Newsletter issue exposes sad state of modern journalism.Submitted by fiodax on Fri, 12/30/2011 - 01:59
Here's my take on the newsletter deal. The man has given his answers. He did not write them, he did not read them until years after they were published, and he doesn't agree with them and disowns them. He's been giving this same answer for years. These letters also came up in the 2008 campaign and have come up prior to that. All the same information, all the same questions, and all the same answers.
Here's the deal. You might not like the answers, but the answers he is giving are the answers he is giving. I think he's telling the truth, but if he's not the only way to get him to change his story is to confront him with NEW information. But for that to happen something has to happen called "journalism". Someone is going to have to put down their talking points memo and actually get off their butts and do some work. Badgering the man with the same question over and over again just because you don't like the answers he is giving is pointless if not shameful, it certainly isn't journalism.
If this story has been around for 10+ years with no new information, and no new answers, could it possibly mean that it just is what it is, that he's telling the truth? It wouldn't be the first time for Ron Paul to do this (tell the truth). Ultimately its up each voter to decide how this issue will affect their vote. However if all the dirt they have on Ron Paul is these newsletters and despite the efforts of many journalist highly motivated to discredit Ron Paul with almost unlimited resources at their disposal, no new information has surfaced to challenge the man's answers, maybe we should just accept what he says and instead focus our decision making according to the very well documented character and policy information we do have about him.
Since we have no facts that we can use to come to any other conclusion regarding these newsletters apart from the answers Ron Paul has given, what we really need to ask ourselves is this: Is Ron Paul a racists? The answer is clearly NO. Personal testimony from former patients, supporters, and even the President of the NAACP in Austin, TX clearly lead us to this conclusion. The Libertarian ideals that are at the core of Ron Paul's philosophy are completely incompatible with racism because Libertarian philosophy refuses to define people in groups such as race but instead recognizes each person as an individual, as should we all.