Our Forgetful Racist Newsletter Publishers

We’ve been ignoring the whole Ron Paul Racist Newsletter Thing because we thought it had been done four years ago, and that the verdict was he had been incredibly stupid to let something like that go under his name.

That is: We were satisfied that Ron Paul had profoundly racist minions whom he wasn’t paying attention to, whatever his own considered views on Rational Bigotry, and we figured that was damning enough.

And besides, racism isn’t as fun as serial adultery or clueless wealth.

But folks are hitting the Nexises, Lexises, and Googles, and turned up some new evidence:

Rep. Ron Paul has tried since 2001 to disavow racist and incendiary language published in Texas newsletters that bore his name, denying he wrote them and even walking out of an interview on CNN Wednesday. But he vouched for the accuracy of the writings and admitted writing at least some of the passages when first asked about them in an interview in 1996.

Well! That is news! Go on:

In 1996, Paul told The Dallas Morning News that his comment about black men in Washington came while writing about a 1992 study by the National Center on Incarceration and Alternatives, a criminal justice think tank in Virginia.

Paul cited the study and wrote: “Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”

“These aren’t my figures,” Paul told the Morning News. “That is the assumption you can gather from the report.”

Of course, citing a “think tank” without providing background raises our hackles. Happily, somebody at Commentary had the same instinct:

A Nexis search for the “National Center on Incarceration and Alternatives” turns up eight articles, all on the Ron Paul newsletter controversy from 1996 and later. Which raises the questions: Did this think tank ever exist? Or was it manufactured by the Paul campaign?

So, there you have it: A fresh controversy! And our judgment about Ron Paul remains unchanged: Half of what he says makes sense. It’s the other half that frightens the shit out of us.

Ron Paul’s story changes on racial comments [USA Today/Des Moines Register, via TPM]

Thematically appropriate threadjack.

Orly loses again. I know, what a shock. This case included (among other things) a RICO claim against Michelle Obama, Hillary and others for conspiring to participate in identity fraud

@Walking Still: What is the atmosphere composed of on her planet, fucking nitrious oxide?

Dr. Paul is a OB/GYN. Now that’s unnerving. That gives me cramps thinking about it. Son Rand has a license to cut into your eyeballs. This family scares me.

Ron Paul always reminds me of the neo-Nazi leader in The Blues Brothers. And I have little doubt that Paul is, at the very least, a vile racist-of-opprtunity (a guy who will leverage racism for political power) and quite possibly a commited white supremacist. That said, let’s not kid ourselves about Commentary or The Weekly Stadard’s motives in bringing this all up. These guys could give two shits about the black man’s plight in America. They’re all about pushing a hard-right, Likudnik extremist, AIPAC approved, neo-conservative agenda, and Ron Paul’s entirely sensible desire to reevaluate U.S. interests in the Middle East scares the shit out of them.

Of course, given Paul’s dabbling in fringe, far-Right extremism, it wouldn’t surprise me if he were secretly a genuine Protocols of the Elders of Zion believing anti-semitic extremist, also.

So watching Commentary and the Weekly Standard attacking Ron Paul is like being witness to a mob hit. You know that even though a vicious mob boss is lying on the floor, twicthing his last in a pool of his own blood, somewhere else another vicious mob boss just consolidated his power.

@Serolf Divad: Regardless of the source — and I don’t disagree about Dark Intentions — it’s a valid issue, similar to other issues that only arose when other candidates lifted their heads above the pack.

That is: If Ron Paul is a low-polling crank with no chance of winning a caucus or primary, he ain’t gonna get much attention. But if he has a shot at Iowa, that’s when the knives come out — just like they did with everybody else. The newsletter issue came and went four years ago because, well, it was only Ron Paul, and everybody was watching Mitt and McCain instead.



During the 2010 congressional election campaign, Republican candidates (and some Democrats) were put under enormous pressure to sign the Americans for Tax Reform “Taxpayer Protection Pledge,” which obliges them to oppose any increase in the marginal personal or corporate tax rate, and any limits on deductions or tax credits that aren’t offset by other tax cuts. To date, all but six Republican representatives and seven senators have signed this collective suicide note, making the group’s president, Grover Norquist, nearly as successful as Reverend Jim Jones.

@Serolf Divad: Thus making the case for Grover to get Stinque’s Anal Pear award…

Add a Comment
Please log in to post a comment