Ron Paul Realism: Question 6 of 7

Ron Paul Realism: Question 6 of 7


The series continues!

It started with this post, and then continued on in posts 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5.

Now…question 6, and the one that could be the most important to Paul’s campaign: What about those racist writings in his newsletter? I’ve heard Paul’s response, but I think most of us can agree it’s pretty weak. So if Paul does start leading the GOP race, what’s the communications strategy when that nugget hits the media?

  • Jim: Drop it. It is a non issue, and has been thoroughly explained. Can the media find one other example of Paul’s alleged racism? Just one more is all I ask.
  • mike: i think the attack is pretty weak really. not sure what the communications plan is if it becomes scrutinized.
  • James Maynard: Everyone has said stupid stuff in their lives. I’m no exception. I’d respond by saying that I didn’t think I had thought those comments through as well as I might have, apologize for them, and then offer to take another question about it from any reporter who has never said anything stupid in their lives. That oughta shut them up. LOL.
  • Spirit of ’76: That “nugget” has already hit the media, and it’s gone nowhere. Even the New York Times absolved him of the charges in their lengthy article on him. Anyway, if that’s all they can dig up to slander him with, they’ve got nothing. The man is teflon.
  • Tannim: Old news. He didn’t write them, but he did take responsibility for them. If the MSM harps on it then they reveal their own racism. Paul’s long voting record and written record speaks for itself far more than one bit written by a subsequently-fired staffer 15 years ago.
  • chad: did you actually read that article? I did, and it was more in regards of a race of people taking advantage of a situation in order to loot their own neigborhood more than it was racism, this was also when gang violence in LA was very bad, i don’t see how saying the words black people can be racist, anyway he said that he didn’t write that article and the guy that did was let go, if you read all the other article in that news letter you can clearly see Dr. Paul is not racist, he is a constitutionalist which guarantees every person equal rights, in fact it never gave any rights to an exclusive group of people, it was not following the constitution that led to having to add the 13, 15 amendment every part of the bill of rights say PEOPLE not black people, white people, christians, women, etc. just people.
  • bbartlog: It’s unclear. I do think that some supporters underestimate the potential for a negative carpet-bombing that exists, should the more well-financed campaigns ever feel the need to go negative on Ron Paul. However, given the size of the cryptoracist vote on the Republican right, I think they would actually choose some other issue to bludgeon him with (at least in the primary).
  • Jordan: You mean how he didn’t write or say the comments? I think the only thing he’s guilty of is being inattentive towards the newsletter that bore his name.
  • Ellis_Wyatt: He didn’t write them, and said so. What’s “weak” about that? Look at his record – he’s a meritocratist sine qua non. How COULD he be racist? A single incident is NOT a “pattern”, by definition. Absurd.
  • James Aragon: His explanation stands with me. The remarks were not really racist, but falling into prejudicial stereotype. The remarks did not actually aim to keep anyone down.
  • meatwad: I’ve not seen Dr. Paul’s newsletter so I can’t confirm or deny the allegations of racism. However, if, as you’ve established, he’s not going to vote on anything not sanctioned by the constitution, what difference would it make how he feels about peoples’ race?
  • Patrick: I’d have to see this newsletter. And if Paul actually wrote it. It won’t matter whether Ron Paul did or didn’t do/say it. The media will do it’s best to bring him down. They have already chosen the candidates they like best. They fawn over them constantly.
  • Matt C: Those comments really bother me. All other things being equal, I would actually withhold my support because of them. But all other things aren’t equal.
  • Vicky: I like how you say “those” in “his”. You know he didn’t write it and you know he didn’t approve it. Ron Paul hasn’t been shown to have a racist bone in his body. There are no Ron Paul “Mecaca” videos. In fact, I can’t even find a coper of the newsletter. CAN YOU?
  • Edward Keithly: His response that he didn’t write them, but took responsibility for publishing them? That’s what passes for weak nowadays? I would invite anyone to listen to his message, check out his campaign and his issues, and make their own judgements about whether he is a racist. Personally, I think it’s rather silly.
  • meinaz: Ghost writer, now fired. This has been explained elsewhere numerous times. You either accept it or you don’t. The standard “racist” smear is to repeatedly ask for explanation after explanation until the person being smeared is mired by this one issue. An apology is then asked. Once given, the smearing increases. Paul has explained the situation. It’s over. People harping on the issue aren’t interested in “racism”, they’re interested in moral demagoguery.
  • Jeanette Doney: I don’t see Dr Paul as a racist. I don’t see any white sheets or swastikas. I see a presidential candidate making points to a divided country that finds ignorance is bliss and being a victim pays. I believe his response to your charge is employing the Constitution as empowering ALL people with rights.
  • Corey Cagle: Yeah, I agree that this needs to be addressed more strongly by Ron Paul. His own writings on racism are essentially the same thing Ayn Rand had to say on the subject: Racism is a primitive form of collectivism, the antidote to which is individualism. When the time does come that this must be addressed, he should stick with this sort of language.
