Ron Paul Newsletters, Fact From Fiction
Submitted by Jimmy Liberty on Thu, 12/22/2011 - 00:17Is Ron Paul a racist? Everything points to no, except for one outlying issue in the form of newsletters sent out in the 80's under his name.
Can one thing written in print undo everything he's talked about and believed for 35 years?
I don't think so, because what was written in the newsletters is so far from Ron Paul's words and actions. Here's why I don't think Ron Paul wrote the newsletters:
1. It’s unusual for a newsletter to be written by the figurehead. My clients put out newsletters, they don’t write them. When getting advice about starting one, my most successful client told me specifically not to do the content myself. Likewise, Paul says he didn't write them or see them.
2. Paul’s known for his consistency. But one of the few issues he’s changed his mind on is the death penalty… because of it’s disproportionate use on minorities and those living in the inner city.
Video: http://dotsub.com/view/d0...
3. When challenging the war on drugs, Paul often points out the injustice of blacks and minorities being imprisoned at a higher rate than whites for the same crime. Video: See video above.
4. When challenging foreign wars, Paul often points out that war disproportionately affects minority families.
5. In 2008 Paul pointed to these positions as a possible reason why he received more support from blacks than any other GOP candidate, which polls showed to be true.
6. Paul often cites Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr and Gandhi as his heroes.
7. When asked in 2007 who he might pick as a running mate, he named one guy, Walter Williams, a black man as a strong possibility. Walter also refers to Paul as a friend and said of Paul he’s one of 3 people the founders would even talk to. Video: 4 minute mark
8. Nelson Lender, the director of the NAACP in Austin, Texas said last campaign that he’s known Ron Paul personally for 20 years and is sure he’s not a racist. Scott Horton interview with Nelson Lender:
[Ron Paul as young doctor ... check out the body language!]
http://oi46.tinypic.com/2...
9. Ron Paul got into politics and his libertarian views come from studying… the work of two Jews, Mises and Rothbard.
10. I’ve personally followed essentially everything Ron Paul has done or said since 2007, every single day, and nothing he’s ever said has ever come close to what was written in the newsletters.
11. In fact, the opposite is true. A lot of people like Ron Paul because of what he says about racism: that it’s an ugly form of collectivism, that we don’t get our rights as groups but as individuals and everyone should be treated the same way.
12. No one has ever produced a clip of Ron Paul speaking anything close to the condemnable words in the newsletter, even though he's been speaking publicly for more than 30 years.
13. His constituents have known about these allegations for 15+ years and still vote Paul in by a landslide year after year, because as Paul says, those who know him know it's not his language and he doesn't believe those things.
14. When asked if Paul repudiates the ugly comments from the newsletter, Paul not only repudiated them but said his entire life repudiates those comments, because his words and actions are 180 degrees apart from racism. Video:
Now, if you have a blog or website, link to this post so people can see the truth when they search for Ron Paul Newsletters.
Thanks for putting this together
Robin Koerner has a number of interviews lined up in the liberal media in January - Robin was getting the Ron is a racist line before all of this, my guess is it won't be saved for the end of the interview, but shouted at him right out of the gate.
I'd also ad to this Ron Paul's refusal to endorse John McCain in 2008, and the conference he had with Cynthia McKinney, (a black woman) Ralph Nader, (a lebanese american) and Chuck Baldwin in which he said they are more deserving of support than McCain. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYALxUfEmfQ
Organizers of the Revolution March 2008, The Rally for the Republic, and the March on the White House 2012 have teamed up with Entertainment Pros to create PAUL FEST! A Celebration of Freedom big enough to Change The World! http://www.paulfestival.org/
This video should be shown at
This video should be shown at every Town Hall Meeting prior to Ron taking questions. That would help block reporters from asking about the news letters. It would turn a negative into a positive!
Ron Paul should write a response
and carry it in his pocket. Every time he is asked about this issue, he should pull out the short response and read it to whatever "well meaning journalist" is asking the question. Pointing out that this question has been asked and answered, and they all know it.
The same should go for the "Would you consider running 3rd party?" question.
Ron Paul 2012
He voted for an MLK holiday in 1979!
Add this to the list:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h1979-624
And yet another hit piece from James Kirchick!
Ron Paul: The new teflon candidate?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-215_162-57347017/ron-paul-the-ne...
