Paul must answer these racism charges...

[acroso]

These New Republic articles need to be addressed for crying out loud!!!

something smells wrong with this...

Paul calls King a gay pedofile and then votes for a national MLK day???

What the hell is going on...and why would Ron Paul apologize for this crap?

This is ruining the campaign...

 

[indivi]

This was addressed a long time ago. However, due to the recent prevalence of this misinformation, the campaign recently released a recap of the real deal behind these letters. Basically, these documents were written by several people NOT INCLUDING RON PAUL and Ron Paul did not review or edit their writings. However he does not deflect all blame because he realizes he should have been more attentive in watching over things being released in his name.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-re...ew-republic-article-regarding-old-newsletters

edit: In short, anyone who thinks Ron Paul has a racist or bigoted bone in his body is flat-out wrong. He has never done or said anything that would lend any credence to such accusations. It's a bunch of hogwash being spread with the intent of smearing Paul's good name, and it has no factual basis nor should it have any real reflection on Paul aside from if you want to consider him a little irresponsible for not reading the things published in the newsletter.

 

[FrankRep]

Press Releases ›

Ron Paul Statement on The New Republic Article Regarding Old Newsletters

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-re...ew-republic-article-regarding-old-newsletters

 

[Change]

He handled it already, check his official campaign ronpaul2008.com. It is done already - move on. The story was B.S. and ran to hurt him on polling day. Move on, it's finish, he was re-elected over and over again as a Congressman, don't you think this would have finished him a long time ago if there was any truth in it. Move on.

 

[zadrock]

I would love to see the following happen:

First, an admission of guilt by whoever DID write these things. Why is Dr. Paul protecting this person or people? Whoever they are, can't they come out and admit what they did?

Second, a one-on-one discussion with someone respected within the black community. I just watched the youtube of Ron Paul at Morgan State University in the October debate, moderated by Tavis Smiley. Dr. Paul did a great job of addressing many issues of interest to blacks and I think Mr. Smiley would be an excellent choice to discuss these issues and talk about the TNR thing as well.

Z

 

[acroso]

hell

hell...if he never saw the documents...how do we even know they actually were written in his journal.

This whole thing smells fishy to me.

Ron paul war room has allegations of forgery on it.

 

[Change]

you must move on. It done.

 

[Printo]

The statements from that report are completely absurd. MLK a gay pedophile? African Americans are animals and we should all buy guns to hunt them?? I cannot imagine any member in Washington, or any part of the government would be so blatantly racist and homophobic.

It's funny how neoconservatives are using this as fodder when Ron Paul most likely has more minority supporters than any other GOP candidate.

 

[Quick]

First, an admission of guilt by whoever DID write these things. Why is Dr. Paul protecting this person or people? Whoever they are, can't they come out and admit what they did?

Probably can't come forward with who wrote the newsletters because, while he (and his staff may know), they don't have any proof. They can't just come out and say "John Doe wrote those but we have no evidence of that." Doesn't work that way, especially when the claim is something as bad as racism.

Second, a one-on-one discussion with someone respected within the black community. I just watched the youtube of Ron Paul at Morgan State University in the October debate, moderated by Tavis Smiley. Dr. Paul did a great job of addressing many issues of interest to blacks and I think Mr. Smiley would be an excellent choice to discuss these issues and talk about the TNR thing as well.

Why not just use the fact that Ron Paul had mentioned that Walter Williams would be a good running mate.

I doubt you'll hear anything more from the campaign short of the press release (assuming that it doesn't get bigger and bigger). The less they talk about it, the quicker it goes away. If they bring it up, go on talk shows and news shows, it just keeps the lies and garbage in the media for that much longer.

Plus, no media outlet would touch a weak story like this especially since the Houston Chronicle did a huge expose on this in 1996. The concluded that Ron Paul did not write the newsletters, and was very peripherally involved if at all post 1988 (all the racist stuff was from '90/'91). Democrats ran with the story, but quieted down once evidence came up that Ron Paul was actually very peripheral.

Making a claim that someone is racist with almost no actual evidence would cause blowback (like I how I stuck that in there?) on that reporter/media outlet. You remember Dan Rather and the Bush National Air Guard thing? He's now a nobody on HDNet. Sad really.

 

[Quick]

The statements from that report are completely absurd. MLK a gay pedophile? African Americans are animals and we should all buy guns to hunt them?? I cannot imagine any member in Washington, or any part of the government would be so blatantly racist and homophobic.

It's funny how neoconservatives are using this as fodder when Ron Paul most likely has more minority supporters than any other GOP candidate.

You're completely right Printo. Even if Ron Paul was this huge racist who hated all black people, there is no way in hell (as a politician and doctor) he would be stupid enough to use his own name and own newsletter to publish such material. He would (like the person who did under Paul's name without him knowing) submit it anonymously to someone, or use an alias. It would be political suicide if he would have written that stuff and then ran for Congress (or something).

Do you think Republicans who are homosexual use their real name online, or if they write pro-gay articles that they use their real name? No, and you obviously know why. It would be political suicide.

The assertion that Ron Paul would use his own name and his own newsletter to write such awful things doesn't make any sense.

Simple logic always prevails.

 

[me3]

Can I get a link to the RP vote for MLK day?

 

[rockwell]

"I would love to see the following happen:

First, an admission of guilt by whoever DID write these things."

Your wish is my command, Thomaso de Torquemada.

The heretic must admit his sin. He is an apostate of the Church of PC.

Then we must see if he floats.

 

[rockwell]

"when the claim is something as bad as racism."


"...the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion have drawn indelible lines of distinction between them."

Thomas Jefferson

Better disown him, too. Maybe go burn down Monticello, then melt all your nickels.

