In his attempt to deflect accusations of racism, Ron Paul is quick to bring up his stance against the war on drugs. For instance, in his infamous CNN interview with Wolf Blitzer, Ron Paul made the following argument:
"So they join me in this position I have against the war in Iraq. And what about the war on drugs? What other candidates will stand up and say I will pardon all blacks, all whites, everybody who were convicted for non-violent drug acts and drug crimes."For the moment, let's ignore Ron Paul's implication that helping out the drug community is the same thing as helping out the black community. And let's ignore the fact that just because you oppose the war on drugs doesn't exempt you from being a racist. Instead, let's look at Ron Paul's own writings and Ron Paul's own history. He may claims that his stance against the war on drugs proves that he's the anti-racist, but does his own website support him on this?
A quick search on Ron Paul's website pulls up four articles about the war on drugs. But his actual opposition to the war on drugs has absolutely nothing to do with race. Ron Paul is not against the war on drugs because he sees it as a war on black people, he's against the war on drugs because he sees it as a war on doctors, and a war on pain relief. Yes, black people do seem to account for a disproportionate number of drug arrests for things like cocaine relative to actual usage, and that's a major problem. But Ron Paul's articles don't seem to address drugs such as cocaine. Instead, he focuses on the drug laws surrounding things like OxyContin. If you actually read Ron Paul's writings on the subject, he's not terribly concerned with helping out the minorities of the world. He seems to be more concerned with helping out people like Rush Limbaugh:"Mr. Speaker, the publicity surrounding popular radio talk show host Rush The controversy surrounding popular radio host Rush Limbaugh’s use of the painkiller OxyContin hopefully will focus public attention on how the federal drug war threatens the effective treatment of chronic pain. In most cases patients are not high profile celebrities like Mr. Limbaugh, so doctors become the target of overzealous federal prosecutors. Faced with the failure of the war on drugs to eliminate drug cartels and kingpins, prosecutors and police have turned their attention to ordinary doctors prescribing perfectly legal drugs. Federal statutes designed for the prosecution of drug dealers are being abused to ensnare innocent doctors.It looks like the Paultards are now attempting to spin Ron Paul's defense of Rush Limbaugh into an example of how Ron Paul is a champion of minority rights. The record disagrees. His latest comments on CNN are a reflection of political opportunism, rather than genuine advocacy. Of all the minorities who are currently being arrested on drug charges, how many of them are being arrested for OxyContin? Of Ron Paul's four articles on the war on drugs, three of them center around pain killers, and two of them center around Rush Limbaugh. None of them center on race.
3 comments:
Um . . . what's your point? That he's misrepresented his stance? I'm confused.
HE'S A MEDICAL DOCTOR. Of course he would see things in terms of prescription drugs. He's also in favor of medical marijuana.
The War on Drugs is bogus. The main reason is that it's our GOVERNMENT (CIA) that's trafficking it ($500 Billion a year operation laundered by Wall Street, this is well documented). These drugs are being dumped on the African American and poor communities with malicious intent.
If he said something like that in a speech, though, they'd probably shoot him. So he puts a doctor spin on it. If it helps that obnoxious fatso kill himself with oxycontin, BFD. It's a free country. Or, it used to be.
You're implying his drug stance SHOULD be all about African Americans and the racist ways they end up in jail. WHY? None of the other candidates take that approach. Actually it's kind of racist to focus on black people when drugs affect everyone.
I'm curious as to why you hold Ron Paul to a different standard than the other candidates.
PS: I'm anonymous because for some reason it won't let me sign in with my Wordpress account. Blog name Hedonistic Pleasureseeker
The fact is that Ron Paul attempted to deflect accusations of racism by proclaiming a position that he never actually advocated. That's deceptive advertising. He opposes the war on drugs, but he lied about his reasons for opposing it, period.
He's free to oppose the war on drugs for the sake of Rush Limbaugh. But if he chooses to lie about it afterwards to prove that he's the anti-racist, then I'm going to call him on it.
Where are Paul's claims that his stance on the drug war makes him an anti-racist? Certainly you don't mean to infer that the quote at the beginning of this post implies he's not racist?
Post a Comment