Ron Paul Attacked Over Newsletters

I’ve said before that there was danger in Ron Paul peaking too early.  It is the practice of the mainstream media (MSM) to build up Republican candidates just so they can have fun tearing them down.  Having worked on the Paul campaign previously in 2008, I was already aware of what kinds of attacks to expect against him.  Because Ron Paul offers little to the MSM by way of dirt or scandal, they have to search beyond the candidate himself to find things to attack him with – such as statements made by some of his supporters.

With only a few weeks to go before the Iowa Caucuses, Ron Paul is surging.  It isn’t coincidence that it is this moment that the MSM has chosen to bring up the heretofore unmentioned “Ron Paul Newsletters” scandal.  In the past 24 hours, the likes of American Spectator, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, New York Magazine, Slate and other media have begun reporting on the newsletter story.  We have none other than the neo-con Sean Hannity to thank for stoking the fire of this non-scandal and encouraging Jeffrey Lord of the American Spectator to look into the issue.  Lord writes:

“As Hannity quite correctly pointed out, with the other GOP candidates having received the political equivalent of an anal exam, somehow Ron Paul has escaped notice. No more.”

Lord goes on to call alleged statements by Paul “the most vile of racist language”, “appalling” and “disturbing”.

This isn’t the first time the MSM has attacked Paul over the newsletters.  In 2008, it was the New Republic that claimed it would be releasing a damning expose on Ron Paul.  Sure enough, around 3pm EST on the day of the New Hampshire Primary, the New Republic launched their attack and the Drudge Report posted not one, but two, links to the story in bold red font.  The last minute assault did little damage to him in New Hampshire because he wasn’t very popular at the time anyway.

But I read the New Republic article.  I read the quotes.  As I am very familiar with Ron Paul’s articulate style of writing and speaking, I immediately recognized that the shocking quotes could not be his.  The quotes were ignorant, angry, used poor grammar and did not reflect Paul’s style in any way. In fact, the author of the expose admitted that Ron Paul denied the quotes were his – but the attack against Paul himself continued.

Then, like now, the publishing of these unattributed quotes is nothing more than a political hatchet job – cold, calculated and poised to cause maximum damage to the political aspirations of Ron Paul and his freedom-loving supporters.

What the MSM insinuates by publishing these quotes is that Ron Paul is anti-gay, anti-black, anti-Jew, and supports the KKK. They suggest that Paul advocates that the “superior” white race should arm itself in preparation for a grand race war with the inferiors among us.  This low blow is nefarious and indicative of the lengths to which enemies of Paul’s message of strict-constitutionalism will go.  The MSM went after Bachmann’s looks.  They ridiculed Perry for his “Oops” gaffe ad nauseum.  They brought forth false accusers to destroy the reputation of Herman Cain.  And now they are trying to paint Ron Paul as a white supremacist just when such accusations could cause him the most strategic damage.  This is politics at its dirtiest. 

I recall defending Ron Paul during the 2008 election cycle.  His strong anti-Iraq war stance earned him the ire of Jamie Kirchick, a strong advocate of the war in Iraq and who worked as the assistant editor of the New Republic.  Kirchick had announced on Tucker Carlson’s show that he had proof that Congressman Ron Paul was a homophobic racist.  Kirchick’s article was published on the day of the New Hampshire Primaries to maximize its shock value and rocket his own name into headlines. 

The premise of the newsletter scandal is a poor one.

From the 1970’s to the 1990’s, various newsletters were published which bore the name “Ron Paul” in their titles.  A vast number of the newsletters were printed without even having been read or reviewed by Ron Paul.  Much of Ron Paul’s support comes independent of him or his official organization.  For example, Dr. Paul was not personally responsible for the 2008 Ron Paul Blimp, the Tea Party ’07, or the various “money bombs” that catapulted him to stardom.  Likewise, past supporters have published their own ideas on subjects, independent of Ron Paul’s involvement or approval.   

It would be wrong to hold Mitt Romney responsible for the polygamy of Mormons in the 1800’s.  It would be wrong to hold Barack Obama personally responsible for all the statements made by his ignorant supporters.  Likewise, it would be wrong to hold Ron Paul responsible for the opinions or statements of all the individuals that share some of his political philosophies.

Unfortunately, since the issue of the newsletters had been raised, Ron Paul knew that he had to address the issue again as he had done in previous campaign cycles.  In response to Kirchick’s article, Ron Paul said in 2008: 

“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.” 

“This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade.  It’s once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.”  

“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit.  Several writers contributed to the product.  For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what when out under my name.”  

If Jamie Kirchick knew that this story was old news and that Ron Paul wasn’t responsible for the handful of racist and homophobic remarks written in the newsletters, why did he run the story anyway?  The answer to that question may be found by reading Kirchick’s own words.  On the “Gays for Ron” website, Berin M. Szoka revealed an excerpt of an email he received from Kirchick about the newsletters.  Kirchick wrote to Szoka: 

“I don’t think Ron Paul is a homophobe; I’m just cynical and enjoy getting supporters of political candidates riled up. If you were a Giuliani guy I’d have called him a fascist. But I must say, the Ron Paul supporters are the most enthusiastic of the bunch!” 

That Jamie Kirchick was a self-aggrandizing pseudo-journalist with a personal agenda to gain attention cannot be denied.  Nor can it be denied that the pseudo-journalists making issue of these newsletters in 2012 are just as irresponsible and intellectually dishonest as Kirchick was in 2008.

If you weren’t already aware of the Newsletter scandal, you now know enough about the issue to strongly defend the honor of Congressman Ron Paul.  And, if you didn’t already know how low Sean Hannity stoops, you do now.  It takes a real slimeball to call another man a racist behind his back. 


Jake Morphonios has worked as a political consultant and campaign strategist for over two decades and is the author of Organizing a Grassroots Political Machine, used in the Steve Forbes 2000 Presidential campaign.


Other Articles by Jake Morphonios:

Ron Paul Lands Punches in ABC Debate

The Dirty Details of Newt Gingrich’s Marital Infidelity

Ron Paul Warns of Approaching Global Meltdown

Ron Paul’s Meeting with Rogue Farmers

Can the Ron Paul Revolution Thwart Kruschev’s Prophecy?


Latest posts by Jake Morphonios (see all)

Comments

  1. says

    The media just keeps rehashing this over and over again; don’t they realize the issue has already been settled? Ron Paul didn’t write those decades-old newsletters, and he’s repeatedly gone on the record OPPOSING racism, believing we should judge all people as individuals, not based on the color of their skin. This newsletter thing is another non-issue (like the Perry hunting camp rock, which was equally irrelevant).

    Newt Gingrich, on the other hand, said far more recently (2006), and with his own mouth, that the Spanish language is “the language of living in a ghetto” (unlike “the language of prosperity”, English). Yet that’s hardly been mentioned, despite being every bit as offensive as anything ever published in those newsletters. Not to mention Gingrich’s other bigoted comments re: Arabs, Palestinians and Kenyans. And yet he gets free passes on every one.

    Let Freedom Sing on 1/12/12: http://musicbomb2012.weebly.com/

  2. ireland4ron says

    Looking in from the outside (Ireland)the only candidate that is honest, trustworthy and can’t be bought is Ron Paul. Rejecting him is a vote for more war, policing the world, restriction of civil liberties, more debt, end of the dollar, higher taxes, more spending. As for Iran? You had 30,000 nuclear missiles pointed at your country during the cold war but you’re worried about a country MAYBE getting a nuke! C’mon!! And then use it against a country with 300 nukes. You telling me Iran wants to destroy Israel and Iran? We’ve had 30 years of bombing each other in Ireland, guess what thousands died, called blowback, and it finally ended when America sent us a diplomat called George Mitchell. Ron Paul is right, diplomacy works, war doesn’t, we’re the proof.
    Ask yourself why is Ron Paul resonating with ordinary folks just like you and me all over the planet!!
    Go to the Ron Paul website and donate to his money bomb today. Just do it!
    By the way I believe Ron Paul sees ALL humans as equal. Enough said.

  3. says


    It would be wrong to hold Mitt Romney responsible for the polygamy of Mormons in the 1800’s.  It would be wrong to hold Barack Obama personally responsible for all the statements made by his ignorant supporters.  Likewise, it would be wrong to hold Ron Paul responsible for the opinions or statements of all the individuals that share some of his political philosophies.”

    You are improperly framing the issue.  Someone on his staff or at a minimum someone with access to his mailing list wrote these newsletter’s in his name for some (ten?) years before he did anything about it.  It wasn’t just someone who “share(s) some of his political philosophies”.  I like Paul, but without naming and shaming who was behind it – I don’t know how this issue really goes away. It paints him as either inept, or racist.  I take him at his word that he isn’t a racist – but it doesn’t make him sound like a presidential caliber leader.

  4. Davemoore89 says

    The article is correct but the author is a jackass as Hannity asked him point-blank about it and to make it worse, RP didn’t give a great answer to us who had never heard of it and went searching for the truth. Just a shame the author shows his own slimeball colors by namecalling Hannity. I’m glad he brought it up because it gave me more reason to seek the truth and now know this is bogus but Hannity did a good thing by bringing it up now because the Elites will and will twist it to sound even worse later. What a goon the author is. 

  5. David says

    If elected, Dr Ron Paul will do more to free blacks from poverty, oppression and discrimination than all the Presidents combined since Abraham Lincoln. Ron Paul and Abraham Lincoln share a common distrust of international bankers; a common belief in Liberty and Freedom for all Americans without regard to race or social standing; and above all, both men sought to heal a divided nation by their unshakable faith the Almighty King of Kings and Lord of Lords! Please take four minutes to listen Toll-Free 1-888-322-1414 and judge for yourself!

  6. Bytejockey says

    The comment about the writing style was interesting.

    I know that software has been developed to analyze writing style, and has been used on texts ranging from the works of Shakespeare to the Bible to Primary Colors.

    Has anyone used this software analysis on the newsletters to try to identify the author?

  7. Archie says

    Jake Morphonios’s logic is “phony”.  The newsletters netted Paul millions of dollars and only 3 people other than him were on staff, including 2 family members.  He was listed as editor of each issue and it was in the first person. He then admitted to writing them in the Dallas Morning News, May, 1996. The newsletters combined with his KKK donation, his blaming the Jews for the “concentration camps” in Gaza, and much more evidence prove that he is indeed a bigot.

  8. says

    The articles in question were published under Ron Paul’s byline, in a newsletter with his name on it, that he owned. Then in 1996 he claimed authorship, not changing his story to deny it until five years later, and to this very day declining to name the actual author.

    Paul’s supporters wouldn’t let ANY other candidate get away with that kind of bullshit on that kind of issue. Nor should they.

  9. Trevor Cason says

    video proof Ron Paul is a racist ..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,…http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMQmInReYlI&feature=g-all-u&context=G230984eFAAAAAAAAAAA

  10. David Petty says

    Nelson Linder, NAACP Leader, clearly debunked the theory of Ron Paul being racist; not to mention Dr. Paul’s pro-civil rights actions in congress over his 30 year career which can be clearly found at VoteSmart.org. If you want more proof simply ask the many he treated – free of charge – as an independent physician Regardless of Skin Color.

    Let’s talk about the real problem: America’s debt. Only Dr. Paul offers a real solution to cut America’s debt by $1 Trillion in year one. Only Dr. Paul offers a plan which cuts the presidential salary to match the Median American Income of $40k/yr. Only Dr. Paul offers to pardon all prisoners arrested on drug-related charges who don’t have violent records – Regardless of Skin Color.

    This is what Ron Paul offers America – learn more: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/.

  11. cate says

    You are the things you say. You are made up of the things you write. You actions are you – the actions you take and the ones you fail to take. I was never going to vote for Ron Paul – so he never could have lost my vote (because he never had it), but he has lost my respect.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *