Alright. So we have five issues quoted with racist content -
1. December 1989 2. November 1990 3. June 1991 4. June 1992 5. October 1992
Do we know that Paul read one of those specific ones during those 10 years? No. As for the ones about MLK (that weren't given references) - several people have said Paul praised King on many occasions. Including the F'in NAACP president. So those quotes certainly are not his.
I think there is still plausible deniability as to his authorship and approval.
Good post - I agree with you completely. I wanted to give someone else a chance to repsond to the parents claims, and you did an excellent job. I hope the parent is able to make a more informed decision based on your response. One more thing about the IRS is that federal income taxes could easily be eliminated if we went back to year 2000 spending levels. That's how much the IRS brings in, and I don't think that level would be difficult to go back to.
If all the FCC did was regulate the spectrum, then we would have a lot less to complain about. But the problem with the FCC is that they have completely gone off the deep end of regulation and censorship.
And even with the spectrum, there could be private ownership and free market solutions.
The new republic article only quoted a couple of the newsletters. Yet you would have me believe that there were continual racist comments throughout the whole ten years? Despite providing no evidence? I don't think so. That, coupled with the fact that he has publicly repudiated those views many times, coupled with his many statements during his 10 terms of public service, would make it seem that you are simply blowing smoke. Do you have an axe to grind or something?
And it would take a complete idiot to think think that pandering to racists would allow one to get ahead politically. Somehow I just don't see an intelligent person making that leap.
Your whole post seems to be based on the faulty labor theory of value... which would make sense, except that value is subjective. Any random person doesn't necessarily deserve Bill Gates' or Paris Hilton's money any more than they do. Economics isn't a zero sum game. It doesn't matter how rich someone is... if people are free to make their own opportunities, that is about as fair as you can get.
Why is it so hard to imagine that the IRS could be abolished without replacing it with another tax? It would be easy if government was cut down to year 2000 levels - not too much to ask. I would even go so far as to say there is no such thing as a "fair tax".
I guess you're free to believe what you want. I'm not convinced that the comments took place over a decade. TNR article itself only quoted a couple of them. I'm not convinced that he is racist, and his many public statements during 10 terms of public service seem to confirm this. Like I said, he did take responsibility for it and publicly repudiated those views. You really think the media isn't mentioning this stuff? You really must not be paying attention. It's one thing to castigate someone over a mistake. It's another to repeatedly drag someone over the coals after they acknowledged their error.
When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name. The quotations in the New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.
I'm not disputing the racism in the letters. I am disputing that Ron wrote them and that he agrees with those sentiments. Just as he said in his statement above.
Who am I supposed to believe - you, or the NAACP president who has known Paul for 20 years? Tough one there, but I think I'll choose the latter.
It's unfortunate that RP allowed his name to be used for such drivel. He should have paid more attention to what people were writing. But that doesn't give you any license to continue smearing him when he has publicly repudiated those views many times.
And after doing that, I (and Ron Paul) would probably consider the following:
1. Abolish the IRS 2. Abolish the Federal Reserve 3. Abolish the Department of Education 4. Abolish the FCC 5. Abolish social security 6. Abolish medicare
Why should I be forced to pay you in order to use computer hardware that I purchased? Who cares if they don't produce the same thing? Money isn't the only reason people produce creative work. I fail to see why "we" would be any poorer if we stopped forcing payments to artists. Or why there would only be one thing instead of 2.
I seem to remember this thing called the American Revolution that was won without a standing army against much more powerful regular forces. Since when has the US ever been under the danger of a successful direct attack? (I mean one that the US government didn't provoke)
Not even Hitler or Japan were stupid enough to launch an full assault on mainland US.
It doesn't matter how much stuff you name off... my point still stands. Entrepreneurs have come up with far more solutions to problems than Nasa ever can or will.
The point is that if we continue down the path we are taking with pollution, don't invest in space travel and continue to procreate, we are sitting in a glass casing. It's only a matter of time before we put ourselves in a near suicide contention with constrained resources. If we don't have peaceful space exploration and means of growing outwards, our only solutions are war, mass genocide, famine, disease and many horrible ugly scenarios.
I don't see how this is supports an argument for *publicly* funded space travel. Humans are remarkably resilient, and are capable of coming up with answers to complex problems by working together voluntarily. Not only that, but there is a lot of promise in the recent advent of privately funded space travel.
