Ok I found this, supposedly an interview from 2001:
An excerpt from an apparent interview with Texas Monthly as quoted on the blog Everything2.com clarifies the above information as follows:
"In spite of calls from Gary Bledsoe, the president of the Texas State Conference of the NAACP, and other civil rights leaders for an apology for such obvious racial typecasting, Paul stood his ground. He said only that his remarks about Barbara Jordan related to her stands on affirmative action and that his written comments about blacks were in the context of 'current events and statistical reports of the time.' He denied any racist intent. What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U. S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this.
"When I ask him why, he pauses for a moment, then says, 'I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. It wasn't my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady.' ...
"His reasons for keeping this a secret are harder to understand: 'They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them . . . I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn't come from me directly, but they campaign aides said that's too confusing. "It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it." ' It is a measure of his stubbornness, determination, and ultimately his contrarian nature that, until this surprising volte-face in our interview, he had never shared this secret. It seems, in retrospect, that it would have been far, far easier to have told the truth at the time."
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=Ron Paul
So it seems that he was careless in not paying close enough attention to what went out under his name in the newsletter. If the above is correct, that when it came out he decided to just accept responsibility for it, instead of explaining that he didn't write it. Then in 2001, he came out and admitted that he hadn't written it but took moral responsibility for it. It seems like the whole situation wasn't handled well from the word go, and perhaps he made the mistake of listening to his politcal advisers. Folks we all make mistakes. But unlike any other candidate, Ron has a record that matches his convictions stretching back over 20 years. He's not wavered in his committment to his principles. So, I'm willing to let this pass as an instance of poor judgement. Just my 2 cents, and it's my last word on the subject unless something new comes to light. Back to work people <cracks whip> We have an election to win!
An excerpt from an apparent interview with Texas Monthly as quoted on the blog Everything2.com clarifies the above information as follows:
"In spite of calls from Gary Bledsoe, the president of the Texas State Conference of the NAACP, and other civil rights leaders for an apology for such obvious racial typecasting, Paul stood his ground. He said only that his remarks about Barbara Jordan related to her stands on affirmative action and that his written comments about blacks were in the context of 'current events and statistical reports of the time.' He denied any racist intent. What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U. S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this.
"When I ask him why, he pauses for a moment, then says, 'I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. It wasn't my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady.' ...
"His reasons for keeping this a secret are harder to understand: 'They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them . . . I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn't come from me directly, but they campaign aides said that's too confusing. "It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it." ' It is a measure of his stubbornness, determination, and ultimately his contrarian nature that, until this surprising volte-face in our interview, he had never shared this secret. It seems, in retrospect, that it would have been far, far easier to have told the truth at the time."
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=Ron Paul
So it seems that he was careless in not paying close enough attention to what went out under his name in the newsletter. If the above is correct, that when it came out he decided to just accept responsibility for it, instead of explaining that he didn't write it. Then in 2001, he came out and admitted that he hadn't written it but took moral responsibility for it. It seems like the whole situation wasn't handled well from the word go, and perhaps he made the mistake of listening to his politcal advisers. Folks we all make mistakes. But unlike any other candidate, Ron has a record that matches his convictions stretching back over 20 years. He's not wavered in his committment to his principles. So, I'm willing to let this pass as an instance of poor judgement. Just my 2 cents, and it's my last word on the subject unless something new comes to light. Back to work people <cracks whip> We have an election to win!
