Topic: Ron Paul
Time to Out the Bigots The Ron Paul Letters of twenty years ago have been grist for every form of slander against the man and the campaign. It's way past time for the perpetrators to be outed and condemned.by William Westmiller
(Libertarian)
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
I’ve known Ron Paul for decades. I admire, respect, and laud him for his principled efforts over all that time. But, there is a flaw. Paul is inclined toward excessive kindness, even when that sentiment is undeserved. Paul has been too kind to some of those who have purported to assist him in years past. Perhaps they are personal friends, certainly professional assistants, but the authors and editors of the repugnant diatribes in The Ron Paul Political Report are cowards and do not deserve shelter.
I have no doubt that Ron is being totally truthful when he says he "never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts" as appear in those publications under his name. It’s certainly commendable that he’s willing to accept "moral responsibility" for allowing them to be printed. But, that’s not enough.
Moral responsibility means accepting the consequences of being forthright and just, speaking the truth and letting the chips fall where they may. If friendship or loyalty stand in the way of that principle, then the principle itself is sacrificed to mere expedience. That isn’t accepting moral responsibility, it is evading it. To that degree, Paul compromises his own integrity and honesty by sheltering those who have done him harm. [See Update2 below]
Stylistic flourishes, pandering phrases, and outright bigotry may have been common political tools decades ago, but those who have used them have, at a minimum, the responsibility to stand up for their own words. The fact that none of those responsible for using those tactics have admitted their acts is sufficient to label them cowards. But, it’s worse than that. They are willing to sacrifice Paul’s reputation and credibility to evade their own embarrassment; to "save face." Moreover, they are tarnishing all the sincere efforts of those who have been devoting their lives and fortunes to promote Paul’s message of liberty. That is inexcusable.
Based on my knowledge of his associates and operations during that period, I can guess who wrote and who approved those Letters. But, I have no facts. There are many people who do. They have an obligation to relieve Ron Paul of the burden by naming names.
It would be nice if we could all put the past behind us. But, there comes a time when the truth must be told and the price must be paid. That time is now.
---
Update1: Russ Douthat at The Atlantic offers a kind appraisal: Paul is human.
"When you're way out there on the fringe, without any obvious way to reach the mainstream, it's very easy to tell yourself that your dubious friends aren't really all that bad - and that besides, if you ever start finding your way back to the mainstream, it won't be all that hard to jettison them along the way. It's easy, as well, to start making excuses for them…"
Update2: Ron Paul told CNN that he does not recall who wrote or edited the Reports, but his staff has been stable over decades and they surely know who was responsible. Other sources cite contemporaneous reports that Paul defended the articles and assumed responsibility for writing them.
Update3: The Economist reports that blogger/author Lew Rockwell was either the writer or editor of the offensive Ron Paul Political Reports:
"It is impossible now to prove individual authorship of any particular item in the newsletter, but it is equally impossible to believe that Mr Rockwell did not know of and approve what was going into the newsletter."
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 12 thumbs so far
2008 William Westmiller, all rights reserved.
Published: Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Last modified: Sunday, January 13, 2008
The views expressed in this
article are those of William Westmiller only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. William Westmiller is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
I am still somewhat at sea over why Dr. Paul would let someone use his name while he didn't pay attention (Lesson learned: Keep tight control of your own identity lest it be misused!)
I am even more at sea over why he won't reveal the authors. Paul claims he destroyed his own files. I believe that, and I believe that Dr. Paul did not write the trash. I find it hard to believe that he has no knowledge whatsoever of who worked on these newsletters during that period.
Why doesn't he just throw out the list of all the names and say that it could have been any one of these people and to ask them who wrote what? To fail to do that makes him seem evasive and shifty. To make excuses for them makes him appear complicit. I am afraid the MSM will not be satisfied with the way this is being handled by the Paul campaign.
But someone saved those files and old newsletters all these years. Who was it? Who gave them to TNR? Friend or foe? Odd that they should surface just now.
Are these letters the equivalent of "Monica's blue dress"?
Edie Calhoun: "... But someone saved those files and old newsletters all these years. Who was it? Who gave them to TNR? Friend or foe? Odd that they should surface just now."
Several public libraries have collections of political newsletters, which is where TNR obtained the back issues (see the TNR link for details). A few of the offensive newsletters were disclosed back in 1996. It is certain that someone associated iwth Ron Paul knows who wrote the articles. They just aren't talking.
I spent several hours researching this topic yesterday. I even waited to post this because what I think I have learned makes no sense to me.
The current award for head public smearmeister seems to belong to Eric Dondero Rittberg, a former Paul staffer who has announced that he will be running against Paul for Paul's TX seat in the House in 2008. Aha!
Well, not quite. Mr. Dondero could not have penned the missives unless he is completely lying about what years he worked for Paul. I do think this person has a good motive for releasing the info about the newsletters into the fringe MSM, though, and I do think he is probably the culprit that did this for his own political gain.
Dondero says that Lew Rockwell wrote the actual words and that he became aware of this while working for Paul. Dondero also said that Rockwell threatened to "sue if he was revealed as the writer". What Dondero did NOT reveal was WHOM the lawsuit threat was aimed at...Paul? Dondero himself?
It is my understanding that Rockwell has made sacrifices in order to help Ron Paul by giving up his website's nonprofit status and paying costs out of pocket. From what I can tell, Paul and Rockwell are still friends.
The actual TNR "article" consists mainly of allegations. The actual words are someone's opinions and as such are defensible. I did not find the supposed quotes to be as bad as the commentary surrounding them that claims that they are "hate-filled racism". Parroting "hate-filled racism" on television and blogs does not make it true.
There seems to be different "flavors" of Libertarianism and a huge schism exists between them. The ideals swing from far left to far right and this where Dondero and Paul parted ideological ways after 9/11. Paul remained an anti-war non-interventionist and Dondero suddenly realized that he was a pre-emptive strike, "bomb everybody before they get us" libertarian. Dondero appears to have been actively courting Rudy for a job in his campaign and publicly states that he supports Rudy and his ideals. Kirchick is also a Rudy fan.
My conclusion is this: This whole "racist" thing is a tempest in a teapot. The story was probably pushed into the mainstream to help Dondero in his own quest for power and in retaliation when Paul beat the pants off Rudy in the primary.
I am still not convinced that Rockwell wrote the actual words in the newsletters but may have had knowledge of them as an editor. Perhaps the idea of squelching someone else's opinions does not appeal to Rockwell. It certainly does not appeal to me, either.
Dondero has posted all over the Internet and it is impossible to miss his writings when doing any kind of research on this topic. It is also impossible to miss what others think of Dondero; kind words would be "flaky", "self-serving", and "wierd".
I hope the people of Texas will see right through Dondero in his run for the House seat. I developed a real dislike for him just by reading what he has written to others. "Nasty man" doesn't even begin to describe it! Dondero himself has cranked out more hate filled rhetoric against Paul over the past few months than any of the newsletters contained judging from what I was able to read of them, anyway.
These are all my own conclusions and may be completely wrong. I have decided that none of it matters to me at this point. It is political muckraking at its finest, if not just complete BS. There is a lot more smoke than there is fire in this whole newsletter mess. Dondero himself seems to be the biggest bigot as he approves of bombing collective groups of people just because they exist and have a different culture or religion. Ugh.
I still support Ron Paul. I see no reason for anyone to drop support of Ron Paul over this. In my opinion, it is bogus.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
2008 William Westmiller, all rights reserved.