Wednesday, December 26, 2007

95% of Black men are "semi-criminal or criminal" - Ron Paul

Ron Paul

I haven’t paid a lot of attention to Ron Paul. There are many reasons for this. 1) There are only 24 hours in a day. 2) Although he sounds great on Iraq nothing else that I have heard makes any sense. Eliminate Income Tax. What? Replace it with what? Nothing. Nothing? That’s what Ron Paul has said. Eliminate Income Tax. So, I haven’t really sought out many of his opinions on other matters. Once I get to unrealistic, I move on.

I was struck by a post on Think Progress. He was waxing poetically in his political newsletter in 1992 (back in the stone ages). Where he mentions -

Indeed, it is shocking to consider the uniformity of opinion among blacks in this country. Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action…. Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the “criminal justice system,” I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.

If similar in-depth studies were conducted in other major cities, who doubts that similar results would be produced? We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.

I know this is kind of weird but as a Black Man, I must say that, I haven’t murdered anyone. I haven’t raped or robbed anyone. I did try to get my roommate in college to pay more than his share of the phone bill once but I don’t think that counts as a mugging or a burglary. I think to paraphrase Ron Paul, that I can safely assume that Mr. Paul is full of cow patties.


Jamel said...

LOL. Bullshit...The more you hear, the less you car.

rikyrah said...


I've been following this ' trend' amongst Black Bloggers to try and 'find' reasons why they're not down with Ron Paul.

For me, this is silly.

Here is the only thing you have to say about Ron Paul:

He was AGAINST the Civil Rights Act.

Here's Reason #1.

As a Black person, I don't think I need #2. And, anyone who doesn't understand THAT - too bad.

Stop researching on him - wasted time. You have a good enough reason so that if you knew nothing else about Ron Paul - this is enough.

rikyrah said...

Sorry EC,

I thought AI had posted this. But, my comment is still the same. :)

Happy to see you posting.

The Angry Independent said...

Yeah Rikyrah, that was Dr. Thompson. :)

But thanks anyway... because I had not heard about Ron Paul's opposition to the Civil Rights Act.

What was his rationale for being against it?

rikyrah said...


Here's a post for you:

Why Blacks Should Think Twice About Supporting Ron Paul

Anonymous said...

Mr. Speaker, I rise to explain my objection to H.Res. 676. I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom.[b] Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.[/b]

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I join the sponsors of H.Res. 676 in promoting racial harmony and individual liberty, the fact is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not accomplish these goals. [b]Instead, this law unconstitutionally expanded federal power, thus reducing liberty.[/b] Furthermore, by prompting raced-based quotas,[b] this law undermined efforts to achieve a color-blind society[/b] and increased racial strife. Therefore, I must oppose H.Res. 676.