It was his newsletter. Even if they were not his, he put them in the newsletter. He obviously didn't object to the bigoted content.Originally Posted by Justin '77
- Join Date
- Sep 2006
- Location
- Moorhead, MN, USA
- Posts
- 14,442
It was his newsletter. Even if they were not his, he put them in the newsletter. He obviously didn't object to the bigoted content.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
Oh Odin, I say this with love:
The underlings did something without asking, Paul wasn't paying attention. He got called out on it. He apologized. Shit happens. If you think about it, it's the inverse of the Ralph Nader effect. In the Ralph Nader situation, he "spoiled the election" and thus his name for a time on some of the organizations he helped found was considered to be "poison", even if he wasn't directly involved with that organization, but had only helped found it. Ron Paul's situation is the inverse.
~Chas'88
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
I think sometimes people are so focused on what they don't want, that they inadvertently start pining for something worse than what they have...I would rather have Obama appointing justices than Mitt Romney. I don't want anyone in this current crop of GOP candidates anywhere near the Oval Office.
Cheers.
That's exactly what "lesser of two evils" voting really is -- not voting for your favored candidate, but instead voting defensively with a vote that most damages their least favored option.
Actually, he has objected, repeatedly and publicly. And he didn't "put them in the newsletter". The guy's a politician, not an editor.
I like the NAACP statement someone offered elsewhere on the forum. As is always the case, it is actions that speak. And Paul's have been unambiguous over the last couple decades.
---
-edit-
Of course, I cannot argue with your initial statement that a particular individual should be allowed nowhere near the levers of power. What is true of openly evil individuals like Obama, Bush, and so on back, is no less true in this case of the banal and even the demonstrably-good. No person or group of people should ever be allowed such power over other people.
I'm sure that's not how you meant it, though...
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch
"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy
"[it] is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky
Eric Cantor as Speaker of the House in January?
I completely agree.
David Kaiser '47
My blog: History Unfolding
My book: The Road to Dallas: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy
Then some of us vote strictly out of fear rather than our heart. It becomes more of an enabling of a dysfunctional system than voting for a democracy that works for the people. Feels like being between a rock and a hard place.
Cheers!
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a
It was easier to scapegoat Nader than to deal with stolen votes and a candidate that lacked charisma.
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a
I don't see how this is *that* much different than Obama's association with Reverend Wright. Sure, these were Wright's words and nothing associated with Obama's name, but I don't see how one can crucify Paul for something he didn't write even though his name is associated with it -- and give Obama a pass for associating with a guy who said the things Wright did, and consider him his spiritual leader.
And we're willing to assign a free pass to Obama when he disassociates himself from Wright's vile words, yet not do the same here for words which Paul never spoke or wrote. Why? Partisanship and bias, IMO. No question about it in my mind. We're basing our judgment based on political convenience rather than consistency, which I personally think is disappointing. Predictable, yes, but disappointing.
Last edited by ziggyX65; 12-24-2011 at 09:56 PM.
I don't think this is a fair analogy. There is a difference between the words of an associate and words under your name.
I don't think Paul is racist (well, for a 76 year old from Texas anyway), but I think it was sloppy of him to allow these things to be released under his name. My greater concern is one I hold for all career legislators running for President - very little managerial or executive experience. It shows in this.
I wonder if he ever had occasion to visit Rick Perry's father's ranch though. That wouldn't make him a racist either. It just makes it funny.
You being a doctrinaire libertarian, you object to many policies and programs that use government to shape us, including both liberal and conservative ones. I hate to remind you, but none of these policies or programs you oppose were invented by Boomers. Social engineering (whether left-wing or right-wing, as Gingrich would now have rather not said) predates Boomers by quite a bit.
We Boomers just got here and are just getting started. Current Boomer leaders are not the last; just the worst. There is still abundant time for the best Boomer leadership to arise. It is Boomers who alone can conceive the visions and provide the charismatic leadership to lead the nation forward through the 4T. It is the turning inward in the 2T that gives prophets the ability to be visionaries, prophets and leaders when the time comes.
Most of the most wealthy and powerful corporate barons of our time are still Silents, as the earlier list I posted showed.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 12-24-2011 at 11:04 PM.
Very well said.
Indeed, much easier!
I think all four archetypes are needed in some form or another. There's a time, a place, and a season for everyone.
