Ron Paul vehemently distances himself from the newsletters on CNN:
Based on this appearance, I am more inclined to believe that he, indeed, did not write them. Nevertheless, he should still be condemned for allowing this stuff to be published in his name.
Thanks to The New Republic, libertarians who weren't paying attention in the 1990s, don't read Texas Monthly, and didn't do their candidate research have now discovered that Ron Paul said--or, more likely, allowed to be said in his name (probably by Lew Rockwell)--nasty things in his newsletters. Much reaction can be found at Hit & Run, as well as Andrew Sullivan's blog and The Volokh Conspiracy. The disclosures are not news to me, nor is the Paul campaign's dismissive reaction a surprise. When you give your political heart to a guy who spends so much time worrying about international bankers, you're not going to get a tolerant cosmopolitan.
Also, respected Austrian economist Steve Horwitz's opinion is here. It is a fair and comprehensive take on this discovery.
2008 Race
Posted by Harrison Bergeron at January 11, 2008 10:08 AM
What do I think?
I think that the GOP establishment has been trying to take Ron Paul down since he backed Reagan against Ford and the Rockefellars (who are the REAL racists.) I think they managed to get someone on to the newsletter staff, wrote some great things, built some trust, found Ron Paul really wasn't involved in the newsletter (a company approached HIM to create the newsletters and Ron Paul authored NOTHING in the newsletters at all) and took advantage of that and put this stuff in ONE newsletter. See, the originator of this crap IMPLIES that it happened for decades, but the only proof he offers is from ONE newsletter. You cannot find anything before or after that sounds even remotely like this.
I mean, seriously, just look at it. It is almost satire. Too perfect. It hits on every single category of racism. It is a charicture of a racist. It sounds like neocon writing. The name-calling, for example. Does that even sound like Ron Paul? When have you heard him talk like that?
As far fetched as it might sound, somebody set Ron Paul up, plain and simple. Now they are spreading rumors that it was Lew Rockwell. These people are the only ones that know who it really was.
It doesn't matter though. It will either be a successful smear attempt or it won't. I don't see the media covering Obama's endorsement by Farrakhan or Hillary hiring the La Raza chairman.
It is obvious to anyone that knows what is at stake if Ron Paul gets elected that there is an extrmely concerted effort to take him down.
It will either work or it won't. You either believe it or you don't.
Ask yourself this: If Ron Paul is telling the truth, what else can he possibly do? What if he really DOESN'T know who wrote this? How would YOU be able to defend yourself if someone did this to you?
It isn't the first smear campaign against Dr. Paul, and it won't be the last. Billions of dollars of taxpayers money and unbelievable power is as at stake for those he opposes.
What did you expect; that they were just going to give up?
Posted by: Scott M. at January 11, 2008 11:20 AM
Not to mention that this newsletter was so obscure that only someone that already KNEW it existed would be able to find it. Did you read where it was found? In a library in Kansas. The TNR author isn't even IN Kansas.
What are the chances that he simply stumbled on this without someone telling him what to look for?
Exactly...
The question is this: do you believe in saving this country from the real evil enough? War isn't pretty and make no mistake, this is war. You are going to have to chose a side and stick with it to the very end.
Posted by: Scott M. at January 11, 2008 11:25 AM
Libertarians are incapable of racism? 67% of blacks are in prison? I'm not sure.
I agree on the Drug War and I agree that he did not write them. And I agree that he is not a racist. But to not care what the Ron Paul Newsletter says, to have no idea who was the editor, who wrote them and to not care is disturbing. But put me down with the blogger (sorry, can’t find who) who would rather not vote for Rep. Paul because of his positions rather than not vote for Paul because of perceived racism.
Paul's assertion in the debate last night that Israel can take care of itself without an implicit American is specious. It is a legitimate position to call for the US to abdicate our involvement in “World Policing” but I strongly disagree. I also dispute his assertion that "we're broke, and can't do it anymore” that “we have to borrow billion from the Chinese to keep up 'The Empire.'" Did he perhaps take out a loan to go to Medical School, or to buy a house?
I have some strong libertarian leanings, but this guy has failed to excite me at all.
What do I think?
I think that the GOP establishment has been trying to take Ron Paul down since he backed Reagan against Ford and the Rockefellars (who are the REAL racists.) I think they managed to get someone on to the newsletter staff, wrote some great things, built some trust, found Ron Paul really wasn't involved in the newsletter (a company approached HIM to create the newsletters and Ron Paul authored NOTHING in the newsletters at all) and took advantage of that and put this stuff in ONE newsletter. See, the originator of this crap IMPLIES that it happened for decades, but the only proof he offers is from ONE newsletter. You cannot find anything before or after that sounds even remotely like this.
I mean, seriously, just look at it. It is almost satire. Too perfect. It hits on every single category of racism. It is a charicture of a racist. It sounds like neocon writing. The name-calling, for example. Does that even sound like Ron Paul? When have you heard him talk like that?
As far fetched as it might sound, somebody set Ron Paul up, plain and simple. Now they are spreading rumors that it was Lew Rockwell. These people are the only ones that know who it really was.
It doesn't matter though. It will either be a successful smear attempt or it won't. I don't see the media covering Obama's endorsement by Farrakhan or Hillary hiring the La Raza chairman.
It is obvious to anyone that knows what is at stake if Ron Paul gets elected that there is an extrmely concerted effort to take him down.
It will either work or it won't. You either believe it or you don't.
Ask yourself this: If Ron Paul is telling the truth, what else can he possibly do? What if he really DOESN'T know who wrote this? How would YOU be able to defend yourself if someone did this to you?
It isn't the first smear campaign against Dr. Paul, and it won't be the last. Billions of dollars of taxpayers money and unbelievable power is as at stake for those he opposes.
What did you expect; that they were just going to give up?
Posted by: Scott M. at January 11, 2008 11:20 AMNot to mention that this newsletter was so obscure that only someone that already KNEW it existed would be able to find it. Did you read where it was found? In a library in Kansas. The TNR author isn't even IN Kansas.
What are the chances that he simply stumbled on this without someone telling him what to look for?
Exactly...
The question is this: do you believe in saving this country from the real evil enough? War isn't pretty and make no mistake, this is war. You are going to have to chose a side and stick with it to the very end.
Posted by: Scott M. at January 11, 2008 11:25 AMLibertarians are incapable of racism? 67% of blacks are in prison? I'm not sure.
I agree on the Drug War and I agree that he did not write them. And I agree that he is not a racist. But to not care what the Ron Paul Newsletter says, to have no idea who was the editor, who wrote them and to not care is disturbing. But put me down with the blogger (sorry, can’t find who) who would rather not vote for Rep. Paul because of his positions rather than not vote for Paul because of perceived racism.
Paul's assertion in the debate last night that Israel can take care of itself without an implicit American is specious. It is a legitimate position to call for the US to abdicate our involvement in “World Policing” but I strongly disagree. I also dispute his assertion that "we're broke, and can't do it anymore” that “we have to borrow billion from the Chinese to keep up 'The Empire.'" Did he perhaps take out a loan to go to Medical School, or to buy a house?
I have some strong libertarian leanings, but this guy has failed to excite me at all.
Posted by: jk at January 11, 2008 12:16 PM | What do you think? [3]