Ron Paul Denies Writing Past Newsletters Featuring Racial Slurs

Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul is defending himself, saying he did not write a series of newsletters in the 1990s that featured slurs against homosexuals and African-Americans.

Newsletters bearing Ron Paul's name have been regularly published since the 1970s, with several including harsh statements toward minority groups, according to a 2008 piece by The New Republic. The question of whether Paul wrote the newsletters recently resurfaced, with many questioning if a lack of a byline was enough evidence to prove Paul did not pen the eyebrow-raising letters.

"Everybody knows I didn't write them," Paul said during a Tuesday campaign stop in New Hampshire. "It's not my sentiment, so it's sort of politics as usual."

The criticism comes just weeks before the Iowa caucuses, with Paul maintaining the position of a likely contender in the key state.

Comments

[CountArtha]

03:57 AM on 02/05/2012

A Fox affiliate in Ohio found the original letter (with byline).

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B7f4_ohEI3YZOGE5ZmE3NjUtOWMzNy00ZmZlLWI1MDUtNWQ4ZDA1ZTIxYTdi&hl=en_US

He's a real person.

http://www.powellreport.com/section/aboutjim

[Fred Bronson]

09:07 PM on 12/25/2011

SO WHAT!! Any one who saids they have never used a racial slur is lying, every one at one time or another has used some thing... Let it go .... Move on.

[nix28]

09:53 PM on 12/22/2011

It doesn't matter whether he wrote them or not. His name is on the newsletters, and if he did not agree with the content, his name should not have been on the newsletters. You'd think he'd be smart enough to monitor any documents that are going to carry his name.

[FastPlastic]

11:12 PM on 12/22/2011

From what I understand his name was on thousands of issues with topics that he supported, some with daily updates. There were a select few issues(less than a dozen from what I've seen) that contained this content. He hired an editor to take care of daily activity, so he didn't read each and every article.

[BiznessLady]

11:42 PM on 12/22/2011

From what I understand? thousands of issues? Fast please stop the meme of falling through the cracks. There were over 30 issues that I found that were outrageous and appalling so far.

That doesn't count the ones expressing viewpoints that I find abhorrent. Most don't waste an opportunity to take cheap shots at specific individuals or groups and support outrageous stereotypes. I found the overall timbre of the newsletter ideologically simplistic, offensive and profane.

[nix28]

01:18 AM on 12/23/2011

If his name was going to be on it, he should have known what was in it. I find it very hard to believe that he allowed his name to be used repeatedly and was not aware of the content of the newsletters.

[A c1111]

08:15 PM on 12/22/2011

Ron Paul has some interesting ideas. But he and his son are Ayn Rand clones or wanna be....he is a libertarian and that seems to mean he supports the supremacist points of views and supports non governmental intervention at any costs..he supports private and personal discrimination practices, he seems to support gun rights like the Old Western movies, and seems to supports life as it was in the Pre Civil war days. All libertarians I have met all seem to crave a time in America when white men were gods and everyone else sucked salt. And to these libertarians the Pre Civil war era was a time of "freedom and great democracy". Ron Paul is about 170 years behind the times..He should get in line with OWS.

[RepublicanDepression]

05:13 PM on 12/22/2011

Hey Ron Paul fans!

Would you still support Ron Paul if it turns out that Ron Paul really did know about his newsletters (or even wrote them!) ?

[BiznessLady]

06:22 PM on 12/22/2011

It has become crystal clear now that he did.

I am not asking people to abandon Ron Paul. I just want them to ask their guy to come clean and stop leaving them to fight for him like he is a victim.

[RepublicanDepression]

06:46 PM on 12/22/2011

well said.

[poeticjustice4all]

04:32 PM on 12/22/2011

In 1996, Ron Paul openly admitted he wrote the racist rants in his newsletter­.

http://new­sone.com/n­ation/case­y-gane-mcc­alla/ron-p­aul-racist­-newslette­rs/

http://adamholland.blogspot.com/2011/05/unanswered-questions-why-ron-pauls.html

[BiznessLady]

06:00 PM on 12/22/2011

tsk.. tsk.. tsk..
While I read that, Read this, they found a lot more articles
http://reason.com/blog/2008/01/11/old-news-rehashed-for-over-a-d

[poeticjustice4all]

06:06 PM on 12/22/2011

Thank you, BiznessLady. That eyebrow raising link is a comprehensive review. The things he said about Barbara Jordon and Jack Kemp are astounding.

[escobar]

03:49 PM on 12/22/2011

Somebody is a FRAUD.
If I got tricked by ghost writers like that, I think I'd sue them.
How does a man publish a news letter and expect people to
take it seriously when he doesn't read it or agree with it himself ?
Someone is not very honest.
Should people ignore everything he has ever said and just trust what he wants us to hear now ? Sort of a fresh start, a clean sheet. What is this, Groundhog day ?
Ignore the man behind the curtain, listen to the great and wonderful OZ ?

