0 votes

New York Times Retracts Smear Against Ron Paul

The New York Times has just issued a retraction to their piece a few days ago attemting to link Ron Paul to white supremacists. They admit that the piece "should not have been published."

I hope their retraction gets as much attention as their original post did.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

formidable force....black out the media!

a comment above brought this to mind....as we become a formidable economic force in this country, maybe we should move in mass and cause real waves....what if all Ron Paul supporters did a black out of the media the way they have done to our candidate....ie start a campaign to relinquish our cable tv...imagine the financial impact we would have on these weasels who get our good hard earned money???? i for one would gladly ban time warner from my house, save the internet of course....i turned the tv off for 9 months a few years ago....phenomenaly positive experience!

just a thought!

No TV for 3 Years!!!

When my husband and I started our business, we got rid of our tv all together for 3 years, so we would have more time and while weird at first, we didn't really miss it. It can easily be done.
Use your tv for target practice and exercise your 2nd!

Classic MSM tactic

This is standard protocol when MSM puts out a smear campaign against a presidential candidate like Dr. Paul. Their plan all along was to smear him in MSM and then put a retraction out later to confuse voters who don't know much about Dr. Paul's views.

over at daily kos he has

another post calling Paul a racist. www.dailykos.com

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."- Thomas Jefferson

NYT still sucks

If you look at the Political page on the NYT website... you will not see Ron Paul's name once. Nor is he pictured in the candidates at the top right of the page... he is in 'other' candidates. They don't deserve our attention and traffic on their site... not even to post a thank you. A thank you for what... stating the obvious, and in doing so, restating the smear again. They will be kissing our butts soon... when Ron Paul wins Iowa and New Hampshire.

Ron Paul '08


NYT sucks, and I agree. They don't deserve our traffic. BOYCOTT NYT!!!

Vote Freedom
Vote Liberty

Paul M. Green
Solomons, MD

Vote Freedom
Vote Liberty

The retraction does nothing except


It's like running the article a again . It again associates Dr. Paul with tis person.

Retraction my ass.Sulzberger owns the Times and is bent on stopping everything that Dr. Paul represents.

These people are not honorable and if you research who they are by watching their actions over the last 2 generations you will see what I am saying.

These people are dreadful and will stoop to anything to get their goal.

Regardless, we want it more than they do.



Racist only?

I'm disappointed really- by now you'd think they'd have trotted out "anti-Semite" too.

Well, his decades-long friendship


with that noted anti-semite Milton Friedman makes that accusation a stretch, even for our "fair" & "balanced" news media...

Sorry for the double post.

I accidentally hit the post button twice.

When All Else Fails

Cry "racism"!. It is a psychological tool that the left uses to taint their opponents and oppress the masses. Don't let this word rule your life. Ron Paul cares about America, and anyone who defends America's borders, culture, laws, language, history is a threat to the open borders pro-war traitors who would sell off our country to the highest bidder if given half a chance.

You are so right!

The left uses this as a weapon. When they are losing an argument, they pull out the racism card and sling it around so much that it's lost effectiveness.

Even some "libertarians" I know use this tactic without even realizing it. They are likely the product of the public schools and the brainwashing and it's almost an automatic reaction.

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

they need to remove the article

it is still there and they provide a link to it at the top of the "retraction."
I think they need to be contacted by a lawyer.

a loud message to send

is your personal feelings on their journalism practices and should you be a subscriber....the cancellation of your subscription.

Not Strong Enough

I have been arguing for two days with a blogger (who I had formerly respected) about his posting of the unfounded allegations. Last night I pointed out the retraction by the New York Times and he responded:

The Times did not "retract" the story (it was not theirs to retract, but Bill White's). They printed Paul's denial of the accusations and said they should have gotten them in the original story. That's hardly a retraction.

Of course he was wrong as the Times clearly stated that the allegations should not have been published. However this response indicates to me that the Times retraction was not nearly strong enough. We still have a lot of work left to do to correct the misconceptions brought forward by this story and the many rumor mongers who helped to spread it.

Great Job, RP campaign!

Especially Jesse Benton and Bill White. This is a huge blow to NYT reputation: publishing unchecked rumors without even contacting the source.
New York TImes? Are you kidding me? You can bet they are very unhappy now. And other MSM outlets are put on notice: the campaugn is watching! And fighting back!
Great job!

"Apology" Not accepted ...

Not until they print a headline saying "We print lies" or they donate the next month of their revenue to RP08.

The retraction is next to worthless...

In my opinion. The publishing editor either knew the info was wrong, the allegations a smear, and allowed the article to be published in the first place making him/her a scumbag OR they had no clue that the info was wrong, and are so incompetent they shouldn't be an editor at a major newspaper.

Either way, the NYT sucks.

Just my 2 cents.

Great News! Keep up the good work!!!

Who is Ron Paul? I am Ron Paul! We are Ron Paul!
"Fire Team for Freedom" on RonPaulRadio.com
Mondays and Wednesdays 10pm EST
or visit www.mikeandjake.com

"Fire Team for Freedom"
visit www.mikeandjake.com

Behold, the power of angry and abrasive emails to NY Times!

I wrote them about a 5 paragraph email, in an angry tone, with conviction, and pointed out all the fabrications and errors... and I'm sure other did too, and didn't assauge their Ego over at the New York Slimes, and they conform... No nicey nicey...

