Saturday, January 14, 2012

Storm Front: Ron Paul's White Supremacist Fanbase


Ron Paul knowingly took a donation from the head of Stormfront:
"WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Republican presidenti­al hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacis­t, and the Texas congressma­n doesn't plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.­" (source: http://www­.msnbc.msn­.com/id/22­331091/ns/­politics-d­ecision_08­/t/paul-ke­eps-donati­on-white-s­upremacist­/#.TxLUGGO­XTPo
Ever heard of Stormfront? It's a "white pride" organization that, well, hates black people, immigrants, and Jews. The thing about these people--aside from their hate speech/preach--is that they like Ron Paul. A lot.

Here's a poll I came across (I've never been to their site previously, but I typed in "What would happen if Ron Paul were to become president" and this link came up). Apparently Ron the Paul has a lot of friends who hate, hate, hate.

And for even more hijinks with the Klansy folks over at Stormfront, I decided to do a search for "Ron Paul" on their site. This is what came up:

Wow. He seems like a friendly old coot. That's strange. (Yeah. Not so much.)
It's well known that Ron Paul has accepted campaign donations from the ironically named Derek Black, the head of Stormfront. But why? Well, perhaps it's because Paul has channeled the group's message. It's now well known that his Ron Paul newsletters of the late '80s contained serious racist warnings of impending race warfare of the '90s:
This “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism” was hardly the first time one of Paul’s publications had raised these topics. As early as December 1989, a section of his Investment Letter, titled “What To Expect for the 1990s,” predicted that “Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities” because “mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’”
Two months later, a newsletter warned of “The Coming Race War,” and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, “If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.” In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” “This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,” the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter’s author--presumably Paul--wrote, “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” (source:  New York Magazine and The New Republic) 
Paul's newsletters, which were called Ron Paul's Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, and The Ron Paul Survival Report, were among the monthly publications and he "never read." So, he must have also missed the part about how gay people enjoy AIDS because they like publicity.

Ron Paul: Yes, it's "the blacks," but it's "the gays" too. According to the Washington Post's Fact Checker:
A separate article from the (Paul's) Survival Report said "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be. The Paul publicans also criticized homosexuals, saying gay people "enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick," referring to AIDS....As for (Martin Luther) King, a 1992 Ron Paul newsletter referred to the civil rights leader as a "world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours."

The flat and black and white world of RP.
Paul insists that he never read his newsletters. Right. Because he was, what, just far too busy being a doctor and giving speeches. These thin, monthly newsletters took too much time to review. Gotcha. This is the equivalent to the "I can't recall" argument that the guilty always use in response to charges levied against them. On the one hand, it's completely unbelievable; on the other, if it's somehow true, it indicates another level of mendacity--to wit, he was happily putting out apocryphal b.s. and charging people for it, even though he had no idea what was in it.

Either way? Ron the Paul ain't a nice old guy. But he's the right kind of not-nice old guy that the fascist white supremacists really like, apparently. I wonder how many of Paul's growing legion of misguided collegiate fanboys are aware of this stuff. Just because someone endorses your candidacy, it doesn't follow that you share their beliefs--that's fallacious reasoning. However, a) he has endorsed racist views in his newsletters, and b) it does raise questions about the validity--and sanity--of your views if they're avidly shared by lizard-brained people who clearly have enlarged amydalae.

1 comment:

  1. funny, at the big campaign donor sites, they come out in support of governmental policies all the time.