The WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY & HOW of Ron Paul's newsletters - constructive comments & suggestions welcome. by George Dance
(libertarian)
Monday, February 4, 2008
The "Newsletters" FAQ
ver. 1.2
Feb. 3, 2008
1. WHAT are "the Newsletters"? 2. WHEN were the Newsletters published? 3. WHO was in charge? 4. WHERE were the Newsletters produced? 5. WHO wrote what? 6. HOW likely is it that Paul wrote the "racist" quotes? 7. DID Paul ever claim to have written those quotes? 8. WHY didn’t Paul originally deny authorship? 9. WHY are the Newsletters an issue today?
1. WHAT are "the Newsletters"?
1.1 "A series of newsletters in the name of GOP presidential hopeful Ron Paul contain several [arguably] racist remarks.... CNN recently obtained the newsletters -- written in the 1990s and one from the late 1980s -- after a report was published about their existence in The New Republic." (1)
1.2 "Not everything you may have heard about the newsletters is true. Contrary to what James Kirchick claims in The New Republic, the newsletters did not offer 'kind words for the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke.' And although various media outlets have described parts of the newsletters as "anti-Semitic," there's little evidence to back up that description in the passages Kirchick cites.... None of it is explicitly racist, and some of it could be written off as deliberately provocative political commentary. Taken together, however, these passages clearly cater to the prejudices of angry white guys who hate gay people and fear blacks." (2)
1.3 "But sources close to the editorial group that published the newsletter (or newsletters) that supposedly carried the comments claim that Ron Paul never had anything to do with them, and wasn't even aware of them." (3)
1.4 Paul: "The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts." (4)
1.5 "Says one source, 'Ron Paul didn't know about those comments, or know they were written under his name until much later when they were brought to his attention. There were several issues that went out with comments that he would not ordinarily make. He was angry when he saw them.'" (3)
2. WHEN were the Newsletters published?
2.1 Paul: "When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit." (4)
2.2 "[T]he period when the most incendiary items appeared -- roughly 1989 to 1994" (5)
2.3 "In fairness, I should add that based on Kirchick's piece, the ugly racist stuff all appears to fall between 1988 and 1992" (6)
3. WHO was in charge?
3.1 "The publication, or publications, comprised a business venture to which Ron Paul lent his name." (3)
3.2 "Ron Paul & Associates, the corporation that published the Ron Paul Political Report and the Ron Paul Survival Report." (5)
3.3 "Timothy Wirkman Virkkala, formerly the managing editor of the libertarian magazine Liberty, told reason.... 'I understood that Burton S. Blumert was the moneybags that got all this started, that he was the publisher,' Virkkala said. 'Lew Rockwell, editor and chief writer; Jeff Tucker, assistant, probably a writer; Murray Rothbard, cheering from the sidelines, probably ghosting now and then.'" (5)
3.4 "In the 1980s Nadia Hayes was Newsletter Publisher. Her assistant was Jean McCiver.... Hayes was forced to resign ... in late 1988.... McIver then took over. She was assisted by David Mertz, better known as David James" (7)
3.5 "Lew Rockwell was more of a Contributing writer, and less Editor." (7)
3.6 "For the period in question, early 1990s, post Nadia Hayes, David James, Jean McIver and Marc Elam were the entire Production Team and Editors of the Newsletters." (7)
4. WHERE were the Newsletters produced?
4.1 "The office was located on 1120 Nasa Rd. 1, Suite 1 (catty-corner from the NASA Space Center.) The Newsletter itself was produced and printed by Marc Elam, Ron's longtime Campaign Manager, out of Elam's office on Fuqua, South Houston." (7)
4.2 "Headquarters were '60 miles away' from Ron Paul's personal Texas offices." (3)
4.3 "This was a big operation," says one source. "And Ron Paul was a busy man..... Ron Paul often was not around to oversee the lay out, printing or mailing. Many times he did not participate in the composition, either." (3)