Here is what I wrote in the comments section:
Mr. Kirchick, you write for The New Republic (TNR). And you claim that Ron Paul absolutely must have known about the racist content of his newsletters. Well, Stephen Glass fabricated the sources, quotes, and locations for several articles he published through TNR. Even though the editorial staff there later apologized and disavowed the content of those articles, does this mean that, at the time, they were all in on the scam? And what about the owners of the magazine? They no doubt made lots of money annually off their publication. Were they part of the scam too?
Newsletters
The more people try to defend Ron Paul over this the more it casts doubt in the minds of people. I suggest we do not respond to the newsletter issue, and talk about his policies. They continue to hammer this because it is all they have. His schedulers should tell any media that he will not respond to any questions about the newsletters. He should put out an official statement and not respond to it any more...it can be ignored like the media ignored him for so long.
RON PAUL 2008 Jazzloversinc
Interview
POLL: Ron Paul walks out of CNN interview after being asked about 'racist' newsletters; what does this say about Paul?
Vote: http://www.wepolls.com/p/6760952
It's < 2 weeks before Iowa, do you think that voters there will think Paul can't keep his cool?
Here is how it works!
The power that rules the world identified Ron Raul as a potential threat early on. This power is very clever. Planting the seeds of destruction early on allows for convenient use should his voice be heard in the future. Why wait until he is on the way up to parade out flimsy charges? An agent of this ruling power put the dirt under Ron Paul's name in the past intentionally to get the desired result of discrediting his message in the future if need be. Rest assured, the world ruling power plans on staying in power. It is our duty to free ourselves from this anti-constitutional slavery that has been imposed upon the United States of America! Ron Paul has pointed out the evil spell we are currently under and has liberated us from this sorcery. Ron Paul is trying to liberate the other candidates from the anti-constitutional spell that has been imposed upon them as well. As the good Dr. Ron Paul points out "Liberate Freedom" to which I would add "Liberate the Constitution"!
Good stuff, for sure. how will the campaign handle this?
1) this is great info.
2) I think the campaign is going to need to work on their response to this issue, because there is no way it's going away. Using this type of evidence would be a great start.
3) I'm sure my friends think I worship RP, but I'd like to think I still have my thinking cap on. When cain started dealing with all those accusations, he handled it by denying it over and over again and refusing to have much more of a public discussion than that. It didn't go well.
I think the campaign should consider setting up an interview with stossel or doyle, or someone who will be fair and deal with this head on. paul is usually calm and logical, and he needs to be exhibiting those traits now more than ever where the public can see. Speak about the newsletters, talk about why they were published in his name at all if he wasn't even reading them. (was he being compensated in any way, etc?) Then talk about how reading the most inflammatory comments affected him, personally. (how did he feel?) Finally, he has admitted moral responsibility, so mention what he has done or is doing to "make it right", even if that means describing how his policies combat racial inequity, as above.
Just my $.02. Of course most of the media has treated RP unfairly overall... That's a given. But this question is totally legit for voters to consider, and I believe RP has the tools and the moral ground to deal with this in the open and put it to bed for good.
http://blog.floydius.com
How about we contact Ben Swann for a Reality Check
How about we contact Ben Swann for a Reality Check on Ron Paul being a racist. Might be a great segment to spread far and wide
from the net
Gloria Borger is married to LANCE MORGAN. Lance is the chief communications and crisis strategist of POWELL TATE. Powell Tate is a D.C. firm that represents every part of the very same MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX that Ron Paul wants to reduce!
This is a total conflict of interest! Her husband's firm includes overseeing a coalition to support congressional funding to parts of the U.S. Military! All of these "journalists" seem to be profiting from these wars!
Walter Williams
I would hope that when Dr. Paul wins the nomination he will pick Walter Williams as his Vice President candidate. First of all it would put this whole issue to rest. Second, Walter would be able to explain all of the welfare reforms that need to happen b/c thats his specialty. Third, because we would be running against a black sitting president having another person of color would help (I hate to say Americans can be shallow). And finally if the worst comes to pass where Dr. Paul passes away (people will consider this when voting) we have someone solid to keep the good fight going.
Dissident View
I simply cannot defend the crap excuse that Ron Paul has proffered. He needs to show remorse for not protecting his legacy and what appeared in the newsletters.