  • Dan Warner: I think if you look at that point in history and his positions now, his comments would maybe be a bit less offensive. In historical context, DC was having a massive breakdown and crime was rampant. It may be an unfortunate truth that poor black people were doing lots of crimes in that city at that time. But Dr. Paul also points out that our economic policies keep people poor and desperate. The gang violence among black youth over drug money and turf also contributes to the ‘black voilence’. All that said I think he will say that what he said is based in statistics and even though it may have offended people he wants to help lift people out of poverty so they don’t have to resort to crime to survive.
  • Buckwheat: Non-issue. Research it more.
  • Jonathan Bennett: Ron Paul isn’t a racist.
  • NH: Not an issue. Hillary and Obama and Richardson are all racists….they even belong to racist organizations. So what?
  • Aaron: His response is not weak in context. I have spent time with Paul this response is consistent with his personality. He is not a spinner. He does not obsess with the horse race and public perception. Those comments were not consistent with his career spanning several decades. No one can honestly try to attribute those comments to reflecting his views. You are right they will be a major story some day and we shall just have to see how he handles it. Already there are those claiming he hates gays for voting for the marriage bill while ignoring the fact that he voted against the Constitutional Amendment each of these votes having a solid formalistic position. Likewise, there are those claiming he is a racist and a “despicable human being” for voting against the anti-Dafur investment act which again was based on a well thought out principled stance. Paul may have trouble in a 15 second sound bite world. However, this is not enough for me to abandon his candidacy.
  • John Campbell: After I got turned on to Ron Paul, that stuff came up. I thougth, OH NO, it’s all over. But then nothing happened. You may be correct that they will become important if/when Dr. Paul rises in popularity. But they seem to be isolated statements completely out of character which gives credence to Dr. Paul’s explanation.
  • Doofus: And you claim you like Ron Paul. You’re about as authentic as the guy who wrote that hit piece in the New York Times.
  • Corky: Wait and see. But from what I’ve seen of the man, I believe him when he says those weren’t his words.
  • Scott: I believe it was years ago, and someone that has devoted his entire life to liberty, and justice, for at the least 10 terms in Congress, should be defense enough. Think about this logically, if he is a racist, then everything that he says about freedom must be a lie, or a fib, right? He gave a response, that I think was short and honest.. And I also think that he would hit it head on if given the nomination.
  • PC: I admit this is the biggest problem. I don’t like it one bit but what enraged me more than anything are some of the factual statements in that piece, and I would hope you read the whole piece, because those writings(plural) come mainly from one piece on the LA Riots. I didn’t know that King charged the cops and the media didn’t air that part of the video, and while it in no way excuses the policemen, it may have prevented the deaths of innocent people, who had nothing to do with the arrest, in the riots. Many people killed on the basis of their race for nothing they ever did, that article pointed that out, and you want to criticize the wording. I hate some of the phrases used but if the media wants to refight the LA Riots and discuss the facts of their actions than so be it, the article was much more scathing to the political leadership in Washington and the media than African Americans. It just might show that while Dr. Paul’s newsletter had racially insensitive comments, he isn’t responsible for the deaths of people, the media are and that is where the emotion in the piece comes out. In fact I would love to have that discussion. I think many African Americans would be enraged themselves when they find out the facts and the media coverage was nothing but a disservice.
  • Lex: Racist writings? The media has already brought them up, if you count the New York Times as major media. They dismissed them as totally out of character and style, and not Dr. Paul’s work, as we have.
  • Ward Ciac: Done by an associate. Not sure they are racist anyway.
  • Tim: This is unfortunate, and I believe that this will ultimately kill his campaign. My opinion is that if the worst thing he has to say about black people is that they’re “fleet-footed,” well, then I don’t think we have too much to worry about. It might help to remind everyone that even if this did reflect his true personality, his limited government philosophy will not afford him the luxury of committing arbitrary and capricious acts of presidential racism. Concerned citizens should be encouraged to review his voting record.
  • coainley: Whatever he may have said that has been labeled racist was probably pretty funny because what I watched on Comedy Central last night was hilarious.
  • Tony Lambiris: From what I read, the “racist writings” were done by a campaign member without formal approval before it was released. I wasn’t there, so I can’t say for sure, but if the press started attacking Ron Paul as a racist, I would hope he would address it the same straight-talk that has made him shine more than the other candidates.
  • Michael: Well there is a difference between racist and racial remarks. I’ve read these writings and I’ve also researched the data in Washington D.C. in those years (not to mention I vacationed there the same years), it was the murder capitol of the country. It’s highly unfortunate that majority of the crime was committed by a specific race. I will say it was bad judgment on his part to write this (or allow his ghost writer to write this). However, I don’t feel it was a racist commentary. I think it will be a non issue.
  • Dary: Ron didn’t make those comments and the guy who did was fired immediately.