[SureThang]

02:21 AM on 12/23/2011

Just imagine a president Ron Paul..."I don't remember doing that, somebody else did it or wrote it." Kind of reminds me a little of Ronald Reagan during the last term of his presidency.

[reinenVernunft]

03:47 PM on 12/22/2011

Ron Paul was right about the housing bubble, right about the FED, and right about intrusive government usurping our civil liberties and violating both the spirit and letter of the constitution.
Of course his reluctance to start World War III is a bit of an extreme position; I wouldn't want to deny my children or my children's children the pleasure of dying or being maimed for life in combat, and certainly don't want to miss out on a thermonuclear war; that's just a bit much. So I think I'll vote for the war candidates who will fight to the last middle class and poor American, as well as all those innocent non-combatants to ensure corporate profit and the entrenchment of a foreign power's hegemony. Everybody knows that the contents of a decades old newsletter is more important than achieving peace, prosperity and protecting freedom.

[keng181]

11:23 PM on 12/22/2011

the sublime truth emerges! thank you

[BiznessLady]

12:23 AM on 12/23/2011

As I recall it is the GOP that we can thank for the Patriot Act and the disgusting habit of attaching invasive measures to appropriations bills.

You seem to think that Progressives are pro government intrusion on personal rights. The only party I see pushing that has been the GOP/TP your brethren. My family has a history of serving in the military and I tell you there is no pleasure in watching your friend die or seeing them maimed from combat. Have you served?

I remember all those wonderful noncombatants that died in 9/11 and the first-responders that are dying from all manners of diseases every month.

We can't make peace among ourselves and you think that you have the answer to World Peace while achieving prosperity and protecting those freedoms too, yanno!

The content of a decades old newsletter lets me know who you are and where you're from.
How you address a crisis or sensitive situation tells me everything about your character, integrity and trustworthiness. Everyone has skeletons in their closet and when you are running for POTUS it is best you lay them out and be as honest as possible or they will reanimate and dash any hopes of higher office you have.
If you don't think that is true, ask Herman Cain.

[howtypical]

03:43 PM on 12/22/2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo1nB5-hA5k

[escobar]

03:38 PM on 12/22/2011

What a fraud he is

[SBawgin]

03:12 PM on 12/22/2011

What is interesting to me is that all he can say is that he did not write them but my question is (if this is true) then why is your name on something that you never cared to police, check up on or even read---yet made money off of it? Using your name means that you support it. In college if you name is on the term paper than you (your name, GPA and transcript) receive a grade/credit for it. If you did not write the paper but passed it off as yours then you were still responsible for what it said and the received grade -–not someone else. In regards to how you make decisions, this means that anyone could just use your name and say (or do) anything that they want and “as long as you did not write it", as you say then it is OK. What an extremely tired, weak and lame excuse for a Presidential Candidate. It’s like a child saying that “the dog ate my homework”! He is really out of touch with reality. What a joke. Ron Paul really thinks that Americans are just stupid sheep! Guess what Ron, you are WRONG on that thought and wrong for America.

[FastPlastic]

04:05 PM on 12/22/2011

Many small businesses start out with the family name, does that mean if one of their employee's has a racist rant while the owners are out of town the owners is racist?

[poeticjustice4all]

04:36 PM on 12/22/2011

Yes -- if when confronted with the hate-speech, you ridiculously claim it's a "ghost employee" that you never hired, never paid and never heard of.

[eric681]

04:39 PM on 12/22/2011

If you make no effort to let your customer's know it was a racist employee and not the owners of the small business then yes it would be safe to say you are a little racist.

[EdCorner]

03:06 PM on 12/22/2011

Here's your answer rubes:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B2u-MCilk3n2ODdjMmI2OTgtMWE4NC00OWEzLWE1MWUtY2Y4Yzg5M2ZkMjY4&hl=en_US

Ron Paul 2012 !!

[Bombastic1892]

05:18 PM on 12/22/2011

this is HuffPo. Facts don't jive to well with the mindset around here.

[poeticjustice4all]

05:44 PM on 12/22/2011

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/21/ron-paul-gets-defensive-over-past-newsletters/?iref=allsearch

[Frog in a pot]

02:26 PM on 12/22/2011

Yesterday Ron Paul claimed on CNN that he'd never read the newsletters that went out in his name. Here is Ron Paul in a 1995 video discussing the very newsletters he claims to never have read.

If you can find away to explain away a hateful newsletter written in someone's own name, it's likely you can find some way to explain this video away too. There's always a path to make yourself right, if that's your intent. Indeed, at this point it probably behooves me to stop arguing.