1) Even if one assumes that newsletters are written by surrogates. The very surrogates should have written material that the figurehead would endorse and benefit from. The Ron Paul name was a brand that should have been protected. If a newsletter author knew that Paul eschewed racism or cherry picking to insult blacks, then they would never write such material. supposing they did, then Paul has to take the blame, it's his legacy.
2) Opposition to the war on drugs is a staple of libertarian sentiment. To argue that Paul disavows drug prohibition because he is especially fond of blacks is weak. Indeed, Paul allows for individual states to criminalize drugs, so what's the point? To be against the drug war is not to like black people.
3) The supposition that a racist must treat all blacks poorly is nonsensical. Abraham Lincoln was a racist and he was fond of Frederick Douglas. A given slave-master would care more about his black servants than his white neighbor within the context of the slavery system. The "I have a black friend" argument is laughable.
4) I will never concede that the newsletters were racist. The content was meant to denigrate and stereotype blacks, but it was not about white supremacy or advocating violence against blacks.
5) I consider many men as my heroes with whom I disagree on religion and race. Mitt Romney's hero is the founder Mormonism and said founder had an unflattering opinion of blacks. A racist is quite capable of admitting that Asians are superior in intellect to whites. Therefore, to admire someone of another 'race' does not preclude racism. I could believe that blacks are largely inferior but listen to Sugar Belly and Hendrix.
http://blklibertarian.blogspot.com/
Nah
Being against the drug war doesn't suggest he's not a racist. It's the fact that he often argues from the viewpoint that it's unfair to blacks. He says they make up 14% of the users, 30% of the arrests and 60% of those who end up in jail (roughly). A racist would probably deny, ignore or support those numbers - Ron Paul uses them to advocate on behalf of blacks.
And it's not that he has a "black friend." That'd be ridiculous. It's that one of his longtime friends, who happens to be black and works on behalf of black issues for a nationally known organization, is vouching for his character.
And no one fact does it. All the facts put together paint a picture, and the picture is of the Ron Paul we all know, not a racist.
Racism
The Dissident View on Ron Paul, must be refuted point by point:
#1-From someone that has read a few of Dr. Paul's his eight books seen and read almost everything on the Daily Paul's front page for four plus years. And, before that was student of the Austrian School, where I first heard of him. I don't think he thought of himself as a "brand", too megalomanical for Dr. Paul. What don't you understand about a guy being a full time OB/GYN, having mega responsibilities of his patients care literally for 24 hours a day. He would have done his patient's a disservice if he spent too much time reading every thing written under his banner. After all newsletters are used by most if not all of the careers that constitute professional life. Then you will come off, as to judge him that he should take the "blame" for everthing written in these newsletters. What did he do wrong? Have a newsletter in the first place? Concentrated on his patients too much? Blame no, he does not need to take the "blame".
#2-Why would you think he does not like black people? Would you like him to really like black people, but want him to arrest people of that skin tone at a rate of 9-1 over whites of the same teen age, thereby, putting them behind the legal eight-ball for the rest of their lives, and for just marijuana possession. With his 35+ years in public life, and we are to believe your inference, that he dislikes black people. No proof.
#3-So then you think he is a friendly racist? Because you say so?
#4- Some people may have seen racism in the newsletters but does that made Ron Paul racist. No again, no proof.
#5- You seem to have more problems toward racism then Dr. Paul. And what is he supposed to do to help you through that?
In his opening he's saying RP should show "remorse" with what was written in these newsletters, no you should go to GettingRich's website and see if you can't get him to show "remorse" about taking 1.6 mil from Fanny or Freddy whatever. Whine over there, please.
You just made the argument...
"2) Opposition to the war on drugs is a staple of libertarian sentiment. To argue that Paul disavows drug prohibition because he is especially fond of blacks is weak."
You just made the argument as to why the newsletters doesn't mean *squat* and they're a non-issue. I take Paul at his word when he says he didn't write that stuff, but what if Paul *IS* a racist? Does it matter? What if he wrote that stuff? Distasteful yes, but people have been *so* trained to be pc and hypersensitive. Nowhere is there anything saying send "blacks back to Africa" (Lincoln supported that), or a call for eugenics, or that blacks are genetically inferior or calls for apartheid. "13 yo blacks are fleet-footed." Wow! Horrendous!
