Isn’t it interesting that the person who seems least concerned with tracking down the “real” author behind the Ron Paul newsletters is Ron Paul? On CNN yesterday, the presidential candidate looked honestly dumbfounded when anchor Ali Velshi pointed out that Paul could just put this issue to rest by asking his former newsletter employees whether any of them wrote the controversial articles (via Matt Welch at Reason):
Ali Velshi: Are you comfortable in telling us who did write them? You haven’t been able to sort of tell us specifically who wrote them.
Paul: No. I don’t, I really don’t know. Twenty years ago I had six or eight people helping with the letter, and I was practicing medicine, to tell you the truth, and, I do not know.
Ali Velshi: Well, we could find out. Because you had six or eight people, is it one of those six or eight people?
Paul: [extended pause] Well, possibly, I could, but …
Ali Velshi: I guess, as you get closer to being president of the United States, folks will want to know that you don’t really dislike black people or people with AIDS, and things like that.
Paul’s answer here stretches credulity: You mean just flat-out ask the eight people who were writing the newsletter at the time which one of them wrote the racist comments? Well, possibly I could, but…
But what? Why hasn’t that already been done? It seems like a fairly simple way to get to the bottom of this.
Amazingly, Paul’s fans also seem to have little interest in clearing his name. While many of them acknowledge that the content in the newsletters was abhorrent, they also dismiss it as something that happened “twenty years ago.” But there’s no statute of limitation on racism for politicians, and Paul has voiced his controversial positions on civil rights and the Jewish state throughout his career.
It shouldn’t be difficult to track down the six or eight people who allegedly worked for Paul’s newsletters in the early 1990s. If Paul hasn’t questioned them yet, it probably won’t be long before someone in the media does this for him.
You are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill. There are very few things to attack Paul about, so why not ride the racist newsletter train thats been debunked for the last 20 years. I hope to see more articles here about trivial issues and less articles about economics and policy.
It would be interesting to people who do not wish to simply google things. Interesting to those who have a preconceived notion before engaging in research.r nr nThen again, you are a blogger… On the Internet… For people who know how to research…r nr nYou can give yourself a wealth of credibility by limiting your a postiori account of “controversial positions” an actually present an engaging analysis. Good luck to you.
Why would former employees that he later fired admit to writing the newsletters? Why would they want the media attention? Look at the media circus that happened with Herman Cain.
I believe he knows who wrote them. If it is Lew Rockwell, like many people have suggested, then it seems Ron does not want to out his friend. He doesn't agree with what he did, but that doesn't mean he is going to call out the person who wrote them just so he can advance his campaign. That is what I think, personally.
It's interesting, as we see images of North Koreans weeping after the death of their Dear Leader, to contemplate what will happen when "Doctor Paul" dies. Here's the thing: The newsletters went out under Ron Paul's name. If he allowed this to happen without his knowledge, he's certainly not competent enough to be President of the United States. It is highly doubtful, however — he's a nutjob, not an imbecile — that he did not know. At best his silence at the time indicates his implicit assent for their content, but it is much more likely that they represented an accurate picture of his world view.
That was a disgusting comment. You know why. You are going to believe what you want to. That's how bias and perception works. You do have the ability and choice to break free from your limited reality scope but no one can do it for you. People are supporting a message an idea more than a man with this election. It is not a world view that is racist in any way. It uplifts the individual giving us more freedom. With that comes the need for responsibilty but people will always do good and bad. Have more faith in your fellow man. We are tired of the status quo establishment. You may realize it or not but to support any other candidate for either party this election is a vote for more war and militarization. We do not have the means or will do support that kind of system even if it was the right thing to do. Many people are tired and want real change not a slogan. With Ron Paul or someone else we will not accept an establishment candidate anymore.
Nope. The comment was spot on, and hit too close to home. Thanks for proving my point. n n n
don't let the Paul-bots get you down, James. when I read comments like "well gosh, those newsletters weren't even that bad" I know these people will excuse him for ANYTHING. just the fact that he thinks it's fine for Iran to go nuclear is enough to scare most people. n nPaul-bots: Kim-Jong Paul is never going to be elected president of this country. please try to understand that.
Ya know Ron Paul is one of the people that actually reads the bills. There is a big different between looking over legislation to effect the nation and checking over a newsletter lol.
He says he reads the bills. It takes a lot less effort to read a letter going out under one's name. If he didn't have time to do that, he doesn't have time to read the bills. We already know that Ron Paul is less than honest- He inserts 'pork' into bills that he proceeds to vote against, while knowing full well that the bill will pass. This newsletter business, and his implausible claim that he reads (and understands) the bills further highlight his lack of character. Dr. Paul, stop pretending to be something you're not: a man of integrity and principle. n
A lot of people point to Lew Rockwell. I've read the comments, they sound NOTHING like Paul and he did the wise thing and not just publicly disavowed them but admitted he had some moral responsibility. He handled it like a real gentleman.
Well, well… I can't tell whether Commentary is regularly read by Paulbots or whether Paulbots simply spend their time monitoring the web for any negative or potentially negative posts and then descend accordingly. Either way, their comments do a disservice to Mr. Paul. n nRon Paul supporters seem to have a strange devotion that seems to be kindled by criticism rather than dampened. If Paulbots want to really boost their guy they would be in the forefront of demanding a definitive answer to the Newsletter controversy. Paul has had every opportunity to provide a clear and definitive answer: 1) research who actually wrote the articles– articles which go beyond sarcasm or defensible satire and extend well into outright racism (real racism and not the kind that the Left harps about); 2) Disavow the author(s) of the articles and clearly enunciate his views about the issue. n nThe excuses that he was a busy doctor and didn't have time to know what was being promulgated in his name is inexcusable. That doesn't work with the high school principal and it is unworthy of a presidential candidate. n nBeyond the newsletters, Ron Paul is simply deluded. As many have pointed out, he is not simply an isolationist, he is a 9-11 Truther with every inclination to blame America for the evil actions of militant Islamists. My great wish is that he stop embarrassing the GOP and switch party affiliation to Libertarian or Independent or Tin Foil Party.