But I would ask you suffer me one final point: Dave Wiegel convincingly argues that Paul isn't a bigot, simply part of coalition who saw bigotry as a potent political force. This is meant as a defense. In fact it's an unwittingly damning indictment, that puts Ron Paul in ugly tradition of non-racist demagogues

One might ask: which current Republican candidate has not been "part of coalition who saw bigotry as a potent political force"?

The Dish

[BiznessLady]

03:15 PM on 12/22/2011

Couldn't resist a peep. f & f I would LOVE to see that video

[Frog in a pot]

03:43 PM on 12/22/2011

They have it on the Dish..Andrew Sullivan

[FastPlastic]

04:25 PM on 12/22/2011

"Yesterday Ron Paul claimed on CNN that he'd never read the newsletter­s that went out in his name."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LywD6gXBudc&feature=related

The link above is the extended version of the interview. Listen carefully as he is saying he didn't read the articles in question, not any of his newsletters period. The shortened bits for prime time removed the sections at the beginning regarding him reading a few here and there.

Journalist: "They were called the Ron Paul report and did you read them at all when they were, when they were published during those years, did you ever sort of take a look at it and say you know what, this isn't what I stand for"
Ron Paul: "Not all the time."

---Later---

Journalist: "so you read them but you never did anything about it at that time"
Paul: "I never read that stuff"

[Bombastic1892]

05:25 PM on 12/22/2011

It seems much more likely that he was referring to the few articles in question when he said "that stuff". I don't think he would refer to the entire newsletter as "that stuff".

He answered the question 4 times and this is exactly what CNN wanted. For him to stray away from what he was saying just far enough for idiots like you to go, "See! there ya have it! he clearly hates black people!"

[Kasado]

02:00 PM on 12/22/2011

It's called freedom of speech and even though Ron Paul disavows writing the articles, he still supports there existance.

[Frog in a pot]

02:28 PM on 12/22/2011

Not only that ,the man who did write them is one of Pauls TOP ADVISORS and was his business partner..Lew Rockwell.

[poeticjustice4all]

04:41 PM on 12/22/2011

False -- and a childish, utterly ridiculous lie.

[Unca Allen]

02:47 PM on 12/22/2011

Actually it's called slander the candidate, a game I'm getting really sick of. No, I've been disgusted with it for some time now.

[BiznessLady]

01:54 PM on 12/22/2011

Before today I used to like Ron Paul, I had a healthy respect for him that he believed some bizarre sh4t but he stuck to his beliefs. That makes an OK person but it is not helpful when in the position of running a government FOR THE PEOPLE! You need to be open to problem solving compromise. He is a rigid ideologue and he is proud of that.

When he walked out on the CNN interview squashing the opportunity to clear up questions that only HE CAN ANSWER about this issue I closed the book on my respect for him. Probably knowing he would be asked once again ' If you didn't write them, WHO DID? Are you still affiliated with that person? Why did lie you about being the author back in '96 or are you lying now? I can't BELIEVE HIS SUPPORTERS DON"T HAVE THESE QUESTIONS?

Being our POTUS means answering tough questions on tough issues. Ron Paul can go kick rocks and the rest of you that are suckered into his web with promises of freedom and liberty are absolutely clueless. Gotta go put in some work before the holiday.. PEACE!

[Unca Allen]

02:49 PM on 12/22/2011

Government FOR the people? What would you know about it, telling us how great Government For the Obama wields unchecked?

[anniesez455]

02:52 PM on 12/22/2011

BiznessLady ...your icon clearly shows you never ever liked Ron Paul you are a bold out li-ar!

[FastPlastic]

03:03 PM on 12/22/2011

He walked out of the interview because the reporter asked the same question multiple times hoping he would give a different answer. This was after being asked several times the day before by the same news agency. Again, he did not write them, he disavows them, he has said before he doesn't know who did, what more can he tell them? I agree that the name of who did would change things, but if he doesn't know it what more can they expect? The media is simply trying to smear him as much as possible with the little evidence they have to back it up, and clearly it's working as you are starting to lean away from Ron Paul. Why doesn't the media pursue the others involved with the newsletters, one would think they would have more knowledge of the day to day. I think the truth of the matter is the media already knows who did which is why it remains a mystery after 20years.

"Why did lie you about being the author back in '96"
I believe if you look at the following link you will find that the journalist is to blame in the supposed admission. He twisted the words of the newsletters in with what was said in the interview making it look like he said it was him. There is no direct quote from the interview of Ron Paul admitting he wrote them.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B2u-MCilk3n2ODdjMmI2OTgtMWE4NC00OWEzLWE1MWUtY2Y4Yzg5M2ZkMjY4&hl=en_US

[poeticjustice4all]

04:44 PM on 12/22/2011

Now explain how up is really down and square is really round.