Abandoning Ron Paul

Abandoning Ron Paul


One blogger has had it…

Man, Paul’s behavior regarding these newsletters has been awful. His “I don’t know who wrote these” is about as slippery as a politician can get. Everyone who was around libertarianism in the early 90s knows Lew was in charge of these and knows Rothbard and his crew were into race-baiting back then. (By the way, notice that the longer Lew has been away from Rothbard’s influence, the more decent he’s become? I personally have found him very affable, and I can’t imagine him putting out material like this today. Just shows what hanging around Rothbard can do to you.)

Paul’s got a decent message, but he’s the wrong vehicle for delivering it.

Agreed. I’ve been trying to convince the Paulites of this recently, but they just don’t seem to listen. They think a 2nd place finish in Nevada will rocket him back into the public eye. Even if that proves to be true, the public eye will immediately refocus on those newsletters and dismiss him again.

And yeah, I know a lot of you are sick of me talking about the newsletters, but tough. It IS a big deal and just because some of you discussed them in a few forums last fall doesn’t mean the issue is settled. Paul knows who wrote them, and he should tell us. Because if you’re being honest with yourself, you have to question why he hasn’t told us who wrote them. Why is that? I think I have a good guess as to why, but you should dig through it all and see what you think.

So yes, there’s the question I’d like you to answer in the comments. Why hasn’t he told us who wrote the newsletters? Why did his campaign pull back on the press release they were going to send out? Any ideas?

I live for comments like this…

GET OVER IT DUDE, there is NOT ONE IOTA of a THING WRONG with DR. PAUL no matter how much you try to bring DIRT UP~ How bout Huckabee and his son the dog killer, how bout GHOULIANI and his PAID SECURITY for his mistress, or the NYFD being against him, or just simply that he is a moron. How bout MITT who flip flops more than a windsock in a hurricane! How bout 100 YEARS MCCAIN? and HIS STUPID qoute, RON PAUL the soliders have a msg for you from when i went to iraq, THEY WANT TO STAY AND WIN, all the while PAUL has gotten the most from MILITARY than ANY OTHER CANDIDATE! How bout those things that MATTER, and LEAVING ALONE something THAT RON PAUL DENIES he authored and making something IT IS NOT!~

you sicken me!

Wow, you’ve convinced me. I DO need to GET REAL and accept the fact that there is NOT ONE IOTA of a THING WRONG with DR. PAUL. How could I actually question a politician? The nerve of me!

Responding to comments…:
A commenter writers…

It’s easy to believe that Ron Paul doesn’t know who authored the newsletters. I worked in that business during that time period, and it wasn’t uncommon for publishers to put out a newsletter under someone’s name, pay that person a royalty for the use of their name, and publish a newsletter. Ron Paul really wasn’t involved in the day-to-day operations of the newsletter. He was a full-time physician and he also likely had a heavy schedule of public speaking.

He could credibly claim he just licensed his name had he been the only person from his family on the payroll, but he wasn’t. As I’ve pointed out before, but both his wife and daughter were employees of the company that put out the newsletters. Were they all too busy? And if they all truly didn’t know, then what the hell were his wife and daughter doing on the payroll? It doesn’t add up and I don’t know why you people are going so easy on a guy who is obviously lying to you.

Also, it’s not like Ron Paul was some sort of massive celebrity in the 90s. The majority of his supporters hadn’t heard about him until late 2006, early 2007. This “he was really, really busy” argument does not stand up to scrutiny.

So to those who think I’m being a troll, well, you need to quit blindly supporting a candidate just because you believe in his message. Had stuff like this come out about Howard Dean back in 2004, I would have abandoned him without hesitation. Remember, the messenger’s credibility is incredibly important when he’s carrying a message of change, and right now Paul is crippling your movement. And it is YOUR movement, not his. Take it back from him before he does any more damage.

  • Matt Baker

    Easy enough, Although you find it hard to believe that he doesnt know who authored them letters, its the truth. Can you not get over that? It hasnt been proven one bit that he does know the truth and holds his tougne. Its funny how the media finds ONE THING and ONE THING only Ron Paul MAY of known about! You jump on him for EARMARKS, that goes to the people he represents, but thats still not enough to make me think Dr. Paul is a liar.