Idealists are good for a Spiritual/Personal fulfillment that lives outside of Time as Legend - Tragedy - Unraveling - Autumn - Time
Nomads are good for dragging the decadence down to Hell and clear the field (like Christ did) - Satire - Crisis - Winter - Hell
Civics are good for Communal fulfillment on Earth, being inclusive but definitive in terms of Space and how we use it - Comedy - High - Spring - Space
Artists are good for pushing us to tap into our better natures & strive for Heaven - Romance - Awakening - Summer - Heaven
Leave it to a bunch of War Babies to grasp the situation:
To everything, turn turn turn, there is a season, turn turn turn...
God the first sentence sounds like the kind of bullshit a stereotypical Millennial would say. I must be loosing my edge.
~Chas'88
Last edited by Chas'88; 12-24-2011 at 11:47 PM.
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
The civic "fulfillment" was spiritual death; not very fulfilling. And good at expanding into and wasting or destroying space. Most of the artists who pushed us to tap into our better natures in the 60s were late artist/prophet cuspers; and prophets did it too. Most of the artists in the 60s were commentators who wrote about what the prophets did.
The Byrds grasped the situation enough to sing the song, but did not write those lines, of course.
I disagree with your assessment of what Christ did.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 12-25-2011 at 12:14 AM.
The Byrds covered the song which was written by a GI (Pete Seeger). Lyrics, as alluded to, are more than 3,000 years old, as I'm sure Chas knows.
The theme song for The Fourth Turning.
Of course you would see it that way. Consider that same time spiritual/personal fulfillment leads to a world where you have a lot of dead Legends who've beaten the curse of the clock, that all the "little people" are scrambling & killing themselves to attempt to live up to. In fact the only way to beat the clock & live on as legend is to kill one's self. In order to achieve all that self-fulfillment, somebody's gotta pay--there's always a price to pay. That's the lesson of Tragedy & the Unraveling. We attempt to outrun the clock in an Unraveling so much that Time just seems to constantly be moving faster and faster. People are trying to live up to the Legendary figures of the day as the goal of Personal & Spiritual fulfillment. And in order to attain Legendary status, it can only be achieved by personal death. There's a reason the age of 27 was upheld during our Unraveling as an important standard. It was the age one died at if one wanted to achieve Legendary status. And if one misses 27, there's always the age of 33--not even Christ got past that one.
However, let's take off the personal generational bias glasses for one minute and consider what the archetypes in general are doing. Idealists tire of a world where the individual is crushed under the weight of the community. Civics tire of a world where the community is sacrificed at the altar in order to achieve individual status. Nomads tire of a world in which they're constantly being stepped on & sacrificed in order to make it better for their elders. Artists tire of a world in which they're constantly being suppressed & silenced in order to make it better for their elders.
And IMO Christ was a Prophet/Nomad cusper. He organized his own sacrifice (as Odin puts it) and was sacrificed. The roles of the sacrificial God in Tragedy typically are what follows: Prophets organize the sacrifice and carry it out. Nomads are the ones which are sacrificed on the altar.
~Chas'88
Last edited by Chas'88; 12-25-2011 at 12:48 AM.
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
This is a better choice:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExH7h9Lk5HY&sns=em
p.s. Love the odd intro from Jerry Lewis. Hey ladeeee!
Sloppy, indeed. I doubt even the most hardened Paulbots would argue with you there.As far as I know, Paul's not a career legislator -- at least not primarily. He's an Ob-Gyn. A fairly decent career itself.My greater concern is one I hold for all career legislators running for President - very little managerial or executive experience. It shows in this.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch
"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy
"[it] is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky
OK, OK, OK, I shot my mouth off on Paul without thinking. But still, it doesn't speak well at his managerial abilities if his subordinates can get away with printing bigoted things.
Or given the timing of most of these quotes, he was likely pandering to the nutso militia types.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
I would certainly agree that if you're going to let your name be used something, you need to be vigilant that those who are using it don't sully it. I could agree that at the very least, Paul was derelict in protecting his name by making sure crap like that doesn't get out with his name attached to it. But that's a much lesser sin, IMO, than actually being the author of the words or stating your full agreement with them, now *or* 20 years ago. And it is a legitimate concern about his ability to pick "subordinates" to carry out his work -- Cabinet members? Federal Judges?
I am aware he is a physician, I could have made my point better. I meant his political career has been strictly in the legislative branch.
