Ron Paul morphs into the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s former parishioner right before our eyes.
In 1995-96 Ron Paul actively promoted the newsletters that bear his name as representing his views. In 2008 and again this year, as the racist language in them drags his presidential campaign, he has disavowed them. And earlier this week, he claimed in a CNN interview not to have even read much of them for a good 10 years after they were published.
Well, on a radio show today he changed the story again, admitting to having written some of them. Just not the most racist stuff, which by the way he minimized to “about 10 sentences out of 10,000 pages for all I know.” Here’s the video:
PAUL: Well, the newsletters were written, you know, a long time ago. And I wrote a certain portion of them. I would write the economics. So a lot of what you just mentioned… his would be material that I would turn in, and it would become part of the letter. But there were many times when I didn’t edit the whole letter, and things got put in. And I didn’t even really become aware of the details of that until many years later when somebody else called and said, you know what was in it? But these were sentences that were put in, a total of eight or ten sentences, and it was bad stuff. It wasn’t a reflection of my views at all. So it got in the letter, I thought it was terrible, it was tragic, you know and I had some responsibility for it, because name went on the letter. But I was not an editor. I’m like a publisher. And if you think of publishers of newspapers, once in a while they get pretty junky stuff in newspapers. And they have to say that this is not the position of that newspaper, and this is certainly the case. But I actually put a type of a newsletter out, it was a freedom report, investment, survival report — every month since 1976. So this is probably ten sentences out of 10,000 pages, for all I know. I think it’s bad that happened but I disavowed all these views, and people who know me best, people of my district, have heard these stories for years and years, and they know they weren’t a reflection of anything I believed in, and it never hurt me politically. Right now, I think it’s the same case, too. People are desperate to find something.
Is anybody buying this? The newsletter wasn’t a “newspaper,” it was staffed by at most three or four people beyond Paul, and he hired them all. If he didn’t write the worst stuff, he incompetently managed the enterprise in ways that suggest he is not capable of managing the executive branch of the government.
The newsletters included a lot more than 10 sentences of offensive material. A whole lot more. They included a theory that the US government created AIDS at a secret Army lab. They included a theory that the $50 bill was being engineered to allow the government to track all of us. And more.
We don’t even have to go back to the newsletters to find Ron Paul saying batty things. Here’s an interview he did with Iran’s English-language propaganda channel in 2009. He compares Israel’s handling of the Gaza Strip to a “concentration camp,” using those exact words. And he blames all of the ills of the Middle East on the US and Israel, not the genocidal jihadists who have tried to destroy Israel more than once and continue to desire that end.
Relevant? Ron Paul just picked up some vital support…from Klanner David Duke. That goes along with the love he gets from Truther Alex Jones and the folks at Stormfront.
Frankly, I’m sick of writing about Ron Paul. In Congress he has been a mostly harmless backbencher, with no evidence of having productively led or done anything. He passed one bill in two decades, and otherwise brought home the bacon to his district. If he remained there or retired he would be of no interest. As long as he’s in the campaign and a factor crowding out better candidates, though, there isn’t much choice but to continuing to expose his record. The mainstream won’t do it until he is actually the nominee. And by then, it will be too late.
And I’m sick of commenting here about how incredibly in the tank PJM is for discrediting Ron Paul at any cost, including spewing juvenile lies like that Randal Paul was named for Ayn Rand.
You GOP Establishment whores can defeat Ron Paul. You will not defeat the movements that succeed him. The wheels are going to start coming off the economy after 2012 and no amount of frenzied money printing will cover that up for President Obama after he beats Romney.
If you’re so sick of commenting, leave!
If you stay, it means you’re a liar and aren’t really sick of commenting.
Your call, troll.
Amen!
Actually, from what I’ve seen, you’re the troll. (You’re nothing but insults)
(You’re real lucky their isn’t a moderator)
And I’m sick and tired of some spineless, anonymous “Mr. X” defending an obvious bigot. Get a life!
Ron Paul is an obsessed ideologue who collects cult followers – the most dangerous kind of politician imaginable.
And the rest of us are sick and tired of Ron Paul supporters getting bent out of shape because someone reports on Ron Paul’s latest lie about his record.
Nobody was happy with his faux outrage on CNN last week so now he claims most of the newsletters and insists it was only the Man With One Arm (One Return Key On His Typewriter?) who inserted the spurious and disreputable comments into Paul’s otherwise pristine, insightful, and wholly accurate prose.
Oh, the humanity!
Most Americans are sick of having you Paulbots waste our air. Stop breathing. Immediately.
Not joking.
Perhaps the “movement” should look back at history and see if his gold standard and economic theories are correct. We have had numerous panics, recessions,depresions and inflation without a fed and with a gold standard. In fact, establishing a gold standard now would be disasterous, as all debt would be converted to gold. Just where are we going to get all the gold to pay our debt? Or do you intend to default? It doesn’t seem to me this was thought out too well. Gold is not money. Money is whatever we are willng to use as a medium of exchange, whether rocks, corn, gold or bullets.
“Is anybody buying this?”
Nope, case closed, the guys a racist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3EADdr-5AY
Thank you for admitting it.
Ron Paul isn’t even the choice of all capital-L Libertarians either.
Didn’t click on my link? I was being sardonic.
“Ron Paul isn’t even the choice of all capital-L Libertarians either.”
What, am I supposed to adjust my vote accordingly? Who cares.
I was thinking he sounded more like the impeached-but-not-convicted former President who declared that “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”
“Frankly, I’m sick of writing about Ron Paul.”
Yep, and we’re sick of reading about him. But exposing his lies and his extreme, fringe beliefs is a crucial part of the process.