    The only liars out there are the media that blinds us, and you who seem to think that just cuz he had a media release that he was gonna put out and didnt, MUST MEAN something totally different!~

    GET OVER IT DUDE, there is NOT ONE IOTA of a THING WRONG with DR. PAUL no matter how much you try to bring DIRT UP~ How bout Huckabee and his son the dog killer, how bout GHOULIANI and his PAID SECURITY for his mistress, or the NYFD being against him, or just simply that he is a moron. How bout MITT who flip flops more than a windsock in a hurricane! How bout 100 YEARS MCCAIN? and HIS STUPID qoute, RON PAUL the soliders have a msg for you from when i went to iraq, THEY WANT TO STAY AND WIN, all the while PAUL has gotten the most from MILITARY than ANY OTHER CANDIDATE! How bout those things that MATTER, and LEAVING ALONE something THAT RON PAUL DENIES he authored and making something IT IS NOT!~

    you sicken me!

    in KANSAS

    Matt Baker

  • john

    Why do you title this “abandoning ron paul”. Mr Gardner, you abandoned Paul LONG ago, and over something that is essentially a non-issue. Have you looked as hard in to the past newsletters of ANY other candidate? McCain was a senator during those times, where’s your all-seeing eye on THOSE writings? What about Clinton, during the time of the newsletters, she was famously conducting the Whitewater purge, where’s your indignation? Come off it, Mr. Gardner, you were a fair-weather friend at best, and certainly in no position to “abandon” Dr. Paul.

  • Kevin

    If Romney doesn’t get media attention for a first place finish in Nevada then there’s no way Dr. Paul is going to get any attention for coming in second. I thought the media were jerks the way they treated Paul in the last debate. I can’t stand McCain so now might be the time to go with my number two, Romney.

  • tony

    Ron Paul a racist? really?


  • Nathan

    If you know as much as you claim to, we should nominate you for the Sherlock Holmes Award of 2008.

  • Ed

    I HAVE looked into the candidates. And I have to agree with John, sounds like you never were a supporter of Paul to begin with.
    From what I can see Paul >IS< the last best Hope for America.

    But I have an open mind, I’d look at any candidate you would care to recommend…..but you didn’t do that, did you…..you just tried tearing down Dr Ron Paul.

    No wonder you can’t get people to listen to you.

    As for the letters, maybe you should try to get some ‘current’ dirt on him, like maybe he’s over due on some library books or something. Good Luck.

  • kabster

    Mr Gardner,
    Why all the hate for Ron Paul ? It’s called “FREEDOM OF SPEECH”
    Look if the man didn’t write the letters then why continue to beat that worn out drum ?
    You are with the scum that has destroyed this country and our freedoms.
    Why not strive for change.
    It’s not like the current and past administrations haven’t practiced their own form of inner city racism by funding drugs that come to our country to keep the poor and unfortunate down. There is no cocaine made in Watts, Harlem or any other place in the U.S. (Iran Contra?) 1 in 3 blacks have been or are in jail. That is just wrong. We need a new direction.

    Why do all you TOOL’s of the Neo-Cons insist on blacking out or making light of Ron Paul ? Fear ?
    Oh, that’s right it’s fear and because you’ve been told to.

    Where are the champions of free speech?
    Where are the Bob Woodward’s and Carl Bernstein’s of out time?
    Where is the neutrality of media ?

    Ron Paul 2008


  • Brian

    This is all well and good and opened my eyes up to the way some of the old libertarians tried to gain support. However, I wish that the media would spend half as much time as they did on these newsletters looking into the dealings of some of the other presidential candidates. While this connection to the old guard of libertarians is bad for Paul, I refuse to believe that all the other candidates are squeaky clean. I believe that while being associated with this strategy to gain more members to your party is in bad taste, I would bet some candidates are associating themselves with people who are flat out harmful to America. I think anyone associated with Norman Podhoretz is far more dangerous than these newsletters. The Paulites dislike the coverage of these newsletters because they hurt their candidate true, but I think many of them are more frustrated by the fact that there are scandals that are far more dangerous and possibly treasonous involving other candidates that get no air time. It just all goes along with the mentality that it’s currently cool to pick on Paul, so why waist time going after a beloved “Main stream” candidate. If anything I feel Donklephant is taking the easy route to page hits, you know that anything about Paul scores you a built in audience without any more legwork other than reporting whats already out there. Step up and move those legs on some other candidates as well. What is Donklephants opinion of the other candidates involvement in the CFR? What is your view on the possibility of a Huckabee win, and then his “taking the nation back for Christ”? How about a piece on how some of the candidates react to the plans for internet censorship or creating a “tiered-internet”. I like you Donklephant, but it seems you are letting places like TNR dictate your content to often

