Ron Paul's Racist Newsletters

The Plank has the old Ron Paul newletters. Paul had several newsletters called Ron Paul's Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report, and The Ron Paul Investment Letter. The paranoid and racist rambling about the L.A. riots are a classic example of what Paul supports.

A Special Issue On Racial Terrorism

These criminals who terrorize our cities -- in riots and on every non-roit day -- are not exclusively black males, but they largely are. As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for black ills, to "fight the power," to steal and loot as much money as possible. Anything is justified against "The Man."

It gets better. The newsletter states whites are never raised to be racist.

My friend waved to the the tiny child, who scowled, stuck out her tongue and said (somewhat tautologicallly): "I hate you, white honkey." And the parents were indulgent. Is any white child taught to hate in this way? I've never heard of it.

Is that a rhetorical question? Newsletters that print racist garbage are a place where people are taught to hate.

Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began. ... What if the checks had never arrived? No doubt the blacks would have fully privatized the welfare state through continued looting. But they were paid off and the violence subsided.

There is this love letter to former Klu Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke.

Duke's platform called called for tax cuts, no quotas, no affirmative action, no welfare and no busing. "Tonight, we concede the election," he said. "But we will never concede our fight for equal rights for all Americans."

To many voters, this seems like plain good sense. Duke carried baggage from his past, but the voters were willing to overlook that. And if he had been afforded the forgiveness an ex-communist gets, he might have won.

The Paul newsletter The Political Report calls Martin Luther King "a world class adulterer." Another newsletter accuses King assaulting women.

Paul's newsletter describes gay men as fatalist that want to die of AIDS.

Well, gays in San Francisco do not obey the dictates of good sense. They have stopped practicing "safe sex."

This newsletter writer unscientific out of his ass to make his argument.

"[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."

Paul went into damage control mode and issued a statement on his web site.

“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.

“In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person's character, not the color of their skin. As I stated on the floor of the U.S. House on April 20, 1999: ‘I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.’

The question is why the hell would Paul allow his name to be used on this newsletter if he didn't agree with the contents? Can Paul tell us who wrote the newsletter? I'm betting he can't. New Republic's James Kirchick notices that many articles are written in the first person.