The Newsletters FAQ, v. 1.1
1. WHAT are "the Newsletters"?
1.1 "A series of newsletters in the name of GOP presidential hopeful
Ron Paul contain several [allegedly] racist remarks.... CNN recently
obtained the newsletters -- written in the 1990s and one from the late
1980s -- after a re****t was published about their existence in The New
Republic." (1) [gd edit]
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 cor****ation that published the Ron
Paul Political Re****t and the Ron Paul Survival Re****t." (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 "Lew Rockwell was more of a Contributing writer, and less
Editor." (7)
3.5 "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 "Headquarters were '60 miles away' from Ron Paul's personal Texas
offices." (3)
4.2 "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, very close to Hobby Air****t." (7)
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 author****p of any
particular item in the newsletter" (10)
6. HOW likely is it that Paul wrote "the offensive articles"?
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. WHY didn't Paul originally deny author****p?
7.1 "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)
7.2 "What is interesting is Paul's idea that the identity of the
person who did write those lines is 'of no im****tance.' Paul never
deals in disavowals or renunciations or distancings, as other
politicians do." (12)
7.3 Paul: "For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral
responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under
my name." (4)
8. WHY are the Newsletters an issue today?
8.1 "'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)
8.2 "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)
8.3 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)
8.4 "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)
(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?" reasononline,
Jan. 16, 2008
http://www.reason.com/news/show/124426.html
(11) James Kirchick, "Angry White Man: The bigoted past of Ron Paul,"
The New Republic, Jan. 08, 2008
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca
(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/
(8) S.C. Gwynne, "Dr. No," Texas Monthly, Oct., 2001
http://www.texasmonthly.com/2001-10-01/feature7-1.php
(9) James Kirchik, "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?_r=2&adxnnl=1&scp=&adxnnlx=1200098725-M4l8ddIes60txw8O/logig&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin
(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
|
