Watch on

Ron Paul standing in front of a Confederate flag and telling an audience that the South was on the right side of the American Civil War

What’s this, you ask? On, nothing. It’s just a video of Ron Paul standing in front of a flag flown by traitors 150 years ago and telling his audience that the South was on the right side of the American Civil War.

At 1:25, Paul says that buying slaves’ freedom would have been a better way to free them than fighting a war over the issue. Does anyone actually believe that Ron Paul, were he a member of Congress in 1861, would have supported a plan for the United States government to spend taxpayer dollars to buy slaves, even if it were to free them? He’d abolish Medicare and Social Security, and he doesn’t support universal healthcare, but he’d support a federal government that would undoubtedly need to increase taxes and then spend that tax money on the purchase of southern slaves? No, he wouldn’t.

What’s stunning about Paul’s views on slavery and the Civil War is the fact that he calls himself a libertarian, and he talks more about personal liberty than any politician currently in office, but he would have been willing to accept idea that human beings could own other human beings. He’s arguing in this video that the North should have purchased the slaves of the South in order to free them, and that tells me that he would have been willing to accept that the northern government could legally purchase human beings. If one opposes slavery, and one believes that personal liberty is our primary, guiding principle, the idea that anyone (or any government) could purchase a human being should be unacceptable. To have supported the North’s purchase of human beings from the South would have been supporting slavery — the idea that one human being could be the property of another — as a legal concept.

Further along in the video, at 2:00, Paul he calls the Civil War a “loss of liberty.” For whom? Certainly not for the slaves who were freed. Were he a slave in 1861, I doubt that his libertarian ideals would have allowed him to argue that his freedom was for sale, to anyone, whether in the North or the South, for any reason. I doubt that he would have referred to the South as the victim, argued that the Civil War was a “loss of liberty”, or complained about “northern aggression”, a term that Southern apologists love to use.

Thank you to Dominion of New York for their article that brought this video to my attention.

ARTICLE: Are you kidding me with this guy?

It amuses me to no end when white folks laud the Declaration of Independence — with all of its lofty rhetoric about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness — all the while stoically ignoring that all that happy-happy-joy-joy talk didn’t apply to the Africans whites dragged to this country and enslaved.

So when I see the tiny wizened messiah talking about the Civil War and lamenting all the liberty that was lost as a result of the war, I laugh bitterly.  When I hear him talking about goooooold! and ending the Fed, I begin banging my head against the closest wall.

Dude is so out of touch with the 21st century, I’m starting to wonder if he’s some sort of time traveler who crawled through the Rift and has managed somehow to amass Paul-lovers and the Paul-curious from each end of the political spectrum, and everything in between.  Everyone from Katrina vanden Heuvel and Glenn Greenwald to David Duke and Stormfront are singing this guy’s praises, in some fashion or another (but not necessarily endorsing him. *wink wink*)

I find it fascinating and more than a little unsettling.

Here is Ron Paul giving a speech about how the South was right, and the Civil War was awful because it destroyed “individual choice.”  Never mind “individual choice” vis-à-vis the enslaved; they weren’t people and thus could lay no claim to “individuality” or “liberty.”  What Paul means by “individual choice,” is “white men’s (specifically white property-owning men) individual choice.” 

Just look at this silly little man, standing proudly in front of a Confederate flag talking about the enslavement of black people in transactional terms. In the Ron Paul Gospel, adherence to the quintessential American values of “individual choice and” “liberty” would have required the Yankees to buy the slaves’ freedom.  A detestable notion, to be sure, but also historically inaccurate since, as we all know, the South started it.

Ultimately, when it comes to black people, the world “liberty” seems to disappear from Paul’s vocabulary.  Funny, that.


The government should enforce fraud laws, theft laws, trespassing laws, coercion laws, kidnapping laws, assault laws, rape laws, and murder laws, but beyond that do nothing else by force because any force beyond this is either fraud, theft, trespassing, coercion, kidnapping, assault, rape, or murder in itself.
—  I saw this quote posted online somewhere. I don’t recall who it was from but I think it really expressed what small government should be.
The real Ron Paul: Links to fringe never severed.

The latest evidence of simmering racial resentment on the American political fringe showed up Monday in a Facebook post by a California man who urged the assassination of the president and his two daughters in obscene, racist language. Aside from the Secret Service, there was little reason for most of us to pay attention to this sick boob — except that he was identified as a local political leader of the Tea Party and an avid supporter of Rep. Ron Paul, the Texas Republican who now seems likely to place first in the Iowa presidential caucuses.

To those who have followed Paul’s long career as a failed presidential candidate — these campaigns have become a family business — the appearance of yet another racist nutjob in his orbit is scarcely news. The newsletters that earned millions of dollars for him from gullible subscribers over the decades were often soiled with vile invectives against blacks and other minorities. He is a perennial favorite of the John Birch Society and kindred extremists on the right. He once refused to return a donation from a leader of the Nazi-worshipping skinheads in the Stormfront movement.