  • John

    I’d rather have a president with ideas I believe in who may or may not know who wrote controversial statements in a newsletter more than a decade ago than a president whose main counterterrorism advisor is Cofer Black, shamed CIA head and current VP of Blackwater. Romney says he isn’t influenced by lobbyists, and uses his personal wealth as proof of the fact that he won’t be swayed by money, but that defense goes against everything we know to be true of greedy, power hungry, individuals.

    I’ve said it would be Romney-Giuliani since day one, and I stand by that today.

    So keep harping on the newsletters and the handling of a decade old controversy, but hopefully you’ll reconsider his independent run when your choices are Romney-Giuliani, Clinton-Obama (sure, that’s looking less and less likely, especially with his comments about Bill today, but what better way to tell America you’re a “uniter” than to let bygones be bygones? Besides, approx. 70% of Democratic voters like one of them, and Obama pulls a ton of Independents), and Bloomberg-“anyone who wants to go halves on a presidency”.

  • RK

    I don’t understand how people “know” what someone else knows. You “KNOW” that Ron Paul has the name of the author of the newsletter? Please tell us how you know this. And if you “KNOW” then maybe you also know who wrote them and you are culpable for not telling us as well.

    I mean, after all, Congressman Paul did say he doesn’t know who wrote them. I guess it can’t possibly be true if you say it isn’t.

    But lets assume for one second you are wrong. Let’s pretend, as you might say, that he doesn’t know. Then what? Then he is not so terrible? I want you to tell us all if he truly doesn’t know what does that mean. I’m sure it will mean something terrible because your position will ALWAYS be that Ron Paul is in the wrong won’t it?

    Face the facts, you are a hater, you will never side with him, and you would rather focus your venom on someone who has done more with his life than any pundit or nay sayer. The very thought of a medical doctor, Air Force veteran, Congressman, author of Economic Philosophy, family man, civil rights supporter, financial conservative, devout Christian would be simply too much for you wouldn’t it? Too scary to have, as McCain called him, the most honest man in Congress as President. I mean if McCain called him the most honest man in Congress and he lied I guess McCain’s judgment isn’t good enough for him to be Pres. either right?

  • John


    Not to say my post is worth addressing, as there are a few other points brought up by other readers worthy of a response, but it would be nice if you addressed some of those and didn’t just pick a comment from someone who types the way Ted Kazcynski writes letter and ridicule them.

    Regardless of what CNN and FOX might think, some debates featuring great difference of opinion are worth having.

  • Liberty Train

    The very idea of Libertarianism lends credence to Dr. Ron Paul’s statement that he does not know who wrote the articles. As someone who volunteered in NH for the primary and got to see the whole Free-State Project 1st hand, it IS not only probable but factual that he does not know.

    Libertarianism is freedom taken to its logical conclusion. Ron Paul sets up a newsletter, gets some people to help, then lets them exercise thier
    individual voices in thier own way. The newsletter was run like Ron Paul wants to run this country; it was de-centralized. He gave them no mandates and he had no over-sight. Are we too used to all controlling media outlets to be able to believe that Dr. Paul was not telling everyone what to write and personally signing off on every article written. He was busy defending the constitution in congress.

    I understand that it may be hard for you to believe Dr. Paul in this era of corrupt and lying politicians but hopefully this cleared it up for you. Now I would love to see you write a letter attacking the other candidates for all the things that they have KNOWINGLY done wrong. Thanks and I look forward to reading that article soon.

  • Vincent G

    Why do you waste time on a dead subject?
    It doesn’t really matter who wrote what ages ago.
    So ragging on about some news letters is nothing more than showing me you are happy with the status quo.

    The country is in deep trouble and no one is addressing it.
    We are nearing a Depression where 20 to 30% of the people could well be out of work.

    This to me is amazing how the minds of people work.
    It’s ok to bend the rules and declare war on a country for no good reason or plan dropping Nuclear Bombs on another because we don’t like what the leader says.

    Worse you will cheer this on the day it happens.

    What we do today has ramifications.
    The past is there to haunt you and nothing you can do will change what has happened.

