Friday, January 27, 2012

Ron Paul Was Intimately Involved With His Racist Newsletter

The more we find out about Ron Paul's involvement in his own racist newsletter, the less credible his denials of knowing about the bigoted content of his newsletters become. Initially, Ron Paul said that he contributed absolutely nothing to his own newsletter: 
Now, Paul says he had nothing to do with the contents of the newsletters published in his name.
"Why don't you go back and look at what I said yesterday on CNN and what I've said for 20-something years, 22 years ago?" Paul said on CNN Wednesday. "I didn't write them. I disavow them. That's it." Paul then removed his microphone and abruptly ended the interview.
Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said the congressman was practicing medicine at the time the newsletters were published and "did not write or approve the incendiary passages and does not agree with them."
A few days later, in an interview with Dave Wiegel for, admitted that he did contribute articles to his own bigoted newsletter but that he only wrote articles focusing on economic issues:
CALLER: Dr. Paul, how confident were you at the time that the newsletters that bore your name were representative of your views on taxes, on monetary policy, the Second Amendment, the Tenth Amendment, all the things that you hold dear? How confident were you that the newsletter accurately portrayed your views on those things?
PAUL: Well, the newsletters were written, you know, a long time ago. And I wrote a certain portion of them. I would write the economics. So a lot of what you just mentioned… his would be material that I would turn in, and it would become part of the letter. But there were many times when I didn’t edit the whole letter, and things got put in. And I didn’t even really become aware of the details of that until many years later when somebody else called and said, you know what was in it? But these were sentences that were put in, a total of eight or ten sentences, and it was bad stuff. It wasn’t a reflection of my views at all. So it got in the letter, I thought it was terrible, it was tragic, you know and I had some responsibility for it, because name went on the letter. But I was not an editor. I’m like a publisher. And if you think of publishers of newspapers, once in a while they get pretty junky stuff in newspapers. And they have to say that this is not the position of that newspaper, and this is certainly the case. But I actually put a type of a newsletter out, it was a freedom report, investment, survival report — every month since 1976. So this is probably ten sentences out of 10,000 pages, for all I know. I think it’s bad that happened but I disavowed all these views, and people who know me best, people of my district, have heard these stories for years and years, and they know they weren’t a reflection of anything I believed in, and it never hurt me politically. Right now, I think it’s the same case, too. People are desperate to find something.
CALLER: But Dr. Paul, many of the newsletters are filled with conspiracies. You had one newsletter from start to finish with fear that the $50 bill, because it was going to be made pink, and it was gonna have all kinds of things that can track us down, so we should all be afraid that maybe tomorrow they’re gonna require us to turn in all of our old money.
PAUL: The paper money now is pink, you know? No, we haven’t had runaway inflation, but I still fear that.
Recently, several close associates have come forward saying that Ron Paul was intimately involved in his own newsletter. 
The Republican presidential candidate has denied writing inflammatory passages in the pamphlets from the 1990s and said recently that he did not read them at the time or for years afterward. Numerous colleagues said he does not hold racist views.
But people close to Paul’s operations said he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.
“It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it,’’ said Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Paul’s company and a supporter of the Texas congressman.
There is additional evidence that demonstrates how close Ron Paul was with his bigoted newsletter: 
Yet a review of his enterprises reveals a sharp-eyed businessman who for nearly two decades oversaw the company and a nonprofit foundation, intertwining them with his political career. The newsletters, which were launched in the mid-1980s and bore such names as the Ron Paul Survival Report, were produced by a company Paul dissolved in 2001.
The company shared offices with his campaigns and foundation at various points, according to those familiar with the operation. Public records show Paul’s wife and daughter were officers of the newsletter company and foundation; his daughter also served as his campaign treasurer.
Another person close to Ron Paul claimed that Ron Paul started adding racist material in his newsletter in a way to increase their profit in their magazine: 
A person involved in Paul’s businesses, who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid criticizing a former employer, said Paul and his associates decided in the late 1980s to try to increase sales by making the newsletters more provocative. They discussed adding controversial material, including racial statements, to help the business, the person said.
“It was playing on a growing racial tension, economic tension, fear of government,’’ said the person, who supports Paul’s economic policies but is not backing him for president. “I’m not saying Ron believed this stuff. It was good copy. Ron Paul is a shrewd businessman.’’
The articles included racial, anti-Semitic and anti-gay content. They claimed, for example, that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. “seduced underage girls and boys’’; they ridiculed black activists by suggesting that New York be named “Zooville” or “Lazyopolis”; and they said the 1992 Los Angeles riots ended “when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.’’ The June 1990 edition of the Ron Paul Political Report included the statement: “Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.”
It is unclear precisely how much money Paul made from his newsletters, but during the years he was publishing them, he reduced his debts and substantially increased his net worth, according to his congressional and presidential disclosure reports. In 1984, he reported debt of up to $765,000, most of which was gone by 1995, when he reported a net worth of up to $3.3 million. Last year, he reported a net worth up to $5.2 million.
The newsletters bore his name in large print and featured articles on topics ranging from investment advice to political commentary. Frequently written in first person, they contained personalized notes, such as holiday greetings from Paul and his wife, Carol.
The Washington Post obtained dozens of copies of the newsletters from the Wisconsin Historical Society. Texas news outlets wrote about them in 1996, and the New Republic published extensive excerpts in 2008. The issue resurfaced late last year, when Paul’s presidential campaign picked up momentum. The extent of Paul’s involvement and his business strategy had not been known.
Paul’s publishing operation began through a nonprofit organization he created in 1976, the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, which advocates for limited government and a free market. The group, founded the year Paul entered Congress, published Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, mostly a collection of his congressional speeches and commentaries.
In 1984, just before losing a Senate bid and leaving Congress, Paul formed Ron Paul & Associates. He soon began publishing the Ron Paul Investment Letter, initially offering mostly economic and monetary information. Texas tax records listed Paul as president of the business, his wife as secretary, his daughter, Lori Paul Pyeatt, as treasurer, and a longtime Paul associate, Lew Rockwell, as vice president.
Ed Crane, the longtime president of the libertarian Cato Institute, said he met Paul for lunch during this period, and the two men discussed direct-mail solicitations, which Paul was sending out to interest people in his newsletters. They agreed that “people who have extreme views” are more likely than others to respond.
Crane said Paul reported getting his best response when he used a mailing list from the now-defunct newspaper Spotlight, which was widely considered anti-Semitic and racist.
The evidence keeps piling up. We know that Ron Paul Paul wrote a letter to his subscribers promoting his racist magazine.We know that Ron Paul let Lew Rockwell or Murray Rothbard ghost write many of these racist articles. Both of these men are known for spouting racist and anti-Semitic views in other forums. We also know that Ron Paul has some association with known racists.  As a result of the growing evidence of Ron Paul's racism, its gets difficult to believe his denials that he is not a racist
Its clear that conservatives, Tea Partiers and Independents should not vote for or support Ron Paul.


