Who wrote Ron Paul’s newsletters? Who cares?
posted at 1:56 pm on January 10, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
It’s Kirchick’s story so he’s obliged to follow up but all it does is play into the apologists’ hands by shifting the question from whether Paul approves of the sentiments in the newsletters published for years under his name to whether he actually composed the text, as though a definitive “no” on the latter point would exculpate him. Even well meaning critics are making this mistake. There’s no way to prove if he did or didn’t unless someone comes forward to take the blame, and even then many of us would suspect he was taking the fall for the cult leader, and even then, who cares? To borrow a slogan from his own core constituency: Paul knew. He had to. And if he didn’t — and remember, a man with congressional ambitions would/should be extra keen to know what’s going out on his letterhead — then to borrow another phrase, he’s unfit to run a Dairy Queen. Let’s keep our eyes on the ball. And hope Chris Wallace keeps his eye on it too.
Here’s the latest dispatch from the rEVOLution. Innocent temporary site glitch or grand Diebold conspiracy to cover up a 30-point blowout victory? 17,000+ views on YouTube and counting.
Update: Which is not to suggest the Paulnuts have a monopoly on paranoia.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Paul knew. He had to.
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 2:00 PM
He should have figured that out with looking at Tanc’s number, when a dropped out candidate was running second.
Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Because someone screwed up the column headings. Duh.
matd on January 10, 2008 at 2:01 PM
Its too bad, I kinda like Ron Paul. He sorta reminded me of Ross Perot.
DMeNTe on January 10, 2008 at 2:01 PM
Does anyone dare suggest that Madame Hillary’s win was, ummmmm, unusual? Osama Obama supposedly had the state locked up, and there were reports of “ballot shortages.”
No, that’s the Democrat side, and we all know only Republicans fiddle the vote.
But I question the timing.
MrScribbler on January 10, 2008 at 2:03 PM
I like so many of Paul’s positions, but this cracks the nut for me.
I brought this up to my rational, intelligent friend, and his response was “real libertarians and even conservatives won’t care about something so trivial.”
*sigh*
MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 2:03 PM
It doesnt matter if Paul knew or not.
They were his newsletters and he is ultimately responsible for their content. He has already said “For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name”
Thats about the most he can do other then naming the author.
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 2:06 PM
We’ve all heard the Ronulan’s say Paul didn’t expect to win, just get his message out. So, he has.
a capella on January 10, 2008 at 2:06 PM
Ron Paul won the internet said so !
/Paulbat
William Amos on January 10, 2008 at 2:07 PM
If somebody wrote something offensive under my name, I would file a lawsuit or at least say SOMETHING about it at the time it was happening.
EJDolbow on January 10, 2008 at 2:08 PM
Paul did say something as soon as he was made aware of it.
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 2:09 PM
Stormfront is either an incompetent administrator or an anti-semitic racist douchebag or a combination of both. None of these are good qualities for a President.
I eagerly await Stormfront’s spinning in the debate and how the Ronulans will try to exonerate him.
BKennedy on January 10, 2008 at 2:11 PM
I found this.
Link
Talon on January 10, 2008 at 2:12 PM
So, why doesn’t he identify the author(s)?
a capella on January 10, 2008 at 2:13 PM
From that last link this is hillarious
William Amos on January 10, 2008 at 2:14 PM
He wasn’t reading his newsletters for 10 years?
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 2:14 PM
who CARES is reeeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiiite
Drunk Report on January 10, 2008 at 2:15 PM
If I ever write anything ban-hammer worthy, Im just letting everyone know now it was not me who wrote it.
infidel on January 10, 2008 at 2:16 PM
Has anyone over at NRO heard a peep from John Derbyshire since this came up? I wonder if he is going to defend him on this one or reconsider his support.
thirteen28 on January 10, 2008 at 2:16 PM
He responded along time ago when the same allegations came up when he was runing for congress. This is a very old issue pre 1996. His response now is the same as it was then
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 2:18 PM
haha.
Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 2:19 PM
If the Paulites say “Who Cares” about this issue then they are admiting that they agree with what was written.
William Amos on January 10, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Did he accept money from racist organizations back then too?
infidel on January 10, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Yeah: “Good work.”
Jim Treacher on January 10, 2008 at 2:20 PM
I have no idea. Maybe Paul accepted the donations because he believes that under the constitution you have the right to be racist? And he thought by accepting the donation he was just reaffirming that right to those people.
