• Narrow screen resolution
  • Wide screen resolution
  • Auto width resolution
  • Increase font size
  • Decrease font size
  • Default font size
  • default color
  • red color
  • green color


BGay.com News

Saturday, Nov 21st, 2009
BGay News
Ron Paul's Ugly Anti-Gay Past
 
on 01-08-2008 16:46

Details about presidential candidate Ron Paul's ugly anti-gay past has surfaced with the discovery of some of the newsletters Ron Paul has published over the years.Ron Paul

"What they reveal are decades worth of obsession with conspiracies, sympathy for the right-wing militia movement, and deeply held bigotry against blacks, Jews, and gays. In short, they suggest that Ron Paul is not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are backing—but rather a member in good standing of some of the oldest and ugliest traditions in American politics," James Kirchik of The New Republic writes.

Kirchik was able to track down the old newsletters, which was published under various titles like Ron Paul's Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report, etc. Even though the newsletters were not all written by Paul, they all had one thing in common: They were published under a banner containing Paul's name, and the articles seem designed to create the impression that they were written by him - and reflected his views.

Kirchik writes:
"... gays earn plenty of animus in Paul's newsletters. They frequently quoted Paul's "old colleague," Representative William Dannemeyer--who advocated quarantining people with AIDS--praising him for "speak[ing] out fearlessly despite the organized power of the gay lobby." In 1990, one newsletter mentioned a reporter from a gay magazine "who certainly had an axe to grind, and that's not easy with a limp wrist." In an item titled, "The Pink House?" the author of a newsletter--again, presumably Paul--complained about President George H.W. Bush's decision to sign a hate crimes bill and invite "the heads of homosexual lobbying groups to the White House for the ceremony," adding, "I miss the closet." "Homosexuals," it said, "not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities." When Marvin Liebman, a founder of the conservative Young Americans for Freedom and a longtime political activist, announced that he was gay in the pages of National Review, a Paul newsletter implored, "Bring Back the Closet!" Surprisingly, one item expressed ambivalence about the contentious issue of gays in the military, but ultimately concluded, "Homosexuals, if admitted, should be put in a special category and not allowed in close physical contact with heterosexuals."

"The newsletters were particularly obsessed with AIDS, "a politically protected disease thanks to payola and the influence of the homosexual lobby," and used it as a rhetorical club to beat gay people in general. In 1990, one newsletter approvingly quoted "a well-known Libertarian editor" as saying, "The ACT-UP slogan, on stickers plastered all over Manhattan, is 'Silence = Death.' But shouldn't it be 'Sodomy = Death'?" Readers were warned to avoid blood transfusions because gays were trying to "poison the blood supply." "Am I the only one sick of hearing about the 'rights' of AIDS carriers?" a newsletter asked in 1990. That same year, citing a Christian-right fringe publication, an item suggested that "the AIDS patient" should not be allowed to eat in restaurants and that "AIDS can be transmitted by saliva," which is false. Paul's newsletters advertised a book, Surviving the AIDS Plague--also based upon the casual-transmission thesis--and defended "parents who worry about sending their healthy kids to school with AIDS victims." Commenting on a rise in AIDS infections, one newsletter said that "gays in San Francisco do not obey the dictates of good sense," adding: "[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."

 Ron Paul today distanced himself from the article with the following statement:

"The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.

"This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.

"When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publically taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name."

Last update: 01-08-2008 17:39

Quote this article in website Print Send to friend



Users' Comments (6)
Posted by Freewheeler, on 01-08-2008 18:11,
1. Please....
The kid from the New Republic has admitted he is more of a propagadist and does not actually believe Paul said those things. It was gross negligence by Ron Paul. Nonetheless, please do a little research before believing the clowns at the New Republic.
 
» Report this comment to administrator

Posted by Replikov, on 01-08-2008 18:28,
2. Ron Paul is not a bigot.
TNR has a long and checkered history of pro-fascism, pro-communism, and pro-new dealism. Founded to promote the rotten progessive movement of militarism, central banking, income taxation, centralization, and regulation of business, it naturally hates and fears the Ron Paul Revolution. The mag is also famous for having published a slew of entirely made-up articles by Stephen Glass, which it passed off as non-fiction. Through the 1950s it was an important magazine, of sigificant if baleful influence, but it long ago declined in circulation and significance, like all DC deadtree ops. Long close t
 
» Report this comment to administrator

Posted by ted, on 01-08-2008 18:30,
3. author seems like a great guy...NOT!
http://gays-for- ron.blogspot.com/2008/01/ jamie-kirchick-i-dont-think- ron-paul-is.html
 
» Report this comment to administrator

Posted by bkusz, on 01-08-2008 18:31,
4. Sleezy politics. The smear..
This story came up months ago and was confirmed as BS then, it is still BS today. Not true. In fact the NY Times ran the racist story and retracted it shortly after, apologizing and confirming it was not factual and Paul indeed had no connection. 
 
Paul would like to make it so a license would not be required to marry and that anyone could make the legal bond.  
 
Google Ron Paul for the truth..
 
» Report this comment to administrator

Posted by Gwen, on 01-08-2008 18:38,
5. Check your facts
I have to agree with the comments above. It used to be that fact checking was rule 1, or maybe 2, of journalism. Sadly, I don't believe that is the case any longer.  
 
Ron Paul was responsible for those news letters, in that someone, using his name, wrote them. They were not his words. Bringing those news letters up at this point in time is a tactic of the media to blemish what has otherwise been a spotless record of Dr. Paul's life and political career.
 
» Report this comment to administrator

More comments...

Add your comment



mXcomment 1.0.6 © 2007-2009 - visualclinic.fr
License Creative Commons - Some rights reserved
BGAY NEWS
  • Pause
  • Previous
  • Next
1/10
John Mayer John Mayer: I Didn'n Kiss a Man After recent rumors about a steamy gay kiss between pop-star John Mayer and another guy, Mayer went on Twitter to make thinks straight.
Read more...
 
BGAY NEWS SECTION
Marc Jacobs glam Nars Lets Marc Jacobs Glam It Up To celebrate the 15th birthday of his eponymous makeup and skin care line, François Nars photographed 15 of his favorite celebrities and fashion people in situations inspired by the names of his products, which are culled from film and fashion history. Read more...