According to The New York Times, Ron Paul, the libertarian candidate, is “a real Republican contender in Iowa.” He is also the candidate of the white supremacists, Jew haters, and gay bashers.
Twenty years ago, he published a newsletter with articles that bore no bylines that were, according to the Times, “racist, anti-gay, and anti-Israel.” He now says he didn’t write them and he doesn’t know who did.
It should be easy enough for experts to compare the writing style of these articles with his past and current writings as a congressman and offer an opinion on the paternity of the earlier articles.
I am surprised that the other presidential candidates and others have not done so. But it really makes no difference whether or not he personally wrote the articles — he offered them to his publication’s readership. It was his newsletter and he was its editor.
His response that he doesn’t know who wrote the articles is ridiculous.
Some will say, “Oh that was 20 years ago.” Yes, then the question is, What has he done over the last 20 years to show he no longer supports those hateful opinions?
So far as I know, nothing.
I believe everyone can change, but it is not enough to say you’ve changed. You must, in my opinion, do something tangible to demonstrate the change.
Worse still, Paul, according to the Times of Dec. 26, “when asked about getting help from volunteers with anti-Jewish or anti-black views, said, 'I wouldn’t be happy with that' but he 'did not disavow their support.' He went on to say, 'If they want to endorse me, they are endorsing what I do or say — it has nothing to do with what they say.'”
Gimmie a break. He knows it has something to do with what he said in the past. They know where he stood on blacks, Jews, and gays and they like it. And apparently, they see no changes in his positions.
Ron Paul is the perfect candidate for the bigots in this country. He is not like the racists who paraded in white sheets or the David Dukes who stated their allegiance to the ideas of Hitler.
No, he is the affable avuncular relative with a twinkle in his eye and voice that doesn’t ever sound shrill, but more like that of your kindly and occasionally crotchety uncle. He doesn’t have to wear an armband or use a stretched arm salute, and you can be sure he regrets the revelation of the earlier hate writings in his newsletters.
It is incredible that a Republican candidate for president in the year 2012, supported by white supremacists, Jew haters, and gay bashers, is a front-runner in the upcoming Iowa caucus.
The United States did itself proud in 2008 by electing an African-American for president. Our better angels prevailed four years ago in not allowing race to dominate our decision-making.
Notwithstanding that Ron Paul is in the lead in Iowa, I believe Republicans will do what is morally right and reject him, and select one of the other Republican candidates.
To his enormous credit, Newt Gingrich has said of Ron Paul, as reported in the Times on Dec. 28, that he “was a ‘protest’ candidate and that he could not vote for the congressman if he won the party’s nomination. In a television interview, Mr. Gingrich, the former House speaker, declared that Mr. Paul’s ‘views are totally outside the mainstream of virtually every decent American.’”
I would hope that every other Republican candidate in the Iowa caucus would likewise state they would not vote for Paul if he were to win the Republican nomination.
Loving guns and the right to bear arms, now constitutionally protected by U.S. Supreme Court decisions, is acceptable. But discriminating against fellow Americans on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation is not.
We will soon know how the people of Iowa feel about this. The caucus vote will be held on Jan. 3.
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.