(no subject)
May. 23rd, 2007 10:17 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
theweaselkingThis is Ron Paul, Republican presidential candidate. As you can see, his wiki bio is being edited by his staff, but that's not the point. He's heavily against the Iraq war, and has been getting praise across the internet for being against the "patriot" act, against the torture bill, and against everything related to the war. Sounds eminently sensible, right?
Yeah... not so much.
Ron Paul on race:
"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action,"Paul wrote.
Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered "as decent people." Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote:
"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," Paul said.
Paul also wrote that although "we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."
And:
"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."
And:
"Regardless of what the media tell us, most white Americans are not going to believe that they are at fault for what blacks have done to cities across America. The professional blacks may have cowed the elites, but good sense survives at the grass roots. Many more are going to have difficultly avoiding the belief that our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists -- and they can be identified by the color of their skin. This conclusion may not be entirely fair, but it is, for many, entirely unavoidable."
=========================
Added bonus: Ron Paul is paying for astroturfers to run around, following people who mention his insanity and post comments. Let's see if I can catch a few, even after I have this notice saying I know them and that I fucking hate spammers.
Yeah... not so much.
Ron Paul on race:
"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action,"Paul wrote.
Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered "as decent people." Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote:
"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," Paul said.
Paul also wrote that although "we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."
And:
"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."
And:
"Regardless of what the media tell us, most white Americans are not going to believe that they are at fault for what blacks have done to cities across America. The professional blacks may have cowed the elites, but good sense survives at the grass roots. Many more are going to have difficultly avoiding the belief that our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists -- and they can be identified by the color of their skin. This conclusion may not be entirely fair, but it is, for many, entirely unavoidable."
=========================
Added bonus: Ron Paul is paying for astroturfers to run around, following people who mention his insanity and post comments. Let's see if I can catch a few, even after I have this notice saying I know them and that I fucking hate spammers.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 02:39 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 03:29 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 03:33 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 05:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 08:24 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 05:51 pm (UTC)I've noticed quick responses from some of my posts -- some from nutjobs -- when I link to something. Is there a way I can see if someone has linked to one of my posts?
That could be fun.
Signed,
Non-Computer Literate Guy
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 05:55 pm (UTC)Your bet bet is probably technorati - sign up for an account, make a post to your journal to "claim" it, and technorati will track links it finds to your posts.
It's not perfect, but it's much better than nothing.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 06:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-24 12:19 am (UTC)It's much more likely that the nutjobs are picking up your incoming links; essentially anything posted publicly on any sort of blog platform will show up on technorati or bloglines citation searches; that's usually a good thing but if you want to avoid the nutjobs then masking links to their sites and/or likely stories may help. anonym.to and tinyurl may both be useful; I've never bothered, beauty of UK politics is unless you want to wind up the BNP, the scariest nuts are the English Parliament campaign, and they're funny...
I've found three or four decent LJ friends through citation searches; they linked to a story and I found them through a citation search on that story, so I recommend not hiding your links too often, you never know when you'll get a good new reader.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-24 07:47 pm (UTC)It's much more likely that the nutjobs are picking up your incoming links. . . .
Nah, they respond too quickly, like within hours of the post. I don't have nearly enough traffic to justify monitoring my words that closely. I suspect they use the strategy
In fact, here's one of the tracked comments. Note the time between the post and the first comment. The only way he could have been aware of the post, other than sheer serenipity, would be to backtrack my link to the CBC site.
After he joined the fray, though, he just kept coming! I was quite amusing.
I'll have to check out the Bloglines and Blogsearch. Thanks again.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-24 07:54 pm (UTC)Of course, the thing with LJ is a lot of stuff is posted to communities, so keeping track of them all is harder work, but I used to keep a feed from each of the main link searches in my live bookmarks, bit obsessive, but was useful at times.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-23 06:39 pm (UTC)Damage control!
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-27 01:06 pm (UTC)