Is Ron Paul a Liar and a Bigot? Or Is He a Liar and a Fool?
For those of you that can remember life before blogs, you may also remember that people used to publish newsletters on all topics. Forty years ago, Ron Paul launched a conservative newsletter business. These newsletters contained racist, Antisemitic and homophobic slurs, some of which were signed by Paul, others were credited to him. What was written in those newsletters was nothing short of disgusting.
For example, his company published a special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report on "racial terrorism” that analyzes the Los Angles riots of 1992. One of the articles written under the bi-line of Ron Paul reported:
“Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. ... What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided.”
When defending homophobic comments by the late Andy Rooney of CBS, a 1990 newsletter notes that a reporter for a gay magazine:
“certainly had an axe to grind, and that’s not easy with a limp wrist.” Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.”
In an undated solicitation letter for The Ron Paul Investment Letter, and the Ron Paul Political Report, the Congressman is generous with his bigotry. He writes:
"I've been told not to talk, but these stooges don't scare me. Threats or no threats, I've laid bare the coming race war in our big cities. The federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS (my training as a physician helps me see through this one.) The Bohemian Grove--perverted, pagan playground of the powerful. Skull & Bones: the demonic fraternity that includes George Bush and leftist Senator John Kerry, Congress's Mr. New Money. The Israeli lobby, which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica."
(more examples of the Congressman's hateful prose can be found here)
When the newsletters were republished by the New Republic in 2008, Congressman Paul strongly denied authorship, saying that he had never even read the newsletters. Case closed, say his supporters.
Here's the problem with Paul's denial: When the newsletters first became an issue during his congressional race in 1996, the congressman didn't deny them nor did he say he never read them. Back in 1996 Congressman Paul defended the articles saying they were taken out of context. But how could he know they were taken out of context if he never read them?
The real question about the congressman and his newsletter company is not being asked. Is Ron Paul a bigot who is lying about not writing or even reading the newsletters he defended just a few years earlier, or was he lying when he defended them as his writing even though he never read them?
Think about this; if you believe Ron Paul when he says he didn't write and never read those newsletter, you must also believe the congressman was so incompetent in running his little newsletter company he never bothered to read what was printed in his name. And when first confronted about the hatred, responding by defending the newsletters he never read, foolishly making himself look like a racist. Are those the actions of a man who is competent enough to be the chief executive of the United States? Or is the man who spewed such hatred the right person to be leader of the free world.
One thing is certain: Ron Paul is a liar. If he was lying in 1996 then he is also a fool who admitted to something he didn't do. If he was lying in 2008 he is a horrible bigot. In the end it doesn't matter, because either way Ron Paul should never be considered a realistic candidate for President of the United States. He should never be allowed in Congress.