As far as I can tell, you haven't addressed the issue. You're simply assuming individuals working together voluntarily wouldn't be able to come up with equal (or more) benefits than NASA provides. I see no reason to agree with you.
It might be here shown, that the power of the federal legislative, to raise and support armies at pleasure, as well in peace as in war, and their controul over the militia, tend, not only to a consolidation of the government, but the destruction of liberty.
In despotic governments, as well as in all the monarchies of Europe, standing armies are kept up to execute the commands of the prince or the magistrate, and are employed for this purpose when occasion requires: But they have always proved the destruction of liberty, and [as] abhorrent to the spirit of a free republic. In England, where they depend upon the parliament for their annual support, they have always been complained of as oppressive and unconstitutional, and are seldom employed in executing of the laws; never except on extraordinary occasions, and then under the direction of a civil magistrate.
A free republic will never keep a standing army to execute its laws. It must depend upon the support of its citizens. But when a government is to receive its support from the aid of the citizens, it must be so constructed as to have the confidence, respect, and affection of the people. Men who, upon the call of the magistrate, offer themselves to execute the laws, are influenced to do it either by affection to the government, or from fear; where a standing army is at hand to punish offenders, every man is actuated by the latter principle, and therefore, when the magistrate casts, will obey: but, where this is not the case, the government must rest for its support upon the confidence and respect which the people have for their government and laws.
My 2005 car has an mp3 cd changer in it that I often use, rather than going through the trouble of getting my iPod out and connecting the FM transmitter. And it's better sound than FM too. Needless to say, the 100 or so tracks that I've purchased from iTunes don't play too well on there.
Normally when I see an album I want, I buy it used from Amazon Marketplace and resell it after I rip the tracks. But I've also purchased mp3s from Amazon and have been quite happy with the service. It's unfortunate that a lot of the music I want doesn't seem to be available there yet. As soon as it is, I will probably often end up buying my favorite two or three tracks from a cd and forego the whole purchase/resell process.
It has to make you wonder whether Ron Paul once again had enough votes to break in to double digits. If it did, I could imagine how it might have an impact on his chances in the next primary states.
My thoughts as well. The design looks terrible, and is similar to the smart fortwo... which I would consider to be a bad thing. Why can't they make it look more like a normal hatchback?
I completely agree. I was paying over $100 for digital cable (+HDTV) and internet from Time Warner. When I moved, I canceled the cable and downgraded my internet to 768mbps and now I'm paying them $15/month. I have a cheapo HDTV antenna and tuner that gets excellent reception of all the local networks. I don't watch all that much TV anyway, and Netflix is able to otherwise fill the void. I upgraded to their 3 at a time plan for about $20/month total. So now I'm paying about $35 a month for hdtv, movies/old shows, and internet.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's possible to ease into less regulation and more freedom with a transition plan, I'm all for it.
Alright. So we have five issues quoted with racist content -
1. December 1989
2. November 1990
3. June 1991
4. June 1992
5. October 1992
Do we know that Paul read one of those specific ones during those 10 years? No. As for the ones about MLK (that weren't given references) - several people have said Paul praised King on many occasions. Including the F'in NAACP president. So those quotes certainly are not his.
I think there is still plausible deniability as to his authorship and approval.
Good post - I agree with you completely. I wanted to give someone else a chance to repsond to the parents claims, and you did an excellent job. I hope the parent is able to make a more informed decision based on your response. One more thing about the IRS is that federal income taxes could easily be eliminated if we went back to year 2000 spending levels. That's how much the IRS brings in, and I don't think that level would be difficult to go back to.
If all the FCC did was regulate the spectrum, then we would have a lot less to complain about. But the problem with the FCC is that they have completely gone off the deep end of regulation and censorship.
And even with the spectrum, there could be private ownership and free market solutions.
The new republic article only quoted a couple of the newsletters. Yet you would have me believe that there were continual racist comments throughout the whole ten years? Despite providing no evidence? I don't think so. That, coupled with the fact that he has publicly repudiated those views many times, coupled with his many statements during his 10 terms of public service, would make it seem that you are simply blowing smoke. Do you have an axe to grind or something?
And it would take a complete idiot to think think that pandering to racists would allow one to get ahead politically. Somehow I just don't see an intelligent person making that leap.
Your whole post seems to be based on the faulty labor theory of value... which would make sense, except that value is subjective. Any random person doesn't necessarily deserve Bill Gates' or Paris Hilton's money any more than they do. Economics isn't a zero sum game. It doesn't matter how rich someone is... if people are free to make their own opportunities, that is about as fair as you can get.
