PDA

View Full Version : The Revolution: A Manifesto, by Thomas Woods?




0zzy
09-01-2008, 10:41 PM
The Washington Times has a big article about Ron Paul's recent book, The Revolution: A Manifesto.

Source (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/01/AR2008090102461.html)


ST. PAUL, Minn., Sept. 1 -- Former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has boasted that he wrote a book slamming the Iraq war and challenging the nation's economic system to continue a grass-roots movement that grew out of his quixotic campaign. The best-selling "The Revolution: A Manifesto" has become the centerpiece of a counterconvention by Paul that he has predicted will attract thousands of supporters to the Twin Cities.

But although the congressman from Texas has repeatedly called the book his own work, it was largely written by an unacknowledged ghostwriter, and it is unclear how much Paul contributed to the final product.

Late last year, Tom Woods, a longtime Paul supporter and libertarian scholar who will be speaking at the counterconvention, sent out copies of the manuscript and indicated that he had written the manifesto on Paul's behalf, according to copies of a letter from Woods and an original manuscript obtained by The Washington Post.

"Enclosed is the manuscript for a book tentatively titled The Revolution: A Manifesto, to be published under Dr. Paul's name," Woods's Dec. 26 letter says. The name of the letter's recipient was redacted. "When my agent shopped the idea around (before I'd actually written the book) back in October, a number of publishers were interested . . ." Woods also wrote that he was "happy to report that Dr. Paul is very pleased with it. He called me with a number of minor changes that I intend to incorporate into the text over the next few days."

Woods confirmed in an interview that the letter is authentic, but said it overemphasizes his role in writing the book. "This is Ron Paul's book in every way," Woods said. When asked if Paul used a ghostwriter, Jesse Benton, his spokesman, said "They are all Dr. Paul's words."
ad_icon

Despite his role, Woods, an author of numerous books under his own name, wrote glowing reviews of Paul's book on libertarian Web sites when it was released by Grand Central Publishing in January. On one, he wrote: "Whatever your expectations for Ron Paul's book . . . I can say with confidence that they have been exceeded. By a mile."

Throughout his campaign and since, Paul has presented himself as an anti-Washington truth teller. His 173-page book has become the extension of a post-campaign movement trying to sustain the grass-roots enthusiasm that made his presidential bid an unlikely success among disaffected Republicans, independents, and some Democrats frustrated by government spending and the nation's aggressive military posture around the world.

The book has become a centerpiece of the shadow convention, which was launched Monday with a book signing. Quotes from the book are being featured on billboards in the Twin Cities and plastered on posters at the nearby Mall of America, encouraging Republicans in town for their party's convention to buy and read Paul's manifesto.

Paul is expecting 10,000 supporters to attend a daylong rally Tuesday, at which numerous libertarian and independent-minded speakers, such as former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura, Grover G. Norquist, and Tucker Carlson, will discuss his agenda for a smaller government, lower taxes and an end to the Iraq war. The convention will be held across the river from the Republican convention, at the arena where the NBA's Minnesota Timberwolves play, and will include a performance by blues guitarist Jimmie Vaughan, speeches and panel discussions.

"It's the ideas in the book that brings this together," Paul explained in an interview with The Post on Friday.

Paul said he organized his counterconvention after officials at the Republican National Committee told him he would not be permitted to address their convention. Paul said the RNC has also limited his access to the convention floor, and his movements at the hall will be monitored by the party. He is not supporting John McCain's candidacy, but he said his event should not be viewed as a protest.

"What we're doing is, we're having a rally. It's a celebration not intended to obstruct or complain," Paul said. "It's also to make a point."

In promoting the manifesto, Paul has always described the words as his own. In the interview, Paul described his writing process, saying he wrote the book in long-hand on yellow legal pads as he stumped for votes in the run-up to the presidential primaries. Asked if he had any help writing the book, he said, "The publisher provided editing services."

Woods is a resident scholar at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, where several Paul supporters conduct scholarly work in economics, philosophy and political economy. He said Paul "scratched down a pile of notes," which became the basis for the book. Woods said he collected those thoughts, along with excerpts of Paul's speeches, into the manifesto and sent it to the congressman when he was finished writing it.

"I put it together in a format that would be sensible," Woods said.

