Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

The scariest thing about GOP presidential contender Ron Paul is not his fringe, odd-ball racial views. It is that people take him seriously.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Ron Paul is Scary, But Those Who Cheer Him Are Even Scarier

By Earl Ofari Hutchinson, New America Media. Posted January 3, 2008.


The scariest thing about GOP presidential contender Ron Paul is not his fringe, odd-ball racial views. It is that people take him seriously.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Earl Ofari Hutchinson

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

The scariest thing about no hope GOP presidential contender Ron Paul is not his fringe, odd-ball racial views. It's not that he polls in single digits in all national polls and has zilch of a chance to get the nomination. It's not that at times the GOP candidates sound just as racially isolationist as he does. It's certainly not that he will wow a national audience with his trademark shoot-from-the-lip zingers even if ABC and Fox recant in a moment of compassion and dump him back in a seat for their January 6 televised GOP New Hampshire presidential debate.

The scariest thing about Paul is that even though only a few hard core Paul backers will waste a vote on him, millions more seem to agree that his off beat views, especially on race matters, make sense. They even stand logic as high as it get can go on its head to defend their leader against all comers. That's especially true when it comes to Paul's views on race and ethnic politics.

That's not a small point given the open but more often sneaky role that race and ethnicity will increasingly play in the presidential derby. Democratic presidential contenders Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Bill Richardson have pulled out all stops to woo and court blacks, Latinos and Asian voters. They have made poverty, affordable health care, immigration reform, and job protections the linchpins of their campaigns.

Paul and the GOP candidates have done just the opposite. They duck, dodge, and deny racial issues. The only departure from their racial blind eye is to fan anti-immigrant flames. Paul has gone one better. In an ad, he demanded that students from alleged terrorist countries should be denied visas into the U.S.

Paul offered not a shred of proof that there are hordes of students pouring into America to commit terrorist acts. The ad was more than just a cheap ploy to fan terrorism fears. This reinforced the worst in racial and religious stereotyping and negative typecasting. The stereotype is that any one in America with a non-white face and is a Muslim is a terrorist.

Then there's Paul's now infamous slavery quip that he made on Meet the Press. Paul claimed the Civil War was an unnecessary bloodbath that could and should have been avoided. All Lincoln had to do was buy the slaves. Other slave promoting countries, asserts Paul, didn't fight wars and they ended slavery peacefully. Paul's historical dumbness would have been laughable except for four things.

One, he was dead wrong. Lincoln twice made offers to the slave owners to buy the slaves. They turned him down flat. The countries that freed the slaves without war, presumably France and England, unlike the U.S., did not practice slavery in their countries. And France did fight a war -- Napoleon's ill-fated invasion of Haiti to put down the slave revolt there.

Two, he's running for president and has a national platform to spout his wrong-headed views (Meet the Press!). Three, he's done and said stuff like this many times before. Among the choice Paulisms are that blacks are criminally inclined, political dumb bells, and chronic welfare deadbeats. There was also the alleged Paul hobnob with a noted white supremacist. Here's what Paul on his campaign website ronpaul2008.com has to say about race. In fact he even highlights this as "Issue: Racism" on the site.

"Government as an institution is particularly ill-suited to combat bigotry." In other words, the 1954 landmark Supreme Court's Brown vs. Board of education school desegregation decision, the 1964 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and legions of court decisions and state laws that bar discrimination are worthless. Worse, says Paul, they actually promote bigotry by dividing Americans into race and class.

Paul's cure for racial bigotry is to change people's hearts. Whew!! The ghosts of Barry Goldwater, Strom Thurmond, the unreconstructed George Wallace, and packs of Southern States Righters and Citizens Councils big shots would lustily cheer Paul on that one. They railed for decades against the federal government's lift of even the tiniest finger to protect black rights and lives. Their stock line was that race relations can only change when hearts change. If we waited for that to happen the "whites only" signs would still be dangling prominently from every toilet and school house door in the South.

Paul's views are a corn ball blend of libertarianism, know-nothing Americanism, and ultra conservative laissez faire limited government. This marks him as a type A American political quirk.

