back to my feeling we need a true multi-party system. maybe a small but viable minority could do something to get ideals like his better ones out there
-------------- Original message -------------- From: Daryle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I've heard a lot of this from early in the campaign, and it's amazing to me that the candidate that means me the least good is the one I agree with the most out of all the available Republicans. What also gets me is how no one takes his good points and runs with them. Paul's analysis of the economy is the best of all the candidates, in either party. For the reasons described below (as well as others), there's no way he's going to get he nomination...so why not steal his math homework and look like a genius? On 1/17/08 1:15 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i missed that, heard him on "Meet the PRess" saying his message had wide > appeal, and, unfortunately, that included some deemed racists--but that's not > his fault or an indication of any negatives in his message. > > -------------- Original message -------------- > From: "B. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > This story has been around for a while but it finally seemed to gain > traction when it was published in the New Republic. > > BTW did you see him try to defend himself? According to him Dr. King > and Rosa Parks were his heroes and this coming out now because it > would erode the support he was getting from "the blacks." > > --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> I called Paul a "fringe" candidate the other day for this reason. > He appeals to a lot of guys who like to call > themselves "Libertarians". Not all of them, of course, but many > Libertarians I've encountered here in Georgia have been disgruntled > white guys who seem to pine for the days when women and people of > colour knew their place. Who see the government as a giant many-armed > creature reaching in to take away their rights, their freedoms, and > their beloved guns. Who believe they can and did achieve all they > have in life by pulling up their own bootstraps. Who see things like > the UN as evil and a corrupting influence on the pure soul of America. >> >> These are the same guys I've encountered in science fiction and > fantasy discussions who are a little too pleased with Conan-type > stories where women are half-naked barbarians nonetheless subject to > men, and the bad guys are often people of color who are cowed and > killed by the white man and his noble, savage strength. These are the > guys who often pine for the "good old days" of American virtue: those > days, of course, being pre Civil Rights, and hell, pre Women's > Suffrage from what I can tell. >> >> Paul says a lot of things that make sense on the surface, but > sometimes you have to look at *why* people feel the way they do. Why > else would he have gotten so many donations from white supremacist > groups that it became a topic on "Meet The Press"? (He claims to have > given the money back). >> >> I'm not saying Paul himself is a racist--now, at least. But his > tone and tenor, his background, and the type of people he inspires > make me nervous. I take everything he says with a tablespoon of salt. >> >> And I guess this would be the downside of my call for a true multi- > party system in America, cause along with Dems and Republicans, maybe > there'd be a few seats held by the Back to Basics party, consisting > mostly of white supremacist isolationists! >> >> -------------- Original message -------------- >> From: "Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>> Angry White Man: The bigoted past of Ron Paul. >>> http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15- > 4532a7da84ca >>> James Kirchick, The New Republic Published: Tuesday, January 08, > 2008 >>> >>> If you are a critic of the Bush administration, chances are that, > at >>> some point over the past six months, Ron Paul has said something > that >>> appealed to you. Paul describes himself as a libertarian, but, > since his >>> presidential campaign took off earlier this year, the Republican >>> congressman has attracted donations and plaudits from across the >>> ideological spectrum. Antiwar conservatives, disaffected > centrists, even >>> young liberal activists have all flocked to Paul, hailing him as > a >>> throwback to an earlier age, when politicians were less mealy- > mouthed >>> and American government was more modest in its ambitions, both at > home >>> and abroad. In The New York Times Magazine, conservative writer >>> Christopher Caldwell gushed that Paul is a "formidable stander on >>> constitutional principle," while The Nation wrote of "his full- > throated >>> rejection of the imperial project in Iraq." Former TNR editor > Andrew >>> Sullivan endorsed Paul for the GOP nomination, and ABC's Jake > Tapper >>> described the candidate as "the one true straight-talker in this > race." >>> Even The Wall Street Journal, the newspaper of the elite bankers > whom >>> Paul detests, recently advised other Republican presidential > contenders >>> not to "dismiss the passion he's tapped." >>> >>> Most voters had never heard of Paul before he launched his > quixotic bid >>> for the Republican nomination. But the Texan has been active in > politics >>> for decades. And, long before he was the darling of antiwar > activists on >>> the left and right, Paul was in the newsletter business. In the > age >>> before blogs, newsletters occupied a prominent place in right- > wing >>> political discourse. With the pages of mainstream political > magazines >>> typically off-limits to their views (National Review editor > William F. >>> Buckley having famously denounced the John Birch Society), > hardline >>> conservatives resorted to putting out their own, less glossy >>> publications. These were often paranoid and rambling--dominated > by talk >>> of international banking conspiracies, the Trilateral > Commission's plans >>> for world government, and warnings about coming Armageddon--but > some of >>> them had wide and devoted audiences. And a few of the most > prominent >>> bore the name of Ron Paul. >>> >>> Paul's newsletters have carried different titles over the years-- > Ron >>> Paul's Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, The Ron Paul > Survival >>> Report--but they generally seem to have been published on a > monthly >>> basis since at least 1978. (Paul, an OB-GYN and former U.S. Air > Force >>> surgeon, was first elected to Congress in 1976.) During some > periods, >>> the newsletters were published by the Foundation for Rational > Economics >>> and Education, a nonprofit Paul founded in 1976; at other times, > they >>> were published by Ron Paul & Associates, a now-defunct entity in > which >>> Paul owned a minority stake, according to his campaign spokesman. > The >>> Freedom Report claimed to have over 100,000 readers in 1984. At > one >>> point, Ron Paul & Associates also put out a monthly publication > called >>> The Ron Paul Investment Letter. >>> >>> The Freedom Report's online archives only go back to 1999, but I > was >>> curious to see older editions of Paul's newsletters, in part > because of >>> a controversy dating to 1996, when Charles "Lefty" Morris, a > Democrat >>> running against Paul for a House seat, released excerpts stating > that >>> "opinion polls consistently show only about 5% of blacks have > sensible >>> political opinions," that "if you have ever been robbed by a > black >>> teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can > be," and >>> that black representative Barbara Jordan is "the archetypical >>> half-educated victimologist" whose "race and sex protect her from >>> criticism." At the time, Paul's campaign said that Morris had > quoted the >>> newsletter out of context. Later, in 2001, Paul would claim that > someone >>> else had written the controversial passages. (Few of the > newsletters >>> contain actual bylines.) Caldwell, writing in the Times Magazine > last >>> year, said he found Paul's explanation believable, "since the > style >>> diverges widely from his own." >>> >>> Finding the pre-1999 newsletters was no easy task, but I was able > to >>> track many of them down at the libraries of the University of > Kansas and >>> the Wisconsin Historical Society. Of course, with few bylines, it > is >>> difficult to know whether any particular article was written by > Paul >>> himself. Some of the earlier newsletters are signed by him, > though the >>> vast majority of the editions I saw contain no bylines at all. >>> Complicating matters, many of the unbylined newsletters were > written in >>> the first person, implying that Paul was the author. >>> >>> But, whoever actually wrote them, the newsletters I saw all had > one >>> thing in common: They were published under a banner containing > Paul's >>> name, and the articles (except for one special edition of a > newsletter >>> that contained the byline of another writer) seem designed to > create the >>> impression that they were written by him--and reflected his > views. What >>> they reveal are decades worth of obsession with conspiracies, > sympathy >>> for the right-wing militia movement, and deeply held bigotry > against >>> blacks, Jews, and gays. In short, they suggest that Ron Paul is > not the >>> plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are >>> backing--but rather a member in good standing of some of the > oldest and >>> ugliest traditions in American politics. >>> >>> >>> >>> To understand Paul's philosophy, the best place to start is > probably the >>> Ludwig von Mises Institute, a libertarian think tank based in > Auburn, >>> Alabama. The institute is named for a libertarian Austrian > economist, >>> but it was founded by a man named Lew Rockwell, who also served > as >>> Paul's congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982. Paul has > had a >>> long and prominent association with the institute, teaching at > its >>> seminars and serving as a "distinguished counselor." The > institute has >>> also published his books. >>> >>> The politics of the organization are complicated--its philosophy > derives >>> largely from the work of the late Murray Rothbard, a Bronx-born > son of >>> Jewish immigrants from Poland and a self-described "anarcho- > capitalist" >>> who viewed the state as nothing more than "a criminal gang"--but > one >>> aspect of the institute's worldview stands out as particularly >>> disturbing: its attachment to the Confederacy. Thomas E. Woods > Jr., a >>> member of the institute's senior faculty, is a founder of the > League of >>> the South, a secessionist group, and the author of The > Politically >>> Incorrect Guide to American History, a pro-Confederate, > revisionist >>> tract published in 2004. Paul enthusiastically blurbed Woods's > book, >>> saying that it "heroically rescues real history from the > politically >>> correct memory hole." Thomas DiLorenzo, another senior faculty > member >>> and author of The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, > His >>> Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, refers to the Civil War as > the "War for >>> Southern Independence" and attacks "Lincoln cultists"; Paul > endorsed the >>> book on MSNBC last month in a debate over whether the Civil War > was >>> necessary (Paul thinks it was not). In April 1995, the institute > hosted >>> a conference on secession at which Paul spoke; previewing the > event, >>> Rockwell wrote to supporters, "We'll explore what causes > [secession] and >>> how to promote it." Paul's newsletters have themselves repeatedly >>> expressed sympathy for the general concept of secession. In 1992, > for >>> instance, the Survival Report argued that "the right of secession > should >>> be ingrained in a free society" and that "there is nothing wrong > with >>> loosely banding together small units of government. With the >>> disintegration of the Soviet Union, we too should consider it." >>> >>> The people surrounding the von Mises Institute--including Paul-- > may >>> describe themselves as libertarians, but they are nothing like > the >>> urbane libertarians who staff the Cato Institute or the > libertines at >>> Reason magazine. Instead, they represent a strain of right-wing >>> libertarianism that views the Civil War as a catastrophic turning > point >>> in American history--the moment when a tyrannical federal > government >>> established its supremacy over the states. As one prominent > Washington >>> libertarian told me, "There are too many libertarians in this > country >>> ... who, because they are attracted to the great books of > Mises, ... >>> find their way to the Mises Institute and then are told that a > defense >>> of the Confederacy is part of libertarian thought." >>> >>> Paul's alliance with neo-Confederates helps explain the views his >>> newsletters have long espoused on race. Take, for instance, a > special >>> issue of the Ron Paul Political Report, published in June 1992, >>> dedicated to explaining the Los Angeles riots of that > year. "Order was >>> only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up > their >>> welfare checks three days after rioting began," read one typical >>> passage. According to the newsletter, the looting was a natural >>> byproduct of government indulging the black community > with "'civil >>> rights,' quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for > government >>> contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, > black >>> mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv > anchors, >>> hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares > question >>> the black agenda." It also denounced "the media" for believing > that >>> "America's number one need is an unlimited white checking account > for >>> underclass blacks." To be fair, the newsletter did praise Asian >>> merchants in Los Angeles, but only because they had the gumption > to >>> resist political correctness and fight back. Koreans were "the > only >>> people to act like real Americans," it explained, "mainly because > they >>> have not yet been assimilated into our rotten liberal culture, > which >>> admonishes whites faced by raging blacks to lie back and think of > England." >>> >>> 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." That >>> same year, a newsletter described the aftermath of a basketball > game in >>> which "blacks poured into the streets of Chicago in celebration. > How to >>> celebrate? How else? They broke the windows of stores to loot." > The >>> newsletter inveighed against liberals who "want to keep