We’ve discussed, at length, the racist newsletters with Ron Paul’s name on the front. However, Reason magazine, in a true show of journalistic zeal, has continued to prod the issue and discovered the very real possibility that the newsletters in question were written by none other than Lew Rockwell.
[Paul] told CNN last week that he still has “no idea” who might have written inflammatory comments such as “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks”—statements he now repudiates. Yet in interviews with Reason, a half-dozen longtime libertarian activists—including some still close to Paul—all named the same man as Paul’s chief ghostwriter: Ludwig von Mises Institute founder Llewellyn Rockwell, Jr.
This would be a double-edged sword for Paul. On the one hand, it would demonstrate quite clearly that he had no hand in writing the letters at all. However, Rockwell is well known to Paul, and it demonstrates a potential lack in oversight on behalf of Paul. It is still very realistic that Rockwell was doing much of this unknown to Paul, as part of his own agenda:
The newsletters’ obsession with blacks and gays was of a piece with a conscious political strategy adopted at that same time by Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard. After breaking with the Libertarian Party following the 1988 presidential election, Rockwell and Rothbard formed a schismatic “paleolibertarian” movement, which rejected what they saw as the social libertinism and leftist tendencies of mainstream libertarians. In 1990, they launched the Rothbard-Rockwell Report, where they crafted a plan they hoped would midwife a broad new “paleo” coalition.
Reason also obtained the following statement from Tom Lizardo, Paul’s chief of staff during much of his congressional campaigns:
Last week, a statement was prepared by Ron Paul’s press secretary Jesse Benton, and approved by Ron Paul, acknowledging Lew Rockwell as having a role in the newsletters. The statement was squashed by campaign chairman Kent Snyder.
More Politics
Huckabee’s boldest God-talk yet: “amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards.”
A 5th Amendment case: Porn, passwords and rights in the Internet age
And then Some
Hannah Hannah Montana Montana: body doubles anonymous.
So many people complained about Bush mixing faith with politics, but he invoked religion less than Clinton. Now comes Huck spouting stuff that neither of the last two presidents would have ever said. I don’t see how this guy is electable, he will scare off all moderates in sight.
Waytago, Reason mag. The neocons sling mud all over Ron. So as it drips off, you scoop up a bucketfull and dump it all over Lew.
Granted it’s a free press. And if that’s where it belongs he’d deserve it. But somehow I don’t think discrediting another major libertarian voice with rumors is going to improve the situation.
Until somebody finds a smoking gun I’m going to judge both of them by their tracable and undenied public record.
Michael,
I strongly object to the idea that is implied in your response - that the libertarian movement should avoid “discrediting” itself. This is the major reason I will not or ever join the LP, and why I am inherently distrustful of most libertarian movements - they suffer from the same maladies as every political organization - powerhunger, greed, deception, propaganda and manipulation. Reason is one of the few independent libertarian organizations out there, and they are generally loyal to the truth before agenda.
It may well be the Lew Rockwell acted as the editor of the newsletters - on behalf of Ron Paul - and that it could well be someone else that wrote certain passages, so Lew Rockwell cannot automatically eb blamed. Eric Dondero mentioned himself there were others also, and how could he have know eveything in any case. Also, only passages of a few newsletters were released by James Kirchik AND when one read these passages in context, you many of these statements are not racist at all. For instance Kennedy also investigated MLK with regard to Communism. One should read every passage in the realities and situation of the time, if you take it out of context and “dress it up” (much like the staetements about supposed weapons of mass destruction in Iraq at the UN by US govt., which proven to be overreactions and false), it gives a very different perception than the original intention. Some formulations are clearly very unfortunate…with rgeard to the one about 95% of blacks there is for example an important “restriction” : narrowed down to the Washington area. It is NOT say 95% of blacks in the whole USA! (of course it is still unfortuante to say this about the Washington area. One does NOT read any general racist theory and philosophy that is so typical of a white supremacist document.
The passages are clearly also not Dr. Paul’s formulation, or thinking. Racists think - per definition - in absolutists terms (e.g. making general statements, as if it were universal trurths), while Dr. Paul’s libertarism philosophy clearly regards such universalistic, absolutistic formulations (in any conext) as unscientific and ideologic: something a liberarian despises with all power.
