Ron has to NAME the people who ran the newsletter
- Thread starter FluffyUnbound
- Start date
itshappening
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2007
- Messages
- 12,355
campaign has to respond now , it's been nearly an hour
Question_Authority
Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 769
Hey good idea. Make it seem like he is going to drop out, then hit the media with the truth.
itshappening
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2007
- Messages
- 12,355
since this hit job was posted on one of the biggest political news sites (drudgereport)
Ethek
Member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2007
- Messages
- 2,524
This news letter has poped up on Drudge and digg several times before. Professional Journalist have already rebuked it for us. I don't see any need for the campaign to respond atm.
allyinoh
Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,097
If it wasn't Ron Paul, he has to say who it was. Who cares... That person could potentially ruin his chances of winning.
Is he willing to take that risk and do this to us who believe in him? This has to end. Tell everyone the persons name and let the media talk to that person.
Is he willing to take that risk and do this to us who believe in him? This has to end. Tell everyone the persons name and let the media talk to that person.
yongrel
Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 9,112
But the difference is that the previous times it has popped up, it wasn't the day of the NH primaries.
itshappening
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2007
- Messages
- 12,355
we need an official press release from the campaign, all the neocons on the radio are talking about it now and the MSM will be reporting on it soon
99.9% of what they say was published are complete lies with no backing whatsoever. This is a fact! But they don't care and they will report on it anyway. They know Ron Paul is too nice to sue them and by the time he did it would be too late and the elections would be over.
MayTheRonBeWithYou
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
- Messages
- 2,477
Don't worry about it. It's too late to affect NH, and the campaign can deal with this BS.
Have faith in Dr Paul.
Have faith in Dr Paul.
New Repuplic is,
Nothing more than a failing liberal rag. Their circulation has been plummeting for years. This stunt was done to sabotage some of RP's Independent base, to Obama's. Below is just a small example of their checkered background
From Wikipedia,
[Controversies
Stephen Glass scandal
In 1998, features writer Stephen Glass was revealed in a Forbes magazine investigation to have fabricated a story called "Hack Heaven". A TNR investigation found that most of Glass' stories had used or been based on fabricated information. The story of Glass's fall and TNR editor Chuck Lane's handling of the scandal was dramatized in a 2003 film Shattered Glass, based on a 1998 article in Vanity Fair.[18]
Ruth Shalit plagiarism
In 1995, writer Ruth Shalit was fired for repeated incidents of plagiarism and an excess of factual errors in her articles.[19]
Lee Siegel
Long-time contributor, critic, and senior editor Lee Siegel had maintained a blog on the TNR site dedicated primarily to art and culture until an investigation revealed that he had collaborated in posting comments to his own blog under an alias aggressively praising Siegel, attacking his critics and claiming not to be Lee Siegel when challenged by an anonymous detractor on his blog.[20][21] The blog was removed from the website and Siegel was suspended from writing for the print magazine;[22] he resumed writing for TNR in April, 2007. Siegel was also controversial for his coinage "blogofascists" which he applied to "the entire political blogosphere", though with an emphasis on leftwing or center-left bloggers such as Daily Kos and Atrios.[23]
Spencer Ackerman
In 2006, associate editor Spencer Ackerman was fired by Foer. Describing it as a "painful" decision, Foer attributed the firing to Ackerman's "insubordination": disparaging the magazine on his personal blog,[24] saying that he would “skullfuck” a terrorist's corpse at an editorial meeting if that was required to "establish his anti-terrorist bona fides" and sending Foer an e-mail where he said—in what according to Ackerman was intended to be a joke—he would “make a niche in your skull” with a baseball bat. Ackerman, by contrast, argued that the dismissal was due to “irreconcilable ideological differences.” He believed that his leftward drift as a result of the Iraq War and the actions of the Bush administration was not appreciated by the senior editorial staff.[25] Within 24 hours of being fired by The New Republic, Ackerman was hired as a senior correspondent for a rival magazine, The American Prospect.
