Ron Raul Racism Controversy

Press Releases › Ron Paul Statement on The New Republic Article Regarding Old Newsletters
January 8, 2008 5:28 am EST

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – In response to an article published by The New Republic, Ron Paul issued the following statement:

“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.’

“This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.

“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.”

You really should at least TRY to make sure a "story" has some credibility, and merit before posting it. Drudge Report already removed it because it was proven to be lies, and Ron Pauls campaign has issued an official statement, on top of the fat that it has was already debunked LONG ago.

Ron Paul Statement on The New Republic Article Regarding Old Newsletters — Ron Paul 2008

I got to that link from this (more current): The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

which mentions Paul's response, he is still somewhat responsible, as even he admitted.

sounds like pure speculation at best...

this is old news brought to light to try to smear

Speculation..? I saw him on local TV this morning still dodging his racial remarks. It was reported that he once commented on the Los Angeles race riots in his printed newsletter stating to the effect that order is only in place when the blacks are lined up for their welfare checks. His only excuse is that he did not edit his own newsletter.

He isn't dodging ****, you may not like the fact that he didn't maintain the newsletter, but that doesn't change the fact that he didn't write the columns, and that he doesn't need to waste energy explaining it to shmucks that are only interested in coming up with more lies everytime he shoots their bull**** down.

Okay, I'll write a letter to the New York Times decrying the genetic evil of black people. Their editor doesn't feel like reading through it and just throws it in. They're not accountable?

Face it, you wouldn't believe anything wrong about Ron Paul, because despite your constant criticism of "sheeple", you seem very much like a "sheeperson" sheperded by Ron Paul.

Come up with a relevent equivolent than get back to us. If Ron Paul had said those things I'd be the first to rip him apart, he didn't, don't cry because I don't blame him for others social shortcomings.

92 - Over the years, I have either written or had written for me, thousands of documents ALL of which were edited or approved by me prior to release. In this case, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and consider him a slacker that does not pay attention to what is produced in his name. He screwed up. Admit it and move past it.

The articles were not written for him.

This is the way I see it, if Ron Paul would have been involved with this in any way shape or form. Or had any prior knowledge of these events I am sure that his people would have kicked this under the rug long ago.

I am confused. If the articles were not written for him, they must have been written by him. No..?