"Ron Paul racist rant caught on tape!" (note, in quotes)

[JoeTheJuggler]

Trust me. Lots of black people are racist. It is sometimes difficult not to be.

That's not the question though. (Again, two wrongs don't make a right.) That some black people are racist isn't relevant to the question of whether or not Ron Paul made racist comments.

It was Ron Paul (or a ghost writer writing in his persona under his name) who described MLK day as "annual Hate Whitey Day". Those are not the words of a black person.

ETA: Just to repeat the entire comment in question:

"Boy, it sure burns me to have a national holiday for Martin Luther King. I voted against this outrage time and time again as a Congressman. What an infamy that Ronald Reagan approved it! We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day."

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Christ, we have been over this twice already.

no, that is not racist.

AGain, because you're using your own private unconventional definition of the term. Using the definitions provided by Merriam Webster (especially number 1), would you agree that the statement is racist?

In the '96 interview Ron Paul tried to claim that he wasn't talking about black males but only about purse-snatchers, but that's contrary to fact. He wasn't saying that black or white or latino purse-snatchers all tended to be fleet of foot. He specifically mentioned young black males. That's exactly the sort of thing M-W's definition 1 is talking about.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Blacks suffer from sickle cell anemia. Is it racist to say so?

Irrelevant. We're not talking about that statement.

But for the record, it would be racist under your unconventional definition, since it's a false statement. There are many blacks who do not suffer from sickle cell anemia. Blacks and people of Mediterranean ancestry are more prone to sickle cell anemia than people of other ethnicities, but they don't all suffer from it. (And logically "blacks" in the sentence you're offering means the same thing as "all blacks".)

 

[Bill Thompson]

AGain, because you're using your own private unconventional definition of the term.

No I am not. Someone is not a racist who tells the truth. I think Ron Paul is insensitive. If someone is racially color blind, he might draw the same conclusions about MLK without recognizing the contributions King has made to society.

 

[Bill Thompson]

Irrelevant. We're not talking about that statement.

But for the record, it would be racist under your unconventional definition, since it's a false statement. There are many blacks who do not suffer from sickle cell anemia. Blacks and people of Mediterranean ancestry are more prone to sickle cell anemia than people of other ethnicities, but they don't all suffer from it. (And logically "blacks" in the sentence you're offering means the same thing as "all blacks".)

Right. So what is your point?

"Most" "ALL" "Some" are words you are sticking into comments where they are not originally.

A professor talked about how african americans tend to have longer shin bones which help make them faster runners. Was his comment racist?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

No I am not. Someone is not a racist who tells the truth.

That is indeed an unconventional definition of racism.

I refer you again to the M-W definitions. If you attempt to address this point again, the burden is on you to show where that definition says what you claim.

That you believe Ron Paul's racist comments are true doesn't make them not racist.

 

[Bill Thompson]

That is indeed an unconventional definition of racism.

I refer you again to the M-W definitions. If you attempt to address this point again, the burden is on you to show where that definition says what you claim.

That you believe Ron Paul's racist comments are true doesn't make them not racist.

Dude, what is your definition of "racist"?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Right. So what is your point?

Just what I said. The statement about sickle cell is irrelevant (as are the comments you remember your college anthropology professor making about shin bone lengths and race). Those aren't the comments Ron Paul made that we're discussing.

However, using your unconventional definition, the comment is racist because it isn't true.

"Most" "ALL" "Some" are words you are sticking into comments where they are not originally.

That's a lie. I didn't add any words into comments. I quoted you accurately, then pointed out that the unmarked noun is logically the same as "all". Are you questioning this? I can quote from basic logic texts to support my positions.

"Xs are Ys" is logically the same as "All Xs are Ys". (Try drawing the Venn diagrams.)

A professor talked about how african americans tend to have longer shin bones which help make them faster runners. Was his comment racist?

It's still irrelevant. See above. I've already answered this question. Your college prof may or may not have been racist, and it has no bearing on whether or not Ron Paul's comments were racist.

BTW, if your position now is that these comments aren't racist, what do you make of Ron Paul's now denying that they were his comments and attempting to distance himself from them? (Remember, he once held the position you're arguing, but has abandoned it for the new position that they weren't his comments and he wasn't even aware of them.) Doesn't that bother you at all about him?

 

[DavidJames]

Dude, what is your definition of "racist"?

You should consider reading this thread. Joe posted a definition about 30 minutes ago.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Dude, what is your definition of "racist"?

Dude, read the thread. I quoted Merriam-Webster.

I don't have or use a private, unconventional definition. I use the conventional one. That's how language works.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

You should consider reading this thread. Joe posted a definition about 30 minutes ago.

In fairness, I only did so after about the 3rd or so attempt at redefining the term.

Speaking of logic and definitions: one of the earlier unconventional redefinition said it wasn't racism unless it was an explicit expression of hatred for black people. Since a racist expressing hatred of black people would be speaking the truth, by this latest unconventional definition such an explicit expression of hatred would NOT be racism!

 

[Bill Thompson]

Dude, read the thread. I quoted Merriam-Webster.

I don't have or use a private, unconventional definition. I use the conventional one. That's how language works.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

"a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race"

Ron Paul's comments do not illustrate that he believes that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Saying that black teens run fast shows he is perceptive and knows what a college professor I once knew also knows of bone structure. It is not a racist comment.

Saying that MLK day is hate whitey day shows that Ron Paul has heard some radio talk shows that some black guys I have known probably would have made. Also, King was at least entertaining the idea of communism. This is a fact backed up by the FBI and by their agent Solo. If Ron Paul hates communism, it is to his credit that he lets his anger against communism to take over any high praise society has about Martin Luther King.

I find it interesting that you are probably a white guy and you are insisting that Ron Paul is racist whilst I am not a white guy and I can tell you that his comments are not and I can say this because of personal experience. But you won't give up. It is amusing.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Ron Paul's comments do not illustrate that he believes that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

This statement does just that:
“If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be."

He did not say if you've ever been robbed by anyone, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be. His statement implies that blacks, because they're blacks, can be unbelievably fleet of foot.

Saying that MLK day is hate whitey day shows that Ron Paul has heard some radio talk shows that some black guys I have known probably would have made.

Nope. That statement was not a quote of someone else's words. It was written as if it were Paul himself making the comment. Plagiarism is not an out.

Also, King was at least entertaining the idea of communism. This is a fact backed up by the FBI and by their agent Solo. If Ron Paul hates communism, it is to his credit that he lets his anger against communism to take over any high praise society has about Martin Luther King.

Irrelevant. Nothing about King's political views figure into the "annual Hate Whitey Day" quote (see the entire comment in my recent post).

I find it interesting that you are probably a white guy and you are insisting that Ron Paul is racist whilst I am not a white guy and I can tell you that his comments are not and I can say this because of personal experience. But you won't give up. It is amusing.

Interesting and amusing to you, maybe, but ad hominem observations aren't relevant either. My arguments stand on their own merits. Your arguments fail due to the fallacies I've explained in some detail.

 

[Tricky]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

"a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race"

Ron Paul's comments do not illustrate that he believes that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Saying that black teens run fast shows he is perceptive and knows what a college professor I once knew also knows of bone structure. It is not a racist comment.

Saying that MLK day is hate whitey day shows that Ron Paul has heard some radio talk shows that some black guys I have known probably would have made. Also, King was at least entertaining the idea of communism. This is a fact backed up by the FBI and by their agent Solo. If Ron Paul hates communism, it is to his credit that he lets his anger against communism to take over any high praise society has about Martin Luther King.

I find it interesting that you are probably a white guy and you are insisting that Ron Paul is racist whilst I am not a white guy and I can tell you that his comments are not and I can say this because of personal experience. But you won't give up. It is amusing.

You skipped the second definition in your link:

"racial prejudice or discrimination". While the second definition is a good bit more open-ended, I think a very good case can be made, based on Ron Paul's newsletters, that he exhibits racial prejudice and discrimination.

 

[Tricky]

This statement does just that:
“If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be."

He did not say if you've ever been robbed by anyone, you know how unbelievably fleet of foot they can be. His statement implies that blacks, because they're blacks, can be unbelievably fleet of foot.

More importantly he implies that if you are robbed, it is likely to be by a black teenaged male. Speaking as someone who actually has been robbed by black teenage males, I would say that it was not their blackness that made them rob me. It was their poverty. In retrospect, I probably shouldn't have been walking through a ghetto late at night, regardless of the racial makeup of the ghetto.

And while it is true that blacks are more likely to be poor than whites, the reasons are, in my opinion, historical and socio-economic. Not due to any inherent racial inferiority.

 

[varwoche]

Paul adherents ask us to believe that Paul was unaware of the numerous controversial newsletters published as if written by Paul.

We're also being asked to believe that nobody close to Paul, such as a family member, close friend or former work colleague from the House, read these newsletters and mentioned the disturbing contents to him, knowing the racist (and homophobic) statements were out of character. This defies credulity in the extreme.

Since when does a skeptic take the naked, self-serving word of a politician running for office (any politician, any office) when it is contradicted by an incriminating, documented record?

That's a sucker not a skeptic. Hook, line, and sinker.

 

[Nova Land]

More importantly he implies that if you are robbed, it is likely to be by a black teenaged male...

He also seems only to be concerned if the victims are white:

It is the hip hop thing to do among the urban youth who play unsuspecting whites like a piano. The youth simply walk up to a car they like, pull a gun, tell the family to get out, steal their jewellery and wallets, and take the car to wreck.

What does the skin color of the victims of car-jackings have to do with this, and why did Ron Paul feel a need to include it? Surely a car-jacking is just as reprehensible regardless of the skin color of the victim. Yet, just as in the newsletter item about purse-snatchings he mentioned only black criminals, in writing this item about car-jackings for some reason he talks about only white victims.

It's quite possible Ron Paul wasn't aware of what he was writing, didn't even notice the underlying racism of it, and honestly believes he isn't racist. But whether those wordings were a conscious choice or an unconscious choice, they're indicative of racist thinking.

 

[citizenzen]

"Boy, it sure burns me to have a national holiday for Martin Luther King. I voted against this outrage time and time again as a Congressman. What an infamy that Ronald Reagan approved it! We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day."

Unquestionably racist.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

It's quite possible Ron Paul wasn't aware of what he was writing, didn't even notice the underlying racism of it, and honestly believes he isn't racist. But whether those wordings were a conscious choice or an unconscious choice, they're indicative of racist thinking.

Good point. Whether a person recognizes or acknowledges his or her racism doesn't mean he or she is not racist.

I refuted one of the earlier attempts to re-define racism by observing that many racist comments are prefaced, "I'm not a racist, but. . . . "

 

[Triterope]

Ron Paul has long opposed Jim Crow laws which imposed racial segregation in public facilities, and he certainly is in favor of equal voting rights for blacks and women.

That's just... wow.