More important: is the status quo and fact that black people are overrepresented in prison compared to their percentage in the whole of the country racist? To this writer, it is clear that rather those that do nothing about this fact - which causes a lot of family breakdown in the black community - e.g. to keep the “war on drugs” by improsoning blakcs for non-violence drug smuggling/offences (it should be a medical and psychiological problem, not government legal one), that contributes to an “institutional racism”, and in this conext Dr. Ron Paul sets the example on how to deal with this problem, by freeing many of these prisoners. It would be up to the community, churches, hospitals, academic institutions etc. to set the example and give information as to the very negative consequences of drug usuage, and not the central government. Also: people often want to try that is prohibited, once it is not outlawed anymore, the incentive and “kick” of trying to break the law and also interest in drugs, would subside (over time).
Zooville etc.
Stefan,
I agree with you that many of the allegations of “racism” are hardly so, unless disagreeing with Lincoln or questioning the Civil Rights movement is inherently racist.
Again, the only race is the human race. Find one racist remark to fall from Dr. Paul’s lips to corroborate his presumed racism and we have a case. Otherwise we are throwing the baby out with the bath water. Is there no sense of proportion with these detractors?
What a revelation! Eric Dondero has been saying all over the web for a week, to anyone who’ll listen:
“From what I witnessed in my 12 years working for Ron, I’d say maybe 40% came from him in the way of scribbles (and I literally do mean scribbles) on a yellow pad, that was then faxed to his office staff in South Houston for editing and publication. I’d estimate that the rest – 50 to 60% was written by Lew. But when I say Lew I also mean his staff of Interns.”
http://www.lastfreevoice.com/2008/01/12/libertarians-react-to-paul-newsletter-scandal/#more-1142
As Paul himself has confirmed, “many” and “several” people wrote for the newsletter, including but not limited to Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell. Neither were the publisher; for the period in question (1988-1992), according to Mr. Dondero, that was Jean McIver.
Reason’s scramble to make Mr. Rockwell “the ghostwriter,” and by extension “the racist,” looks less like investigative reporting, and more like an attempt to expiate the sin of racism by sacrificing a scapegoat.
Well, this actually doesn’t make Paul or Rockwell look better… it makes them look worse, that they could at the very least have shown so little oversight over stuff that was usually from their own hand.
http://www.takimag.com/site/article/why_the_beltway_libertarians_are_trying_to_smear_ron_paul/
Yawn…
Search on Google: 9/11 families file RICO lawsuits aganist Bush since 2003 in court. Four waves of them. Their lawyer is Stanley Hilton.
Now that is news. Why don’t you investigate that and write about it?
Beltway vs paleos. Cato vs Misis Institute.. YAWN. Political positioning at it’s bratiest. Cato and the beltway are just upset that Ron Paul’s movement took off without them. Now Misis gets attention and CATO doesn’t. The beltway can spend the rest of eternity splitting hairs, and cannibalizing Libertarians that aren’t lockstep with them. The R3volution isn’t about whose the purist Libertarian of them all. Ron Paul is a Republican with Libertarian leanings. The orange line can smear Ron Paul, but even they know Ron Paul is no Racist. Lew is the witch they want to burn. There are those who want to advance freedom, and then there are those who are afraid that R3volution might get them muddy. By all means, report on this ancient story, but at least put the so called racist comments in context. As for self righteous indignation, give it a rest. When I start seeing the media go after the other candidates for racist remarks and associations, I might consider that the media really has the best interests of the American voters at heart. Right now, not too many people are believing that.
Who cares - I have come to grips with this and frankly I don’t care…
How about we now go after all the other bastards trying to take the rains of this country - before we end up with someone in power far worse..than someone who may or may not be involved in something that someone may or may not said about something someone may or may not wrote during a time frame that may or may not have had an audience that may or may not be nut jobs… WTF ARE WE DOING FOLKS..
See you in the breadline.
So I saw ABC tonight had a little special about Ron Paul… but not the kind of publicity he wants, I’m sure… the Bunny Farm “employees” all endorse him as their man. hehehe
Bunny Farm employees are American people, too. I have no problem with them.
If there was no demand for prostitution there wouldn’t be any prostitutes, yet it has been around forever.
Maybe men should examine themselves as to why such a thing exists in the first place.
“Waytago, Reason mag. The neocons sling mud all over Ron. So as it drips off, you scoop up a bucketfull and dump it all over Lew.”
Christ Almighty, stating a simple fact (’Lew wrote the newsletters) is not “mud-sling.” He should just own up to it.