Because, beside being racists guys like Duke are anti-federal government like Dr Paul. Just because these morons get one thing right doesn't make them the same as Dr Paul and it is beneath you to suggest it my friend.
2007-12-29 10:00:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
David Duke gained in New Hampshire Vice Presidential decision usually happening. As a Democrat. Duke additionally served as chief campaign consultant to Democrat Bobby Armstrong, who adverse Bobby Jindal. perchance Obama can replace Biden with Paul as his Veep.
2016-10-09 09:42:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by boddie 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Did you read the bottom of your link page?
Ron Paul is NOT a David Duke supporter!
2007-12-29 10:05:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Kelly B 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Given the libertarian "philosophy" where the near total concentration on ABSOLUTE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS as opposed to COLLECTIVE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS (no,this is not an oxymoron) ,many postions of libertarians on a host of issues superficially appear to be racist but in fact are not .
The classic example of this apparent conflict is found in the following article about Barry Goldwater.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_views_of_rights
To a libertarian,it is much more important that a store owner's right to be able to deny any person (be they Black,Jewish ,Wasp etc) access TRUMPS the customer's right to be given such access ; a right backed by government.
Having said all that,it is also true that the proportion of racists in the libertarian movement is relatively high because in many respects libertarians are simply ultra conservatives and are as far on the right of the political continuum as the communists are on the left .(The 'far right" recognize only INDIVIDUAL ABSOLUTE RIGHTS while the "far left" /Communists recognize only the COLLECTIVE RIGHTS of individuals).
Racism is substantially more prevealent among conservatives than liberals simple because of their different ideologies.The sheer offensive racist history of American conservatives both social and economic liberals fully attests to this FACT.
All of this to say ,that I have taken the time to google Paul's race comments and I conclude he appears to be a racist simple on the bases of the LANGUAGE he uses to describe his views/opinions .Just contrast how a Goldwater languaged delicate racial issues and the how Paul languages them.
2007-12-30 09:46:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If true, no suprise. The most desirable, and most undesirable (this case) support who offers up the MOST FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
We see the patriot act, and the democrats attempt to censor free speech. We see the Constitution saying FREE SPEECH is a GOD GIVEN RIGHT.
Black Panthers, White Supremacists, Gays & Lesbian groups, Pro War & Anti War groups ALL benefit from a pro constitution candidate. That candidate is most likely to leave that group alone so long as they are non violent.
Which do you prefer? A candidate to erases the right of freedom of speech from any group that the majority does not agree with? Or one who will protect the minority (this case)?
2007-12-29 10:00:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by vote_usa_first 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
I'm sure there are a few undesirable people who support each, and every candidate on offer.
Candidates cannot investigate every small donator.
Now that link is very interesting, Ron Paul is one of the few, if not the only candidate, who dares to bring up the issue of tax payers money going to Israel, and there a huge campaign to discredit him because of this. Those Nazi references may not be all that they appear.
"according to the ADL" I rest my case!
Zionist propaganda strikes again
2007-12-29 10:00:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by . 5
·
3⤊
1⤋
Yes, is that true??
I thought David Duke converted to Islam, and was supporting the Muslim Obama.
Am I wrong?
I don't think so.....
2007-12-29 10:02:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by everbrook 4
·
0⤊
3⤋
Look, I'm not a Ron Paul supporter but Paul has no control which idiot will stand up and offer his support. I'm sure he does not welcome this kind of "help".
2007-12-29 09:58:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
It is because they are both anti-war isolationists.
2007-12-29 09:59:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