5. WHO wrote what?
5.1 * "[Paul] pauses for a moment, then says, I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. It wasn't my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around.'" (8)
5.2 "From what I witnessed in my 12 years working for Ron, I'd say maybe 40% came from him in the way of scribbles (and I literally do mean scribbles) on a yellow pad, that was then faxed to his office staff in South Houston for editing and publication." (7)
5.3 "Several writers contributed to the product." (4)
5.4 "50 to 60% was written by Lew. But when I say Lew I also mean his staff of Interns, which during that period included most prominently Jeff Tucker and Mark Thornton of Auburn Univ. in Alabama." (7)
5.5 "This source and others add that [the] publications utilized guest writers and editors on a regular basis. Often these guest writers and editors would write a "Ron Paul" column." (3)
5.6 "None of the newsletters CNN found says who wrote them." (1)
5.7 "Paul told CNN's "The Situation Room" Thursday that he didn't write any of the offensive articles and has 'no idea' who did." (1)
5.8 Paul: "People came and [went]. And there were people who were hired. I don't know any of their names. I absolutely honestly do not know who wrote those things." (9)
5.9 "It is impossible now to prove individual authorship of any particular item in the newsletter" (10)
6. HOW likely is it that Paul wrote the "racist" quotes?
6.1 "They were published under a banner containing Paul's name, and the articles (except for one special edition ...) seem designed to create the impression that they were written by him and reflected his views." (11)
6.2 "Of course, with few bylines, it is difficult to know whether any particular article was written by Paul himself.... [T]he vast majority of the editions I saw contain no bylines at all." (11)
6.3 "The race-baiting newsletter passages do not sound like anything else Paul has said or written in his public life. People who were familiar with the newsletters' production confirm that they were largely ghostwritten and that Paul often did not review them prior to publication." (2)
6.4 "Paul ... later explained that he had not written the passages himself -- quite believably, since the style diverges widely from his own." (12)
6.5 "It is equally plausible that the hateful items published in his newsletter, so different in style from the congressman's own speech and writing, are not his handiwork." (10)
6.6 "What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U.S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this." (8)
6.7 "For example, TNR breathlessly notes that Paul has appeared on the Alex Jones radio show and given interviews to the John Birch Society. But this, of course, hardly indicates Paul shares their beliefs (many of which, incidentally, are quite unremarkable). TNR supplies no damning quotes from these, or any other, interviews -- because, quite simply, there aren't any damning quotes." (13)
6.8 "Matt Welch, the editor-in-chief of Reason magazine who shares some of Paul's beliefs on big government, says he has never heard the congressman make racist comments like those in the newsletters." (1)
6.9 "Do these sound like Ron Paul to you? I've listened to him speak a great deal these past few months and either he has had a personality transplant or he didn't write this." (14)
7. DID Paul ever claim to have written those quotes?
7.1 "So what exactly did Paul and his campaign say about these and more egregious statements during his contentious 1996 campaign for Congress, when Democrat Lefty Morris made the newsletters a constant issue? Besides complaining that the quotes were taken 'out of context' and proof of his opponent's 'race-baiting,' Paul and his campaign defended and took full ownership of the comments." (15)
7.2 "Welch does not claim that the Smoking Gun exists: unlike the others relying on him, he does not say that Paul 'said,' 'claimed', 'admitted,' or 'insisted' that he had written the Quotes. And for good reason; the entire "Nexis tour" contains not even one such statement." (16)
8. WHY didn't Paul originally deny authorship?
8.1 "His reasons for keeping this a secret are harder to understand: They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them . . . I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn't come from me directly, but they [campaign aides] said that's too confusing. "It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it."' It is a measure of his stubbornness, determination, and ultimately his contrarian nature that, until this surprising volte-face in our interview, he had never shared this secret. It seems, in retrospect, that it would have been far, far easier to have told the truth at the time." (8)
8.2 "What is interesting is Paul's idea that the identity of the person who did write those lines is of no importance. Paul never deals in disavowals or renunciations or distancings, as other politicians do." (12)
