The not-Mitt race for the GOP nomination is swinging wildly. Bachmann had her day in Ames, but those seeds were sewn on rocky ground. Cain was dogged by allegations of infidelity and inappropriate behavior. Perry stumbled through the debates. Gingrich hasn’t fully fallen yet, but he’s teetering and his numbers are cooling off. Ron Paul is gaining momentum and rising in the polls. Could Ron Paul take the nomination? A thousand times: no.
He’s wonderfully pro-life. He is a sure vote against profligate spending.* He is a racist and has a pretty low opinion of Jews and celebrated when David Duke nearly won a Senate seat.
But don’t take my word for it. Read about what was published under his name.
Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote:
“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,” Paul said.
We don’t think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That’s true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such.
And on Jews:
By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government.
And his limp-wristed (look it up: it means weak) attempt to distance himself from all this was merely “I didn’t write it, a staffer did, and it would be too confusing to explain it away beyond that.”
Not a direct quote, but an apt paraphrase. And utter nonsense since every noxious word was printed under his name.
I was not a fan of Ron Paul before this, seeing his foreign policy as utter lunacy in a world of a global economy, ICBMs, nuclear weapons, and non-linear warfare, but I had forgotten about this stuff.
And if you find yourself wondering why I and so many others are appalled at this sort of thing, well, that’s terribly unfortunate. If you comment, I or a site administrator will likely approve your comments, but I’m not going to engage in discussion about that topic.
*His votes against spending bills on limited-government, libertarian, anti-pork grounds are merely symbolic since a) the bills are going to pass anyhow; and b) he already signed on to get his share of pork when they do.**
**We spell that: h-y-p-o-c-r-i-s-y.