LETTER: Attacks on Ron Paul too much
To the editor:
I’m writing out of concern over two segments that have been published in the Statesman over the past two weeks. I suppose both could serve as rebuttals to the negative (or lack of) publicity in regard to Presidential candidate Ron Paul. I won’t deny any bias, but I believe I’m being rational. An article was written on Jan. 16, which stated that Ron Paul was “unfit to be president” and went on to rehash some questionable literature that had been printed under his name in the 90s. All candidates should be placed under scrutiny when running for such a position as president, and I don’t criticize anyone for doing that. I simply want the truth to be clear. Light research will lead one to the facts; Ron Paul did not, and would never write the bigoted remarks documented in the article. Nelson Linder, President of the NAACP even came out in defense of Dr. Paul on this matter. I find these accusations incredibly ironic, and of course inconvenient for the candidate who I know is not only against racism and bigotry, but has the best platform for equal rights. Ron Paul has always fought for the rights of all individuals, and not just collective groups which is where racism has always had it’s beginnings. Any individual is entitled to the same rights as any other individual, regardless of race, gender, creed, or sexual orientation. On the back page of Thursday’s paper there was a segment titled “Where they stand.” It listed a variety of topics and where each presidential candidate stood on each issue. Ron Paul wasn’t included as a candidate! Rudy Giuliani was on the list, when Ron Paul currently exceeds him in delegates, and has beat him in every primary state thus far with the exception of New Hampshire. Fred Thompson was on the list, when in the very same issue The Statesmen reported his dropout! Time and time again, Ron Paul has been unduly omitted from the mainstream press. When I saw that The Statesman had decided to jump on the bandwagon, I was disappointed.