  1. Thanks........interesting information. I hate to think Paul's a liar, too, but that doesn't look that good for him.

  2. If you believe those racist statements sound like Dr. Paul, you really haven't listened to him. At the very least consider the following evidence:

  3. If Ron Paul isn't a racist, why publish the trash in his newsletter in the first place?

    Its clear that he was intimately and involved with the magazine in which he approved each article before publication. The fact that he approved it and never once objected to it before or after these articles were published is troubling.

    If a magazine or newsletter was found to have published racist material, they would have issued an apology and retraction immediately. Ron Paul never did this.

    First we got a flat out denial from Ron Paul. Then we get a half admission that he did write articles but we're to believe he only focused on economic issues. But given all the lies Ron Paul has said about his own newsletters, its difficult to believe that he only wrote the economic articles.

    Even we are to believe that he's being honest that he only wrote the economic articles, he allows well known racists to write the articles. Why hire these men in the first place? Why didn't he reject the articles when these men submitted it for publication? Why didn't he issue a retraction and apology after they were published? Why didn't he fire these men after the article were published?

    Instead, he let racist men write racist articles with his approval and said nothing about them for many years.

    Only when he's running for President in 2008 and 2012 does he try to distance himself from his own newsletters that were published under his name. How convenient.

    There's the additional question of why even try to use racism as a way to increase his business? Its such a horrible business and Public Relations idea unless you know your articles are being read by the minority of racists in America who have no qualms with the content of the newsletters.

    The evidence is overwhelming. Ron Paul is a racist. There's strong evidence that proves this. Even if we are to view all the evidence in a way that is most favorable to Ron Paul, his actions and words strongly suggest he's a racist.