Now there's the fourth reason not to laugh at Paul. And this is really what makes him scary. There are apparently millions that don't see a darn thing wrong with any of this and pillory anyone who does. They are even scarier than him. Maybe ABC and Fox should let Paul crash the New Hampshire debate. It's always good to see an extremist publicly confirm just how scary he and those that cheer him on really are.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: election08, ron paul

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new book is The Latino Challenge to Black America: Towards a Conversation between African-Americans and Hispanics (Middle Passage Press and Hispanic Economics New York).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Everyone Sees What They WANT to See
Posted by: screwjack2000 on Jan 3, 2008 10:50 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You WANT to see racism because he is a member of the Republican party. It is that simple. Your logic is that he is a Republican so he must be racist. You clearly do NOT understand his views and you offer zero substantive proof for your claims. Another dipshit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wow...you are clueless Posted by: elfinito
Unbelievable hit piece!
Posted by: Lucky_Duck on Jan 3, 2008 11:08 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow...I'd have to say that unfounded, slanderous, arm chair politicking hit pieces like this will do nothing but tarnish your credibility as an informed and unbiased journalist, Mr. Hutchinson. Seriously, this story frightens me about as much as the babblings of Hannity, O'Reily, and Limbaugh. It makes me wonder more what YOUR agenda is....even if it comes from the other side of the aisle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The writer's agenda is obvious Posted by: CUnknown
» Right On Gazooks... Posted by: elfinito
Just because YOU'RE ill informed doesn't make everyone so
Posted by: lnardozi on Jan 3, 2008 11:10 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seriously. I never met a person who had such WEAK reasons for disliking Dr. Paul. What's the REAL reason? Are you supported by defense money? You committed to the welfare state because you think it buys you votes? Why? Dont care if you lose your house when the dollar tanks?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» But that won't happen Posted by: PaulC
Ron Paul is not scary, those who slander and lie are scary.
Posted by: daftdada on Jan 3, 2008 11:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I thought AlterNet was an unbiased news portal. I guess I was wrong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
» Uh, no... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
Civil War not about slavery
Posted by: wootendw on Jan 3, 2008 11:29 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lincoln did not seek the presidency to free the slaves nor did South Carolina secede in order to keep them. South Carolina, the first state to secede, threatened to do so in 1832 when slave state Democrat Andrew Jackson was president because of a high tariff on imported goods, many of which were shipped through Charleston. Lincoln also supported high tariffs favored by the north eastern manufacturers. Lincoln was not against slavery - he was only against expansion of the slave-state political power block that opposed his pro-tariff constituency. As a young lawyer, Lincoln once represented a slave owner's attempt to regain his slaves. And, as President, in an effort to dissuade secession, he promised to support a constitutional amendment that would make slavery a PERMANENT part of the constitution. Do your homework, Mr. Hutchinson.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wrong on a couple of points Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Wrong on a couple of points Posted by: RobbieUMD
Protest vote
Posted by: Rod on Jan 3, 2008 11:54 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IF the Democrats are stupid enough to nominate Hillary, I will if possible vote for Ron Paul. Not because I agree with all his views, but because I would love to see him win and shake things up a bit. Is it stupid on my part, maybe? I would rather have the Senate, and House at war with the President than the fox watching the henhouse wink wink thing we have now. If that is stupid then so be it.

My $.02 (with stagflation coming soon to worth only $.01)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Consider voting for him anyway Posted by: CUnknown
» Yes it is stupid Posted by: Ellie1
» RE: Yes it is stupid Posted by: Rod
» RE: Yes it is stupid Posted by: Cooltruth
» Yes it is stupid. NM Posted by: lefty010
» RE: Yes it is stupid. NM Posted by: Lesha
Lincoln on the Civil War
Posted by: hjmaiere on Jan 3, 2008 11:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lincoln himself on more than one occasion stated outright that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/23xese

