So I guess I pissed off the Ron Paul cult with my last post, given the fact that my blog traffic has skyrocketed and I’m now receiving angry comments (some of which I have not posted because they are inflammatory and offensive).
However, I feel that should respond to one good argument the Paulites have made. That argument is that there should not be guilt by association. In other words, just because Dr. Paul meets with 9/11 conspiracy groups or because he is endorsed by white supremacist groups, that doesn’t mean he’s a bad guy. Consider this comment I received, for example:
“You’re ignorance astounds me. Guilt by association, ay? Apparently if you want a protected border, you’re a racist. If you work with Pat Buchanan, you’re an anti-Semite. If you’re Ron Paul and you speak to a group of Robert Taft supporters, you’re a racist again.”
Fair enough. So let’s forget for a moment which extremist groups Ron Paul meets with or what kind of shady people he surrounds himself with. Just consider what Ron Paul said, as covered by the Houston Chronicle in 1992:
Paul, writing in his independent political newsletter in 1992, reported about unspecified surveys of blacks.
“Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action,” Paul wrote.
Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered “as decent people.” 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.
Paul also wrote that although “we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”
Now make up your own mind.