white > America >>> from taking action against black crime and welfare," > adding, "Jury >>> verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off > black >>> rage, it seems." >>> >>> Such views on race also inflected the newsletters' commentary on > foreign >>> affairs. South Africa's transition to multiracial democracy was >>> portrayed as a "destruction of civilization" that was "the most > tragic >>> [to] ever occur on that continent, at least below the Sahara"; > and, in >>> March 1994, a month before Nelson Mandela was elected president, > one >>> item warned of an impending "South African Holocaust." >>> >>> Martin Luther King Jr. earned special ire from Paul's > newsletters, which >>> attacked the civil rights leader frequently, often to justify > opposition >>> to the federal holiday named after him. ("What an infamy Ronald > Reagan >>> approved it!" one newsletter complained in 1990. "We can thank > him for >>> our annual Hate Whitey Day.") In the early 1990s, newsletters > attacked >>> the "X-Rated Martin Luther King" as a "world-class philanderer > who beat >>> up his paramours," "seduced underage girls and boys," and "made a > pass >>> at" fellow civil rights leader Ralph Abernathy. One newsletter > ridiculed >>> black activists who wanted to rename New York City after King, >>> suggesting that "Welfaria," "Zooville," "Rapetown," "Dirtburg," > and >>> "Lazyopolis" were better alternatives. The same year, King was > described >>> as "a comsymp, if not an actual party member, and the man who > replaced >>> the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced > integration." >>> >>> While bashing King, the newsletters had kind words for the former >>> Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke. In a passage > titled >>> "The Duke's Victory," a newsletter celebrated Duke's 44 percent > showing >>> in the 1990 Louisiana Senate primary. "Duke lost the election," > it said, >>> "but he scared the blazes out of the Establishment." In 1991, a >>> newsletter asked, "Is David Duke's new prominence, despite his > losing >>> the gubernatorial election, good for anti-big government forces?" > The >>> conclusion was that "our priority should be to take the anti- > government, >>> anti-tax, anti-crime, anti-welfare loafers, anti-race privilege, >>> anti-foreign meddling message of Duke, and enclose it in a more >>> consistent package of freedom." Duke is now returning the favor, > telling >>> me that, while he will not formally endorse any candidate, he has > made >>> information about Ron Paul available on his website. >>> >>> >>> >>> Like blacks, gays earn plenty of animus in Paul's newsletters. > They >>> frequently quoted Paul's "old colleague," Representative William >>> Dannemeyer--who advocated quarantining people with AIDS--praising > him >>> for "speak[ing] out fearlessly despite the organized power of the > gay >>> lobby." In 1990, one newsletter mentioned a reporter from a gay > magazine >>> "who certainly had an axe to grind, and that's not easy with a > limp >>> wrist." In an item titled, "The Pink House?" the author of a >>> newsletter--again, presumably Paul--complained about President > George >>> H.W. Bush's decision to sign a hate crimes bill and invite "the > heads of >>> homosexual lobbying groups to the White House for the ceremony," > adding, >>> "I miss the closet." "Homosexuals," it said, "not to speak of the > rest >>> of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them > to hide >>> their activities." When Marvin Liebman, a founder of the > conservative >>> Young Americans for Freedom and a longtime political activist, > announced >>> that he was gay in the pages of National Review, a Paul > newsletter >>> implored, "Bring Back the Closet!" Surprisingly, one item > expressed >>> ambivalence about the contentious issue of gays in the military, > but >>> ultimately concluded, "Homosexuals, if admitted, should be put in > a >>> special category and not allowed in close physical contact with >>> heterosexuals." >>> >>> The newsletters were particularly obsessed with AIDS, "a > politically >>> protected disease thanks to payola and the influence of the > homosexual >>> lobby," and used it as a rhetorical club to beat gay people in > general. >>> In 1990, one newsletter approvingly quoted "a well-known > Libertarian >>> editor" as saying, "The ACT-UP slogan, on stickers plastered all > over >>> Manhattan, is 'Silence = Death.' But shouldn't it be 'Sodomy = > Death'?" >>> Readers were warned to avoid blood transfusions because gays were > trying >>> to "poison the blood supply." "Am I the only one sick of hearing > about >>> the 'rights' of AIDS carriers?" a newsletter asked in 1990. That > same >>> year, citing a Christian-right fringe publication, an item > suggested >>> that "the AIDS patient" should not be allowed to eat in > restaurants and >>> that "AIDS