8.3 Paul: "For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name." (4)
9. WHY are the Newsletters an issue today?
9.1 "'When you bring this question up, you're really saying, "You're a racist" or "Are you a racist?" And the answer is, "No, I'm not a racist,"' he said. Paul said he had never even read the articles with the racist comments. 'I do repudiate everything that is written along those lines' he said, adding he wanted to 'make sure everybody knew where I stood on this position because it's obviously wrong.'" (1)
9.2 "The presidential hopeful described the newsletter revelations as a 'rehash' of old material dug up by his opponents because he is gaining ground with black voters due to his stance against the war in Iraq and the war on drugs." (1)
9.3 Paul: "This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reason." (4)
9.4 "Adds a source aware of the current tempest over these remarks, Anybody who claims that Ron Paul made the comments in question is deliberately mis-stating what occurred to make political points. It is a measure of [his opponents'] desperation that they are dredging this up again. Anybody who reads all that he has written -- and there's lots of it -- could see that right away.'" (3)
______________
References:
(1) "Ron Paul 90's Newsletters Rant Against Blacks, Gays," CNN Election Center 2008, updated 3:45 a.m. EST, Fri Jan. 11, 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/
(2) Jacob Sullum, "Ron Paul’s Apology," The Athens Messenger, Jan. 19, 2008 http://www.athensmessenger.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=274&ArticleID=7940&TM=57198.22
(3) "Ron Paul Race Smear Erased?" FreeMarketNews.com, Jan 11, 2008 http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=41822
(4) Ron Paul, "Statement on The New Republic Article Regarding Old Newsletters," Jan. 8, 2008 http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-releases/125/ron-paul-statement-on-the-new-republic-article-regarding-old-newsletters
(5) Julian Sanchez and David Weigel, "Who Wrote Ron Paul's Newsletters?" Reason online, Jan. 16, 2008 http://www.reason.com/news/show/124426.html
(6) David Freddoso, The Corner on National Review online, Friday, Jan. 11, 2008 http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MTk1NjBjMjIzMzAxYmUyNDVkZTY4M2UwMjNmMWMyMGM=
(7) Eric Dondero, Response to "Ron Paul to Address Race Issues on CNN," Third Party Watch, Jan. 10th, 2008 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/01/10/ron-paul-to-address-race-issues-on-cnn/
(9) James Kirchick, "Paul’s Pause," The New Republic, Jan. 17, 2008 http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=a798dde9-f263-462b-b15c-6dfc538f03ff
(10) "The Rockwell Files," Democracy in America, economist.com, Jan. 11, 2008 http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2008/01/the_rockwell_files.cfm
(11) James Kirchick, "Angry White Man," The New Republic, Jan. 08, 2008 http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca
(12) Christopher Caldwell, "The Antiwar, Anti-Abortion, Anti-Drug-Enforcement- Administration, Anti-Medicare Candidacy of Dr. Ron Paul," The New York Times Magazine, July 22, 2007 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/magazine/22Paul-t.html
(13) James W. Harris, "Ron Paul is Not a Bigot," OpEd News, Jan. 17, 2008 http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_james_w__080116_ron_paul_is_not_a_bi.htm
(14) Andrew Sullivan, "Ron Paul Exposed?", The Daily Dish, Atlantic Online, Jan. 8, 2008 http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/01/ron-paul-expose.html
(15) Matt Welch, "‘Old News’? ‘Rehashed for Over a Decade’?", Reason - Hit & Run, Jan. 11, 2008 http://www.reason.com/blog/show/124339.html
(16) George Dance, "The Search for the Smoking Gun," The Ron Paul Reports, Nolan Chart LLC, Feb. 1, 2008 http://www.nolanchart.com/article1630.html
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 43
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of George Dance only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
George Dance 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.
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.
