Thursday, January 10, 2008

shame, shame, shame

I'm Withdrawing My Support of Ron Paul's Candidacy
I agree with the author of the above link due to racist and homophobic remarks printed in Mr. Paul's newsletter, so I'm recrossing the blue-red line and can't decide between Obama and Hilary. The decision would have been a lot clearer in my mind before Monday when Hilary actually showed the world that she's not a robot. We still have some time to decide until the Ohio primary, though. I urge everyone to vote in the primary elections, as this is just as important as voting in November.


  1. Don't be suckered by the typical smear tactics that show up whenever there is a real threat to the establishment.

    "Paul disavowed the writings in a response to the New Republic article, saying that the quotations do not represent his beliefs, and that he has "never uttered such words and denounce[s] such small-minded thoughts." He again noted that he accepts "moral responsibility" for not paying closer attention to writings published under his name.[117] In a subsequent interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, he said he did not know who wrote the articles and stated he "[repudiates] everything that is written along those lines." Blitzer told Paul that he was "shocked" by the newsletters, because they did not seem to reflect "the Ron Paul that I've come to know, and the viewers have come to know" over the course of several interviews during the campaign.[118] David Gergen, CNN senior political analyst, commented "I don't think there's an excuse in politics to have something go out under your name and say, 'Oh by the way, I didn't write that'."[118][119]

    In the interview with Blitzer, Paul asserted that racism is incompatible with his beliefs and that he sees people as individuals—not as part of collectives. He also dismissed the attack as an attempt to accuse him of racism by proxy, claiming that he has collected more money among African-Americans than any other Republican candidate.[118] Nelson Linder, president of the Austin chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), defended Paul, saying that he has known him for 20 years, saw him as a "free thinker", "very intelligent and very informed", talking about "real issues" that "invite attacks on him", who was "correct in what he's saying", and that knowing his intent, he believes Paul has been misconstrued and taken out of context.[120] Former LA Times editor Andrew Malcolm noted that Paul got second place in the January 19 Nevada Republican caucus despite the recent reports about the newsletters."

  2. Yeah, I read all of that before. After the primaries so far, it doesn't look like Ron Paul will likely be on the ballot in the Fall, so that's another reason I'm re-thinking my choice.

  3. And if you need another reason: He's pro-life. Any candidate who thinks it's a good idea not let women control their own reproductive fates and health can bite me.

    And a word about "pro-life". We're all pro-life. What these overlord morons are is anti-pro-choice. Assholes.