Scott Thomas Beauchamp controversy
Main article: Scott Thomas Beauchamp controversy
In July 2007, after The New Republic published an article by an American soldier in Iraq titled "Shock Troops," allegations of inadequate fact-checking were leveled against the magazine. Critics alleged that the piece contained inconsistent details indicative of fabrication. The identity of the anonymous soldier, Scott Thomas Beauchamp, was revealed. Beauchamp was married to Elspeth Reeve, one of the magazine’s three fact-checkers. As a result of the controversy, the New Republic and the United States Army launched investigations, reaching different conclusions.[26][27][28]
As of December 1, 2007, an article titled "The Fog of War" and bearing the byline of Franklin Foer, postdate December 10, 2007, has been available for professional critique. In the article, Foer writes that the magazine can no longer stand behind the stories written by Beachamp
Nothing more than a failing liberal rag. Their circulation has been plummeting for years. This stunt was done to sabotage some of RP's Independent base, to Obama's. Below is just a small example of their checkered background
From Wikipedia,
[Controversies
Stephen Glass scandal
In 1998, features writer Stephen Glass was revealed in a Forbes magazine investigation to have fabricated a story called "Hack Heaven". A TNR investigation found that most of Glass' stories had used or been based on fabricated information. The story of Glass's fall and TNR editor Chuck Lane's handling of the scandal was dramatized in a 2003 film Shattered Glass, based on a 1998 article in Vanity Fair.[18]
Ruth Shalit plagiarism
In 1995, writer Ruth Shalit was fired for repeated incidents of plagiarism and an excess of factual errors in her articles.[19]
Lee Siegel
Long-time contributor, critic, and senior editor Lee Siegel had maintained a blog on the TNR site dedicated primarily to art and culture until an investigation revealed that he had collaborated in posting comments to his own blog under an alias aggressively praising Siegel, attacking his critics and claiming not to be Lee Siegel when challenged by an anonymous detractor on his blog.[20][21] The blog was removed from the website and Siegel was suspended from writing for the print magazine;[22] he resumed writing for TNR in April, 2007. Siegel was also controversial for his coinage "blogofascists" which he applied to "the entire political blogosphere", though with an emphasis on leftwing or center-left bloggers such as Daily Kos and Atrios.[23]
Spencer Ackerman
In 2006, associate editor Spencer Ackerman was fired by Foer. Describing it as a "painful" decision, Foer attributed the firing to Ackerman's "insubordination": disparaging the magazine on his personal blog,[24] saying that he would “skullfuck” a terrorist's corpse at an editorial meeting if that was required to "establish his anti-terrorist bona fides" and sending Foer an e-mail where he said—in what according to Ackerman was intended to be a joke—he would “make a niche in your skull” with a baseball bat. Ackerman, by contrast, argued that the dismissal was due to “irreconcilable ideological differences.” He believed that his leftward drift as a result of the Iraq War and the actions of the Bush administration was not appreciated by the senior editorial staff.[25] Within 24 hours of being fired by The New Republic, Ackerman was hired as a senior correspondent for a rival magazine, The American Prospect.
Scott Thomas Beauchamp controversy
Main article: Scott Thomas Beauchamp controversy
In July 2007, after The New Republic published an article by an American soldier in Iraq titled "Shock Troops," allegations of inadequate fact-checking were leveled against the magazine. Critics alleged that the piece contained inconsistent details indicative of fabrication. The identity of the anonymous soldier, Scott Thomas Beauchamp, was revealed. Beauchamp was married to Elspeth Reeve, one of the magazine’s three fact-checkers. As a result of the controversy, the New Republic and the United States Army launched investigations, reaching different conclusions.[26][27][28]
As of December 1, 2007, an article titled "The Fog of War" and bearing the byline of Franklin Foer, postdate December 10, 2007, has been available for professional critique. In the article, Foer writes that the magazine can no longer stand behind the stories written by Beachamp
Last edited:
Johncjackson
Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 1,764
If whoever wrote it had any sense of decency, they'd out themself.
That's what I think.