Let me know when you find the perfect candidate. It is clear you have an agenda. How much in bailouts do you receive?
I love how Paultards question others' motives when their Dear Leader, Dr. Paul, is criticized.
Your Truther accusations are false Sir. He is a non-interventionist and thinks America should respect the sovereignty of other countries. Our meddling in other countries affairs is what has attributed to 9-11.
Two words: LEW ROCKWELL n nIt was most likely Lew Rockwell. He was in charge of the company Dr. Paul outsourced to write the articles and he's been accused of making racist comments in the past…as well as editing articles. n nThis is clearly so out of step with what Ron Paul has been preaching for 30 years. The media is taking low blows without even TRYING to get to the bottom of it. He delivered thousands of people into this world, many of whom were minorities. He believes in life and liberty for ALL. He has been fighting for the Bill of Rights his entire career. n nNothing in those letters sounds like Paul. But some of it does sound like Lew. And he was in charge of getting them written. DO THE MATH
Where does come in? Also: I guess it's totally fine that Dr. Paul hired a raving racist to write a newsletter published under his own name. You make a good point. That totally absolves Ron Paul of responsibility, just like Eric Holder bears no responsibility for the Fast and Furious scandal. As he his fond of pointing out, his staff knew about it, but he did not.
Yeah yeah yeah. First person anecdotes. His name. His subscriptions. And he collects the money. But hey, it all went by him.. Who knew? Except he defended the articles in 1996 and took ownership of them. Down the memory hole. What he has been preaching for the last 30 years is that America is a corrupt and evil nation, run de facto by a CIA coup, manipulated by unseen and controlling forces, debased in its government, debased in its currency, and rightly reviled around the world that can only be saved by a systematic counter-revolution. Good luck with that. n nSend us the newsletters en route to yeoman's paradise.
Your Truther accusations are false Sir. He is a non-interventionist and thinks America should respect the sovereignty of other countries. Our meddling in other countries affairs is what has attributed to 9-11.
The simple fact is the newsletter stories or comments are so unlike and out of character for Ron Paul that it is obvious they were not written by him. Side by side they do not resemble in context or style any other written works of Paul. Paul has always been a champion of human rights and has spoken highly of MLK and his peaceful methods of resistance. As a physician Paul provided care to disadvantaged minorities, his work being charitable. The local NAACP has come to Paul's defense releasing a statement that Dr. Paul is not a racist. Logic should prevail when examining the evidence but instead this story is being played and played on a broken and biased media conglomeration of special interests.
Ron Paul can't remember who put his suit on this morning. And yes, he truckles to Truthers and regularly goes on Alex Jones to philosophize about the deep dark New Order at the core of the American soul. That comment about 9-11 glee in the White House over their long-planned Iraqi war was a dog whistle. And if you think Al Qaeda's claustrophobic blinded-by-sunlight war to exterminate the impure and restore the Caliphate–whether the auto de fe be fed on American victims or Iraqi Shia or Egyptian Copts–is a rational response to American meddling, your cart is before the horse. When you follow Ron Paul's lead you end up staring at the ultimate horse's arse.
To Nolan: His "lack of character"? You must be having a laugh… He does that to represent his constituents, who pay into the system and deserve their money back, exactly in line with libertarian principles, and exactly what a man of character, and a true statesman would do. All that these alleged "controversies" do is highlight the ignorance of your average American voter and the way in which the media sells us supposed "controversies" like it sells us wars and fast food. The only person with no character, slinging insults at a good man, and gulity of having no judgment, is you my friend. If you can't see Ron Paul's integrity, which is plainly evident, it is you with the blatant prejudice and an utter lack of judgment. You see precisely what you want to see. There is no such thing as righteous indignance with the media, exposing Ron Paul for what he truly is. The media represents and does the grunt work of the banks and the military industrial complex, CNN and Fox most of all, the very people Ron Paul does not represent.
He can't since he represents the American people and not the power elite and its nefarious schemes, wars, and acts of legitimized theft (media, Iraq, bailouts). Did you know he only takes one fifth of his annual salary and gives the rest back to the government? Did you know Goldman Sachs bankrolls the Romney campaign? That is why they attack him. Not because reasonable people think he's a racist, if that word has any genuine meaning any longer. In fact, of all Republican candidates, Paul polls best among minorities. So if "racist" means holding a particular biased worldview that exaggerates minority wrongs and underplays their goods, minorities don't buy it. You on the other hand, are surely swallowing the Kool-aid. Disagreeing with him is one thing, slandering him is another. I disagree with him on much. But saying he has no character? That's so absurd as to be risible. You don't know what character is. Get it? But unfortunately for you, you are trapped, because having no judgment means your are trapped in a state that causes you to overlook the absolutely apparent.
nHow is Ron Paul protecting "free speech" by refusing to out the author of said newsletters? That makes no sense. Also, said person — we'll call him Ron — wouldn't be having his name dragged through the mud, if by that you mean he was being falsely accused of writing something he didn't. It would be a discussion of words/sentiments actually expressed by this person. That's not mud slinging. That's demanding responsibility and accountability from our public "servants". Ron Paul is a fundamentally dishonest man who whines when the principles he claims to espouse are applied to him. n