From Angry White Man, written almost four years ago for the New Republic about Ron Paul and the racist newsletters published under his name:
As early as December 1989, a section of his Investment Letter, titled “What To Expect for the 1990s,” predicted that “Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities” because “mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white ‘haves.’” Two months later, a newsletter warned of “The Coming Race War,” and, in November 1990, an item advised readers, “If you live in a major city, and can leave, do so. If not, but you can have a rural retreat, for investment and refuge, buy it.” In June 1991, an entry on racial disturbances in Washington, DC’s Adams Morgan neighborhood was titled, “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” “This is only the first skirmish in the race war of the 1990s,” the newsletter predicted. In an October 1992 item about urban crime, the newsletter’s author—presumably Paul—wrote, “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self defense. For the animals are coming.” That same year, a newsletter described the aftermath of a basketball game in which “blacks poured into the streets of Chicago in celebration. How to celebrate? How else? They broke the windows of stores to loot.” The newsletter inveighed against liberals who “want to keep white America from taking action against black crime and welfare,” adding, “Jury verdicts, basketball games, and even music are enough to set off black rage, it seems.”
I am over people declaring that Ron Paul is a racist and citing his old newsletters as proof, only to have Paul and his supporters deny it. The case is, they are unsigned, and thus easy to write off as someone else’s views. Which Paul has. Repeatedly. And that’s fine.
Let’s assume he didn’t author these newsletters. If he didn’t, we have to take into consideration that these were written over a long enough period of time that the only conclusions that should be drawn don’t bode all that well for the candidate.
We are talking years here. If they were written by one individual, to me that means Paul was never intelligent enough to read over newsletters that people might assume had been written by him. In that case, he doesn’t deserve to be labeled a racist, but he doesn’t deserve to keep his job, either.
Or, he did read them over, and routinely fired writers for their racist remarks and replaced them with other racist writers. Who does he choose to surround himself with? Does he consistently work with such vile, paranoid individuals?
If the latter is the case, eventually would he not, given his stature and place in politics, start looking them over before they went to print (why he didn’t do this to begin with is beyond me) or even take the task of writing them into his own hands?
Ron Paul might not be a racist, but he also clearly lacks good judgement.
Can we talk about something else?