Presidential Election and Election Coverage 2008: Ron Paul a Racist and Anti-Semite?

Ron Paul and his Presidential Election 2008 bid to become the Republican Presidential Candidate may have hit a speed bump. The Ron Paul 2008 campaign and Ron Paul may have some explaining to do to the American public. It is alleged that Ron Paul made racist and anti-Semitic statements in his eight-page newsletter The Ron Paul Political Report, founded in 1985. In the DailyKos, writer phenry gives great detailed background into the matter. The Houston Chronicle first brought to public limelight Ron Paul's musings in his The Ron Paul Political Report. So far, neither Ron Paul nor the Ron Paul 2008 campaign has made public any issues of his newsletter.

Here are some excerpts from the Houston Chronicle article 05/23/1996:

The Racist Ron Paul

Paul, writing in his independent political newsletter in 1992, reported about unspecified surveys of blacks."Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action," Paul wrote.

Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered ""as decent people." Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote:
""Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," Paul said.

Paul also wrote that although ""we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."

The Anti-Semite Ron Paul

In later newsletters, Paul aimed criticism at the Israeli government's U.S. lobbying efforts...Stating that lobbying groups who seek special favors and handouts are evil, Paul wrote, ""By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government" and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism.

Ron Paul thus far, has defended the allegations by insinuating that he had no control over that particular issue's content and a ghostwriter wrote that particular article for The Ron Paul Political Report. Hence, Ron Paul is not denying the content itself but the authorship and editorial control over his own newsletter that published it, a newsletter that carried his name.

However, wouldn't common sense and logic impede acceptance of his defense of the published words in his The Ron Paul Political Report.

Also, even if we suspend common sense and logic regarding his defense on the issue, wouldn't we again be impeded by common sense and logic, in order to believe that a newsletter with seven thousand subscriptions didn't reserve one subscription addressed to Ron Paul's home. Moreover, is it plausible to believe that he would pay for mass publication of the newsletter, out of his pocket, without reviewing the content beforehand? Highly unlikely.

Logically, how can Ron Paul's vanity prohibit him from reading any issue of The Ron Paul Political Report? Similarly, Ron Paul using his own funds to finance his newsletter, not being aware of how, what, and where of his newsletter seems implausible to me.

Additionally, outrageous and egregious is that when those particular issues of The Ron Paul Political Report were published and disseminated; he didn't admonish the articles' content nor denounce the racist and anti-Semitic statements. So by staying silent on the issues at the time of the newsletters' publication, was he simply endorsing and condoning the racist and anti-Semitic contained within?

Furthermore, even if common sense and logic permits us to accept Ron Paul's assertion that a ghostwriter wrote the articles in question; we would have to suspend reality by accepting that he doesn't know who the ghostwriter is? In such a mom-n-pop small newsletter like The Ron Paul Political Report, how is it possible not to know who is writing for you, especially on your behalf. If he knows the person who wrote the articles that means Ron Paul at worse, associates with racists and Anti-Semites and at worst, is friends with such a person and shares such despicable views.

Now let's look at a comparison of basic job duties of Ron Paul the publisher/editor/writer of The Ron Paul Political Report and Ron Paul the Congressman:

Publisher/Editor/Writer Ron Paul - The Ron Paul Political Report

•Responsibility includes general oversight of all aspects of newsletter publishing including writing, marketing, editorial review, layout review, financial management, etc

•Implement checks and balances for proper editorial review

•Reading in detail the entire content of the newsletter before and after publication

•Ability to comprehend what is written in the newsletter

Congressman Ron Paul

•Responsibility includes writing, sponsoring, and supporting legislation

•Read in detail the entire content of the legislation before sponsoring it

•Read in detail the entire content of another Congressman's legislation before supporting it

•Ability to comprehend what is written in the legislation

So if we are to forgo common sense and logic as Americans and accept that Ron Paul's duties as publisher and editor of The Ron Paul Political Report were remiss during publication of only those particular controversial newsletter editions, then it reflects poorly on his judgment and oversight abilities as publisher.

The basic duty of a Congressman as it relates to a publisher and editor is to review (meaning read) in detail legislation you sponsor and support. Herein, if he didn't read nor review that vile content, how can we expect him to be a competent public servant as Congressman?

If Ron Paul was remiss in his duty as publisher in not reviewing his own newsletter, what makes you think he is not doing the same as Congressman by avoiding his job of critical reading and review of the people's legislation?

Scary, thought isn't it. Isn't that how we classify incompetence?

So let's assume that he is not fulfilling his basic duties as Congressman, what makes you think he is fulfilling his other duties as Congressman?

Hence, on what merit is Ron Paul seeking to be President of our great country when he may not be fulfilling even the most rudimentary duties as Congressman and in the past as Publisher/Editor of The Ron Paul Political Report.

The American public would agree that if he couldn't manage with proper oversight the content of his own publication and have checks and balances in place to make sure vile articles such as attributed to the controversial issues of the mom-n-pop The Ron Paul Political Report could never be published; on what credible basis are Americans to believe that he can carry on the basic duties of a President in oversight of the US and managing checks and balances with the other two branches of government, Congress and Supreme Court.

Thus, Ron Paul's defense completely falls apart under common sense and logical scrutiny. Where is the fundamental journalistic scrutiny from the "legitimate media?" Why are people contributing to this man? Why are some Americans supporting him? Who is voting for this man to be re-elected to an august body such as the Congress? Is he fit to sponsor and support legislation in Congress that affects all Americans with his belief system?

Lastly, Ron Paul is unwilling to accept responsibility for the contents of his newsletter with his name on it. A publisher is always responsible for the content of his publication. Ron Paul is attempting to escape responsibility as a publisher and blames someone else, a "ghostwriter" for the content; then on what basis can he ridicule George Bush, another "public servant" who doesn't accept responsibility for his actions and blames others for his misdeeds. Can the country handle another incarnation of George Bush in Ron Paul?

Thus, Ron Paul's defense completely falls apart under common sense and logical scrutiny. Where is the hue and cry from the "legitimate media?" Why are people contributing to this man? Who is voting for this man to be re-elected to an august body such as the Congress? Is he fit to sponsor and support legislation in Congress that affects all Americans with his belief system?

The supporters of Ron Paul must not be carried away by the veneer of Ron Paul but examine the underpinnings of the man himself.

Would you really support him after reading Gaurav Bhola Makes a Case Against Ron Paul?

If you do, God help you.

Gaurav Bhola Makes a Case Against Ron Paul

Gimmie The Scoop.com

Gaurave Bhola-Scoop on Bloglines