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 2:21 PM
Regardless of whether he knew or not, the newsletter is called the “Ron Paul Political/Survival Report.” It’s got his name on it and that makes him responsible for the content.
He didn’t disavow it until years later, and then, only disavowed the stuff he didn’t quite “agree” with. He didn’t retract it when it was printed and didn’t apologize for it then, either.
Then there’s the fact that WRonG Paul wouldn’t release copies of these newsletters. It took a disgruntled former supporter ponying them up to finally get to see what these little gems said.
Any way you slice this, WRonG Paul is responsible for this content whether he denies having written it or not.
ConBlog_NH on January 10, 2008 at 2:21 PM
So Dr.Paul made money for over 10 years peddling anti-semetic and racist conspiracies but a simple, my bad, I’ll start prood reading this stuff now is OK for most Libertarians? So he isn’t a neo-nazi conspiracist douche bag, he just works with them and makes money off them. I call BS! If he wants to take moral responsibility he should resign from congress, withdraw from from the presidential race and refund all the money from the non anti-semitic and racist Libertarians.
I also call BS that he had no idea what was going on his newsletter for 10 years.
Shtetl G on January 10, 2008 at 2:22 PM
This was going on for 10 years under his name, I can’t believe he didn’t read the newsletters or no one told him about them for a decade. You are asking us to suspend our reason here. It is obvious to me that Ron Paul endorsed the sentiments going out under his name in the news letters and going out under his SIGNATURE in the solicitation letter.
As the kids say, well, Duh!
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 2:23 PM
So, lets get this straight, someone has to come forward and take resposibility for the articles for Ron Paul to be presumed innocent. It’s like the police say your guilty of something and you will always be guilty of that thing uless someone comes forward and takes the blame. OK. So if someone on the blog says something racist then Michelle is racist because her name is tied to the website and the only way for her not to become a racist is if that person come out and proclaims he/she is a racist and even then that person is protecting MM. The one who makes the accusation is the one who has to prove their right. So Kirchick has to prove it nobody else. Be a real journalist instead of gossip columnist.
Go Fred
menoname on January 10, 2008 at 2:23 PM
I agree and so does Paul. He has said he is ultimately responsible for them.
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 2:24 PM
Exactly.
Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 2:24 PM
Good, then he should drop out of the race.
You don’t just issue a statement saying your “ultimately responsible” and expect everyone to respond: “well, OK then, nevermind”
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 2:25 PM
The young NRO Paul-ite, Freddoso, confessed that the newsletter revelations troubled him. Derbyshire is, as usual, just a bit more interested in jigsaw puzzles, visual representations of algebraic equations, off-color religious-themed jokes recalled from British school days in the 1950s, and Islamic creationists.
Man’s got to have his priorities.
CK MacLeod on January 10, 2008 at 2:28 PM
Thank you for reaffirming my belief in the Comedy Gold Standard!
Jim Treacher on January 10, 2008 at 2:30 PM
This is, absolutely, the apotheosis of the Paulnut mindset. We’ve reached escape velocity.
Allahpundit on January 10, 2008 at 2:31 PM
If that’s truly the case, then he should have fired the person writing the content after the FIRST offense, written a retraction and/or apology, or ceased publishing the newsletter all together.
He didn’t do that, did he? There was a LOT more than just one instance…
I like to call that a “tacit approval” on the part of Dr. Paul.
ConBlog_NH on January 10, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Since I don’t just believe things that are written over at TNR, I looked into some of these claims on my own.
Ron appeared on a radio program called “The Political Cesspool”. The guys on this show refer to the musical act “Prussian Blue” as “a twin-girl singing group”.
Oh yeah, they also think that all Americans are of European descent.
I’m not sure which is more of an indictment.
Anyway, the fact that this guy is currently a Republican serving in congress, and will appear with presidential candidates in a debate on Fox is probably going to be used against the party for years to come.
Oh, Sheets.
Dorvillian on January 10, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Should Brack Obama drop out as well since he attends a racist black church? He attends the church, has spoken there, takes donations from them and has not publicly denoucned them. Does that make him a racist too?
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 2:40 PM
The reason why it is an issue now is that the same type of people are supporting him and Lew Rockwell is still very involved in his campaign. So as far as I can tell his “moral responsibility” didn’t mean all that much and his explation really doesn’t explain anything anyway.
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 2:40 PM
I know a lot of people who are not qualified to be President, that doesn’t mean Ron Paul is qualified.