What is it about the kindly old doctor that attracts some of the most violent and reactionary elements in society to his banner?

For many years, Paul was merely an outlying crank in the ranks of the Republican Party — a “libertarian” who courted the paranoid bigots in the John Birch Society, whose monthly magazine featured his name on its masthead as a “contributing editor.” More than a decade ago, during his 1996 campaign for Congress, the racist ravings in his newsletters were first exposed — the same series of articles that besmirched Martin Luther King and Barbara Jordan and encouraged every racist stereotype about African Americans as criminals and welfare dependents. He disowns those words now, but back then a spokesman defended them as merely “taken out of context.”

Back then, his rhetorical flirtations with the White Citizens Councils hardly mattered. Almost nobody bothered to listen seriously to his urgings that America return to the gold standard, repeal the income tax and the direct election of U.S. senators and erase all of the advances of the past century in protecting the public from cyclical depressions, poisonous food, water, air and drugs, and the insecurities of poverty, old age and ill health. Most Americans still could remember when this Darwinian ideology influenced policy and knew that the nation was not better off — except for a few robber barons — back in the days before Theodore Roosevelt inaugurated the Progressive Era, beginning a century of reform.

On the far right, including wealthy figures such as the Koch family that once supported the Birch Society and now backs the Tea Party, there are many who share Paul’s brand of political nostalgia. Kindly and gentle as he appears, Paul has always known how to sound the dog whistle that excites them, whether it was in the race-baiting that adorned his newsletters for years, the claims that medicine served us better before Medicare and Medicaid or the campaign against the Federal Reserve. Although Paul has occasionally disavowed his supporters on the ultra-right when political expediency demanded it, they have never abandoned him — and they won’t, because whether or not he is actually a racial bigot, he shares their disdain for the 20th century.

There is little reason to worry about the policies of a Paul administration, despite his current lead in the Iowa polls. But the rise of the Tea Party and the vacuum of leadership in the Republican Party have created a space for Paul’s lethal fantasies, which if enacted would return us to the bad old days of mass poverty, rampant pollution, racial supremacy and all the other ills that characterized the America of the robber barons.

Pot and politics. ✌🇺🇸Anyone who supports Obama, I have many questions and facts that will hopefully cure your apathy towards politics…

You say you’re for peace but you support Obama who supports the war. You say you want free healthcare but obamacare was written to include a middle man (insurance companies) instead of adapting a socialist healthcare system like Canada and Europe, you hate Bush but Obama didn’t repeal the patriot act & voted for the NDAA, NSA, (BIG GOVERNMENT) etc… You want equal rights however Obama has never voted for laws that protect civil & individual liberties, only caused the American people to argue amongst each other when enviably were all equal and free to make our own decisions as long as were not infringing on anyone else; according the constitution which already protects our basic rights I.E the freedom to choose who to marry, who to fuck, how to protect yourself, what to consume, etc, etc, etc. Obama has only created policies and laws that diminished our little liberties we have left. You say you want lower taxes however Obamacare and the war itself is going to either raise taxes, borrow money, or print more money through the unconstitutional Federal Reserve which has ALREADY caused our dollar to worth nothing and is now a fiat currency that is about to collapse. So why are u choosing to obey what the government and its unfathomable agenda to destroy the American constitution and economy at the same time? Why are we allowing the government to tell us what to do when the constitution was written for the government to follow, respect, and protect us THE PEOPLE?  

Theres one very obvious choice who is constantly dis-valued within our corrupted media. A doctor, veteran, economic genius, and champion of the constitution and liberty. Support an honest individual with integrity like  #RonPaul. The constitution was created by patriots, like ron paul who understood what it ment to protect your liberty and the right to the pursuit of happiness. Not men who were lobbied by muiltibillion dollar companies to pass laws that benefit themselves and call it for the good of the people. (MONSANTO, BIG BANKS, BP, ARCO, COCA COLA, WALMART, AT&T, FDA, APPLE, etc)  Not rich men who tell you to share your money however they make billions signing laws we don’t vote for and most likely don’t ‘share their wealth’ without getting a fat tax return on ‘charity’ money. #staywoke #educateyourself @therevolutionwillnotbetelevised 

• President Obama: Why would you “authorizes the U.S government to DETAIN AND TORTURE American citizen?”

› Forget about the idea of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. This “would open the door for trial-free, indefinite detention of anyone, including American citizens, so long as the government calls them terrorists.”

• “It is your responsibility, right and obligation as an American citizen to warn your friends and family of what has occurred tonight.” 

• Knowledge is Power. 
To learn about what this bill of laws is really about, please visit us at Facebook, Twitter or Tumblr. and watch our latest videos.

Watch on

Can’t think of a better way to start this off.