    The choice is simple from my viewpoint.
    You are either going to make a stand to fight for law and order in government or you are going to give them another pass.
    I for one am sick of a do as I say but don’t do as I do government.

    I am tired of the parrots that say the same talking points down the line from top to bottom in both parties. They don’t even bother to try and make it sound more original!

    What kind of people do we have running this show?
    Are the Parties more important than the country or it’s people?

    And here we have one person that is telling it like it is.
    He has a plan to return to the rule of law.
    But he has a blemish in his past.
    He didn’t pay enough attention to what people were writing in his news letter.
    And one cares about the rule of law it seems.

    Maybe we should vote for John.
    John for instance has everyone figured out.
    He got the message. Build the wall first and then give them amnesty.
    No one really cares if we are there for 100 years as long as the causalities are low.
    The man is not all there if he thinks like this.
    Hmm I don’t hear anyone talking about this.
    I guess this is more acceptable.
    Maybe we should allow him to become president.
    Wasn’t there a famous line about give them cake once a long time ago?

    But really if you wish to stop supporting Ron then do so and Vote for what ever you wish.

    Because all this time wasted on a news letter is really nothing to loose your head over I would think.

    Vincent G

  • Russell

    I give up on you Gardner. I use to look forward to reading your criticisms of Paul but now you are stretching it too much. Now when I see anything written by you I will just by it. You act like you want to be convinced but you will never be and refuse to be.

    A few words as to why this newsletter scandal doesn’t matter to me.

    1) I think Ron Paul is not a racist and in fact his administration would do more good for minorities in this country than any other candidate.
    2) If you think about the priorities of issues, saving this country from debt and war is more important than any other issue of our day, and only Paul can/will do that.
    3) You can tell a lot by a person by the people that claim to be his enemy/opponent, and as far as I can tell, the integrity, judgment and morality of the majority of pundits and politicians that dislike him is on question.
    4) No matter how many times you say it “IS” a big deal, it is not. You should focus on priorities as well. Do you think Ron Paul is a decent person? Do you think he didn’t agree with what was in the newsletter? If so you should focus on the issues, which you obviously are not, making it very petty of you to constantly focus on this.
    5) Your country is in very poor condition right now and our government is only growing bigger and more oppressive.

    But I guess you need your page hits and there is no better way of getting them than asking Ron Paul supporters their opinion. It is pretty despicable of you to portray his supporters in a negative light without also showing that most of his supporters are good natured and often leave well reasoned and polite responses, which you then fail to address or respond.

    I suggest that any reader of this guy quit feeding the troll because it is obvious he doesn’t care about reason or logic. Good riddance.

  • http://grizzlegriz.blogspot.com Grizzle

    I think libertarian priorites are getting really backward.

    First, I think you have the wrong take on the newsletters. Rockwell and crew paid Paul to use his name ostensibly to promote federalism. When he heard that there was racist content in between delivering babies, he probably blew it off. It’s one of life’s lessons; no doubt he regrets it. It’s not like he’s ever said anything or done anything inherently racist and he never will. This isn’t a prelude to something bigger and you know it. It’s an abberation

    Second, what really gets me is this: When Paul came on the scene there was a big question about whether there were enough libertarians left in the party to form a base. As it turned out, it didn’t matter so much because Paul has managed to turn hundreds of thousands of people into Goldwater libertarian/conservatives. Yet oddly, the pre-Ron Paul Revolution libertarian writers and commentors are the ones that are willing to turn their backs on the movement.

    How can this be? The frontrunners in both parties are pushing pro-federal agendas. How can libertarians dismiss the National ID Card, economic malfeasance, and the Iraq war in the face and say that Paul’s minoirity interest in a stupid newsletter is more important? What do they tell the dead, dying, and disabled soldiers? “Sorry kid, I was afraid to be associated with someone who was associated with someone who wrote something racist 20 years ago, so I let the Iraq War ride”? No wonder the liberty movement never got off the couch. It’s prime theorists are waiting from Jesus to descend from Heaven to lead it.

  • Leanne

    Justin, if you feel that ron paul isn’t the right vehicle that’s your choice. You don’t have to justify it to anyone. As for the Paul supporters, they’ve already stated to you why they will continue to support him. I personally don’t care about the newsletters. In context, they’re politicly incorrect, but not racist. Ron Paul didn’t write them, and I don’t care who did. He’s still the best choice. Perhaps, in a few years, someone from the Libertarian Party will step forward and get the kind of momentum that RP has. I suspect the Libertarian’s will cannibalize that candidate for contaminaiting the message one way or the other. It’s tough to be a messiah. The Paul supporters just want a decent president with real solutions.