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Pointing out the flaws of others is not a defense of one’s own character…
Ceterum censeo Fred! esse desumo !!!
elgeneralisimo on January 10, 2008 at 2:42 PM
I never said it was. I was simply raising the question. Should Obama resign because of his views?
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 2:44 PM
If the topic of discussion was Obama, sure…
elgeneralisimo on January 10, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Here is a note from Derb. Looks like he is holding out right now.
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 2:48 PM
So, what position would Lew Rockwell hold in a Ron Paul Administration?
Department of Housing and Urban Development?
Keljeck on January 10, 2008 at 2:48 PM
So are you saying Ron Paul is not qualified because of his views? I sure am.
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 2:49 PM
What’s wrong with the Dutch musical group that gave us the song “Venus”? Oh, wait–that was Shocking Blue. Nevermind.
Okay, I was kidding there, but I did have to look up Prussian Blue, because I’d never heard of them. Vile stuff–nothing like raising your kids to be juvenile hate queens. Ugh, frigging Nazis.
ReubenJCogburn on January 10, 2008 at 2:49 PM
In past Ron Paul organizations Lew Rockwell held the same position Karl Rove did for Bush.
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Maybe he’ll put those in the HUD program in those much talked about FEMA concentration camps.
mram on January 10, 2008 at 2:51 PM
OH FUN!
Say what you want, but a Ron Paul administration would be comedy gold. A Government run by anarchists?
Hell yes!
Keljeck on January 10, 2008 at 2:52 PM
Face it, dude. It’s over for Ron Paul. He’s toast. He’s gonna get killed in the debate tonight. I can’t wait!!
freakagriep on January 10, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Obama is a Trojan Horse of a different color, both more dangerous and more significant than Paul. He also deserves to be exposed and rejected, and not just because of his church. Failing to denounce Paul hardly puts us in a better position to attack Obama. In fact, the possible need to attack Obama on similar but more complex grounds makes exposing and rejecting Paul all the more important.
CK MacLeod on January 10, 2008 at 2:55 PM
You make a good point and if Obama gets the democratic nod, we will be sure to bring that up during the run up to general election.
Talon on January 10, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Looks like the ghostwriter excuse doesn’t hold up, either:
freakagriep on January 10, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Let me try a hypothetical. Imagine there is an ex congressman named Paul Ronald. He has just been booted out of office. He needs some money so he sets up a newsletter. Now Dr.Ronald is a busy man owing from the fact that he does not have a job anymore so he does not write this newsletter. In his newsletter people write under his name about the Jews setting up the Branch Davidians and dirty rioting blacks in the inner cities. This goes on for 10 years and he makes a lot of money off this newsletter. Eventually he get re-elected into congress and decides to run for president.
One day some people ask about all this crazy shit that he made money off of and was written under his name. His response is that he’s taken “responsibility” for this newsletter, now back off.
Now my question to all the Dr.Ronald supporters, WTF?
Shtetl G on January 10, 2008 at 2:59 PM
I agree. He hasn’t even apologized to anyone for the content.
freakagriep on January 10, 2008 at 3:02 PM
That doesn’t prove anything. The point of being a Ghostwriter is that you are writing in place of another person. If it was, as is theorized, Lew Rockwell, OF COURSE he’d know that Ron Paul voted against MLK Day, served in the armed forces, and ran for President in 1988.
I’m willing to accept that they were Ghostwritten, I am not wiling to accept Ron Paul had no idea what was going on.
Keljeck on January 10, 2008 at 3:04 PM
Should Huckabee resign for visiting Cornerstone Church with John Hagee? Or will he even be “grilled” about this in tonight’s debate?
sweeper on January 10, 2008 at 3:06 PM
He was visiting a church, not funding a racist newsletter written in his name.
There’s a huge difference.
Keljeck on January 10, 2008 at 3:07 PM
You gotta admit that an Obama v. Paul race would be fun to watch, even if the country would lose whoever won.
pedestrian on January 10, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Tu Ne Cede Malis!
Fed Up on January 10, 2008 at 3:08 PM
Looking for another civil war?
bnelson44 on January 10, 2008 at 3:14 PM
The more that the RP campaign tries to hide who the author is, the more I think it’s RP.
freakagriep on January 10, 2008 at 3:15 PM
The enemedia and the Democrats–but I repeat myself–are sitting on that in the hopes that the Huckster will get the nomination. Then they’ll unload on him, while screaming “Separation of church and state!”, for getting paid 25K for preaching a sermon while running for President. That’s the only reason they haven’t made more of it so far, and I agree, it’s shady as hell. Like pretty much all things Huckster.