I'm an atheist but I'll be voting for Paul. Atheists have a bigger beef with Paul even if he were a racist because we *know* he is devoutly religious and his positions on abortion and evolution. But I *don't* care because I know he defends the Constitution.
There's only one reason the media keeps playing the racist card and that's because they see it as the *one* chink in his armor. I suspect we'll see it over and over (although Blitzer did the "you don't care if children are starving on the streets" bit).
And EPJ notes that the CNN interviewer's husband is a big shot with a DC lobbying firm. She's got a huge conflict of interest yet CNN allows her to pull this crap. That means the stench at CNN goes straight to the top.
To apologize for something
To apologize for something you did not do or know about at the time is ridiculous. He has disavowed the articles and that is enough -- asked and answered. The attack is coming from the neocons (Military Induatrial Complex aka warmongers) supporting the establishment candidates. It is not going to work for them in the long term -- their days of power is coming to an end so get over it.
POST THIS VIDEO ON ALL ARTICLES ACCUSING HIM OF RACISM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3EADdr-5AY&feature=share
This YouTube should be sent
This YouTube should be sent to every media outlet, including the National Review. The attack on Ron may backfire by attracting people to check his real record. I can see Ron attracting more supporters if that happens.
Best video proving not racist
Awesome!!
This has everything needed to show without a doubt that Ron Paul is not, and never has been, racist.
Witness the POWER of an IDEA - the MASSIVE Ron Paul Rallies! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgsg7a-Ok8Q
Establishment and Media tactics
The media is bought off by BIG Corporations.They use these type of tactics to steer the American People away from the true issues at hand.Like
A)Economy
B)Jobs
C)War
Come on guys,you all know Ron Paul is the most Honest man up there running for President.The Media will take just 3 words and turn it around for there benefit and keep digging at it until the American People start believing it.The most IMPORTANT issue at hand is getting Ron Paul elected to get our Republic back.
We are in a fight to get this country back on track.Do not let them win,get boots on the ground and get the good word out on Ron Paul!This right now of what they are pulling is garbage and they know it.Now they are scared that the American People have woken up to there scare tactics.They will do anything to keep there money supply coming in,which in turn comes from us,the American people.
We better wake up to these tactics!Just shut off the BOOB TUBE PLEASE!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juFSNpjbVN4
"Network" 1976 -- Turn off your TV! [combined with today's news]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9wCAQz73tA&feature=related
I have a few general
comments on this whole discussion. There have been a few posts with a multitude of comments on how Ron should say this or that. Of these suggestions, the most detrimental is the suggestion that the person who wrote them should come forward or that we should somehow force our collective will on the situation and pressure Lew Rockwell or others we suspect to either admit to it or find out who it was. That's an arrogant approach to take in my opinion. My personal view is that it is a sensitive internal matter between Dr. Paul and whoever wrote the articles.
We have to understand that the media doesn't want an answer that will settle the issue so their only purpose for finding out who wrote them is to dig up more dirt(warrented or otherwise) and attach it to Dr. Paul.
Dr. Paul said he didn't write them and that he takes full responsibility for them being written under his name. More importantly, he has stated that they are not his beliefs, and his record speaks to that.
Beyond this there is no answer that will satisfy the media because they don't want to be satisfied. They simply want more "red meat" so that they can place it front and center in the election thereby suppressing the more important issues which Dr. Paul has championed for many years.
So, I say Dr. Paul is doing great by keeping to the basics. The media doesn't have enough to successfully make it the main story, which is the reason they can only successfully allot a portion of the time in interviews to this issue. Dr. Paul is still able to talk about the issues and get his message out to the public and we should be thankful for that.
Be carefull what you wish for.
(Btw, thanks for putting this information together.)
Level the playing field with ROBERT'S RULES and a good recording device:
http://www.dailypaul.com/142513/roberts-rules-video-library
Alternative Cancer Therapies
http://www.dailypaul.com/226732/alternative-cancer-therapies...
Good comment ...
... especially this: "Beyond this there is no answer that will satisfy the media because they don't want to be satisfied. They simply want more "red meat" so that they can place it front and center in the election thereby suppressing the more important issues which Dr. Paul has championed for many years."
It is pointless and maybe even detrimental to be derailed into the hopeless effort to prove oneself not a racist. Ron Paul's record speaks for itself.