  • jb


    You can’t abandon some one you never really embraced.

    I think the newsletter issue is over -I suppose if Paul does well someone will bring it up again. The racist smear is the easist, and most deadly -I don ‘t suppose you read this – http://www.takimag.com/site/article/why_the_beltway_libertarians_are_trying_to_smear_ron_paul/

    Anyway, regardless of what happens from here, no-one has accomplished the degree of breakthrough that Paul has, short of being a billionaire, or a regional phenom (like George Wallace) – So, what will you do to defeat the Republican /Democratic Warfare/welfare hegelian Dialectic ?

  • mketcher

    It’s easy to believe that Ron Paul doesn’t know who authored the newsletters. I worked in that business during that time period, and it wasn’t uncommon for publishers to put out a newsletter under someone’s name, pay that person a royalty for the use of their name, and publish a newsletter. Ron Paul really wasn’t involved in the day-to-day operations of the newsletter. He was a full-time physician and he also likely had a heavy schedule of public speaking.

    What’s more, there may have been as many as a dozen or a half-dozen writers who worked on the non-by-lined articles in these newsletter over several years. So, after 15 years it’s not surprising that Dr. Paul may not know which article is attributed to which writer, even if he ever knew.

    And what if Lew Rockwell, Ron’s good friend, was the author of them, and Ron is merely saying he doesn’t remember in order to protect Lew. I would hold him in high regard for that. Yes, he may be telling a little white lie by doing that (as far as lies by politicians go, it’s a relatively harmless one — what difference does it make who authored the articles?). But he’s also serving a greater good. He’s being loyal to a good friend. He’s willing to take the heat for the newsletters in order to protect a friend. I would say that’s a plus for him. Most politicians would abandon their friends immediately if they thought it would diminish their quest for power. It shows that Ron Paul is not the sort of power-mad politicians who would abandon his friends.

    It’s time to give this ancient news a rest — and look towards the future — by donating to Ron Paul and supporting him.

  • Andrew

    I am not going to say Ron Paul is perfect, but I don’t think he wrote these newsletters. He should have oversaw them better, but it’s done now, and they are 15 years old.

    I think his track record speaks for itself though. Everything he has said, and everything he has voted for speaks against racism.

    It is a bit ridiculous to repost the same allegation every other day, because it is the only thing anyone has on him. The bottom line is, he is the only candidate that isn’t bought and paid for, and he has the most intelligent plan to get our economy out of the burning wreckage it is headed for.

    But his campaign is bigger than that. His stances would reverse almost 100 years of bad policy. He doesn’t simply want to manage the country better, he wants to give it back to the people.

    We are tired of being bullied by our government. We are tired of them stealing our money. We are tired of having our troops sent to needless wars. We are tired of seeing civilians in other countries die needlessly. We are tired of having our rights systematically taken away.

    There is only one candidate currently running that is for changing all of these horrible policies. So if you aren’t going to vote for Ron Paul, tell me who you are choosing instead, and how they are going to really change things.

  • Cameron

    Although the newsletter story made me a little uncomfortable, I compared that to the situation this country is in today and I would much rather deal with a newsletter scandal than a failing economy, an unjust war, and more restrictions on our individual liberties.

    Ron Paul is dead-on with the issues. The issue should be about respecting the constitution, and that is what he is championing. Ron Paul is a human being, and human beings are not perfect. He is the only candidate who can get this country back on the track that our founders intended it to be on.

    -NO to the REAL ID
    -NO to the Patriot Act
    -NO to preemptive warfare
    -NO to special interests
    -NO to open borders
    -NO to excessive government regulation
    -NO to excessive government spending
    -NO to the IRS!
    -YES for freedom! =)

    I’m voting for the man/woman who represents these ideals. The only man running on them is Ron Paul, and he has the voting record to back it up!

    -Cameron Flynn
    Redondo Beach, CA

  • chris lawton


    I’m ashamed to say that McCain is the preferred presidential candidate of the South Carolina GOP leadership. I guess it’s because scalawags like the company of traitors.

