CorruptUser wrote:Could someone provide examples of Paul's bigotry outside of his newsletters? Not that I'm saying he isn't homophic or racist, just whether he has acted on those biases.
These are much more nuanced than the newsletters, but just using the wikipedia article on his political positions there's a few decent (though, again, nuanced) examples:
* Opposes the Civil Rights Act of 1964
* Opposed the renewal of the Voting Rights Act
* Opposes Affirmative Action
Those are all imperfect, and the wikipedia page gives his reasoning for his positions, but those are certainly positions that would have a negative impact on minorities. As well, his own website* gives his own views on immigration being to end the "welfare state" (disproportionately affecting minorities), no longer granting citizenship to those born on US soil (which strikes me as a "keep America white" position), and opposing any kind of amnesty or leniency with the current illegal immigrants. I haven't done any serious looking for detailed news articles or analyses of his voting to get more information, but there is at least some evidence of such between just wikipedia and his own website. Whether you see it as sufficient examples or merely fully in line with his stated beliefs is something that can be more left up to the reader, but I think that, at the very least, it's definitely fair to say they could plausibly be motivated through racism.
* Ugh. I feel dirty every time I visit a campaign website. Even for people I want to vote for. And especially for people I don't want to vote for.
The Reaper wrote:So, Gary Johnson is OFFICIALLY going for the Libertarian Party nomination now. Signed the paperwork this morning on live internet feed from the capitol of NM. At least it's no longer (however obvious) speculation.
edit: link! http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... omination/
Somewhat off topic, but I always hate that third parties always put nearly all of their effort into winning the presidency. It's not going to happen the way things are. It just won't- the republicans and democrats have too much going in their favor with the way the system is right now. If they want to have some actual change, they should start by building up networks and logistics in local government areas- the green party could conceivably do quite well in places like Vermont or San Francisco, for instance, and I'm sure there are parts of Texas or the mid-west that the libertarian party could do well in. After they've started to establish themselves in certain places, they'll be able to grow from there and make inroads with the federal government- imagine if the senate had even half a dozen third party or independent members!
None of that is to say they should just give up on the executive- at the very least, it's a great way to bring attention to their causes- but I wish they'd expend more of that energy on building up local strength, instead of being content to get 1% of the vote every four years and wonder why they never get anywhere. I also realize it's still a very difficult path, but to me it seems to be a path that has a far higher probability of payoff.