Why is it so hard to imagine that the IRS could be abolished without replacing it with another tax? It would be easy if government was cut down to year 2000 levels - not too much to ask. I would even go so far as to say there is no such thing as a "fair tax".
I guess you're free to believe what you want. I'm not convinced that the comments took place over a decade. TNR article itself only quoted a couple of them. I'm not convinced that he is racist, and his many public statements during 10 terms of public service seem to confirm this. Like I said, he did take responsibility for it and publicly repudiated those views. You really think the media isn't mentioning this stuff? You really must not be paying attention. It's one thing to castigate someone over a mistake. It's another to repeatedly drag someone over the coals after they acknowledged their error.
In all fairness, even a monkey would be better than the current administration.
I'm not disputing the racism in the letters. I am disputing that Ron wrote them and that he agrees with those sentiments. Just as he said in his statement above.
Who am I supposed to believe - you, or the NAACP president who has known Paul for 20 years? Tough one there, but I think I'll choose the latter.
It's unfortunate that RP allowed his name to be used for such drivel. He should have paid more attention to what people were writing. But that doesn't give you any license to continue smearing him when he has publicly repudiated those views many times.
NAACP President: Ron Paul Is Not A Racist
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/011308_not_racist.htm
And after doing that, I (and Ron Paul) would probably consider the following:
1. Abolish the IRS
2. Abolish the Federal Reserve
3. Abolish the Department of Education
4. Abolish the FCC
5. Abolish social security
6. Abolish medicare
I'll take it you don't have a valid criticism, as there is a complete lack of substance in your response.
Why should I be forced to pay you in order to use computer hardware that I purchased?
Who cares if they don't produce the same thing? Money isn't the only reason people produce creative work.
I fail to see why "we" would be any poorer if we stopped forcing payments to artists. Or why there would only be one thing instead of 2.
Or they could stop throwing people in jail for victimless crimes, such as drug offenses... for which 16% of prisoners are there for.
http://www.justice.gov.uk/docs/population-in-custody-0407.pdf
I seem to remember this thing called the American Revolution that was won without a standing army against much more powerful regular forces. Since when has the US ever been under the danger of a successful direct attack? (I mean one that the US government didn't provoke)
Not even Hitler or Japan were stupid enough to launch an full assault on mainland US.
It doesn't matter how much stuff you name off... my point still stands. Entrepreneurs have come up with far more solutions to problems than Nasa ever can or will.
I don't see how this is supports an argument for *publicly* funded space travel. Humans are remarkably resilient, and are capable of coming up with answers to complex problems by working together voluntarily. Not only that, but there is a lot of promise in the recent advent of privately funded space travel.
As far as I can tell, you haven't addressed the issue. You're simply assuming individuals working together voluntarily wouldn't be able to come up with equal (or more) benefits than NASA provides. I see no reason to agree with you.
-Brutus #1, Anti-Federalist
My 2005 car has an mp3 cd changer in it that I often use, rather than going through the trouble of getting my iPod out and connecting the FM transmitter. And it's better sound than FM too. Needless to say, the 100 or so tracks that I've purchased from iTunes don't play too well on there.
Normally when I see an album I want, I buy it used from Amazon Marketplace and resell it after I rip the tracks. But I've also purchased mp3s from Amazon and have been quite happy with the service. It's unfortunate that a lot of the music I want doesn't seem to be available there yet. As soon as it is, I will probably often end up buying my favorite two or three tracks from a cd and forego the whole purchase/resell process.
It has to make you wonder whether Ron Paul once again had enough votes to break in to double digits. If it did, I could imagine how it might have an impact on his chances in the next primary states.
My thoughts as well. The design looks terrible, and is similar to the smart fortwo... which I would consider to be a bad thing. Why can't they make it look more like a normal hatchback?
I completely agree. I was paying over $100 for digital cable (+HDTV) and internet from Time Warner. When I moved, I canceled the cable and downgraded my internet to 768mbps and now I'm paying them $15/month. I have a cheapo HDTV antenna and tuner that gets excellent reception of all the local networks. I don't watch all that much TV anyway, and Netflix is able to otherwise fill the void. I upgraded to their 3 at a time plan for about $20/month total. So now I'm paying about $35 a month for hdtv, movies/old shows, and internet.