    The Ultimate Weapon for Funding The Ron Paul Revolution! It’s FREE and makes your Ron Paul Life better
    and more fun.

    Share with everyone!


  • Parke

    Restore our rights. End the war. Save the dollar.

    Thats what Im concerned about. Thats why Im voting for Ron Paul. It really doesnt matter to me about the newsletter. After doing enough research on Ron Paul I believe he isnt racist.

  • Dr Ward Ciac II

    People of Color for the most part don’t seem to have a problem with Dr Paul, and even support him more than the others. They know the newsletter flap is the Establishment suppressing the little guy. It’s very familiar to them.

  • Gene

    Justin, you keep saying this is a big deal, yet you still have not listed a single reason why. If you have evidence that Paul is the author, then supply it. Do you honestly think if Ron Paul supported doubling Israeli aid the TNR piece would have seen the light of day?

  • http://www.getabackbone.com Harold

    The only reason people like this try to bash Ron Paul and others, is so they can get accepted by the elite MSM and hopefully get a boost for their company. They know if they go against the mainstream, they will never be more than a small organization that has to work hard for their money. You lack a backbone and should be ashamed for what you are doing to gain approval. You are the little girl in high school that would make fun of a good person, just so the popular kids would accept you. Grow up…you make me sick.

  • Mark D

    Kirchik talked about the newsletters on NPR.
    Even the friendly questions at NPR reveal there is no story here. Kirchik is just another TNR columnist with a big imagination, half a story, and an unforgiving political agenda.

    Kirchik: “They started out when congressman Paul was actually a congressman….and they were like your regular letter to a constituent that alot of congressman send out. But they were oddly obsessed with conspiracy theories that have long been bugbears of the sort of paranoid populist right….Then once he was out of congress, starting in the late 1980’s, thats when you see the real racial and homophobic animus.”

    Alex Chadwik (NPR): “So he was in congress..then he was out and its during this period he was out that some of the more shocking statements. What do you find there?”

    Kirchik: “Well there is an obsession for example with MLK and not in a good way. He is obsessed with his sex life….[relates quotes about pedophilia, extramarital affairs]… this is indicative of neoconfederate literature or racist literature, MLK is an obsession, a continuing obsession.”

    Alex Chadwik (NPR) “:…What exactly was Dr. Paul’s involvement in this?”

    Kirchik:” Well this is unknown…”

  • Brian

    Why do you keep writing about this subject, without anything new to add? This piece only seems to be pointing out that someone agrees with your opinion – congratulations.

    I think the horse is dead – give it a rest.

  • Scott

    The problem is… you have your priorities all wrong. When looking at presidential candidates, we should be considering what each of them would do with the office. If there is any dirt in these candidates’ pasts, we should only be considering how it affects what they would actually do.

    Romney has proven that he does not keep his word while in office. Huckabee has proven that he is a taxer/spender. McCain, as we know, has no problem with staying in Iraq for 100 years… resulting in endless turmoil and needless Arab deaths. The list goes on and on. There are a million reasons to be very afraid of what most of the other candidates would do with the presidency.

    So… be honest with yourself. You are disturbed by the newsletter issue. So how does this issue affect what Paul will do in office? Does it actually change anything? The guy has been consistent in his actions for 30 years. How, specifically, will this issue negatively affect his actions as president? I’d like to hear your answer to this one.

  • Duckman

    Quite a few Paul supporters like their guy so much that they can’t see straight anymore.

    Justin is 100% right, as Reason magazine, and other former supporters who are now distancing themselves from Ron Paul over this.

    Let me be clear: I was a Paul supporter. I donated on the two big moneybomb days, donated many other occasions, joined a meetup group, made and waved signs, and canvassed on several occasions.

    However, I was very dissapointed when this newsletter story came to light, that Ron Paul had the audacity to claim he doesn’t know who wrote this content, and to claim this was a settled issue requiring no further explanation when 90% of the general public had never heard of this issue before.

    It’s just impossible for me to believe that Ron Paul could not know who the author of this content is. This was a small one-horse operation of intimate Paul associates who put this out, and Ron Paul has been dogged about the content of his newsletter for years. Under those circumstances, is there any possible, concievable way Ron Paul could be ignorant as to who wrote this content?

    Ron Paul could have owned up, admitted who the authors are, and said that he never subscribed to these small-minded ideas OR that if he had, he should have admitted to it, and said that he’s grown.

