I've been saying this for quite some time. It's been more than just a few coincidences. I watched the pending strategies on the RP Forums last night, as they prepared on how to spin this for their candidate, who tends to remain silent in the face of criticism. The time has come for media scrutiny. As we now learn, it is much, much, much more than just an isolated newsletter. It's extensive, coming from many newsletters, many sources, that the media has uncovered, complete with sources. They speak for themselves: http://pajamasmedia.com/2008/01/ron_paul.php It goes much, much deeper than this, with so many racist quotes pulled from many different newsletters over a period of time, it would simply be too much to post here. This story was first covered on Tucker Carlson last night (Tucker is a RP Supporter) with a TNR rep on. One of the big strategies I've seen is to focus on what was said, regarding "code words" being used, as a conspiracy. However, in organizations like these, it's not uncommon for "code words" to be used. Such as the case is, with "neocon" being a code word for "Jews." The story is up now, on TNR, however, it's feeling the effects of being "Drudged" and is not loading. Should be interesting to see how the continued denial and spin takes hold, despite a plethora of new information uncovered.
So Ron Paul called Martin Luther King a gay pedophile Gtech? Do you actually believe this? What serious evidence do you have to back up these "quotes?" Hey Gtech, why don't I start my own newsletter, put racist comments in it, and then attribute it to one of the candidates who is running for president? Come on Gtech, anyone can make a newsletter. Gtech, if you're going to evaluate a candidate, do it based on the things he/she actually "does," and not so much what they say, or what they are accused to have said. Talk is cheap. Actions always speak louder than words. I've actually researched the things Ron Paul has "done," and he is the person that he appears to be, unlike the other candidates running for office.
As Tucker Carlson asked last night "Do you have any recordings of Paul himself actually saying anything remotely racist?" The answer, of course, "No." These are nothing but smear attacks from a mainstream media desperate to silence Ron Paul. Donate $$$ to Ron Paul on Martin Luther King Day (1/21) to let these people know we will not be silenced! www.freeatlast2008.com
Pretending it is not true does not address the issue. Ron Paul put out newsletters since 1978 under his name, we have 30 years of his racist, paranoid, newsletters to review. The fact that he allowed this drivel under his name for decades speaks much about the man.
Correction on this part. It seems there is a coordinated DDoS effort by supporters. Considering ALL of these are RP's newsletters and own words, it's hard to imagine how RP could smear himself with his own words.
From the article: "Paul's campaign wants to depict its candidate as a naïve, absentee overseer, with minimal knowledge of what his underlings were doing on his behalf. This portrayal might be more believable if extremist views had cropped up in the newsletters only sporadically--or if the newsletters had just been published for a short time. But it is difficult to imagine how Paul could allow material consistently saturated in racism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and conspiracy-mongering to be printed under his name for so long if he did not share these views. In that respect, whether or not Paul personally wrote the most offensive passages is almost beside the point. If he disagreed with what was being written under his name, you would think that at some point--over the course of decades--he would have done something about it."
I'm wondering if RP and the campaign is going to remain silent on this one, and let his supporters blindly come up with "conspiracies" about it, and do the dirty work for him? This goes so much deeper than the one or two newsletters that were previously known about. It's really going to take an incredible amount of denial and deception for his supporters not to look at this objectively and ask the tough questions they champion of asking others.
I'm wondering if RP and the campaign is going to remain silent on this one, and let his supporters blindly come up with "conspiracies" about it, and do the dirty work for him? This goes so much deeper than the one or two newsletters that were previously known about. It's really going to take an incredible amount of denial and deception for his supporters not to look at this objectively and ask the tough questions they champion of asking others.
Did you know Kirchick, the author of this piece, was also the guy who started this whole "neo-con is a code word for Jews" thing? It's the same unfounded bullshit with a new spin on it, and I won't even dignify it with a reasoned rebuttal, I'll give this retarded thread the only response it deserves: Ron Paul Peace, Prosperity, and Justice. /Voting records don't lie
The problem with smears, is that you have to look at who is doing the smearing. Jamie Kirchick http://gays-for-ron.blogspot.com/2008/01/jamie-kirchick-i-dont-think-ron-paul-is.html ------------- Professor Thomas DiLorenzo replies to allegations of neo-confederate ties. http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/018418.html Excerpt --- And here is the response from the Ron Paul campaign Ron Paul Statement on The New Republic Article Regarding Old Newsletters http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-re...ew-republic-article-regarding-old-newsletters Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Ron Paul Peace, Prosperity, and Justice.
Maybe you haven't been following this board very long, your name doesn't look very familiar to me. This is a rehash of the same exact crap the Texas GOP tried to derail Paul's Congressional campaign with in 1996. They failed. Not because Paul's district is overly racist, but because Paul's district realized what a big load of crap this whole accusation is, and dismissed it as bull. I'm willing to debate policy, issues, beliefs, voting record, and any serious allegation, but the bottom line is this has been brought up and debunked, and Paul has 10 terms in Congress to prove that the allegations simply don't stick. He definitely should have kept a damned close eye on what went out under his name, but his voting record, 30 years of statements and essays, and thousands of hours of speeches and public appearances confirm for me it's just false.