can be transmitted by saliva," which is false. Paul's >>> newsletters advertised a book, Surviving the AIDS Plague--also > based >>> upon the casual-transmission thesis--and defended "parents who > worry >>> about sending their healthy kids to school with AIDS victims." >>> Commenting on a rise in AIDS infections, one newsletter said > that "gays >>> in San Francisco do not obey the dictates of good sense," adding: >>> "[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their > fifties. They >>> are not married, they have no children, and their lives are > centered on >>> new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity > that >>> comes with being sick." >>> >>> The rhetoric when it came to Jews was little better. The > newsletters >>> display an obsession with Israel; no other country is mentioned > more >>> often in the editions I saw, or with more vitriol. A 1987 issue > of >>> Paul's Investment Letter called Israel "an aggressive, national >>> socialist state," and a 1990 newsletter discussed the "tens of > thousands >>> of well-placed friends of Israel in all countries who are willing > to wok >>> [sic] for the Mossad in their area of expertise." Of the 1993 > World >>> Trade Center bombing, a newsletter said, "Whether it was a setup > by the >>> Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly > a >>> retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little." >>> >>> >>> >>> Paul's newsletters didn't just contain bigotry. They also > contained >>> paranoia--specifically, the brand of anti-government paranoia > that >>> festered among right-wing militia groups during the 1980s > and '90s. >>> Indeed, the newsletters seemed to hint that armed revolution > against the >>> federal government would be justified. In January 1995, three > months >>> before right-wing militants bombed the Murrah Federal Building in >>> Oklahoma City, a newsletter listed "Ten Militia Commandments," >>> describing "the 1,500 local militias now training to defend > liberty" as >>> "one of the most encouraging developments in America." It warned > militia >>> members that they were "possibly under BATF [Bureau of Alcohol, > Tobacco >>> and Firearms] or other totalitarian federal surveillance" and > printed >>> bits of advice from the Sons of Liberty, an anti-government > militia >>> based in Alabama--among them, "You can't kill a Hydra by cutting > off its >>> head," "Keep the group size down," "Keep quiet and you're harder > to >>> find," "Leave no clues," "Avoid the phone as much as possible," > and >>> "Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, > let it >>> begin here." >>> >>> The newsletters are chock-full of shopworn conspiracies, > reflecting >>> Paul's obsession with the "industrial-banking-political elite" > and >>> promoting his distrust of a federally regulated monetary system >>> utilizing paper bills. They contain frequent and bristling > references to >>> the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, and the Council > on >>> Foreign Relations--organizations that conspiracy theorists have > long >>> accused of seeking world domination. In 1978, a newsletter blamed > David >>> Rockefeller, the Trilateral Commission, and "fascist-oriented, >>> international banking and business interests" for the Panama > Canal >>> Treaty, which it called "one of the saddest events in the history > of the >>> United States." A 1988 newsletter cited a doctor who believed > that AIDS >>> was created in a World Health Organization laboratory in Fort > Detrick, >>> Maryland. In addition, Ron Paul & Associates sold a video about > Waco >>> produced by "patriotic Indiana lawyer Linda Thompson"--as one of > the >>> newsletters called her--who maintained that Waco was a conspiracy > to >>> kill ATF agents who had previously worked for President Clinton > as >>> bodyguards. As with many of the more outlandish theories the > newsletters >>> cited over the years, the video received a qualified > endorsement: "I >>> can't vouch for every single judgment by the narrator, but the > film does >>> show the depths of government perfidy, and the national police's > tricks >>> and crimes," the newsletter said, adding, "Send your check for > $24.95 to >>> our Houston office, or charge the tape to your credit card at >>> 1-800-RON-PAUL." >>> >>> >>> >>> When I asked Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign spokesman, about the >>> newsletters, he said that, over the years, Paul had > granted "various >>> levels of approval" to what appeared in his publications--ranging > from >>> "no approval" to instances where he "actually wrote it himself." > After I >>> read Benton some of the more offensive passages, he said, "A lot > of [the >>> newsletters] he did not see. Most of the incendiary stuff, no." > He added >>> that he was surprised to hear about the insults hurled at Martin > Luther >>> King, because "Ron thinks Martin Luther King is a hero." >>> >>> In other words, Paul's campaign wants to depict its candidate as > a >>> naïve, absentee overseer, with minimal knowledge of what his > underlings >>> were doing on his behalf. This portrayal might be more believable > if >>> extremist views had cropped up in the newsletters only > sporadically--or >>> if the newsletters had just been published for a short time. But > it is >>> difficult to imagine how Paul could allow material consistently >>> saturated in racism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and conspiracy- > mongering >>> to be printed under his name for so long if he did not share > these >>> views. In that respect, whether or not Paul personally wrote the > most >>> offensive passages is almost beside the point. If he disagreed > with what >>> was being written under his name, you would think that at some >>> point--over the course of decades--he would have done something > about it. >>> >>> What's more, Paul's connections to extremism go beyond the > newsletters. >>> He has given extensive interviews to the magazine of the John > Birch >>> Society, and has frequently been a guest of Alex Jones, a radio > host and >>> perhaps the most famous conspiracy theorist in America. Jones-- > whose >>> recent documentary, Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement, > details >>> the plans of George Pataki, David Rockefeller, and Queen Beatrix > of the >>> Netherlands, among others, to exterminate most of humanity and > develop >>> themselves into "superhuman" computer hybrids able to "travel > throughout >>> the cosmos"--estimates that Paul has appeared on his radio > program about >>> 40 times over the past twelve years. >>> >>> Then there is Gary North, who has worked on Paul's congressional > staff. >>> North is a central figure in Christian Reconstructionism, which >>> advocates the implementation of Biblical law in modern society. >>> Christian Reconstructionists share common ground with > libertarians, >>> since both groups dislike the central government. North has > advocated >>> the execution of women who have abortions and people who curse > their >>> parents. In a 1986 book, North argued for stoning as a form of > capital >>> punishment--because "the implements of execution are available to >>> everyone at virtually no cost." North is perhaps best known for > Gary >>> North's Remnant Review, a "Christian and pro free-market" > newsletter. In >>> a 1983 letter Paul wrote on behalf of an organization called the >>> Committee to Stop the Bail-Out of Multinational Banks (known by > the >>> acronym CSBOMB), he bragged, "Perhaps you already read in Gary > North's >>> Remnant Review about my exposes of government abuse." >>> >>> >>> >>> Ron Paul is not going to be president. But, as his campaign has > gathered >>> steam, he has found himself increasingly permitted inside the > boundaries >>> of respectable debate. He sat for an extensive interview with Tim >>> Russert recently. He has raised almost $20 million in just three > months, >>> much of it online. And he received nearly three times as many > votes as >>> erstwhile front-runner Rudy Giuliani in last week's Iowa caucus. > All the >>> while he has generally been portrayed by the media as principled > and >>> serious, while garnering praise for being a "straight-talker." >>> >>> From his newsletters, however, a different picture of Paul >>> emerges--that of someone who is either himself deeply embittered > or, for >>> a long time, allowed others to write bitterly on his behalf. His >>> adversaries are often described in harsh terms: Barbara Jordan is > called >>> "Barbara Morondon," Eleanor Holmes Norton is a "black pinko," > Donna >>> Shalala is a "short lesbian," Ron Brown is a "racial > victimologist," and >>> Roberta Achtenberg, the first openly gay public official > confirmed by >>> the United States Senate, is a "far-left, normal-hating lesbian >>> activist." Maybe such outbursts mean Ron Paul really is a >>> straight-talker. Or maybe they just mean he is a man filled with > hate. >>> >>> Corrections: This article originally stated that The Nation > praised Ron >>> Paul's "full-throated rejection of the imperial project in Iraq." > The >>> magazine did not praise Paul's position, but merely described it. > The >>> piece also originally misidentified ABC's Jake Tapper as Jack. In >>> addition, Paul was a surgeon in the Air Force, not the Army, as > the >>> piece originally stated. It also stated that David Duke competed > in the >>> 1990 Louisiana Republican Senate primary. In fact, he was a > Republican >>> candidate in an open primary. The article has been corrected. >>> >>> James Kirchick is an assistant editor at The New Republic. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links >>> >>> >>> >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