Some of your are rightfully concerned about the writings, of which there are more than just that one piece about Washington DC.

Still, some say it doesn’t matter. Reality check time. It does.

Here’s the piece from the NY Times that one commentor said absolved Paul of any wrong doing…

The question is whether the old ideologies being resurrected are neglected wisdom or discredited nonsense. In the 1996 general election, Paul’s Democratic opponent Lefty Morris held a press conference to air several shocking quotes from a newsletter that Paul published during his decade away from Washington. Passages described the black male population of Washington as “semi-criminal or entirely criminal” and stated that “by far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government.” Morris noted that a Canadian neo-Nazi Web site had listed Paul’s newsletter as a laudably “racialist” publication.

Paul survived these revelations. He later explained that he had not written the passages himself — quite believably, since the style diverges widely from his own. But his response to the accusations was not transparent. When Morris called on him to release the rest of his newsletters, he would not. He remains touchy about it. “Even the fact that you’re asking this question infers, ‘Oh, you’re an anti-Semite,’ ” he told me in June. Actually, it doesn’t. Paul was in Congress when Israel bombed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear plant in 1981 and — unlike the United Nations and the Reagan administration — defended its right to do so. He says Saudi Arabia has an influence on Washington equal to Israel’s. His votes against support for Israel follow quite naturally from his opposition to all foreign aid. There is no sign that they reflect any special animus against the Jewish state.

Hmmm….just because Paul “survived” as a Texas congressman with those explanations doesn’t mean they’ll float for a presidential nominee trying to get a nation behind him.

To me, his explanation doesn’t really hold up to close scrutiny, because it wasn’t just one or two times questionable stuff got out there. In short, those newsletters are a timebomb waiting to explode. And I don’t know about you, but if somebody is ghost writing for me, I’m reading everything they’re printing I said.

Also, if Paul won’t release the newsletters, well, that’s going to be a big PR problem for his camp. Hell, Howard Dean wouldn’t release his records as Governor because he was protecting the identity of people who wrote him personally. At least that was justified. Not releasing newsletters he sold subscriptions to is not only odd, it looks like he’s genuinely trying to hide something.

Again, your opponents will be able to bury your campaign with this issue alone.

Take heed.

  • Jeanette Doney

    I think we should ask Bill Crosby what he thinks.

  • john

    Never mind the questions. The real problem is most people in the US want sound bites.. It is yet to be seen if he can dumb it down. The facts are Obama is a nuked his chances and Hillary has too many negatives.Rudy is a drag queen, Thompson is very lazy,Romney has too many stock dating problems in Bain companies.. I just don’t see a third party that is going to elect Clinton.. There are no Ross Perot in the picture. Paul if he is going to push his agenda he is going to have a very difficult time finding enough Austrians and free market guys to effect change. He will be forces to put people in very early to be serious.. Mainstream media actually ignoring helps with the corporatism issues… I love his ideas but does America know what it wants? The scare of the Q tips will be a problem…

  • infragreen

    Daily Kos spun this in the WORST way. Rovian would be a good word.

    The left is all up in arms about Pauls supposed civil rights record.
    This country has far worse problems than furthering ACLU political correctness victimization, i.e. “civil rights”.