I think Dr. Paul is too loyal and has too much sense of responsibility to "name names."
But this person should be man enough to out himelf.
FluffyUnbound
Member
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 661
The problem is that, with its somewhat vague answers, the campaign allowed the impression to settle "out there" that this was a case of one or two issues of the newsletter having articles in them that "slipped through".
That does not appear to have been the case. It looks like the newsletter was actually written by someone who actively disliked blacks and homosexuals, and was written that way for YEARS, over a great number of issues.
I'm sure that the people who actually ran the newsletter probably "seemed like good guys", who "just get a little worked up sometimes", and that Dr. Paul makes excuses for them the way you might make excuses for your "fun" uncle who tells racist jokes when he has too much to drink at the family reunion. But we aren't in a position where we can do that now.
If Paul actually believes in the "racism as collectivism" stuff he copies out of old Rand anthologies, he has to throw these people under the bus. More than that - if he actually believes it, he should WANT to throw these people under the bus.
The Republican party is being taken over by theocrats and fascists, and Paul has a chance to stop them or at least slow them down, and he shouldn't sacrifice that chance to cover up the mistakes of some a-hole who hates black people.
Andrew76
Member
- Joined
- May 17, 2007
- Messages
- 346
YES. He must address this now. We seem to forget quickly that this stuff has been rebuked and debunked for US, the die hard Ron Paul supporters, but for millions of people in America and around the world, this is totally new to them. Generating this initial support can be fragile. Someone just finding out about him might go..."Wow, this guy is great! No Iraq war, no IRS, .... he's voted this way for 30 years!? Man, what's the catch?" And then.. bingo, "Oh... damn. He's a bigotted, conspiracy theorist, racist. Shit. I shoulda' known there was a catch."
If you go to Google.com right now, select "news" and type in Ron Paul, this smear piece is EVERYWHERE. All. over. the. place.
We know he did not write this. He needs to say who did, or this is all over. You cannot underestimate the power of something like this. The campaign can't respond, Ron Paul must respond.
Again, we know this stuff is false, but people new to RP do not. Will they *really* try and seek out info on whether these allegations are true or not, or will they (most likely) just write him off?
This is part of grass roots. Anyone who's got a blog needs to address this NOW. We need to flood every inch of the online world with the truth of this matter, and, Ron Paul needs to name the original author and explain that this "newsletter," was something that had very little oversight, and he was a busy, busy man at the time.
For the love of Paul, DO NOT IGNORE THIS.
If you go to Google.com right now, select "news" and type in Ron Paul, this smear piece is EVERYWHERE. All. over. the. place.
We know he did not write this. He needs to say who did, or this is all over. You cannot underestimate the power of something like this. The campaign can't respond, Ron Paul must respond.
Again, we know this stuff is false, but people new to RP do not. Will they *really* try and seek out info on whether these allegations are true or not, or will they (most likely) just write him off?
This is part of grass roots. Anyone who's got a blog needs to address this NOW. We need to flood every inch of the online world with the truth of this matter, and, Ron Paul needs to name the original author and explain that this "newsletter," was something that had very little oversight, and he was a busy, busy man at the time.
For the love of Paul, DO NOT IGNORE THIS.
Patrick_Henry
Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Messages
- 133
What are we talking about? What newsletter?
PaleoConservative
Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2007
- Messages
- 143
Do we actually have a hard copy of this news letter or are we just taking their "word" for it that this stuff is in there.
MayTheRonBeWithYou
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
- Messages
- 2,477
No it's not. I just searched it.
Calm down. This will not affect NH, and the campaign will refute it.
Have faith in Dr Paul.
witheyeswideopen
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 10
Really?!? Because the TNR.com article quotes multiple newsletters... this is not the 'old smear', but a brand new one that claims to show a pattern of racist ideas. And if someone else wrote it, then who is this mystery person? I doubt RP wrote the stuff, but then who did? Is it wrong to ask questions? I've already emailed the campaign a few times asking for a press conference. Nothing yet.
Similar threads
