Posts Tagged ‘racism

23
Dec
11

Why Ron Paul’s Reaction To Racist Rants Is Easily As Disturbing As The Rants Themselves

It looks like the Not memorable???profoundly distressing his response to it is. Take this excerpt Ron Paul racism charge won’t die. And it shouldn’t. But what I find truly disturbing is that no one yet has highlighted how gravely and from one of his newsletters:

It is the hip-hop thing to do among the urban youth who play unsuspecting whites like pianos. The youth simply walk up to a car they like, pull a gun, tell the family to get out, steal their jewelry and wallets, and take the car to wreck. Such actions have ballooned in the recent months.

In the old days, average people could avoid such youth by staying out of bad neighborhoods. Empowered by media, police, and political complicity, however, the youth now roam everywhere looking for cars to steal and people to rob.

What can you do? More and more Americans are carrying a gun in the car. An ex-cop I know advises that if you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example).

I frankly don’t know what to make of such advice, but even in my little town of Lake Jackson, Texas, I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.

And here is his response to the question of whether or not he knew about/wrote/endorsed said excerpt:

You know what the answer is? I didn’t write them, didn’t read them at the time, and I disavow them. This is the answer.

Let’s forget for a moment that Ron Paul’s whole raison d’etre is to promote personal responsibility. Let’s forget that, in addressing these things published under his name, he’s totally relinquished his own personal responsibility. Let’s forget that he’s claiming that it’s impossible for one person to know everything published in a newsletter (maybe why there should be…oh, I dunno…a group of people…call ’em a “collaborative” or and “agency” that keeps a lookout for stuff like this, so the publisher knows what they’re publishing, and when it might amount to shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater). Forget all that. Here is what deeply troubles me, and it troubles me that no one has brought this to his (or anyone else’s) attention:
He’s treating this article as though it’s just an everyday article.
Let’s be clear about what this article is doing. It states unequivocally that the correct response for a white person to make when threatened by a black person (and, yes, it’s racially specific Is This Also "Not Memorable"??in that way) is to shoot said black person with an unregistered weapon, then wipe it down and dispose of it. In short, it is an instruction manual on how to commit and get away with a homicide. Implicit in this set of instructions, as well, is that the cops will not actively pursue the matter, but that’s a blog for another time.

For a moment, imagine this type of article were to be published in an Afghan magazine. Imagine that magazine were to say that, since American soldiers are threats to Afghan livelihood, you should arm yourselves. Then, whenever you see a soldier approach you, you should shoot him/her in the face, then dispose of the weapon.

Can you imagine the outrage and terror that would be inspired by this?

It would be national and incredible in its scale.

And it should be.

So when I see Dr. Paul respond to questions about this flippantly–when I see him, in effect, acting as though this were a recipe someone published and he’s being questioned as to whether it was oregano or thyme recommended be put in the sauce–it outrages and terrifies me.

How does an article that details how to murder someone not cause a blip on the radar? How does an article that provides a terrorist instruction manual not warrant a second read? How is an article that promotes illegal violent activity at its highest level not even memorable?

The only answer must be that this article was not seen as a threatening one. It isn’t a call to terrorist action, because the victims it would harm aren’t people.

And let’s, once again, be clear about whom this kind of terrorist vigilantism would harm. This article specifically states that you should shoot an “urban youth” who is “[walking] up to [your] car.” Disgusting.

So then what does that say about Paul’s view of black people, since they are specifically referenced as the enemy in this excerpt? And how can he claim that he could personally be responsible for helping over 10% of the population pursue life, liberty, and happiness?

“Fire!” in a crowded theater is less sinister than this article. Not remembering it was ever written…well, that’s more sinister yet.

21
Dec
11

Ron Paul Racism Flap Grosser Than His Old Man Neck Flap

It’s already been established that women are the only people Ron Paul doesn’t believe should be free to do anything they’d like. But wait! Now he’s attacking real people too! In short, he’s having to deal with charges he’s a filthy racist again:

A 1992 passage from the Ron Paul Political Report about the Los Angeles riots read, “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.” A passage in another newsletter asserted that people with AIDS should not be allowed to eat in restaurants because “AIDS can be transmitted by saliva”; in 1990 one of his publications criticized Ronald Reagan for having gone along with the creation of the federal holiday honoring the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., which it called “Hate Whitey Day.”

Yes, he disavowed the writings before. Yes, he said he didn’t even know they were in the publications. Yes, he said they’re deplorable.

However.

This reminds me of a brilliant email debate a friend of mine had a long time ago. Part of it revolved around whether or not scholarly articles were more engaging if they were more conversational. One side stated that he found a convivial tone more conducive to understanding key concepts, and thought the personal nature of it (pronouns included) showed a more courageous stance by the author to take personal, as well as professional, ownership of the ideas being expressed in the work. The rebuttal was simple (and I’ll paraphrase it here):
Putting your name on the work implies your personal ownership. More resounding than saying, “I believe…” is putting your name at the top of any type of legitimate publication. The implication of the words contained therein, then, is always going to reflect on the name at the top, as will anything opined within the draft.

So what were the names of the publications in which the racist jargon appeared? Ron Paul Political Report, Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, Ron Paul Survival Report and Ron Paul Investment Letter.

Eep.

07
May
09

The Hell?