    What good are civil rights for minorites, be it ethnic, gender or sexuality, when NOBODY has civil liberties?

    I believe Paul DID NOT write it. He said he didn’t and I have NO REASON not to believe him.

  • Bill Moore

    Maybe we can ask about the US foreign policy of bombing countries that are made up of people with darker skin color than the leaders that enact such policy.

  • Helena Handbasket

    Justin, you adopt a surprisingly muckraking angle. It should be a simple matter to find “the rest” of the newsletters and clear his name. There are lots of supporters and detractors out there, and the full text can be posted to the web. Look, Dr. Paul has written about ten books, and a weekly column for about ten years, and many many bills. Do you think that (without forgery) the CFR MSM can find something real to hurt him? Do you think that if they wanted to turn their heels on (say) Willard M. Romney they wouldn’t find a hundred times more dirt? Who’s the sacrificial virgin now?

    Rather, Paul won two more straw polls this weekend, making SEVEN first-place finishes, and pulling ahead of EVERY current candidate in head-to-head counts over the last 19 polls since 6/8. See for detail. He has won first place twice in crucial New Hampshire, and he just passed Willard with a 10-9 record against him, and there are some more big poll victories coming up.

    Send Ron Paul a B-Day Gift Today at !!!

  • David

    If this becomes a big issue in the media it will only serve to help Ron Paul’s name recognition in the end. Dr. Paul’s history looks like Mother Theresa’s when compared to any of the top tier candidates in both parties. In fairness, let him answer it again & again, and let more people get exposed to Dr. Paul. I think it will only be beneficial.

  • DesertRat

    Ron Paul is just about as perfect a candidate possible. Compared to all the other candidates Ron Paul is a absolute saint. All of the anti-Paul forces out there really have to stretch every petty thing completely out of proportion in order to try to make anything stick. It’s just not going to work. Ron Paul is the ONLY honest candidate running. He has already said that he did not make those statements many time. perhaps we should use water torture on him to make him confess to things he never said.

    Justin, your blog is just about a disingenuous as they come. Talk about beating a dead dog…

  • Paul

    DesertRat, you need to chill. Justin’s asking some valid questions. If all of Justin’s fears are unfounded, then there won’t be a problem… but beyond that, it’s better to be safe than sorry, because we still have quite the uphill battle.

  • The New Centrist

    Paul is a “Constitutionalist” who wants to ammend the Constitution and a “libertarian” who is against free trade. What a guy…

    Ron Paul and the Paulistas, Part II: Virtual Reality Versus Political Reality

  • NH

    cryptoracist? The comments were facts not racism….good grief!

    Paul is pretty important judging from how some go out of their way to trash him.

  • Joe Lawson

    Is Fred Thompson a racist, didn’ he play a grand imperial wizard for the KKK in a movie somewhere?

  • NH

    Why not check out Hillary and Obama and Richardson OPEN racism here? Obama’s church is not enough?

  • The Jolly Ronpaul

    When you have people out there analyzing a political candidate in up to seven pages, I would not want to release anything published, either.

  • Mr. Dylan

    Yes, pull out the racism card. From what I understand Paul didn’t even write this alleged article. How many examples do you think we can pull up of any other candidate who may at one time been affiliated with one random person who uttered what could be construed as a racist remark? Drop it. Get over it. And show me some REAL DIRT on Mr. Ron Paul. The media hasn’t been able to come up with anything, and we all know they would if they could. So I sincerely doubt you can find anything at all that can blemish this principled man.

    Join the fight for our freedom.

  • lost_in_samoa

    Hi Justin,

    “Again, your opponents will be able to bury your campaign with this issue alone. Take heed.”

    Why should we the public give this credence. Because a smarmy wannabe opinion maker like yourself tells us so? I mean really, the only thing you offer us is insight into a well oiled highly corrupt machine.

    The same machine that ignores the current president’s obvious blunders, mistakes, and malfeasance. This very same machine ignored Clinton and his various boondoggles. Remember Monica? This machine covered up the Bush 41 disasters. This machine gave us fauxtograpy, spin, and propaganda so insipid that it is sickening to behold.

    Why should we believe anything the established media outlets tell us about any candidate? It’s not like CNN/FOX/ABC/NBC/CBS/TNN have an unblemished history of accuracy. Is it?

