Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Ron Paul’s racist newsletters come back to haunt him

By SHERRY BREWER
December 22, 2011

Ron Paul (REUTERS/Richard Clement)

A common complaint from Texas Congressman and GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul’s supporters is that the media ignores their favorite candidate.

As the old Mongolian proverb goes, “be careful what you wish for.”  Paul is getting media attention now and it’s not the kind of attention he or his enthusiastic band of followers wanted.

A series of racist-themed newsletters that appeared under his name in the 1990s have resurfaced and questions about those newsletters and the money he made from them caused Paul to walk out on a CNN interview Wednesday.

“I didn’t write them. I disavow them,” a testy Paul told CNN’s Gloria Berger.  He also claimed to have never read the newsletters.

That is a change from earlier claims by Paul, who in the past said he wrote “some of them.”  In fact, a study of Paul’s comments throughout his political career reveals he has changed his story about the newsletters more than once.

In an interview with the Dallas Morning News, published  on May 22, 1996, Paul did not deny writing the newsletters.  Instead, he defended the writings, saying the comments were “taken out of context.”

In 1992, Paul wrote in his newsletter that “95 percent of the black men in Washington, DC, are “semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”  He also said that anyone who had ever been robbed by a black teenager knew they were “unbelievably fleet of foot.”

“It’s typical political demagoguery,” Paul said.

But he did not deny — at that time — writing the articles in the Ron Paul Political Report or other newsletters published under his name.

Paul also took responsibility for the newsletters in a 1996 interview with Texas Monthly magazine.

At least one former Paul staffer tells Capitol Hill Blue that Paul knew about the newsletter and approved the racists themes published under his name.

“The newsletters were his bread and butter,” said the former staffer who asked not to be identified. “He knew and he agreed with what was being published.”

Former Paul aide Eric Dondero says Paul “did read them, every line of them, off his fax machine at his Clute office before they were published. He would typically sign them at the bottom of the last page giving his okay, and refax them to go to the printer.”

The New Republic reported in 2008 that Paul pulled down close to a million in just one year of publishing the newsletter.  In his shortened interview with CNN, Paul said he would like to see the money.

The Atlantic reported on its web site Wednesday that many questions remain unanswered about Paul’s involvement in his newsletter and the incredibly racist comments published under his name.

Michael Brendan Doughterty of The Atlantic writes:

There is no doubt that the newsletters contained utterly racist statements.

Some choice quotes:

“Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”

“We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational.”

After the Los Angeles riots, one article in a newsletter claimed, “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.”

One referred to Martin Luther King Jr. as “the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours” and who “seduced underage girls and boys.”

Another referred to Barbara Jordan, a civil rights activist and congresswoman as “Barbara Morondon,” the “archetypical half-educated victimologist.”

Other newsletters had strange conspiracy theories about homosexuals, the CIA, and AIDS.

Some speculate the newsletters were actually written by long-time Paul confidant Lew Rockwell but few believe the Congressman did not know what was being said in his name.

The Ron Paul campaign did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Enhanced by Zemanta

16 Responses to Ron Paul’s racist newsletters come back to haunt him

  1. Joe Rest

    December 22, 2011 at 11:14 am

    Making a judgement call on this one is not so clear cut. It basically comes down to if one believes Ron Paul is telling the truth or not. Some people will say he is not, some will say he is. I would lean towards believing him. Why? Because we saw Ron Paul is a strictly honest man, almost to a fault. John Stewart once said it is impossible to do a comedy skit on Ron Paul because in all of his statements he cannot find one contradiction. He is fiercely honest. i would suspect he just made a poor judgement call in who he trusted.

    We need to understand to be a libertarian by strict definition means it is impossible to be racist. Libertarians see everybody as important individuals while racism is a collectivist idea seeing people as a group. Libertarians would say it is not the color of a persons skin which matters but the character of the individual.

    For goodness sake, the man as a doctor gave free care to minority mothers when they couldn’t afford to pay him.. Weirdest form of “racism” I’ve ever heard of!

  2. Carl Nemo **==

    December 22, 2011 at 12:44 pm

    “One referred to Martin Luther King Jr. as “the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours” and who “seduced underage girls and boys.”…extract from post

    This information came from years of building FBI/NSA HUMINT on Dr. King. J.Edgar Hoover had an axe to grind concerning Dr. King. Rest assured folks these agencies can find some dirt on any of us, even Mother Teresa (deceased) / : |

    I think Ron made a mistake by getting huffy and walking out on the interview. He should have fessed up and reaffirmed his written words as well as opinions on the subject. People respect honesty even if the message is racist, skewed, harsh or otherwise.