So Heather Mac Donald, of SecularRight.org fame(?), just woke up in what she hopes to be her own sick, rolled over the come-encrusted sheets to find her laptop beneath all the popper bottles. At least, that’s what I’m assuming must have preceded this type of ramble (via Andrew Sullivan):

It is no secret that resistance to homosexuality is highest among the black population (though probably other ethnic minorities are close contenders). I fear that it will be harder than usual to persuade black men of the obligation to marry the mother of their children if the inevitable media saturation coverage associates marriage with homosexuals. Is the availability of homosexual marriage a valid reason to shun the institution? No, but that doesn’t make the reaction any less likely.

What are the chances that gay marriage would further doom marriage among blacks? I don’t know. Again, if someone can persuade me that the chances are zero, then I would be much more sanguine. But anything more than zero, I am reluctant to risk.

Look, Heather, I’m sorry that the hot black dude who fucked you eight ways to Sunday last night hasn’t called. Really. But that’s no reason to start a race-baiting diatribe, likening black men to the kind of pre-adolescent idiots that would refrain from doing something just because people they might not want to be associated with.

See, Miss Mac Donald, here’s the thing: Regardless of their homophobia (a “fact,” the veracity of which is still waaaay up for dispute), black people are able to make up their own minds. Really, it’s true! Regardless of how many incendiary racist and/or homophobic images assault their fully-functioning brains during an average day, black people can formulate logic and make decisions (an ability that I’m sure amazes and confuses someone such as yourself, but I digress).

Besides, the notion that gay marriage would somehow further taint a notion that was not already tainted in someone’s mind is ludicrous. If seeing a gay couple tie the knot is all it takes to dissuade someone from marrying someone else, methinks the relationship might be in trouble before the ink’s dry on the license.

And, you fucking stupid twat, black people voted in the last election, didn’t they? Even though idiot racist asshats like you did? So your argument’s shit on basically all levels, not the least of which is human. Quot erat demonstratum, you evil little troll.

12
Mar
09

Did You Know An American Nazi Tried To Kill Obama?


No, not those two idiots from a while ago. This one’s serious:

James G. Cummings was a white supremacist millionaire, residing in Maine in a house with the Nazi flag in front of it (yes, he flagged his house for them). Inside his lair, he had all the makings of a dirty bomb, which he planned to explode at Obama’s inauguration. And he would have done it, unimpeded, had his wife not shot him dead on December 9.

First of all, this pisses me off because once again we are treated to an example of Bush and his policies not so much “keeping us safe” (as Peggy Noonan and other conservatives have been attempting to gush, in order to make him not sound like the biggest failure ever). His security would have allowed a terrorist attack on our soil. Just like it did before.

Secondly, where the fuck is the media on this one? Where’s the outrage? I haven’t even heard Olbermann get all hot and bothered about it, and he lives for getting hot and bothered about basically anything. What gives???

Anyway, there you have it. There are white supremacists out there with the means, knowledge, and motives to kill Obama and anyone else who stands in his way. They were sort of abstract notions to me before, but this shows how very real they are, and I’m willing to bet they don’t all have wives willing to shoot them before they’re caught. Sweet fucking dreams.

09
Mar
09

SNL Finally Realizes Black Face Isn’t All That Funny After All


Hilarious, no?

Oh, Lorne Michaels, you poor, poor old fool. You really thought it was a good idea to have Fred Armisen do Obama, didn’t you? After all, what illustrates our hope for a post-racial America better than a good old-fashioned blackface comedian mocking our negro President? Egads.Well, it appears maybe Lorne’s changed his tune. Last night Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson played Obama, was apparently quite funny doing it, and the audience didn’t have to feel guilty if they laughed. Bonus!Then again, since this is SNL we’re talking about, I haven’t had to feel guilty any time I’ve watched the previous sketches, since the writing has been as painful to watch as the tone-deaf choice of impersonator (bah-ZING!).

Vodpod videos no longer available.

05
Mar
09

Barnes & IgNoble


(To be fair, I snagged that title from Slate. Because it’s genius. And because it’s true.)

I watched the assholes that run Barnes & Noble force a lot of quality bookstores out of business, coast (San Francisco) to coast (New York) to coast (Baton Rouge).
Worse yet is that the giant well-lit pseudo-intellectual places which replace the independent shops are marketing machines, rather than promoters of genuine literature appreciation. Borders, BN, and the like serve only to perpetuate the McEducation of the youth in America.

In short, I wish them nothing but pain. Like, say, this kind of pain, brought to you by a Florida Barnes & Noble (by way of Wonkette).

Saying one of your customers did it is kind of my point. These places aren’t havens for intellectuals or hipsters; they’re havens for the Dave Matthews hipsters and the people who want to feel like they’re smart because they look at books sometimes. Blech.

20
Feb
09

Straight. To. Hell.

I keep looking at this picture. And trying not to laugh. It’s not her fault that she was born to maybe the biggest dickbag in the history of dickbags (Rick Santorum). It’s not her fault that her father’s such a huge homophobe that my beloved Dan Savage has made his name synonomous with post-anal spuge. I know it. Really, I do.

And then I laugh.

I stop looking at it, but I still laugh.

I laugh and laugh until I cry.

Until I look just like her.

Such is her own sweet revenge, I guess.

Anyway, so here’s a link if you want to view her daddy’s latest bit of asshattery.

Fun excerpt:

The lecture continued when Santorum pointed out what he thought were the main differences between Christians and Muslims. Santorum said Christians, who believe in Jesus Christ, never governed or conquered anyone, but Mohammed was a warrior and killed people

Thank you, my darling Wonkette, for putting this picture next to your report on this douchebag. It makes the hurty in my head go away, and reposition itself in my aching sides.