    The point is this. This is a non issue with Ron Paul supporters. It is a non issue with most of the voting public. If we the people can forgive a president getting a blow job in the hallowed halls of our nations capitol, we can forgive Dr. Paul for having a loose cannon for an employee, 15 years ago.

    Your insistence that this is a smoking gun only shows that you, and most of the well oiled money news machine are not up with the times. If you were you would know that this is the cusp of a revolution in the most original sense of the word. The very fact of the number of responses to your little blog stand as a testament to this truth.

    We no longer believe you, subsequently we are no longer listening to you. Our presence here today is an effort to be polite only.

    Our recruitment takes place in venues that are not open to you. Walmart, the mall, yard sales, street corners, bakeries, everywhere. We gain supporters every day. Our growth rate is geometric.

    Make no mistake of our purpose. We are going to take back our Republic from the backroom dealmakers that have ruined our fine nation and bankrupted generations of our citizens.

    The level of disgust with the sitting government, be it Republican or Democrat, is at an all time high. Every indicator points to this. And it is no coincidence that we have Dr. Paul to rally behind. Enough is enough.

    The great unwashed, (and pissed off), masses are just beginning the process of throwing all of you corrupt, arrogant, self important, self serving, “farging bastiches” out the door. We are gonna give all of you the bum’s rush.

    So as we say in Iraq, INCOMMING!!!



  • The New Centrist

    Paul may have a lot of support on the Internet among twoofers and other tinfoilistas but virtual reality is not the same thing as political reality.

    If you were back home, you’d see the astounding scope (*cough*) of Paul’s support. I saw it on C-SPAN last night. Three or four dudes in a gun shop and two or three people in a pharmacy. Rudy and Hillary must be worried.

    Check it out, Paul will not only receive less of the popular vote than Ross Perot, he will receive less than Nader. I may be wrong, but I doubt it.

  • Vicky

    Nice bomb throwing Justin. Ignore the truth and keep throwing out the lie.

    Donkephant About Us: “Tired of the rhetoric, bomb-throwing and partisan hackery? We’re not.”

  • Daniel

    The New Centrist:

    In that case, who are you going to vote for, and why?

  • lost_in_samoa

    Hello New Centrist,

    I am back home. On Leave. And I wear my tinfoil hat with pride, thank you very much. It fit’s nicely under my kevlar.

    Perhaps you should peek out from under the reality that Faux News has spoonfed you and notice all of the RP signs.

    Two pimply teenagers in a basement did’nt nail those up.

    Perhaps you might question the validity of the “scientific polls”. RP is in the top of most of the straw polls.

    Who is generating ANY wide spread excitement this election?

    Sure aint Hillary. Nor Obama. Hell…. Romney can’t pay people to be excited about him. Guiliana….. please….. all’s we have to do is ask the NYPD or NYFD how he is. Ghouliani is damaged goods.

    So who does that leave? Thompson? HAAA.

    Wanna dredge up old bones Justin? How about Thompson’s collusion during the Watergate scandal? No… Thompson’s got too many skeletons not buried deeply enough.

    The only candidate out there that has any prayer of winning on the GOP side is Dr. Paul.

    Besides, there is a very large block of voters who are sick and tired of the “lesser of two evils” choice. We are disgusted with politicians who promise one thing and deliver another.

    So why not vote your conscience? I am. Everybody I know is. If you loose then at least you can sleep well at night.


  • James Aragon


    Ron Paul’s only concern is the misconstruing of ghost-written statements that are inflammatory if read out of context. The fact is that a disproportionate sector of the black male populous in Washington D.C. were creating high levels of crime in the 80s. To the city’s credit, the crime rates have decreased in number over the past 20 years. The reasoning of high crime in the inner city is birthed out of the nanny state, to which Mr. Paul espouses as being a problem and not a solution. It is also no surprise that Israel has a powerful lobby that has undoubtedly contributed to poor decisions made by our foreign policymakers in favor of Israel. He also argues the same for ‘big oil’. His support of Israel’s attack on Osirak stands on its own as basing his policy on principles. Release of his letters would only lead to nitpicking of language that does not tell the whole story. He is ready to answer any question honestly, of which the text of past newsletters cannot.

  • Akston

    Yup, three or four dudes in a gun shop and two or three people in a pharmacy.

    New Centrist seems to have nailed it down there.