    So people need to make up their minds, do they vote for this guy or not and if not will they be satisifed with the subsitute, lying sob’s that might make it to the presidency who’ll screw them over in a NY minute. Cain a black man, proved himself to be a liar concerning his many years of philandering. Perry has racist skeletons in his closet and on it goes concerning candidates and people in general.

    Bill Clinton told the late Ted Kennedy that Obama was better suited to provide White Democrats with coffee than he is to lead Americans which outraged Ted but since it was Bill Clinton the media gave him a pass with only a short hissyfit over what he had said. Obama and Bill have engaged in “Barney hugs” since those campaign trail ‘daze’.

    Many black men and women I’ve known in my life say racist things about their own people or towards ‘whitey’ etc. Even the best folks have a bit of bad within as well as the worst have some good.

    Paul screwed up by dodging the allegations.

    *****

    “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” …John 8:7. Christian bible

    *****

    Carl Nemo **==

  3. woody188

    December 22, 2011 at 2:58 pm

    If one would like to read the Paul article it is located here. Once it’s understood the article was written in response to and in the aftermath of the LA “Rodney King” Riots, it makes much more sense as to how such a thing might even be written. It is a highly controversial event on it’s own. I’m not excusing it, but I understand it better having read the whole article. You should too.

    • Carl Nemo **==

      December 22, 2011 at 5:19 pm

      Thanks Woody188 for the link article. I urge others to read it too.

      It surely lays out the “realpolitik” of racism at the street level in our times.

      Carl Nemo **==

  4. Bill Cravener

    December 22, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    It just does not matter how pure Ron Paul is he will never be the President of the United States. The powers that be will see to that. Saying he will do this or that is one thing but the congress will spit in his face if he were President and he would in the end accomplish nothing. Believe it!!

  5. David Ryon

    December 22, 2011 at 7:57 pm

    Dr. Paul has a right to be irritated. Dr. Paul has answered this question multiple times over the past 20 years. He has answered the media’s question concerning the remarks in the publication that had his name on it. Dr. Paul clearly has stated that he did not write the remarks and does not support the racist remarks that were written. How many times does he have to answer the same question.

    I challenge the media to find a statement that was written personally by Ron Paul or an audio file or a video file that shows Ron Paul making a racist remark. All the media is giving us is statements that were not written by Ron Paul.

    Does it make ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX or any media outlet and their employees RACIST when they allow people to post RACIST remarks on their web sites and blog sites and in their newspapers? According to the Media, the answer would be YES. “Judge not media, Lest ye be judged”

    The media doesn’t live up to its own standards. These hit pieces prevent the other Republican candidates from getting their hands dirty and not attack Ron Paul directly. Newt Gingrich is most likely behind this attack. So much for your positive campaign Newt.

    The bottom line is Ron Paul is not racist.

    • Editor

      December 22, 2011 at 10:40 pm

      This excuse is, from our point of view, a common mantra of the Ron Paul faithful: The claim that he has “answered the media’s question concerning the remarks multiple times over the past 20 years.”

      As is so typical in politics, the claim has some truth in it, but not all of the truth. Yes, Ron Paul has answered the question multiple times. The problem is that he has given multiple — and different — answers. First, as quoted in the Dallas Morning News, he was “taken out of context.” Then, as quoted in the Texas Monthly, he only wrote “some of the articles.” Now he’s claiming he didn’t write any of them and never even read them.

      So, yes, he’s answered the questions multiple times. And he’s given various multiple answers.

      So which of these differing answers are we to believe?

  6. Bill Cravener

    December 23, 2011 at 5:37 am

    The more I know of Ron Paul the more eccentric I find that old man to be.

  7. Senegoid

    December 23, 2011 at 10:28 am

    Politics: the theater continues, sound and fury, bread and circuses. The racists, the sex feigns, mistresses, inhaling, not inhaling, having sexual relations, not having sexual relations (with that women) – cigars – all good fun, entertaining, but nothing to do with policy.

    And it’s RP’s policies that the power elite fear most. The racist stuff is a convenient distraction – is it not?

    RP’s policies will most likely RiP. The Powers That Be will see to that.

    Joining the neo-conservative dots:

    Project for a New America Century – full spectrum dominance – Supreme Court elects GWB – 9/11 – Patriot Act – illegal wire taps – Iraqi War – FBI warns of endemic fraud in the mortgage industry – Fusion Centers – Military Commissions Act 2006 – more Fusion Centers – extension of Patriot Act – FEMA Centers – massive US taxpayer bail out of fraudant banks – bankers rewards themselves with record bonuses – Tea Party – Occupy Wall St – Fusion Centers now in all US states – Nation Defense Authorization Act 2012 – game over.

