In a Time of Universal Deceit, Telling the Truth is Revolutionary.
Tuesday, November 28, 2023

For Ron Paul, everything old is new again

Ron Paul: Who, me?

Ron Paul got a free pass from the media as long as he was a backbencher with a fringe following but when he surged in the Iowa polls, the press woke up and took a closer look at the history of the Texas Congressman.

And the Fourth Estate didn’t like what it found.

The problem, Howard Kurtz at The Daily Beast reports, is that the story was there all along.  All it took was somebody to take more than a cursory look at Paul’s background.

Writes Kurtz:

The explosive material that is fueling the negative coverage of Ron Paul, from his isolationist foreign policy to the racist newsletters published in his name, has been readily available to journalists. There was no need to assemble an investigative team to meet sources in parking garages; all that was required was a simple database search.

But in a stunning dereliction of duty, the vast majority of the press corps couldn’t be bothered.

Kurtz is right that the story has been there. Capitol Hill Blue covered it in depth in the 2008 Presidential campaingn.  The Dallas Morning News exposed Paul’s racist and homophobic newsletters in 1996.  So did the Austin American Statesman and the Texas Monthly.

So where was the rest of the media?  Asleep at the wheel (to borrow the name of one of our favorite Texas swing bands).

Kurtz continues:

We all know the media can’t walk, chew gum, and cover more than two presidential candidates at a time. All too often, journalists are like lemmings, marching in lockstep after whoever has gotten a bump in the polls. That’s why the news business has lurched from Trump to Bachmann to Perry to Cain to Newt to Paul (and perhaps now Santorum, who’s blipped up to third in Iowa in a CNN/Time survey).

But it’s not as though Paul had some hidden past that could be excavated only through dusty court records. He says stuff every day—eliminate aid to Israel, abolish the Fed, get rid of the income tax, bring American soldiers home from around the world—that would create a firestorm around any other candidate.

Of course, none of this matters to the Ron Paul faithful. They claim it’s all old news. That’s true but it became current news when the grandfather of all politicians got huffy with a CNN anchor and walked off the set because she had the gall to ask him to explain his involvement with the newsletters that padded his bank account by a million or so bucks a year.

From where we sit, Paul has not only evaded the issue for too many years, he has changed his story more often than a teenager caught breaking curfew. In other words, he lied.

Does this matter to the Ron Paul Greek chorus?  Of course not. Their candidate is Saint Paul, the political messiah who can do no wrong.  It doesn’t matter that many of his positions are so outrageous, so unworkable, so far-fetched that they would destroy the American economy, gut our defensive capabilities and push America back into the dark ages.  Ron Paul, in their eyes, is infallible and cannot be questioned.

But can a man who — as he claims — knew nothing about the racist, homophobic, anti-Semitic content of two-decades of newsletters published in his name be trusted at the helm of a nation?  Logic says no, but logic left the building long ago.

Kurtz adds:

To be sure, Paul says he never read most of what was published in the Ron Paul Freedom Report, Ron Paul Political Report, and other similarly named journals. But even if we take him at his word, the questions are obvious: Why didn’t you know? What does this say about your management skills? Why would you associate with people who would put out this filth?

That these questions are just now starting to be asked, on the eve of the Iowa caucuses, is an embarrassment for the media. And Paul’s testy responses make clear that he did not expect to have to explain these incendiary words that he now dismisses as old news.

Sorry Ronnie.  Your supporters kept complaining that the media wasn’t paying attention to you.

Well, they’re paying attention now and everything old is new again.

Be careful what you wish for.

Enhanced by Zemanta

12 thoughts on “For Ron Paul, everything old is new again”

  1. There will always be people who cannot grasp the idea of “true” freedom because they do not possess the mental capacity, nor the spirit to be able to realize such freedom is attainable.

    Those people will not vote for Ron Paul.

    They believe what they are told to believe.

    They are happily intellectually stunted, perfectly content avoiding the effort it would take to realize the possibilities they will never grasp.

  2. Ron Paul’s vision of an American utopia, it is hilarious! Ron Paul and his supporters remind me of the hippies of the 1960’s LSD crowd. His lethal fantasies would return us to the old days and all the ills of Americas 20th century. There is however little reason to worry about the policies of a Paul administration despite his place in the Iowa polls. This little old odd ball of a man will never be President except in the minds of his delusional followers. I now look forward to all the Paulites slamming yet another of Doug’s excellent and truthful reads on their beloved messiah Saint Paul.


    • Bill, the more you rant about Ron Paul your writing seems as if you and our site host have engaged the “Vulcan Mind Meld” together.

      In addition to your continual ‘little old man’ reference, you are now accusing the guy of being a drugged out 60’s hippy or having the support of such. Many of those drugged out ‘hippies’ went on to found major U.S. coporations that are household words today. In fact, Dr. Paul was a U.S. Air Force flight surgeon from 1963-68. I suggest everyone take the time to read his Wiki bio. This ‘little old man’ is a deep draft vessel when it comes to principles as opposed to the other candidates.

      Being a strict constitutionalist is a ‘lethal fantasy’…say what?! / : |

      You seemingly have a major disconnect between our now on the rocks, out of control big government that’s gone so far off the rails in terms of what this nation was founded upon, no longer supported by our founding document, the U.S. Constitution, that you’ve lost your ability think clearly as many of our citizens with their “I’ve got mine…screw the rest of you types” that inhabit America. You seemingly like the way things are going. Then I suggest you vote for Mitt, he’s an expert at talking out of two sides of his mouth, one yes the other side no at the same time.