    Frankly, I’d rather Ron Paul tell me that he used to wear KKK robes and once burned crosses but has since seen the light and renounced such things than for him to LIE about how racist writings came to be in his newsletter.

    That’s the high-road that frankly I EXPECTED from Ron Paul. Instead, he chose to lie. and for no obviously good reason. It really leaves a sour taste in my mouth. It shows he will be dishonest and that he has poor crisis judgement.

    I know his remaining supporters are currently out there attacking every media outlet that has dared to do investigation into what the truth is here, but that is just shooting the messenger. The fact is that there’s something wrong at the core of this story, and Ron Paul himself blew whatever chance he may have had to win by his poor response to this crisis. What’s worse, this is a crisis he should have been well prepared for since this is, after all, “old news.”

  • Lars

    Folks, seriously…there are people blinded so much by main stream media and their specific focus on these newsletters to discourage Ron Paul supporters….they can’t see so straight anymore. Those that have done their homework know the truth. That is just plain fact. Also, I would never under any circumstance support anyone with simple-minded beliefs such as singling out individuals for discrimination.

    Ron Paul admitted to negligence….ONCE! If this was an occuring theme in the mans history, I’d be less forgiving…but, it has only happened once…and when brought to his attention? He admitted moral obligation, and took the hit. To me, that is a very noble thing…in line with this mans consistant record of principled integrity.

    In closing, if you’d like to dismiss his ideology and drop support, that is your choice. Just make certain that you have REALLY done your homework…and you are willing to accept one of the other politicians over this one. For ME? I’m 100% pro-Ron Paul and 100% pro-liberty (and that means for any living human-being on this God given Earth! No matter what color, background or history!)

    GO RON PAUL!!!! You’ve given your all…just let me do the same for you and your message!

  • boston dan

    keep on smearing Ron paul.

    By doing so, you support the candidates that were selected by the Federal Reserve Empire.

    You are a hypocrite in the very least and obviously never supported RP to begin with, so why pretend to now? We, i.e. real Americans that don’t love the Federal Reserve Empire, can do without the likes of you.

  • Mark Elgin

    You say you supported Ron Paul. Who do you support now? I can assure you that anyone can come up with 20x the dirt and lies on whoever it might be. If you had a wife that had a 30 year track record of honesty and overall integrity, would you divorce her because ONE THING she said didn’t sound believable. Someone can earn the benefit of the doubt on one thing. In this case, what Ron Paul is being accused of doesn’t show up in any of his actions, so it is not believable that he wrote it or even knew who wrote it. I have learned that people have become scared of freedom and will do anything to fight it. Everyone wants the safety net of the government to stay intact so we don’t have to be accountable for our actions. One comment said the author needs a backbone. Actually, we all need a backbone!

  • http://www.paltalk.com Dan Warner

    Justin I fail to see why you keep beating this dead horse. Is it to get hits on your articles or do you have a genuine beef? From what I see you have nothing else to talk about. We just had two states vote. Why are you not talking about ‘Paul pulls a weak 2nd in Nevada’ or ‘Paul looses badly in SC’? I mean those at least would be legitimate points to debate with your readers, but this continued smear is kinda getting old now.

    I will not be visiting this site anymore. I used to at least find your willingness to debate real newsworthy issues worth the time. You are no longer talking current events, but instead you have degraded into digging into crap to sling, old dried up crap at that.

    Maybe if you shift gears and talk about news events again I will come back, but I doubt it.

  • Gene

    Gotta love the “I was a Ron Paul supported, but..”posts. Yeah dude, and I was a Hillary supporter too.

  • David

    Racism schmacism. This is all bunk and you know it.
    Get over it you mollycoddling milksop.

  • Brad

    Fools and their rights are soon parted.

    The mentally minuscule are easily led by the bridle of emotion.

    If you limit the data you evaluate, keeping only what supports your paradigm, you will come to faulty conclusion.

    There is a greater balance of good when dealing with Ron Paul.

    I vote for virtue; I vote for Ron Paul.