At some point you have to shake off the Stockholm Syndrome and get a grip. All this talk of confessing is starting to reek of religious dogma. Is this America or is it an auto de fe?

 

[Vaughn]

"when the claim is something as bad as racism."


"...the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion have drawn indelible lines of distinction between them."

Thomas Jefferson

Better disown him, too. Maybe go burn down Monticello, then melt all your nickels.

At some point you have to shake off the Stockholm Syndrome and get a grip. All this talk of confessing is starting to reek of religious dogma. Is this America or is it an auto de fe?

First off, Thomas Jefferson didn't write those words in 1991. Second, if the campaign does not properly defend itself then we are toast. We have already started to loose supporters, heck it sounds like we have lost one of our biggest supporters Andrew Sullivan.
Paul should separate himself from the people who wrote this trash in his name, but for some reason he hasn't done this and none of us understand why. If he can't handle this situation properly how will Paul handle the presidency?

 

[Shavenyak]

First off, Thomas Jefferson didn't write those words in 1991. Second, if the campaign does not properly defend itself then we are toast. We have already started to loose supporters, heck it sounds like we have lost one of our biggest supporters Andrew Sullivan.
Paul should separate himself from the people who wrote this trash in his name, but for some reason he hasn't done this and none of us understand why. If he can't handle this situation properly how will Paul handle the presidency?

That's the thing, he's addressed it many times over the years. Every time he probably hopes it will be his last but it keeps coming back.

All you people crying because he "never explained this before" are ignorant of his past. I found out about this the first day I found out about Dr. Paul and it does not bother me because I believe him when he says he didn't write them or know of them until it was too late.

Has he lied about anything else? He DESERVES the benefit of the doubt on this one.

 

[acroso]

I want a link to the memo that says MLK is a gay pedofile..

 

[Shavenyak]

Paul should not have taken this so lightly in the first place. He should have emphasized how he was anti-racist from the beginning in case the newsletters business all came out, not just the stuff that came out in 1996. He probably thought the racism stuff would be limited to the things that came out in 1996 but he shouldn't have assumed that. This was a time-bomb: anyone could have done a committed search and discovered all the explosive stuff, and somebody did. Now his responses look inadequate in light of what came out the other day.

The only thing Paul can do is a full mea culpa. Brushing it off with the very superficial apologia as he does will not work. It makes people think he doesn't care about racism and homophobia.

Being a libertarian is inherently anti-racist. That alone should remove all doubt.

 

[VoluntaryMan]

edit: In short, anyone who thinks Ron Paul has a racist or bigoted bone in his body is flat-out wrong. He has never done or said anything that would lend any credence to such accusations. It's a bunch of hogwash being spread with the intent of smearing Paul's good name, and it has no factual basis nor should it have any real reflection on Paul aside from if you want to consider him a little irresponsible for not reading the things published in the newsletter.

His character makes him vulnerable to such smears: the guy is not a control freak, far from it, and he is far too libertarian with his own name and likeness; has he ever denied anyone permission to use either? I don't believe that he customarily even requires the user to seek permission. Look at this campaign: the man is definitely not in control of his own brand. That he would be completely ignorant of things going out under his name should come as no surprise to anyone here.

 

[VoluntaryMan]

Paul should separate himself from the people who wrote this trash in his name, but for some reason he hasn't done this and none of us understand why. If he can't handle this situation properly how will Paul handle the presidency?

I'm tempted to say that RP is being loyal to a fault, but I suspect it is more than customary loyalty. This degree of protection is usually reserved for one's friends or family members. I believe his explanation, but do not accept his obligation to cover for anyone, unless that person is very close to him.

Example: the other day I took my 8 year old son to a Chinese restaurant. In the presence of the waiter, my son asked if their was dog on the menu. I was very embarassed, and probably would have made less of an issue about it (considering his age), if he hadn't repeated it, with a devilish grin on his little face. I was very upset. However, at his age, I am very responsible for everything he sees, hears, and repeats.

I know that's an extreme example, but I can envision a close friend or family member, someone younger, less wise, and trusted doing something as embarassing as this, essentially betraying a trust, but being forgiven, enlightened, and restored. If this was a young family member or a friend to whom he's remained close, his protection would make sense. Regardless of who the writer was, though, he needs to step up, man up, and come clean. It's too important, and it's that time.

I don't know who this was. Some have said Rockwell. That's what Dondero says, but Dondero says lots of things. Whoever it was needs to come forward. Now.

 

[Shavenyak]

I'm tempted to say that RP is being loyal to a fault, but I suspect it is more than customary loyalty. This degree of protection is usually reserved for one's friends or family members. I believe his explanation, but do not accept his obligation to cover for anyone, unless that person is very close to him.

Example: the other day I took my 8 year old son to a Chinese restaurant. In the presence of the waiter, my son asked if their was dog on the menu. I was very embarassed, and probably would have made less of an issue about it (considering his age), if he hadn't repeated it, with a devilish grin on his little face. I was very upset. However, at his age, I am very responsible for everything he sees, hears, and repeats.

I know that's an extreme example, but I can envision a close friend or family member, someone younger, less wise, and trusted doing something as embarassing as this, essentially betraying a trust, but being forgiven, enlightened, and restored. If this was a young family member or a friend to whom he's remained close, his protection would make sense. Ragardless of who the writer was, though, he needs to step up, man up, and come clean. It's too important, and it's that time.

I don't know who this was. Some have said Rockwell. That's what Dondero says, but Dondero says lots of things. Whoever it was needs to come forward. Now.

Dondero said the racist stuff was North, Rockwell just did the commentary on Israel's influence on US foreign policy.