ReubenJCogburn on January 10, 2008 at 3:15 PM
The backdrop on all these Paul discussion’s have been his guilt by association. With the storm troopers (or whoever), the truthers, Alex Jones, they have all been laid out there. Now these Newsletters come out (that are not going to change many minds) and it is no longer that his foreign policies are whacked, it’s that the man is secretly building concentration camps will secret nazi treasure. This is a take down from a discredited source and everyone is right on board. But beware the takedown method.
sweeper on January 10, 2008 at 3:16 PM
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt!
ConBlog_NH on January 10, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Sweeper’s right, we shouldn’t associate Ron Paul with the Ron Paul newsletter. What silly geese.
Jim Treacher on January 10, 2008 at 3:17 PM
I sent an email to Kathryn Jean Lopez at National Review suggesting that since Derbyshire was a Paul booster he should be addressing the newsletters. No response from her, and he has been preoccupied with jigsaw puzzles.
Not a stellar moment for NRO, in my opinion.
JohnTant on January 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM
I talked to the scum of the Earth yesterday, a heroin addict who squats in abandoned houses and learned something surprising. He’s enthusiastically supporting Ron Paul and is registered to vote. Sensing the possibility of something interesting, I went to his abandoned house and there was Ron Paul pamphlets and beer cans and alcohol bottles littering the place. It’s a large house and his “housemates” claimed to share the Ron Paul enthusiasm. I don’t believe that my observations are unusual. Anarchist squatters are recepients of welfare in Europe–biting the hand that feeds them.
I started thinking about this in terms of the Indiana’s Voter ID law. The Democrats argue that that law would disenfranchise people like this heroin addict. And I can’t help but think our Founding Fathers were right not to let people who are too irresponsible vote. Coulter jokes about women’s suffrage, but I’m actually serious here. On the hand, the Dems are right on their side. These heroin addict squatters second choice is Obama. On the other hand, while squatters probably would make the effort to do something stupid like vote for Paul in primary, I’m not sure that would do something sensible like voting in general election. Of course, you never know.
thuja on January 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM
Okay, here is what I dont understand. I have read through all of these articles by Paul http://www.house.gov/paul/legis.shtml
All of his speeches given before congress
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/
And all of the articles found here
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/#art2
In all of these I dont see anything remotely racist or tied to conspiracy theories.
You would think that in 12 years of writing these he would have said something, or accidently let something slip. I haven’t found anything though.
So, after looking at all of this, his explanation of not managing all his newsletters and allowing someone to say something racist under them under his name seems plausible.
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 3:22 PM
You obviously have a higher class of squatter friends than most.
sweeper on January 10, 2008 at 3:23 PM
So, after looking at all of this, his explanation of not managing all his newsletters and allowing someone to say something racist under them under his name seems plausible.
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Which is why he’s unfit to be President of the United States.
freakagriep on January 10, 2008 at 3:25 PM
So Huckabee goes to Cornerstone once.
Ron Paul has been on Alex Jones’ show how many times now? And he FUNDED A RACIST NEWSLETTER.
There’s a large difference here you are purposely overlooking to rationalize your faith in that man.
You think he’s going to say racist things in prepared statements in Congress?
In fact, most of Ron Paul’s articles at LRC are those prepared statements.
There are racist things in his newsletter, there are crazy conspiracy theories in his newsletter, and depending on who the ghostwriter is, he may still be working for the Paul campaign and could end up in his administration.
If he allowed for such an oversight, particularly for a friend, who’s to say what kind of people are working for him?
Keljeck on January 10, 2008 at 3:31 PM
mismanaging a newsletter writing campaign written over 15 years ago does not disqualify someone for running for president in my opinion.
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 3:32 PM
Then what does? Being an entirely ineffective congressman?
Keljeck on January 10, 2008 at 3:36 PM
Being a convicted felon
Not being a US citizen
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Woot! Then in your eyes I’m viable!
Vote for me!
Keljeck on January 10, 2008 at 3:48 PM
hah, you only asked what excluded someone from running. Not what characteristics the president should have
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 3:51 PM
I guess I don’t quite understand the dismayed reaction from some members of the Reason clique.
Isn’t this whole escapade an affirmation of libertarian reasoning?
Sell your daughter out as a crack-whore?
Hey, it’s capitalism, dude!
Importing millions of indentured servants from south of the border to enhance the stock portfolios of your friends?
That’s just the free market at work, baby!