They've tried to attack him on his "extreme" positions on everything from drugs to Iran to Israel. It has all blown up in their faces and made Paul even stronger.
If the newsletters had never been written, they would have NOTHING to try to hang him with. So, expect that they will never let go of this. And they DON'T WANT a satisfactory answer, explanation or excuse.
Paul and the campagin are probably doing the best that can be done, and taking the right course by saying over and over, "I didn't write them. I disagree with them. I disavow them." And then steering the discussion back to the real issues.
Remember, his enemies are not nice guys. They play for keeps. If they think they can use this to kill his surge, they will.
I have no suggestions or magic bullet to offer. This must simply be weathered. Paul needs to go over and around the media and reach directly to the voters -- and that's what he's doing.
The only misstep I've seen is his walking out of that interview. But I can't say it was "wrong." The frustration must be almost overwhelming. How would any of us have reacted?
Sorry, I know I'm rambling. I guess my only point is to reinforce stillwater's comment. Keep to the basics. Don't try to "prove" to anyone that you're not a racist -- that just makes you look desperate and pleading, and nothing you say or do will "satisfy" your enemies.
Turn up the heat! www.thepetitionsite.com/1/message-to-the-GOP/
On facebook: www.facebook.com/MessageToGOP
Could Gloria Borger have a Conflict of Interest?
Did anyone notice this comment after the article -- if true it becomes obvious her motivations and the inherient duplicity of the news media: (link to article at end of post)
"Posted By the200wing | 30 minutes ago
The woman who "interviewed" Paul, Gloria Borger, is married to a LANCE MORGAN. Mr. Morgan is the chief communications and crisis strategist of POWELL TATE. Powell Tate is a Washington D.C. firm that represents every part of the very same MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX that Ron Paul wants to reduce!
This is a total conflict of interest! Her husband's firm includes overseeing a coalition to support congressional funds to parts of the U.S. Military! She's profiting from the wars that Dr. Paul wants to end! She's got a lot to lose with a Paul presidency, to say the least.
Also, the CNN piece WASN'T REAL! The interview was already over when she continued to ask Ron Paul those questions!
The interview was done with and Ron was taking off his mic, but they edited it (note the abrupt flashes) to make it look like he had stormed off prematurely!"
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11148867-cnn-repor...
be who you is, 'cause if you be who you ain't then you ain't who you is ~ from a gravestone in Tombstone, AZ
Lew didn't write the
Lew didn't write the newsletters.
The establishment is SCARED TO DEATH of Ron and us :)
They are desperate to find some dirt that sticks. For those of you familiar with Rands campaign they will go to great lengths to try and find something to push people away.
I will refer to one of my favorite quotes by Samuel Adams...
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."
Stay the course this is going to be a rough road. The more extreme they get the better it is for us.
It's very telling who the new
It's very telling who the new Paulites are :)
If people are going to dismiss Paul over very controversial newsletters good riddance. They don't matter, they were 20 years ago, Ron already apologized.
Ron Paul Revolution has survived off people not trusting the mainstream media.
Drop it, your only falling int their game of rehashing the same stupid irrelevant stuff over and over.
We are human beings and we all have skeletons in our past. It is so absurd to dismiss everything this man has done by some newsletter that is so out of character its comical. The only thing important is the here and now.
Ron Paul 2012
Lew Rockwell is suppose to be the ghostwriter.
Lew Rockwell is suppose to be the ghostwriter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Rockwell
Charles Ballard
I believe it's Fred Reed...
http://www.fredoneverything.net/biography.shtml
Everything you need to know for the NEWSLETTER rebuttals...
http://regulatetheregulators.blogspot.com/2011/12/in-defense...
Also, read this comment on Fred Reed...
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?340885-I-think-i...
Ron Paul 2012 for Peace
I think you probably need to
I think you probably need to go back and re-read Reed. Not quite his style. Could have been him, but I really doubt it.
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington
Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel... The battle, Sir,
Newsletters
Here it comes! I was an Obama delegate in 2008 as was my husband. My son Texan in Sweden has fervently been a Paul revolutionary for many, many years! We are coming around b/c of bringing the troops home. But... Those newsletters even though they are false will cut into his support among independents and peace loving dems. Not a good thing. MSM will milk this to the end, unfortunately.