The overwhelming flood of

The overwhelming flood of criticism was
incredible once they opened up the comments gate!
I only got to about 38 of 280 or more.
They know it now.


The smear campaign has already done its work for those who read the article and this retraction might not be read by those same people. They put the retraction out to appease the angry and say "we are still legitimate", but the lies they spew has already contaminated the minds of readers unfamiliar with Ron Paul.

Kudos to the Ron Paul Campaign

Having the New York Times issue the retraction first without having to have the campaign issue a formal denial is a good outcome. Most people read any sort of denial as fishy, but a retraction without a denial throws the whole thing back in the Times face and simply reinforces the oft repeated theme that the Old Media seems to be out to get Ron Paul.

I was getting real real nervous about the lack of a substantive response to the allegations from the campaign, but clearly the campaign handled this one correctly. Kudos.

Hilarious rebuttal

There were some great comments in defense of Ron Paul. This one had me ROFL:

Finally, Lifson would have to hold that Paul has spent the last 20 years in Congress reigning in all of his white supremacist furor, while faking the most libertarian platform in GOP memory, on the off-chance that he may someday become president, whence he can unleash his true socialist white supremacist agenda.

Hilarious, brilliant, and reasonable!!

"The best way to insure implicit obedience is to commence tyranny in nursery." - Disraeli

Don't Vote For Ron Paul for anything less than
Re[love]ution & Renaissance

After irresponsible stories

After irresponsible stories like this, its no wonder a huge number of Americans no longer consider the NYT a respectable newspaper.


NYT has been caught before..

There were at least two major scandals regarding the NYT and its reporters -- two people who had printed outright fabrications and were fired.

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

Not the greatest retraction

The retraction is a start, but it just reeks. First, the content is still up there and all they are doing is apologizing for not verifying it . It should be yanked online. Second, calling Ron Paul a Nazi even if you hide behind gossip as your source is a pretty heavy libel for a rag like the NYT. Virginia should be fired over this. I see also that the comments have 36 comments now and have been closed for further comments. That is impossible because the dates of the comments range from the 24th through 26th and I know this smear got a lot of attention on other sites. I tried to comment on the 25th and at that time it was showing as 0 comments, and my comment is not among those displayed. I bet there were hundreds or thousands of disgusted people who attempted to comment. This whole episode is shameful.

Aside from all that, racism is a witch-hunt. If someone states that they are not racist that should be the end of the matter unless there is evidence of actions or policies which infringe on someone's rights. The difference between going after Ron Paul on this and going after Huckabee on setting murdering rapists free or raising taxes is that Huckabee's skeletons are real verifiable facts and they show what he is capable of in office. Ron Paul, as we know, has no such skeletons -these so called "rumors" would be totally out of character and are not reflected in his record and his style. This story just shows how the MSM cannot be trusted to report news without bias or an agenda.

Hollow Apology

After rereading the "retraction," they never really apologized for the error or for libeling Dr. Paul, they just said it shouldn't have been published.

I guess the only thing the NYT is genuinely sorry for is that their attempt at a smear didn't stick!

Please consider reviewing the comments after the retraction

Put yourself in the shoes of an editor who found a mistake and did the right thing, but who doesn't know much about Ron Paul except that he's a 'second tier' candidate with a 'fanatical supporters' who 'live in their basements' and can raise campaign money.

Which comments make you more or less scared that Ron Paul supporters might win?

"The best way to insure implicit obedience is to commence tyranny in nursery." - Disraeli

Don't Vote For Ron Paul for anything less than
Re[love]ution & Renaissance

I have yet to review 'em

But I hope at least one includes the fact that the author apparently thinks it's ok to lie to judges in courtrooms...

I'm sure some of the pro-Paul comments look a bit like flames, so I'm not trying to take away from your point TOO much...But perhaps -- just perhaps -- if the NYT instituted a policy against hiring obvious liars this kind of issue wouldn't keep biting them in the ass over & over. I'm not all that nice when I respond to liars, either. (And I hope someone else can dig up that URL again where she says she lied, but it was here yesterday as I drank from the DailyPaul firehose!)

dig dig dig AHA!!! A miracle I found it, but...


here's a link to the liar-link from yesterday.

What did I tell you?

NYT has been caught in many a serious lie, about things that were quite a bit more serious than this.

This was made up out of whole cloth, ala Dan Rather, to support an idea they want to push.

Folks, this is how the Rockefeller-controlled media WORKS and always has since every major outlet had elitists placed within them in powerful positions, ON PURPOSE by Rockefeller's own admission.

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

Every time I see the word

Every time I see the word "smear" now, I feel like a having a bagel.

"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore

Where in the paper

Was it as prominent as the smear piece?

This is huge, it needs to go

This is huge, it needs to go viral.


I sure hope Ron gets to blast the NYT and "thank" them for making the correction on Tucker and Woof tomorrow - such fun, hahahhaha.

RP campaign shouldn't stop there...

The campaign should issue some "lawyerly advice" to littlegreenfootballs, American Thinker and Lone Star Times for a 'cease and desist' to avoid an expensive day in court. Fundraising prowess has its advantages ;)

"Give a man a gun, and he could rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he could rob the world."

I think the only effect that

I think the only effect that would have would be an increase of traffic to those sites, and I am quite sure 1% of all voters have ever heard of them, let alone visit them. Voters are what matters, and the campaign should stay focused on getting votes.