    It would appear animals now have far more rights in the US than the citizens:

    “FBI Says Activists Who Investigate Factory Farms Can Be Prosecuted as Terrorists:

    http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/fbi-undercover-investigators-animal-enterprise-terrorism-act/5440/

    “It is deeply sobering to see one’s name in an FBI file proposing terrorism charges,” he said in an email. “It is even more sobering to realize the supposedly terroristic activities in question are merely exposing the horrific cruelty of factory farms, educating the public about what goes on behind those closed doors, and openly rescuing a few animals from one of those farms as an act of civil disobedience.”…

    This document illustrates how the backlash against effective activism has progressed within the animal rights movement. However, if this type of legislation is not overturned, it will set a precedent for corporations to use this model against Occupy Wall Street and anyone else who threaten business as usual.”

    The Nobel Peace Prize winner has been chosen to carry on the policies of GWB – my money’s on BO to win another term – now that big money and big war have control they intend on keeping it, totally.

    Merry Xmas America, oops sorry, Happy Holidays – enjoy, for these will be the last before the War on Terror, and related military occupation comes to the US homeland.

    Soon we will all be defined as terrorist – it will be for our own safety.

    Next year is the year of the Dragon – it may well be inflammatory: socially, enconomically, and militarily.

    • woody188

      December 23, 2011 at 1:50 pm

      You had me up until stealing from farms became “openly rescuing a few animals from one of those farms as an act of civil disobedience.”

      Should it be called terrorism?

      No. But it is theft and should be treated as theft of property.

      When I certified for my concealed carry permit, one of the questions I asked for clarification was “Could I shoot someone that was stealing my livestock?”

      The answer was no, not unless I was threatened or in fear of my own life. But if it came to my family starving versus shooting someone to keep our livestock, one better believe I’m pulling the trigger, despite what it’s called in their mind.

    • Carl Nemo **==

      December 24, 2011 at 10:54 pm

      An excellent laundry list of creeping totalitarianism in America Senegoid.

      For an Australian you seemingly have a far better grasp concerning the dark order of the day stalking America than the average U.S. citizen.

      Thanks for your spot-on input.

      Merry Christmas and a Happy and Successful New Year 2011 to you and yours my friend in thought…cheers! : )

      Carl Nemo **==

      • Carl Nemo **==

        December 24, 2011 at 11:00 pm

        Re: last paragraph

        “Merry Christmas and a Happy and Successful New Year 2011 to you and yours my friend in thought…cheers! : )

        should read:

        Merry Christmas and a Happy and Successful New Year 2012 to you and yours my friend in thought…cheers! : )

        My apologies Senegoid, the only excuse I can offer is that I’ve tipped one too many a bit early this Christmas Eve. I’m feelin’ gooooood! and hope you be too. : ))

        Carl Nemo **==

  8. David Heath

    December 23, 2011 at 7:18 pm

    This is really dangerous. Ron Paul’s response proves he was complicit in the distribution of the racist material and strongly implicates him as being part of the neoconfederate movement. It is a well known fact that the fairly secretive neoconfederate movement is headquartered in Texas. One of their big mantras being “The South will rise again!” which refers to the overthrow of the US goverment. A job that the confederacy failed to do in the Civil War. What concerns me is that Ron Paul is no dunce. He knows EXACTLY what he is doing concerning his response to the allegations against him. People must understand that neoconfederism is VERY prominent in the South despite what people hear about the South. Ron Paul knows this and I feel that he anticipates this story helping him in those states in both the primary and general election. Make no mistake, the neoconfederates are a subversive group all the way.

  9. Senegoid

    December 23, 2011 at 10:20 pm

    “Should it be called terrorism?

    No. But it is theft and should be treated as theft of property.”

    Exactly Woody.

    The activist guy calls it “civil disobedience” while the FBI calls it “terrorism”. In reality it’s theft which can already be prosecuted under current property laws in an open and transparent manner.

    The NDAA does not require proof, prosecution or transparency, how convenient.

    In the months and years ahead who will have the term terrorist applied to them or their world view? And for what reasons?

    “He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.”

  10. woody188

    December 26, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    The unedited CNN interview seems to show Paul as much less agitated.

    • Carl Nemo **==

      December 26, 2011 at 7:42 pm

      Thanks Woody188 for the link. It demonstrates as to how the MSM can take short excerpts from an interview in order to create ‘false tenor’ in terms of contention relative to the interviewed that they wish to ‘target’…no? In this case Congressman Ron Paul.

      Cunning sob’s indeed…no? / : |

      Carl Nemo **==