The Civil War was really about preserving the federal revenue collected in the form of tariffs paid mostly by the southern states and spent mostly by the northern states.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lincoln on the Civil War Posted by: brunowe
» Civil War, avoidable? Posted by: CUnknown
» Sherman Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: Sherman Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Sherman Posted by: CUnknown
» RE: Sherman Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Civil War, avoidable? Posted by: CollD
» NO the glass is half-full, no half-empty Posted by: chief of okeefe
oceantoad@37.com
Posted by: oceantoad on Jan 3, 2008 12:08 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Globalist booklickers might think as much.
Go Ron Go!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is This Columnist Saying Slavery Would Still Be Around
Posted by: bcgirl125 on Jan 3, 2008 12:20 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if not for the immensely destructive Civil War? The fact is that the practice of slavery was on the way out worldwide at the time of the Civil War, and it would have been discontinued soon enough anyway. America is not immune to historical trends.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That is not what I said Posted by: PaulC
» Freedom isn't free! Posted by: CollD
Supporting The Constitution
Posted by: rvmaccargar13 on Jan 3, 2008 12:20 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Men like Ron Paul are the only thing that will save our great Nation from destruction. If it wasn't for our Constitution and men like Ron Paul who fight to save it's integrity....you would not be able to write and publish the lies and slander that you are putting out here.

I hate what you are writing, but, I respect your right to do so. I support our Nation and I will be voting for Ron Paul! So call me whatever name you will, Sir....the truth is getting out and America will have it's second revolution!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Supporting The Constitution Posted by: Madrafter
re: "whites only" signs would still be dangling prominently from every toilet and school house door
Posted by: guestalten on Jan 3, 2008 12:23 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You can't really believe that there would be 'whites only' signs existing today. What I can't believe is how much credit you and others give to the government that rightly belongs to the grass-roots civil rights movement and peaceful civil disobedience. The Civil Rights Act was a reaction to the movement, not the other way around. This giving a medal to Rosa Parks was just the government trying to justify its relevance and steal more credit and rewrite history as if to say 'we supported you'.

Laws don't change the hearts of the people, the hearts of the people change the laws.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Revolution, ha! Posted by: brunowe
Freedom isnt Cornball
Posted by: pdimon on Jan 3, 2008 12:31 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it amusing how so many of the Ron Paul nay sayers like Mr Hutchinson will say things such as,

"Paul's views are a corn ball blend of libertarianism, know-nothing Americanism, and ultra conservative laissez faire limited government"

The only thing Ron Paul is trying to do is to Free Us.

And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free
john8:32

I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.
James Madison

In the truest sense, freedom cannot be bestowed; it must be achieved.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin

Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton

It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.
James Madison

It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.
Frederic Bastiat

Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it.
Malcolm X

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.
Thomas Jefferson

The temporal government has laws which extend no further than to life and property and external affairs on earth, for God cannot and will not permit anyone but himself to rule over the soul. Therefore, where the temporal authority presumes to prescribe laws for the soul, it encroaches upon God's government and only misleads souls and destroys them. We want to make this so clear that everyone will grasp it, and that our fine gentlemen, the princes and bishops, will see what fools they are when they seek to coerce the people with their laws and commandments into believing this or that.
Martin Luther

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Supporters of John Edwards...
Posted by: Zibblu on Jan 3, 2008 12:39 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
are what's really scary. How can people who profess to be "liberal" be taking this option? He voted for the patriot act. He voted for the war in iraq.

Ron Paul is the ONLY viable pro peace & pro civil liberties candidate (sorry to Gravel & Kucinich but they were never able to get off the ground...)

I implore other civil libertarians who believe in peace & freedom as much as I do to leave party politics behind and vote for Ron Paul.

