Posted on 01/11/2008 6:59:44 AM PST by jdm
Reason Magazine has long associated themselves with the Ron Paul campaign, if not officially endorsing him. Their Hit & Run blog has served as the heart of rational Paul apologetics, and in their skilled hands, that has proven essential to his campaign. Now, as the magazine has Paul on its cover, its new editor has the unpleasant task of looking a little more closely at the candidate, and Matt Welch finds it an unpleasant journey.
Has Paul really disassociated himself from, and "taken moral responsibility" for, these "Ron Paul" newsletters "for over a decade"? If he has, that history has not been recorded by the Nexis database, as best as I can reckon.The first indication I could find of Paul either expressing remorse about the statements or claiming that he did not author them came in an October 2001 Texas Monthly article -- less than eight years ago. ...
So what exactly did Paul and his campaign say about these and more egregious statements during his contentious 1996 campaign for Congress, when Democrat Lefty Morris made the newsletters a constant issue? Besides complaining that the quotes were taken "out of context" and proof of his opponent's "race-baiting," Paul and his campaign defended and took full ownership of the comments.
Indeed. Rather than claiming he had never read these newsletters, as Paul absurdly did on CNN last night, Paul claimed that he himself wrote the newsletters. Matt Welch find this in the contemporaneous Dallas Morning News report on the newsletters during Paul's 1996 Congressional campaign (May 22, 1996, emphasis mine):
Dr. Paul denied suggestions that he was a racist and said he was not evoking stereotypes when he wrote the columns. He said they should be read and quoted in their entirety to avoid misrepresentation. [...]
In the interview, he did not deny he made the statement about the swiftness of black men.
"If you try to catch someone that has stolen a purse from you, there is no chance to catch them," Dr. Paul said.
Matt has more examples of Paul's non-denials in 1996. Twelve years later, Paul wants people to believe that not only did he not write any of his newsletters, he never read them either. His role in the single most effective piece of outreach of his organization, he explained to Wolf Blitzer last night, was as a publisher -- one who didn't bother to read his own publication. These 1996 quotes put lie to his CNN interview answers.
Not only does this show dishonesty, but it indicates that Paul had a lot more involvement in the publication of the despicable statements found in his own newsletter than Paul or his less-rational apologists want to admit. The supremacists and conspiracy theorists surrounding his campaign apparently got attracted by more than just Paul's views on the Constitution; they read the newsletters and determined that Paul was one of them. His refusal to recant in 1996 and his explanation that he can't recall ever reading the newsletters today signal to them that he still wants their support.
People wonder why this matters, given Paul's fringe appeal. It matters because we can't allow this kind of hatred to get legitimized in mainstream politics again. This kind of rhetoric used to be mainstream, and not just in the South, either. Republicans cannot allow the party to get tainted by the stench of racism and conspiracy mongering. If enough of us don't step up and denounce it, strongly and repeatedly, we will not be able to avoid it.
Matt Welch and the people at Reason have reached that same conclusion in regards to libertarianism and their magazine. Good for them, even if it came a little late.
“No changing the subject, Ronulans.”
OK - try this.
Post one of the many articles demonstrating Fred’s support of Aristide back in the day.... and see how long it takes before the thread is removed.
If our newsmedia were doing there jobs, instead of pimping another Bushhater, ie, Michael Moore.
His raising of bloodmoney from the UnAmerican Democrat Party members, and Alex Jones conspirazoids should have run him out of the country as a traitor.
But no, modern day Americans put tolerance as their highest virtue, so much so that we find ourselves with no others.
It's pathetic that so many losers on FR are destroying their reputations by defending this pustulent sack of traitorous effluvia.
Wrong! Here are the relevant Texas Monthly remarks: "but those words weren’t really written by me. It wasn’t my language at all... They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them . . ."
Here's what the above post states: "Dr. Paul denied suggestions that he was a racist and said he was not evoking stereotypes when he wrote the columns."
Paul never states he wrote the columns in the Texas Monthly article. The newspaper quotes him as saying so. Big difference. Paul is a fraud.
I f I had been held captive that long and been torture “Gook” would be the “kinder gentler” term I would come up with. Do you really want to put the great Haiti embargo as the thing to blast Fred over. Is that your big gun? I mean FReepers are still all tore up about Aristide.
From Dallas Morning News 1996:
...Dr. Paul denied suggestions that he was a racist and said he was not evoking stereotypes when he wrote the columns. He said they should be read and quoted in their entirety to avoid misrepresentation.
From 2008 Press Release:
I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.
So what is it, they were never his words and anyone that utters them is small minded or they were his words and just taken out of context?
Go away? That would be nice.
The Claxton Army drinks as much Kool Aid as the RAT moonbats
When the biggest libertarian magazine in the country abandons you, it’s time to fade away quietly.
Very Clown Posseesque. Thanks for posting.
I just got in and already Paul haters are butchering the English language. Did you hear your boy Rudy is too broke to pay his staff this month? Way to go.
Again, the Texas Monthly had the entire story and you know it. Paul foolishly stood by the newsletter when it first came out. He admitted his mistake back in 2001. Now.....when do you think Fred will admit he supported Aristide not the embargo? We’re still waiting. On the other hand.....if you’re looking for the perfect candidate, you should repudiate Fred because he doesn’t make the grade either by your standard.
Time for Paul to slither back to obscurity. His cult can continue to follow and defend him but America will reject him for what he is.
When Thompson supported Aristide in 1991, he was supporting a democratically elected executive who was displaced by a military coup.
The Aristide of 1991 was not Aristide the dictator of 2004.
Actually, Thompson was much like a Ron Paul supporter in one respect: he was taken in by the rhetoric of a scummy charlatan who claimed to be a man of principle.
Unlike Ron Paul supporters, who continue to make excuses for their favorite traitor, Fred Thompson did not drink the Kool Aid and no longer supported Aristide when he violated the haitian Constitution.
Glad to see you supported the marxists overthrowing a democratically elected government and expected everyone at the time to have a magic time machine to predict what would happen after Aristide returned from exile.
I guess that is possible on the Enterprise where the jump around in time on dozens of episodes. This is the real world.
You beat me to it..
So he was either lying then about writing that newsletter or he is lying now.
Which is it?
So he is a fool, heck, I didn’t even go that far..
"Dr. Paul, who served in Congress in the late 1970s and early 1980s, said Tuesday that he has produced the newsletter since 1985 and distributes it to an estimated 7,000 to 8,000 subscribers. A phone call to the newsletter's toll-free number was answered by his campaign staff. [...]
"Dr. Paul denied suggestions that he was a racist and said he was not evoking stereotypes when he wrote the columns. He said they should be read and quoted in their entirety to avoid misrepresentation. [...]"
Dr. Paul clearly admits producing newsletters, and a phone call to the telephone number in the article goes to his campaign staff. His denials are worthless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.