    Ron Paul’s decades of consistent adherence to the principles of liberty and constitutional restraint are to just a flimsy cover for a lurking racist loon.

    Tell me, what is so frightening about a call to obey the constitution and favor liberty over excess federal control. What do his opponents actually favor?

    Ad-hominem hit and run attacks are meaningless. If you want to be taken seriously, offer alternative positions to Ron Paul’s.

  • aitch

    Welfare is slavery to the government. Ron Paul is the only Republican willing to talk about the poor. He does not exclude anyone from his message of freedom.

    This disproves these accusations for me. If you ever heard him talk, you’d know he’s no racist. He has many of the same goals the liberals do – he only believes it can be better achieved a different way.

  • Cedric

    Ron Paul interviewed on the michael medved show…

  • Valeria

    I happen to think there are many more pressing problems, such as an economic collapse facing us than to worry about some comment about racism. My mother still has her ration stamps from the great depression. Here we are headed for THAT again. Better think about what you want. Do you want to keep your liberty and freedom? or do you want to go through history again? Racism will be a far bigger problem than it is now.

    DR. Ron Paul (that is DOCTOR) is a medical doctor. He is no more a racist than the pope. Is the pope a racist? Ron Paul treasures life even in the unborn. That means ALL life. Ever hear of DOCTOR Ron Paul turning down a woman who was black (or any other race) about to have a baby that he wouldn’t help her because of her race? His own hometown people revere him a wonderful physician. This includes ALL races. Not just white people. Use your common sense. Our country is on the verge of collapse. Your about to get a national ID card and we have no Health care. Dr. Paul will bring us FREE health care. Makes the racist thing look a bit small to me. Is the army only white people? Did Ron Paul NOT vote against the war? He said, if this war had not happened we would have 3,600 soldiers alive today, (this means ALL OF THEM) and many more who would not be injured. The war is unconstitutional which is why he voted against it, but he is all inclusive when he speaks on issues. He is trying to protect Americans. This is not divisive. He is not trying to protect White americans or black or other races based on their race alone. He is trying to put the country back on an even level. Ron Paul has now taken world recognition. Even they like him. That is a pretty huge mark for a candidate to make. This is OUR revolution. Don’t miss it. We need Ron Paul in the worst way. Our government is not a constitutional government. Look how far down they have taken our country. Then look at the light which God has sent to us. Vote for Ron Paul.

  • Paul

    He said it best when asked about the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military. He said that people shouldn’t BE categorized. It’s a divisive thing that pits one group against another. Everybody should be treated as people. Not blacks or whites or latinos or gays or any other category at all. By eliminating the devisiveness of categorizations in government policy you eliminate pitting folks against one another.

    Dr. Paul has been absolutely consistent in his positions on every topic for the past 20 years he’s been in office. Given that, where are all of the other examples of his “racism” in the 10 years since this incident? This is a complete nonissue and once he has explained it once, he should offer the same explanation each time it’s brought up, along with pointing out the muckraking and mudslinging tendencies of whoever brings it up.

  • Pamela

    What to do? Get it all out in the open. Publish the complete article; let everyone read it for themselves. The truth will set us all free from this speculation! And then while we’re at it, let’s put ALL the candidates under that SAME MICROSCOPE and give them all a looksee. I’m willing to stand behind Dr. Paul for this examination because I know he’ll be exonerated. So bring it on. And bring it on the OTHERS as well. Fair and unbiased… let’s go. (the publicity will only help Dr. Paul’s campaign… I say: bring it on! 😀 )

  • PA Freedom

    I can’t believe this is being presented as a serious question. Paul is not Robert Byrd or Strom T., who said they are done with that past. Paul doesn’t even have that past. He has taken the government to task for furthering racism. Defend freedom, vote Ron Paul.

  • lost_in_samoa

    Hey New Centrist,

    You POS troll. Open your blog up and debate us!



  • Nate

    First off, Ron can say whatever he wants. This is all about the First Amendment. Let’s not follow the gov’t down the path of censorship. After all, censorship is becoming America’s favorite past-time. The US gov’t (and their corporate friends), already detain protesters, ban books like “America Deceived” from Amazon and Wikipedia, shut down Imus and fire 21-year tenured, BYU physics professor Steven Jones because he proved explosives, thermite in particular, took down the WTC buildings. Free Speech forever, you decide based on his entire record if he’s racist.
    Last link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):