Racism is a form of collectivism which Ron Paul categorically rejects. This newsletter business is stupid. Ron Paul fired the person who wrote that drivel when he learned about it and apologized for it a long time ago. That New Republic guy (a Giuliani supporter mind you) who is pushing this racism issue is intellectually dishonest.
So no one, including the campaign, is going to address it? It's hard to address the truth. What's really odd, is that some who very often complain the loudest about attacking others, instead of addressing/debating issues, have resorted to what they accuse others of. Attacking the author of the story as a convenient mechanism to deflect legitimate discourse. Ironically, there is no attack on all those newsletters exposed on Pajamas Media today. Guerilla, I was reading last night that Dondero (the devil child to RP supporters, because he resigned - RP supporters suggest he quit, but people typically don't get "severance packages" when they quit ) was saying that at least one of those racist newsletters was authored by Lew Rockwell. Do you know this to be true? Is Lew going to take the fall for Ron Paul? This is not the same as past ties to RP's racism. To my knowledge, only two newsletters have been previously identified. There are good many more that are now dug up, all with the same theme. What's really interesting, Guerilla, is that you still hold to the notion that Bush was AOL because of an unsourced letter about Bush that was proven to be a forgery, and to this day, still accuse Bush of such, but when real news letters written by RP (a great many) are exposed, you reject them. That's kind of "biased" isn't it? Inconvenient truths? Just curious.
Guerilla posted a link up above to a press release issued by the campaign addressing the issue. I guess you didn't read his post?
The campaign addressed it. In fact, to one reporter, they made clear that they've already addressed it many times before. He left Congress for a few years, concentrated full-time on medicine again, but in the meantime, a newsletter was being published under his name. He's apologized and taken moral responsibility for being sloppy with what came out under his name, and in fact, part of his campaign statement today denounced the words. Interesting to apply this logic to the case here. His character, as seen through his voting record, speeches, statements, and hours upon hours of video online, portrays a candidate who is as far from a racist as possible. He's publicly praised Rosa Parks, Gandhi, MLK, along with many other heroes of recent history. Some of his closest friends and associates are Jewish, as are people who have been and currently are involved in his past and present campaigns. Kirchick openly admits Paul has never publicly said anything close to these lines, and most people who read Paul's writing admit that the writing style is nothing close to Paul's style. Non-issue. If you want to bring something real to the table, we'll talk. But I'm not going to continue discussing this crap with you, particularly when you openly lie about there being no public statement about it, when a quick perusal of Paul's campaign site shows it was addressed as of 5:30AM this morning. Ron Paul: Peace, Prosperity, and Justice
Eric Dondero is treated less like a devil child, and more like a retarded child. His posts on the 3rd Party Watch blog, frequently bring comments from 3rd party members like, "Donderooooooo!" The only person who takes Dondero seriously, is Dondero. He's pretty much persona non grata in the Republican and Libertarian parties, although he claims to be a player in both. I'm happy Eric wrote that about Lew, because I'm pretty sure the Mises crowd is getting ready for some defamation of character lawsuits. Do you have a source link I can forward on to him for action? If Paul didn't write any of them, you can dig up 10,000 newsletters, going back before the birth of Christ. The bottom line is, Paul's been publishing books for decades, and you would be hard pressed to find this kind of language, or subject matter in any of them. But like most smears, they are only good on impact, not after scrutiny. Much of Kirchick's article is either factually inaccurate, or intentionally misleading. And as posted above, Kirchick revels in attacking to get a reaction. I see Drudge has already pulled the link. Well, RP's letters are out there. As are his responses going back to 1996 and 2001. As are most of his congressional speeches, his financial history, his legislative history etc. But for some reason, Bush's military records are nowhere to be found. Strange, because several men who would have served with him if he was not AWOL, claim that he was never present. You can find the interviews on YouTube. All GWB had to do to clear his name, would have been to release his records. Oh wait. They're missing. Btw, I have a special and intimate message for you. Ron Paul: Peace, Prosperity, and Justice .
Sounds like our local dp neocon is getting desperate again. Whats next, Ron paul is really a pink elephant that comes from the planet doodoo????????? This is getting funnier by the moment
Guerilla, shhhhhhh your not supposed to be telling the truth about the great dodge drafter and gtechs hero. He wont address this issue because it will expose the hypocrisy right smack dab in the middle.
I believe my point was more than made, thank you both for the assistance. In light of no evidence, other than a forged document, and EVEN AFTER GWB RELEASED HIS FULL MILITARY RECORDS TO THE MEDIA (unlike John Kerry), one STILL falsely accuses GWB of something that is known to be false. But, in light of OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE, including new scathing racially charged newsletters under RP's name, and all the other evidence that has been exposed, one still holds out that *this* is just a smear. I can't imagine a better example of hypocrisy. This question was avoided, in lieu (no pun intended, but you have to admit it's good!) of bashing a former aide to RP who left, because he was disgusted with RP's blaming America for the 9/11 attacks in a debate. Since it's an important question and was obviously avoided, I believe it deserves another opportunity: RP supporters suggest he quit, but people typically don't get "severance packages" when they quit ) was saying that at least one of those racist newsletters was authored by Lew Rockwell. Do you know this to be true? Is Lew going to take the fall for Ron Paul?