We may not agree with him on everything, but he's right on the big issues and he's the only pro peace & pro freedom candidate who can win!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Viable? Posted by: brunowe
» WRONG on the big issues! Posted by: armorypk
Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
» Kucinich is still standing... Posted by: undrgrndgirl
Yeah i said it
Posted by: trickydix on Jan 3, 2008 12:45 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow now this sad, I been coming here for years trying to stay a head of the game, I was under the impression the ALTERNET was neutral and only reported the facts not opinions. Seems to me the Ron Paul is catching it from both sides, so I guess that means he is the real truth. I’m a Black man and truth be told, I will be voting for Ron Paul, thou shall not try and use spin or the race card on me. I could careless about the civil-war, I care about the Iraqi War were some of my friends are being cut in half, while the media and all these snake oil politicians line their pockets with the War Machines money. To the writer of the article, how about you use your limited resources to talk about real issue like the US. Dollar that is on pace to be worth about as much and a Mexican Paso, how about the housing bubble blow out, or how about you address the Fact that the current topics of discussion , health care, child care, Gay Marriage are all the same topics from 2000 and 2004, or haven’t you noticed. At Least Ron Paul has a pair, he has a vision and he has my vote, yeah a Black man said it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yeah i said it Posted by: RobbieUMD
Entry of the 9/11 Hijackers into the United States
Posted by: JohnMatthews321 on Jan 3, 2008 12:58 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are partially correct, it was wrong to single out student visas. All visas from terrorist nations should be denied:

"Beginning in 1997, the 19 hijackers submitted 24 applications and received 23 visas. The
pilots acquired most of theirs in the year 2000. The other hijackers, with two exceptions,
obtained their s between the fall of 2000 and June 2001. Two of the visas were issued in
Berlin, and two were issued in the United Arab Emirates. The rest were issued in Saudi
Arabia. One of the pilots, Hani Hanjour, had an application denied in September 2000
for lack of adequate documentation. He then produced more evidence in support of his
student visa application, and it was approved. Except for Hanjour, all the hijackers
sought tourist visas."
PDF Link

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What?
Posted by: dfwgeek on Jan 3, 2008 12:59 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I support Ron Paul. It seems that you have not studied Dr. Paul's views.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those who dont believe in liberty are scary
Posted by: mickrussom on Jan 3, 2008 1:01 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hit piece, yellow journalism lies and corrupted automaton talk.

Liberty and freedom and the constitution are Ron Paul's mantra, along with a sound currency.

Not believing in this is anti American thinking, and those who continue to disparage freedom and liberty will be exposed for being the traitors they are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Paulist mindset in a nutshell Posted by: heathehren
No More Labels!
Posted by: bugmenot on Jan 3, 2008 1:03 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Hutchinson, I am a black woman who is voting for Ron Paul because of his Constitutional focus on the freedom of the true minority - the individual. Because of this, I do not have to wear labels about what group I belong to and what rights I should have as a member of that group. These are God-given rights, and your hateful words are the reason we have slipped away from the truth. After being set free of that old thinking, I read writing like yours with disdain. You sound ignorant and ridiculous. I give no weight to your uneducated opinion. You are sharing OLD thinking, and in effect, you are holding back America. Take a second look at the Constitution. The truth will set you free!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No More Labels! Posted by: tomdesabla
» Read his website. Posted by: Beck
Paranoid Earl
Posted by: PJR79 on Jan 3, 2008 1:07 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with the notion that there is an alarming atmosphere of isolationism and anti-immigrant sentiment that certain politicians are using to score points:ie. "Tancredo".
That being said, Ron Paul's view that an alternative to civil war would have been possible to bring about an end to slavery is not a racist sentiment.
As for the government dictating how individuals should be assigned to certain groups (schools, workplace) based on race - this is the very essence of racism, and it is foolish to suggest otherwise. In any event, this is a single aspect of a very consistent political philosophy: that of voluntary cooperation rather than government coercion (the way of the Democrats, socialists and communists). Attacking Ron Paul over his distaste for social engineering by an elitist government? I think I'll stick with Dr. Paul, thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just read the comments
Posted by: collin28 on Jan 3, 2008 1:16 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I started to read the article but got turned off, then I started to read all the comments, and read all of them and they got me excited.

I am definitely going to support and vote for Dr. Ron Paul.

Don't waste your time reading this post, just read the comments.....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Pro Life consistently Posted by: swissliberal