  • Sk00L

    As a libertarian who practices what he preaches, Dr. Paul really doesn’t care what you think! He believes that your thoughts and opinions are your business, and you have a right to them…no matter how ugly or disagreeable they may be to him or anyone else. I think this is probably why he hasn’t “outed” the ghostwriters who worked on those newsletters (if he even knows who they are). He thinks they’re entitled to their opinions. Why? Because freedom of speech and freedom of thought are the cornerstone of our political system. Dr. Paul is the only Constitutional candidate in the race…and the First Amendment protects the rights of figures like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. or Malcolm X or Al Sharpton just as much as it protects the rights of anyone spouting racist or bigoted nonsense. You can’t get one without the other.

    As a veteran of a number of political campaigns, I wish Dr. Paul had been more “politically correct” in his response. I wish there had been more “mainstream” coverage of the fact that Dr. Paul thinks economist Walter Williams (who, by the way, is black) would make a great running mate. Or the fact that he always votes against awarding Congressional Medals of Freedom (because such an expenditure is not authorized by the Constitution) but when Rosa Parks was nominated for one, he offered to chip in money from his own pocket so the taxpayers didn’t have to foot the bill. (None of his colleagues took him up on his offer, and instead raided the Treasury (i.e., your pocketbook).

    Unfortunately, the American electorate has been sufficiently dumbed down that it merely takes an accusation of racism to destroy a candidate. But again, that’s just not who Ron Paul is. He’s the Anti-Romney. He’s non-slick and non-calculating. He’s essentially a freedom-loving policy wonk who wants to strip power from an out-of-control, financially and morally bankrupt federal bureaucracy and return it to the individual American citizen.

    It’s tragic to think that the American electorate is so easily manipulated, and that political correctness has run amok to the extent that we can’t even have an honest dialog about racism in politics and society…in this of all years.

    And finally, from his website, http://www.ronpaul2008.com, here’s his statement on racism: “A nation that once prided itself on a sense of rugged individualism has become uncomfortably obsessed with racial group identities.

    The collectivist mindset is at the heart of racism.
    Government as an institution is particularly ill-suited to combat bigotry. Bigotry at its essence is a problem of the heart, and we cannot change people’s hearts by passing more laws and regulations.

    It is the federal government that most divides us by race, class, religion, and gender. Through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, government plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails. Government “benevolence” crowds out genuine goodwill by institutionalizing group thinking, thus making each group suspicious that others are receiving more of the government loot. This leads to resentment and hostility among us.
    Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called “diversity” actually perpetuate racism.

    The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence – not skin color, gender, or ethnicity.

    In a free society, every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty.”

    This is a cut and paste but I believe it to be significant and entirely relevant. no matter how anyone tries to be original, the thing you wish to say has already been said with more composure and artistry then the aim your work intends to be.

  • Gerrod H

    Don’t forget the donation drive today. Please donate as much as you can. freeatlast2008.com

  • Bob

    It is up to the individual to decide their opinion of a candidate. I have watched Ron Paul for a year or so now. He is my hero. If I could vote for him I would.

    People are bringing up the racist letters, ok, these should be looked into.

    But what about the immoral war, the war that has probably cost the lives of 1,000,000 of my fellow human beings. Ron Paul is against that. THIS IS IMPORTANT. This is THE important issue.

  • thurmond

    It was disapointing to to read the comments of Ron Paul’s supports, who appear to be asking the world to ignore the racist comments expoused in a news letter bearing Ron Paul’s name. Ron Paul is seeking the most important position on the face of the earth, the presidency of the United State. This position requires an individual with such characteristics as honesty, integrity, humanity, and fairness. This is why we must know the level of Ron Paul’s involvement in the racist news letter that beared his name for nearly 20 years.

    Ron Paul stated in his defense that he didn’t authored the racist articles that appeared in his news letter, despite the fact that he was the editor of the news letter, and that the news letter was published for approximately 20 years. Even if you were to believe Mr. Paul’s incredible alleged that he was not the author of the racist articles that appeared in his news letter, it would required the suspension of logic and reason to believe that he was not at least complicit in the publication of the vulger comments that appeared in his news letter and shared the same views. I find it hard to believe that Mr. Paul never read the articles in his own news letter in the 20 years of its publication, or that some never mentioned to him the racist reviews that were expoused in his news letter.

    It would appear that Mr. Paul is not the person he claims to be. He is not the first politician to have sought to hide past embarrising conduct on the road to the White House. To the Ron Paul supporters, I take no pleasure in inform you that Ron Paul is the great savior the American people have been searching for. He is a flaud individual like the rest of us. Perhaps even more flaud than most.