The sooner he drops out, the better. One can only hope …
Wait, wait, wait.
If the guy wrote some of it…during this entire time, NOBODY wrote him an email, met him in person or wrote a letter to him…in response to the newsletter?
Huh?
A Timothy McVeigh, a David Duke…somebody?
Someone who agreed or disagreed? A constituent who wanted to converse about the policies contained therein?
No staffer brought it to his attention? Said that someone reacted positively or negatively?
In ten years not a single person wanted to discuss what would amount to an explosive statement no matter WHO wrote it…under Paul’s byline?
And…it was brought to his attention years ago…and he STILL never got to the bottom of how it got into his newsletter? Ever?
Because, I know if it had gotten into MY byline…I would be furious. Somebody’s head would roll. I would immediately take steps to do more than meekly “walk back” this excrement.
And I wouldn’t be wishy washy about it now. I would be furious that it ever got tied to my name.
But…then again…I wouldn’t blame the US for 9/11 or say Hamas was just peachy or that Iran is better than we are….
These are ALL disgusting views to my way of thinking. Traitorous. Treasonous. Poisonous. I’m not down with the party of David Duke and Timothy McVeigh, Rosie O’Donnell and Michael Moore.
And no countryman of mine would be. We get enough slander and treason from the left.
You get a twofer with Ron Paul.
On foreign affairs you get a leftist who makes Obama look like Sylvester Stalone in the jungles of Viet Nam.
On economic affairs you get a crackpot who makes Elijah Muhammad look like a buttoned down accountant who still does the sums with a slide ruler.
The petri dish full of crackpot ideas in Ron Paul’s head has been incubating for decades and now it’s popped onto the wide screen tv….just in time to get Obama re-elected. That guy sure is lucky, isn’t he?
I’m really beginning to wonder if Paul might be a guy that Soros has been incubating for decades for just this moment.
Rembember the false flag Tea Party candidates?
This guy is the false flag to end all false flags.
We already know that about half his fruitcake supporters are not registered republicans. Who do they remind you of?
Just trying to make sense out of insanity.
- he isn’t going to get the nomination
- he doesn’t move the debate forward
- he doesn’t help the Republican party
- his supporters are extremists, not conservatives or Republicans
- more than half of Paul’s positions are left of the marxists
- the other half have no chance of being implemented
- he doesn’t get rich doing this
- he doesn’t get popular doing this…except with the make believe media
Why is he doing this?
- his nutjob supporters are absolutely unmoved by the fact that a 3rd party candidacy will elect Obama. This despite the fact that they claim to be the exact opposite of Obama on economic and fiscal policy and are supposedly the exact opposite on government itself. Isn’t it strange that they would basically vote for Obama if Paul runs 3rd party?
- Paul also isn’t politicing for a bigger voice in the party. No evidence of that
- he refused to support McCain in 2008. He endorsed Cynthia McKinley instead.
- his foreign policies are identical to the fringe left, the people who are complaining that Obama isn’t radically left enough. Krugman, et al
- he is given a pass by the make believe media
- no attack ads against Paul by the Obama campaign
In a recent article, Eric Dondero said that in all the years he worked for Ron Paul, he never heard Paul utter a racist or anti-Jewish sentiment.
I believe that. I don’t think Ron Paul ever believed the racist garbage that appeared in his newsletter.
But Ron Paul knew that stuff was being published under his name, and let it go on for several years. He did so because it brought it millions of dollars in subscriptions from those it appealed to. Also, it encouraged them to donate to his Congressional re-election campaigns and presidential campaigns.
So Ron Paul circulated vile nonsense, which he knew was bad, for personal and political gain.
That is dishonest, dishonorable, and disgraceful.
Proreason: Ron Paul did not endorse McKinney; he recommended voting for McKinney, Bob Barr, Ralph Nader, or Chuck Baldwin instead of McCain or Obama.
“Paul, who unsuccessfully sought the Republican presidential nomination, will tell supporters he is not endorsing GOP nominee John McCain or Democratic nominee Barack Obama, and will instead give his seal of approval to four candidates: Green Party nominee Cynthia McKinney, Libertarian Party nominee Bob Barr, independent candidate Ralph Nader, and Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin, according to a senior Paul aide.”
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/12/29/ron-paul-yeah-i-wrote-some-of-the-newsletters-just-not-the-bad-stuff-thats-causing-me-problems-now/?replytocom=241663#respond
No amount of data or facts interferes with the Paulbots belief system. They are worse than the obamabots.
In this case giving “his seal of approval” is not endorsing you see, and the fact that he endorsed four nuts instead of one makes it not an endorsement.
It’s really surreal what they will say.
here is the correct link for the quote.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/09/ron-paul-to-announce-presidential-endorsement-plans/
The article in the link is from cnn
This guy will no doubt say the article is incorrect, that it isn’t from a reliable source, and that it doesn’t contain the word “endorse”, all of which will prove his crazy point. When you live in an alternate universe, nothing is impossible.
He also doesn’t believe Ron Paul is racist, even though he published racist articles for years. With that logic, unless you go on national TV and call black people the n word to their face, you aren’t a racist. But even if Paul did that a hundred times, they would claim it was satire, or some other crazy bullshit.
Lol Bryan Preston you are blinded by your hatred. Your TNR link proves Ron Paul to be exactly correct.
The list from TNR includes such damnable lines as “The ATF are ‘Jackbooted Thugs’”.
Uhh… well they are – At least if you pay attention to the news and follow Radley Balko, among others. Unless you think Raw Milk Prohibition and the Lacey-Act raid of Gibson Guitar was justified.
Your story is weak, your links are biased.