Want to open up your own meth lab?
Isn’t that what entrepreneuralism is all about?!
I don’t see why capitalizing upon racism and anti-Semitism is some big departure for the cultists. Unless it’s just because this particular episode casts doubt upon the self-perceived “coolness” of Nick Gillespie’s pals.
Gerard on January 10, 2008 at 4:10 PM
HEHEHE
Talon on January 10, 2008 at 4:21 PM
yep.
Paul is either guilty as sin on this and his ties to neo-nazi’s.
OR
He has the political IQ of a gnat fly
jp on January 10, 2008 at 4:44 PM
anyone else think Derbs. pointless post about Jigsaw puzzles is his way of flipping us all off?
jp on January 10, 2008 at 4:45 PM
Paul interview on CNN and newsletters coming up shortly.
CK MacLeod on January 10, 2008 at 4:54 PM
It’s a good thing you said it, because my version lacked the smooth second stage separation..
saus on January 10, 2008 at 5:24 PM
wow
Paul did good on CNN
I believe what he said
offroadaz on January 10, 2008 at 5:40 PM
No he didn’t. He said on one hand that liberterians don’t catergorize group and than went on to explain why black people support him.
sweeper on January 10, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Color me shocked and amazed. I’m sure that the Branch Davidians believed everything that David Koresh said and thought it was good too.
But you go ahead and keep believing that for 10 years his signed newsletter that was written in the first person and made references to his wife, his career and his military service were all ghost-written by some unknown party without his knowledge.
Or just blame it on the Jews. Either way.
Hollowpoint on January 10, 2008 at 5:46 PM
You Neocons are just peeved because Paul the Great has illuminated the hidden truth about who was responsible for the Bali Bombings!
Damn those belligerent Aussie vacationers!
Gerard on January 10, 2008 at 5:48 PM
Ron Paul was fired up on CNN. Should be a good debate tonight if he is still fired up. If someone actually came out and said they heard RP speak like that then thats a different thing. But if he did write those, he’s a way better actor than Fred since no one has heard him talk like that.
menoname on January 10, 2008 at 5:49 PM
Was there really signatures on them or just a logo.
menoname on January 10, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Was there really signatures on them or just a logo.
Why should it even matter?
Don’t you grasp the fundamental point here?
Ron Paul profited from the virulently racist attitudes of his supporters for nearly two decades.
Whether or not he shared their views is completely irrelevant.
Gerard on January 10, 2008 at 6:13 PM
So if someone on hear makes a racist mark, does that mean MM is a racist because her name is linked to the website.
menoname on January 10, 2008 at 6:19 PM
Yes.
BTW, “I didn’t write it, I don’t know who wrote it (and video tape is easy to fake these days), but I take moral responsibility” is weaseling, it’s a nudge-nudge wink-wink head fake.
If you believe it, you’re a willing dupe.
DiannaD on January 10, 2008 at 6:26 PM
No. Don’t be stupid.
DiannaD on January 10, 2008 at 6:29 PM
if Fox doesnt’ call him out, this isn’t going to get much mainstream notice and Paul’s spin will pass. The lib media will let it slide so long as he’s a thorn in republicans side, which helps them.
jp on January 10, 2008 at 6:29 PM
Well, now we know what you can say when your newletter is caught saying racist and anti-Semitic things – But I didn’t mean it.
I wonder if that defense was tried at Nuremburg….
mjk on January 10, 2008 at 6:37 PM
So if someone on hear makes a racist remark, does that mean MM is a racist because her name is linked to the website.
You completely miss the point.
Michele Malkin did not create her websites in order to appeal to disgruntled, conspiracy-minded, maladroit losers and virulent racists and anti-Semites, or to profit from their collective psychoses.
If she did allow racist and anti-Semitic crackpots and homophobic bigots to monopolize this site, and to post their bilge without moderation-which wouldn’t happen, but let’s stipulate that this is an hypothetical-then yes, she’d probably be forced to admit culpability, which Ron Paul has been steadfastly unwilling to do.
According to him none of his deranged supporters-not the lunatics who’ve assaulted Sean Hannity and Rudy Giuliani, not the Troofer outpatients from Bellevue’s pysch ward, not the WN wannabe stormtroopers who donate to his campaign-are his responsibility. He’s not even responsible for the nutbars who he specifically and repeatedly courts-in person!
I would love to have this guy as CIC.
It would be like an endless loop of Dr. Strangelove.
Gerard on January 10, 2008 at 7:09 PM
Comment pages: