Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Ron Paul slams Boston police. Has he gone too far? more proof of his racist idealogy as well...

Posted by   + Show Post

 

Ron Paul slams Boston police. Has he gone too far?

Ron Paul, in a posting on the website of a libertarian activist, accused US law enforcement of 'a military-style occupation of an American city' in its response to the Boston bombing.

By Peter Grier | Christian Science Monitor - 23 hrs ago

In a post on the website of libertarian activist Lew Rockwell, Mr. Paul said Monday that the governmental reaction to the tragic explosions was worse than the attack itself. The forced lockdown of much of the Boston area, police riding armored vehicles through the streets, and door-to-door searches without warrants were all reminiscent of a military coup or martial law, Paul added.

"The Boston bombing provided the opportunity for the government to turn what should have been a police investigation into a military-style occupation of an American city," according to Paul.

RECOMMENDED: Quiz: How much do you know about terrorism?

Furthermore, this response did not result in the capture of suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, Paul charged. He was discovered hiding in a boat by a private citizen, who called police.

"And he was identified not by government surveillance cameras, but by private citizens who willingly shared their photographs with the police," Paul wrote on Lew Rockwell's site.

Yikes. This isn't going to go down well in Watertown, is it? Citizens there applauded when police finally carted off Tsarnaev alive. The Boston police commissioner told his troops over the radio that "it's a proud day to be a Boston police officer." In the wake of the suspect's capture the media have generally portrayed law enforcement officers as heroes.

Want your top political issues explained? Get customized DC Decoder updates.

But Paul's contrarian take perhaps should not be surprising. After all, he's a committed libertarian who at one point in the GOP presidential debates said that the border fence with Mexico might at some point be used to keep US citizens penned in.

And while Paul's position here is, um, not in the majority, there are other public figures who charge that the Boston response was overkill. In some ways this is one of those points in the circle of American politics were conservative libertarianism and liberal progressivism meet.

The generally left-leaning Guardian columnist Glenn Greenwald, for instance, told PBS host Bill Moyers over the weekend that the public lionization of police in the wake of the Boston bombing isn't necessarily a good thing.

"The way in which Americans now related to their government, the way in which they get nationalistic pride is through the assertion of this massive military or police force, and very few other things produce that kind of pride," Greenwald said. "I think [this] shows a lot about our value systems and what the government is failing to do. And that's the way in which this culture becomes coarsened."

However, state and local officials have continued to defend their decision to shut down much of Boston for the Tsarnaev manhunt. At the time they did not know whether the suspect had more explosives or fellow conspirators, and they did not want to risk another tragedy.

"I think we did what we should have done and were supposed to do with the always-imperfect information that you have at the time," Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) said at a news conference last week.

And Paul in particular is now drawing criticism for the company he keeps. Lew Rockwell, Paul's former congressional chief of staff, now heads the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a think tank with "deep ties to the neo-Confederate movement," which believes the wrong side won the Civil War, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.

As a Paul employee, Rockwell oversaw newsletters published under the former congressman's name that contained controversial statements about race, homosexuality, and other hot-button topics.

Furthermore, Paul's own new organization, the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, has an advisory board that contains a "bevy of conspiracy theorists, cranks, and apologists for some of the worst regimes on the planet," according to Daily Beast writer James Kirchik.

These include Southwestern Law School professor Butler Shaffer, who has written a post for the Lew Rockwell website titled "9/11 was a conspiracy," notes the Daily Beast.

by on May. 1, 2013 at 12:31 PM
Replies (71-71):
SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on May. 5, 2013 at 11:54 PM

Not one person - I said a publishing team. People write in candidates' voices all the time. As others do for their donation letters, and speeches. Different organizations use the writing of publishing groups all the time. I agree with you that a candidate needs to be monitoring their newsletter.

Like I said - I've never been a Ron Paul supporters. I just think he is being smeared inappropriately. Why do you think there are so many blacks who have liked Ron Paul, who say there is no way he is racist? Did you watch the commentary from various black individuals supporting Ron Paul, some for quite awhile? They vociferously reject the racism charge.  I just found this video today - and learned today how much more black support Ron Paul has.

If you want to be fair, you really should check out the sources I cited - Otherwise, I don't see the point of responding to a post like this.

BESIDES - That isn't  even the point. It's the allegedly unconstitutional activity of the Boston police in the wake of the Marathon bombing. What do you think about that?


Quoting sweet-a-kins:

Stopped at your first point because you are wrong About the newsletter

There were less than 10 people producing it and it was written as if it were Ron Paul.....

Quoting SallyMJ:

Huh?

Sorry this is long - but I wanted to clearly express my opinion. Ladies, if it's too long for you - don't read it. :)

1) First, I have never been a Ron Paul supporter. I don't think Ron Paul ever expected to win the presidency. He has wanted to bring attention to libertarian principles. He is more extreme on some issue, even his libertarian/conservative son Rand Paul on such issues as zero interaction with other countries.

Ron Paul said he used a publishing group to create his newsletter - That is common. I doubt  the guy writing it - whose words were the exact opposite of libertarianism - expressed Ron Paul's views. (And I've never been a Ron Paul supporter, but I have to say he is scrupulously consistent with his libertarian views, which to be honest, drives many people crazy.) As everyone knows, there was a huge scandal when this came out. Unfortunately, not everyone who works for someone honestly represents their views. Sometimes their whole goal is to discredit the person.

Such as the ultra liberal guy who wanted to make Gary Bauer sick by volunteering for him, even though he didn't agree with Bauer in the slightest, and then admitting afterwards that he had licked the doorknobs and put snot on the phones when he was sick, to try to make Bauer sick - yes he actually did that.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0002/05/rs.00.htm



2) Ron Paul said he thought the Boston police acted in an unconstitutional manner toward the citizens of Boston, because he thought they broke our Fourth Amendment right for due process and against unreasonable search and seizure. Not because the BPD allegedly damaged Ron Paul's run for office. That's a stretch. How could he even know the ideology of anyone, including individual police officers? His view on the BPD behavior is a libertarian one.

As said earlier, I agree the newsletter comments are troubling. I don't know that they came from Ron Paul, because they are completely inconsistent with his speeches, comments, and all of his writings over the previous 30 years. Don't you think that if that were his perspective that it would have matched everything else he said - and that it would have come out years ago. Racism is inconsistent with libertarianism.  If I'm not mistaken, Ron Paul has been the strongest libertarian voice ever. His constituents would have called him out and not re-elected him again and again. And he has always had a significant support in the black community - higher than other GOP candidates, which would be impossible if he were racist. They appreciate his libertarian principles on decriminalizing drug use and releasing non-violent drug users from prison. These views resound with blacks especially - given how many blacks are in prison just for drug use - and Ron Paul is the only one who has consistently had these views. (See the video made by various blacks toward Ron Paul.)

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/HaireoftheDog/archives/2012/01/19/black-people-love-ron-paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CoQWAXuUyI



Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN