by Ghost of John Brown
I have varied feelings about the candidates in this Presidential Race. My favorite is RIck Perry, who is currently seeing a second look with many in Iowa and has been endorsed by a number of the writers on RedState. I would be pretty darn happy with Rick Santorum. I agree with Michele Bachmann on most everything, but I just believe her to be less than a perfect vessel to carry the message. Newt has had some great ideas, but carries a lot of baggage. I also like Romney and Huntsman's business experience. If you look past a couple of points (mind you, very important points), Huntsman was at least fiscally a pretty solid Governor. While I have my favorites, I will gladly vote for any of the above instead of Barack Obama. I will also gladly work hard, put out signs and get the word out for any of them. Heck, aside from a couple of points as well, Gary Johnson was a terrific Governor, and I would have gladly preferred him over President Obama had he not jumped ship.
You might notice I left someone out of that list. Ron Paul would easily be the single worst Presidential candidate that the Republicans have ever nominated.
For a couple of decades, Congressman Paul had several incarnations of newsletters that carried his name. Numerous sources have identified that the newsletters were published through Ron Paul Associates, an entity that Ron Paul had at least partial ownership of. I don't think anyone, including Congressman Paul would deny this.
There are only a couple of ways of looking at this.
Either Ron Paul knew what were in the newsletters or he didn't. No other choices there. Pretty simple. Congressman Paul claims that he didn't really read the newsletters until later, and when he was asked today if he had read them he said "Not all the time. Well, on occasion, yes.". So let's give Cong. Paul the benefit of the doubt and say he had no idea what was in them. What that means is that he has no control over the people in his direct charge, but now he is asking us to vote him into the most critical political position on the planet with literally millions of people working for him. If he can't control the people that work for him on a newsletter, then how can he be the Commander in Chief?
But it is not that simple. I don't buy for a single minute that Cong. Paul didn't know what were in those newsletters and that he didn't write at least some of them.
Let's take a look at some of the evidence.
The website "Et tu, Mr. Destructo?" has put up scans of over 50 of his newsletters. Click here to read them as they were published. Not excerpts, not taken out of context. The actual newsletters. They are full of vile and contemptible language. Certainly language that would preclude Mr. Paul from gaining the support of the majority of the country. But here is the rub:
Mr. Paul has not always claimed that he didn't write or know about them:
The newsletters became a spotlight issue in the 1996 Congressional Race between Ron Paul and Charles "Lefty" Morris, a Democrat.
In a 7/25/1996 interview with the Houston Chronicle, a question came up about comments that were made in the newsletter about former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan. Mr. Paul said: that he was expressing his "clear philosophical difference" with Jordan. Nowhere in the published story did Mr. Paul disavow what was said or deny that he wrote it. In fact, he seemed to support the notion that he did write at least that article.
In a 5/24/1996 article in the Victoria Advocate another one of Mr. Paul's newsletters came up. This time, the quote from the article was "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.". Mr. Paul's press secretary, Michael Sullivan stated that Mr. Morris needed to apologize for using Mr. Paul's word's out of context and his comments about black males being fleet-footed and criminal were "sarcastic and aimed at the Washington, D.C. police force". He went on to talk about Cong. Paul's "writing style". He said that the newsletters were a source of extra income for Dr. Paul. Again, there was no indication in the article and from the quotes from Cong. Paul that he denied writing the article.
A November 1, 1996 Op-Ed in the Austin Chronicle, takes up the issue. The article discusses the fact that many in the press had requested old copies of the newsletters. The article says that Paul "had responded that it is impossible to dredge up all of his old writings, but he told voters that they could request individual copies from his campaign headquarters". He is quoted later in the article talking about his "tongue-in-cheek" opinions. Again, not once did Cong. Paul deny that he had written the newsletters.
In a 5/23/1996 article in the Houston Chronicle, Mr. Paul was asked about comments declaring blacks as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about top political issues. The article says that Paul opposes racism and that his written commentaries about blacks came in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time." Again, not once did Cong. Paul deny that he had written the newsletters.
It's convenient now, 16 years later to claim that he didn't write the articles and that he had no knowledge of them. That's not what he said back in 1996. In 1996, he blamed his writing style. Kind of hard to blame your writing style if you claim you didn't write them, don't ya think?
The Articles Were Written in First Person:
If you read any of the newsletter articles, many are written in the first person.
- A 1993 newsletter article about the New York bombing of the World Trade Center (not to be confused with 9/11), the article talks about "A Jewish Friend of Mine" that suggested the bombings were carried out by the Mossad, the Israeli version of the CIA.
- An April 1978 newsletter states: "Since I first warned about the planned Canal Treaties in 1976 as a Congressman....". At the bottom of the newsletter, it is signed "Ron Paul"
- In a 12/90 newsletter, there is an article about Dr. Martin Luther King claiming that he was a "world class adulterer" that "also seduced underage girls and boys". At the bottom of the same page, the newsletter closes out with a Happy Holidays message from "My wife Carol and our children and grandchildren".
- In a February 1991 newsletter the Federal holiday for Martin Luther King and denounces his "sexual relationship between King and his fellow Christian minister Ralph David Abernathy". The article concludes with "Am I glad I voted in Congress against an expensive federal holiday for this man".
- In a January 1991 newsletter, there is considerable discussion about Dr. Martin Luther King and the thought that he plagiarized. The article states: "In 1988 when I ran for president on the Libertarian Party ticket...."
I could go on and on about this as there are dozens of examples.
There are only two possibilities. Either he wrote these or he didn't. Pretty simple. If he did write them, he was spewing racist garbage. If he didn't write them, which he conveniently now says he didn't, why would a sitting member of Congress allow someone under his direct control to say these things and write as a ghost writer?
At best, Congressman Paul is a bumbling idiot that couldn't control his staff and hired racist conspiracy nuts. That is the best thing that you can say about the newsletters. At worst, you can say that Ron Paul was a serial racist that held firm to conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory. However, I think the evidence pretty clearly leads to the notion that Ron Paul did, in fact, write these newsletter articles, or at least he wrote many of them. Either way, despite the pleadings from the dedicated Ron Paul supporters, he is clearly unfit to hold the highest office in this nation.
Follow Ghost of John Brown on Facebook. Click here.
