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?
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.
In the interest of full disclosure, always a good thing for a politician, Paul refused to release copies of the newsletter.
Note the quick mention in a July, 2007 interview with Paul by the NYT Magazine. A fairly positive bio.
The question is whether the old ideologies being resurrected are neglected wisdom or discredited nonsense. In the 1996 general election, Paul’s Democratic opponent Lefty Morris held a press conference to air several shocking quotes from a newsletter that Paul published during his decade away from Washington. Passages described the black male population of Washington as “semi-criminal or entirely criminal” and stated that “by far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government.” Morris noted that a Canadian neo-Nazi Web site had listed Paul’s newsletter as a laudably “racialist” publication.Paul survived these revelations. He later explained that he had not written the passages himself — quite believably, since the style diverges widely from his own. But his response to the accusations was not transparent. When Morris called on him to release the rest of his newsletters, he would not. He remains touchy about it. “Even the fact that you’re asking this question infers, ‘Oh, you’re an anti-Semite,’ ” he told me in June. Actually, it doesn’t. Paul was in Congress when Israel bombed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear plant in 1981 and — unlike the United Nations and the Reagan administration — defended its right to do so. He says Saudi Arabia has an influence on Washington equal to Israel’s. His votes against support for Israel follow quite naturally from his opposition to all foreign aid. There is no sign that they reflect any special animus against the Jewish state.
As recently as June he refused to release copies, answering the request with the standard you're accusing me of being an antisemite excuse, which struck me odd at the time, since the issue was racism. Neither Jews nor Israel are mentioned in the article being questioned. Obviously Paul knew about the newsletters content, else his response would have been Even the fact that you’re asking this question infers, ‘Oh, you’re an anti-Semite racist’, based on the single racist article.
2001 - a Paul quote - “weren’t written by me”
1996 - not a Paul quote - the part of the article that said “when he wrote the columns” could be an assumption made by the Dallas Morning News. Paul might have just said “I was not a racist, I do not evoke stereotypes, read the entire article.”
He might not have known what the person was talking about exactly.
From what I have here, the facts surrounding 1996 are vague.
It would be easier to see a conflict if Paul said in 1996 “I wrote every one of the articles in every one of my newsletters.” Did he say that? What did he say?
If the question is “were they Paul’s words?” I’d say that the evidence points to no, unless there’s a direct quote from Paul in 1996.
He stopped writing when he left Congress.
So, it depends on which article we are discussing.