Some Further Thoughts on Ron Paul

I thought I'd add a few comments to my extremely short review of Bruno, beginning with the Ron Paul issue. My criticism of the New Saint Paul has apparently caused a few people to sever all ties to me. Unquestioning devotion to a fringe political figure trumps friendship. That's fine. Enjoy your cult.

First off, I'd like to point out that I am not the only person who considers Ron Paul a racist. I certainly didn't consider him one when he first came on the national scene, because he presented himself in a very straightforward, dignified, intelligent manner. I wasn't even overly disturbed that he accepted a $500 donation from the white supremacist group Stormfront. After all, fringe politicians aren't in any position to turn down cash or vet donors for obnoxious beliefs.

But then excerpts from Ron Paul's newsletter surfaced. The Ron Paul newsletter has been issued monthly, under various names, since about 1978. Though Ron Paul was listed as "editor of publications" and acknowledges that was his title, he insists that he had extemely limited awareness of who was writing for the newsletter, what they were writing, and what was being distributed in his name. He swears he is not a racist, and has apologized for not knowing that racist invective was being disseminated by his own newsletter. Hence, he disavows the following:

• Carjacking is the "hip-hop thing to do among the urban youth who play unsuspecting whites like pianos... even in my little town of Lake Jackson, Texas, I've urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming." (October 1992 newsletter)
• "Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems." (October 1992)
• A June 1991 article on racial unrest in the Adams Morgan neighborhood of D.C. was titled "Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo".
• While Dr. Paul lists Martin Luther King, Jr., as a personal hero, this is what the Ron Paul newsletter had to say about him: "a pro-Communist philanderer...who seduced underage girls and boys". (MLK was a philanderer and arguably a socialist, not a child molester) Martin Luther King Day was referred to as "Hate Whitey Day".
• "I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city [Washington, D.C.] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."
• Instead of being renamed after Martin Luther King, Jr., New York City could be called Welfaria, Zooville, Rapetown, Dirtburg, or Lazyopolis.
• The L.A. riots were the natural result of the effects of "'civil rights,' quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda." The riots ended only when the blacks had to "pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began". (June 1992 Special Issue on Racial Terrorism)
• An article on Nelson Mandela, titled "South African Holocaust",
• David Duke was congratulated for his 44% showing in the 1990 Louisiana Senate primary. "Duke lost the election, but he scared the blazes out of the Establishment."

If these comments don't fit the definition of racism, I need a new dictionary.
The newsletters had quite a lot to say about gays and AIDS, as well:

• "Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities."
• Gays should be allowed in the military, but "should be put in a special category and not allowed in close physical contact with heterosexuals."
• Readers were advised to avoid getting blood transfusions, because gays were intentionally trying to "poison the blood supply." They were also informed that AIDS "can be transmitted by saliva". The writer opined that AIDS sufferers "should not be allowed to eat in restaurants".
• Gay men with AIDS "enjoy the attention and pity that comes from being sick." They "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."

Then there are the conspiracy theories, put forth in articles and in ads for independently produced documentaries:

• On the 1993 World Trade Center bombing: "Whether it was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little."
• The World Health Organization created AIDS.
• Waco was a conspiracy to kill ATF agents who had previously worked for President Clinton as bodyguards.

Most of the quoted articles carried no byline, so readers are left with the impression that Ron Paul wrote them himself. He is from Lake Jackson, and a 1990 holiday message seemed to be directly from Paul and his wife to the readers. There is wide speculation that Lew Rockwell is the real author.

But let's give Dr. Paul the benefit of the doubt, eh? Let's say he did totally ignore 100% of the content of his own newsletter for a full 20 years, as he claims.
Though I'm no fan, I have to agree with a comment by Little Green Footballs: "Even if this was written by someone else, it’s almost more disturbing that Ron Paul could be so disconnected and dysfunctional that he let freaks like this run his newsletter."

And there's still Dr. David McKalip, the physician and close personal friend of Paul who sent this image in an email to everyone on his Tea Party mailing list.

And then there's Gary North, a former member of Paul's Congressional staff. North is a Christian Reconstructionist who wants to see ancient Biblical laws and practices instituted in the U.S., including stoning as a means of execution and cursing one's parents as a capitol offense.

Then there's Lew Rockwell. Like Ron Paul, Rockwell has some good ideas. He's anti-war, against big government, a defender of states' rights. On the other hand, Rockwell has argued that the U.S. should never have entered WWII. Writers for the Lew Rockwell blog propagate the Ringworm Children nonsense. Author David Kramer calls the nonexistent event a "bit of modern Israeli history that I don’t recall being taught in Hebrew School".

Then there's Alex Jones, a man so misinformed and ignorant that I had to devote an entire blog to his broadcasts. Ron Paul is a frequent guest. He was Jones' guest when Jones declared, back in November, that Obama is a closet Muslim/Nation of Islam/Black Identity adherent who is going to usher in persecution of whites. Paul said nothing. Not even "Huh?".
Paul has filled in for Jones when Jones is on vacation.
Nuff said.

All in all, I don't think I am out of line in calling Ron Paul a paranoid racist. I have a right to that personal opinion. I am not obligated to respect or admire anyone just because they have some good ideas.