Liberty MavenBob Barr Not Pure Like Ron Paul On Racist Support, And That Is Good
June 2nd, 2008 1:38 pm | by Marc Gallagher | Published in Bob Barr, Election, Maven Commentary, Politics, Racism, Ron Paul | 5 Responses
Reason Magazine is reporting that after the Barr campaign noticed a white supremacist forum post showing support for Barr they responded with the following.
The Barr campaign is not going to be a vehicle for every fringe and hate group to promote itself. We do not want and will not accept the support of haters. Anyone with love in their heart for our country and for every resident of our country regardless of race, religion, nationality or sexual orientation is welcome with open arms.
Tell the haters I said don’t let the door hit you on the backside on your way out!
One of the major criticisms of the Ron Paul campaign was that they did not reject similar support. I defended Ron Paul on his decision on that to many people, including here at Liberty Maven. The Barr campaign response on this gives his supporters the benefit of not having to defend him on it. They reject it immediately.
One of Ron Paul’s undoings was the newsletters that went out under his name, perceived to be full of racist rhetoric. That coupled with his denial to return a donation from Stormfronter Don Black could be viewed by some surface-dwellers as a supporting racism yesterday and today. The truth of course is that Ron Paul is a pure liberty minded individual. He will defend your right to say it, even if he vehemently disagrees with you. This kind of purity is respectful, but ultimately is a political campaign killer.
I applaud Ron Paul for his actions for purity.
I applaud Bob Barr’s actions today for doing the right thing.
Loading ...
June 2nd, 2008 at 2:30 pm (#)
I think Ron Paul’s is the better response. The trouble with repudiating the support of “hate groups” is that you have to define what you mean by “hate”, which gets you into all kinds of disputes over political correctness. Are those who support, for instance, The Defense of Marriage Act, subscribing to “hate”?
When Ron Paul said that he would not return anyone’s money based upon their political pronouncements he stated that he did not thereby associate himself with their pronouncements, but rather it was they who wished to associate themselves with his pronouncements, and he had no control over that. Once you fall into the trap of disassociating yourself from one person who “supports” you, the questions will never end as to why you don’t do the same with others. See what happened to Barack Obama, once he played the game of affirming or repudiating everything his pastor said. Candidates should insist that the media can question them about anything they say or print (such as Ron Paul’s lamented newsletter), but they will not comment on anyone else’s comments, now matter how outrageous they are. It’s not only a good principle, but it also saves you a lot of headaches. Those who aren’t satisfied with this answer are those who aren’t likely to support you anyway.
June 2nd, 2008 at 2:49 pm (#)
“Are those who support, for instance, The Defense of Marriage Act, subscribing to “hate”?”
Yes, they are.
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:19 pm (#)
I see both sides hence the ambiguity in my article.
I support Ron Paul’s principled response for sure.
I also support Barr’s response because, in my view, it is the “right thing to do” to denounce “hate” in and of itself, as well as strategically in a political campaign.
This is not to say his campaign is doing it purely for political gain, because generally speaking the American public rejects such “hate” spreading organizations. So it is not a stretch to assume Barr is in that rejection majority.
On the DOMA issue, keep in mind that DOMA was/is supported by Ron Paul as well. And Barr rejects the abused portions of it that let the federal government use it as a battering ram against the states.
Enjoy,
Marc
June 2nd, 2008 at 6:09 pm (#)
OH PUHLEEEEEEEEESE!
First off, many of these groups are ‘plants’ to discredit the candidate. He doesn’t even know them.
Second, since when is DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ‘hateful’? It is not and I take offense to the offensive subjective poster who says it is.
So there.. dangfitz you just committed a HATE CRIME.
Perhaps I’ll report you to the UN for making fun of my CHOSEN LIFESTYLE.
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:23 pm (#)
Marc,
Better check your compass. Sorry if you find this offensive, but not unlike you buddy Barr, not sure what your belive…
Perhaps you are in fact a cafeteria Libertarian?!?
Regards, Donna