      This Ron Paul newsletter hysteria that’s found on this site has reached ludicrous proportions to the point that is seems to be an obsessive/compulsive writing disorder on the part of the site host, his supporting staff and some forum participants.

      Simply don’t vote for the guy. Your non vote will be x’d out by many that do support Ron Paul for President 2012!

      Carl Nemo **==

      • From the many posts I’ve read here from the partisan RP followers I think you are confused as who’s doing the ranting here on Doug’s site. As to whom I may or may not vote for that’s none of your business. But I can assure you of one thing, my vote will not go to that odd little old man Ron Paul.

  3. “It doesn’t matter that many of his positions are so outrageous, so unworkable, so far-fetched that they would destroy the American economy . . . .”

    Hilarious! Doug hasn’t actually noticed that the economy has already been destroyed by the very people he defends with this thinnest of smears!

    Even better is this ‘racist’ garbage that’s brought out no end of black people posting on YouTube etc letting the world know how they really feel about Dr Paul:
    Oh, those self-hating blacks!

    I think our host is a secret supporter, but can’t publicly admit it. Keep supplying the oxygen, Doug!

    • Thanks Frank Verismo for the excellent and relevating link concerning black American support for candidate Paul. : )

      Doug Thompson, you know that I value you personally and support your site, but methinks due to your many years involvement with D.C. politics, you’ve become a ‘cesspool of cynicism’. I’ve been accused of such by fellow site members and even close associates of mine, but we all thought “Mr. Change we can believe in” was our ‘El Cid’, but has turned out to be a major disappointment to say the least.

      I personally feel as yourself it’s the system, but that’s all we’ve got, so why not Paul? There isn’t any “none of the above” on the ballot, so we have to be flexible; I.E., pragmatists concerning possible outcomes.


      “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” … Joseph Goebbels


      Carl Nemo **==

  4. No Al, we all knew about the stuff what was in the Newsletters. We all understood that this was from the Republican part of Paul’s life. They all had a problem with race and the gay community. Paul at that time refused to hold a woman in trouble and wanted an abortion. Pat Buchanan was another Republican who fed from that same trough. It came with the Birch Society and was picked up by the religious right. It sent me running away from the GOP.

  5. One would think that this Kurtz quote was about the coverage of Zero in 2008:

    “But in a stunning dereliction of duty, the vast majority of the press corps couldn’t be bothered [or maybe realized}.”

    Of course, Doug, given your own analysis that all the candidates for Pres this cycle are liars and ne’er-do-wells, perhaps the Ron Paul faithful have merely decided that if the only difference among the candidates is degree-of-fallibility, then at least Paul’s positions are most in line with what they want… i.e., sound money, ethical foreign policy, Constitutional govt, and individual liberty.

    While you may have been steeped in the DC stew, your claim that “his positions are so outrageous, so unworkable, so far-fetched that they would destroy the American economy, gut our defensive capabilities and push America back into the dark ages”… are nothing but bombastic hyperbole.

    One could look at our founding for antithesis, but such is the theory pushed now by govt wonks… you know, those who have brought us down this “modern” road of ruin so far so fast.

    Paul’s approach, i.e., the focus of the founders – a govt of limited apparatus and function – worked so well until “progressives” [I’m being nice] seized hold.

    Given our current fiscal, political, and international morass, one must legitimately ask… which approach is the bogus one?

    • Re: second paragraph quote

      “But in a stunning dereliction of duty, the vast majority of the press corps couldn’t be bothered.” …extract from post

      Precisly Almandine and I must say this post of yours exposes a side of you that I’ve never realized. My apologies. A fine piece of writing indeed. : )

      An excellent rebuttal and presentation concerning the almost mindless kvetching about Ron Paul since he just might get the nomination from Iowans. Even if Ron doesn’t prevail in New Hampshire and beyond I feel he deserves such a coup after so many years of trying to get his message across. This is probably his last go around at seeking the Presidency, but I’m sure his son Rand Paul will take the handoff of the torch and do so in the future.

      In fact Rand Paul was the only Senator to initially oppose the unconstitutional Levin/McCain admendment in the recent NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) concerning the use of the U.S. military to roundup citizens, holding them without charges, their right to counsel and to do so indefinitely until the ‘war on terror’ was declared over which will be the 12th of never; I.E., traitorous crimpols’ dreams come true in turning the U.S. into a military dictatorship. Congress makes my skin crawl, with me knowing as to what a low metric they operate.

      Yep, the Paul family are just a nasty bunch of ‘traitors’ not worthy of high office or the Presidency…no? / : |

      Carl Nemo **==

      • I made reference to the Levin/McCain amendment to the NDAA so I thought I’d supply a Ron Paul vidclip with him speaking as to how the last nail has been driven into “Lady Liberty’s” coffin.

        Is this man a crook, a newsletter scamster, grifter, a destructor of all that was once good about this nation?

        I think not…!

        Watch the clip, then think…just think if that’s possible concerning Candidate Paul in these seeming end times for the American Republic…?

        Carl Nemo **==

        • Thanks for posting that history-in-the-making link, Carl. A good tonic for the hard of thinking, although, sadly, wasted on those who refuse to.
          “Most people would sooner die than think – in fact, they do”.

      • Thanks Carl…

        and I am drawn to the old quote, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”… and it seems to me that if all one can do is point out the warts on every candidate imaginable, point out the shortcomings of whoever runs for office, and point out only those negatives without discriminating amongst them all… then there is no service being rendered… there is no higher purpose being served, there is no information being transmitted – just Noise.

        In a real world I’d expect the Learned One from DC to show us the way…

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: