenty of journalistic snark on this issue, similar questions about Paul's mixed group of supporters have come from within. The New York Times profile quoted a revealing 2007 email message in which the organizer of a Ron Paul meetup group in Pasadena, Calif., asked for advice from Paul's campaign headquarters:
"We're in a difficult position of working on a campaign that draws supporters from laterally opposing points of view, and we have the added bonus of attracting every wacko fringe group in the country. And in a Ron Paul Meetup many people will consider each other 'wackos' for their beliefs whether that is simply because they're liberal, conspiracy theorists, neo-Nazis, evangelical Christian, etc. ... We absolutely must focus on Ron's message only and put aside all other agendas, which anyone can save for the next 'Star Trek' convention or whatever."
Scandals and controversy:
In 1992, several issues of Ron Paul's newsletter published racist remarks attributed to him, including the lines: "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal;" and "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."
During the 1996 elections, these remarks were brought forward and Paul stood by them, saying they weren't racist. But in 2001, he told Texas Monthly that he had not written those phrases but had been advised to take responsibility for the comments anyway—an explanation that Texas Monthly's Sam Gwynne found largely credible.
http://www.propublica.org/article/our-guide-to-the-best-coverage-of-ron-paul-and-his-record/single
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment