Ron Paul’s Iowa campaign team yesterday boasted that Nebraska-based anti-gay Reverend Rev. Phillip G. Kayser is backing their candidate.
“We welcome Rev. Kayser’s endorsement and the enlightening statements he makes on how Ron Paul’s approach to government is consistent with Christian beliefs,” Ron Paul’s team wrote press release. “We’re thankful for the thoughtfulness with which he makes his endorsement and hope his endorsement and others like it make a strong top-three showing in the caucus more likely.”
Kayser’s Christian beliefs, however, are anything but; as Talking Points Memo noted, the so-called pastor thinks the United States should employ Biblical law, including the death penalty, to rid our nation of gay people.
“Genesis 19 shows that the angels knew homosexuality (at least as it was flagrantly flaunted in Sodom) was worthy of death,” Kayser wrote in an article called “Is the Death Penalty Just?” He later claimed implementing such laws would dissuade other gay people from coming out of the closet and perverting society: “Only those who were prosecuted by citizens could be punished, and the punishment could take a number of forms, including death. This would have a tendency of driving homosexuals back into their closets.”
Ron Paul’s states’ rights politics, Kayser told TPM, would at least open the possibility for such extreme, disgusting legislation. “Under a Ron Paul presidency, states would be freed up to not have political correctness imposed on them,” he said.
Following these revelations, Paul’s campaign has now erased Kayser’s endorsement from their site. (It is preserved over at Outside the Beltway.)
Paul’s team has also neglected to return TPM’s calls on the matter, which, as the site points out, highlights the prominent role other anti-gay activists are playing in his presidential bid. His Iowa campaign director, for example, is a man named Mike Heath, who once chaired the vehemently homophobic group “Americans for the Truth About Homosexuality,” which claims gay people can be “cured” and that gay men are all pedophiles who want to “convert” America’s youth. It’s pretty sick stuff — almost as sick as the anti-gay remarks in Paul’s 90s-era newsletters.
It’s queer Paul would distance himself from Kayser and not Heath, but perhaps it has to do with the fact that Paul, who claims to support individual liberty, is trying to court social conservatives who can help him win the GOP nomination. If he were to verbally and publicly denounce Kayser, rather than quietly removing his endorsement from the campaign’s website, Paul would alienate the right-wing bigots whom he’s so desperately trying to win over. This, reader, is political opportunism at its most vile.
December 29, 2011 at 1:05 pm, Rudy Vassallo said:
LIBERTY..BRING WE THE PEOPLE TOGHETER..WE CAN LET PEOPLE LIVE THEIR LIFE THE WAY THEY WANT…LET GOD MAKE THE FINAL JUDGEMENT..KNOW LETS LIBERTY RINGS..RON PAUL 2012..LIBERTY..PEACE AND PROSPERITY RON PAUL 2012
December 29, 2011 at 1:06 pm, katrinacristoff said:
Since Gingrich and Bachmann aren’t even on the ballots in Virginia I’ve
come to realize that in fact the whole Republican primary process is a
SCAM. Gingrich and Bachmann were NEVER INTENDED TO WIN. It’s been Romney
from the start, but as Ron Paul’s influence has grown the powers that
be are shaking in their boots!
December 29, 2011 at 1:39 pm, Yesiammark said:
It is becoming pretty difficult to support Paul if what is written here is true. I have given Ron Paul a substantial amount of money this primary season, but I think no more. If Paul is associating with these types of reactionary red necks, I will move on to Huntsman or maybe Romney if necessary.
December 29, 2011 at 2:08 pm, Stephanie Robinson said:
It is NOT TRUE. Please research the sources of these articles and Dr. Paul’s reactions to them – he is not a homophobe or a racist! This is insanity, America WAKE UP!!
December 29, 2011 at 2:56 pm, Independent Thought said:
If you let the media sway you like that, then go support Romney.
Or Obama, same thing.
December 29, 2011 at 2:01 pm, First Name Last Name said:
The biggest thing that people need to understand about this Ron Paul situation, is that at some point in America’s recent history, the mainstream media was hijacked by what can only be described as an “extremely organised mafia with a political agenda”.
This “political agenda” is highly toxic to America and seeks to put it in a position of perpetual war, spawn out of lies and propaganda; the result of which is millions of dead civilians and service people, not to mention an inevitable economic collapse.
Ron Paul is not stupid. He is fighting HARD to seize control of America back from this mafia, AND to prevent this “hostage” situation from occurring ever again.
But this mafia is also not stupid.
And that is why they are fighting Ron Paul as hard as they possibly can, to discredit him, to smear him and to use every possible method at their disposable, including their stranglehold over the American media, to get people to hate Ron Paul as much as they possibly can.
The sad thing is, they will probably succeed too. Unless the good people of this land wake up. Fast.
December 30, 2011 at 8:37 am, Robbert Bricker said:
i get what you’re saying, but the ‘media mob’ is not anti-ron paul, rather, they are sensationalists. it doesn’t matter what or who you are, if a story can get hits, clicks on ads, then it goes up.
December 30, 2011 at 1:36 pm, First Name Last Name said:
The media CAN be sensationalist, certainly. They can ALSO be completely silent on a subject, and do so with such unity that you would have to look internationally in order to get to the bottom of a particular story.
But I agree that not ALL of the American media is deliberately anti-Ron Paul; The periphery of the media are mostly “band-wagon jumpers”.
But where it matters, there IS a very real “media conspiracy”, which has the sufficient power, agenda, and experience to steer and deliver the entire mainstream narrative to suit it’s interests. And right now, this cabal is unquestionably, targeting Ron Paul.
It takes a trained ear and eye, but once you can hear it and see it, there is no mistaking it.
December 29, 2011 at 2:37 pm, Chris said:
More cowardly anti-Paul drivel — one day these pundits and so-called journalists will realize that the smears no longer work. Endorsements such as this are expected to someone that champions personal liberties. Everyone that associates with Dr. Paul knows that he is not a bigot in the least. Even Dondero the disgruntled former staffer had to admit that – never a peep of anti gay, jewish or racial sentiment. Give it up! It turns out democracy does actually work in this country and the establishment is terrified of that.
December 29, 2011 at 2:42 pm, Tantroo_McNally said:
So do you think Jesus was a hack because he didn’t distance himself from Judas. Does that make Jesus pro-Judas? Manipulating evil to do good, is hardly evil in my mind. I just hope that’s what is happening here and not the other way around. Which one people believe is ultimately up to them, from what I’ve seen of Paul himself, I’m leaning more toward the former.
But ultimately, Ron Paul is the lesser of the evils (on the GOP side) when it comes to gay rights, because he himself hasn’t shown that evil. Even the “moderate” Romney asked a married gay couple about the “sanctity of marriage” not knowing they were gay and married.
If you’re gay and Republican, my suggest is look at the facts which I’m sure you’re well aware of. All the candidates other then Paul want overreaching federal power, which means that it would be easier for gays to be put back into the “second class” chair with a Republican president and congress. You could even see a DEA type imposition of marriage rights at the federal level.
At least with Paul, it make the fractures the fight instead of making it easy to lose.
The chances that the pastor’s “Kill the gays” would make it at the local level I think shows that the pastor is more trying to get Marijuana legalized because to believe he can get such a law passed today. He must be high.
December 29, 2011 at 4:37 pm, KittenJuggler said:
No matter what Ron Paul does or says, the media jumps on him.
December 29, 2011 at 7:05 pm, Stevil Burgess said:
well im still a gay ron paul supporter.is there any political camp with out a anti gay supporter .Ive followed ron paul since 2008 and have never seen him put any one in grand groups.he has been on the side of liberty for what 30 years now.and frankly all not some of his other supporters I’ve meet have been welcoming to anyone who still believes in individual rights.Rev. Phillip G. Kayser is a fascist wishing to mold the world to his hate fulled ideas yes but he doesn’t represent ron pauls views or mine he probably doesn’t understand ron pauls stance on liberty .
December 29, 2011 at 8:10 pm, Stevil Burgess said:
“Under a Ron Paul presidency, states would be freed up to not have political correctness imposed on them,”good it shouldn’t be the government job to tell us what to believe its wasn’t long ago government had banned gays from the military is the state better at choosing what our personal morals should be followed over a free society? ron paul says no as a poof so do i.if i don’t believe Kayser should be able to tell me how to live then i should give him the same respect its a principle of a free society.
December 29, 2011 at 8:12 pm, Dafdfa said:
It’s obvious the Paul campaign was not aware of the comments before commending the endorsement.
Grow up.
December 29, 2011 at 8:58 pm, Anonymous said:
You guys are pathetic. Don’t hate someone for the people who follow him. There are Nazi’s and anti-gay people who support every one of the other candidates, and as crazy as it sounds, these types of people even support Barack Obama.
The fact that Paul is willing to play politics on some level to gain votes is by no means a negative on Paul. Show me one politician who has never played politics and I’ll will show you a politician who has never held office.
In addition, the entire concept of Paul’s message is one that promotes liberty in a top down method. If you can’t handle the concepts of localized distribution of power and “self-government,” then you are in the wrong country.
December 29, 2011 at 8:59 pm, Anonymous said:
Nothing but Ron Paul hit pieces from the Lame Stream today. I guess it’s true: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
December 30, 2011 at 8:44 am, drmaddogs said:
Iowa GOP explains moving vote tabulation away from HQ1774 precints-how
does one have campaign representatives for each precint accomapny the votes to
where tabulation happens? 6 candidatesx1774 precients=10,000+ individuals in the
night moving the votes to a ‘location’? Won’t happen..3 people cannot keep a
secret(location). So the ballots will be in the posession of the few. Will they
be ‘stuffed’? Precounted and first? Locked in a box during transport? 1774
locks? 1774 boxes? Won’t happen. Will the transporters be searched first, will
they be trailed, will they bemonitored in the transport vehicles, will the
vehicles be search before transport and after?The Party is simply moving
off-site-NOT SIMPLE.said it was only to avoid a sabotage.- When simplicty is
gone..duplicity steps in.Those slips are collected, taken to a table,
and counted in the open.- To bad people are emotional about their candidate, too
bad the democratic process is some times messy, arguementative. Too bad it is
inconveinent to have to deal with the basic premiss of one person one vote.
The answer is not to avail simplicity where there can be no simple
solution, the answer is to avail an open vote. Deal with it GOP. Like it has
always been dealt with, infront of everybody, no secret location, no unknown
transfers