It's not unusual for a prominent political figure to employ a ghostwriter for a memoir or political tome, especially in the midst of a presidential campaign.

Woods defended the arrangement, saying, "I mean, this is new? Does anyone call up Hillary Clinton and ask questions like this? That someone no one has heard of took Ron Paul's ideas and pulled them into a book? Isn't that a bit overblown?"

Clinton's most recent book, a memoir, acknowledges the contributions of three others. She credits them for "making sense of mountains of information about my life" and for guiding her efforts "to explain and express my feelings about my time in the White House."

McCain has written several books with adviser Mark Salter, who is credited as a co-author in all of them. Democratic nominee Barack Obama has written two books on his own.

Neither Woods nor Paul would provide details about how much they were paid for working on the book. The manifesto has sold more than 100,000 copies and reached the top of several bestseller lists. Paul said House ethics rules prevented him from being paid anything in advance.
ad_icon

"I have not received any money for the book, even though I potentially might," Paul said. "I am ambivalent on taking the money. I might just donate it to my foundation. That's going to be a decision down the road."

Bruno
09-01-2008, 10:44 PM
I was just reading that, too. It's not a big deal to me.

0zzy
09-01-2008, 10:45 PM
This seems to happen a lot. The Conscience of a Conservative, for example, wasn't written by Barry Goldwater, but by L. Brent Bozell. But, ya...
(funny, I go by my middle name too and both my middle name and last name start with a B- C. Brent Burk - maybe I'll write a book for a politician one day!)

0zzy
09-01-2008, 10:45 PM
I was just reading that, too. It's not a big deal to me.

Me neither, I knew Thomas Woods is a great author but never read any of his books, or so I thought! ^_^

mport1
09-01-2008, 10:46 PM
I assumed it had been ghost written or co-authored but I thought it was Lew Rockwell.

John E
09-01-2008, 10:46 PM
A non-story... I read the book (anyone here who hasn't?) and you can easily see that every bit of it is in line with what Ron Paul has said in the past and during the recent election cycle.

The good news is that is the book is being featured IN the news! :)

ronpaulitician
09-01-2008, 10:47 PM
No wonder the book didn't always seem to flow well. The comments within it were not written in book form, but in comment form, which were then compiled into book form.

This bugs me only slightly, in that I wish it would've just said how the book was made in the introduction.

0zzy
09-01-2008, 10:48 PM
No wonder the book didn't always seem to flow well. The comments within it were not written in book form, but in comment form, which were then compiled into book form.

This bugs me only slightly, in that I wish it would've just said how the book was made in the introduction.

hah, you be silly :).

pacelli
09-01-2008, 10:48 PM
Not this ghostwriter shit again.

0zzy
09-01-2008, 10:49 PM
Not this ghostwriter shit again.

:O?


about his book, not his articles.
ya....

Jeremy
09-01-2008, 10:49 PM
i dont get it, they say two opposite things

the article contradicts itself in different paragraphs....

so what actually happened???

0zzy
09-01-2008, 10:50 PM
i dont get it, they say two opposite things

the article contradicts itself in different paragraphs....

so what actually happened???

where did it contradict itself?


it seems like Thomas Woods compiled writings of Paul and edited to book form.

Jeremy
09-01-2008, 10:51 PM
where did it contradict itself?


it seems like Thomas Woods compiled writings of Paul and edited to book form.

oh.... weird... o.0

Bruno
09-01-2008, 10:57 PM
where did it contradict itself?


it seems like Thomas Woods compiled writings of Paul and edited to book form.


The title itself Paul Is Here, and the RNC Isn't Happy contradicts the article, which is almost entirely about the ghostwriting of Paul's book from the very first sentence.

ronpaulitician
09-01-2008, 10:58 PM
The title itself Paul Is Here, and the RNC Isn't Happy contradicts the article, which is almost entirely about the ghostwriting of Paul's book from the very first sentence.
Not sure if this is true about the web, but I believe the headlines are generally created by someone different than the writer of the article.

0zzy
09-01-2008, 11:13 PM
Not sure if this is true about the web, but I believe the headlines are generally created by someone different than the writer of the article.

ya, the sub-headline was more accurate.

tonesforjonesbones
09-02-2008, 06:13 AM
Well...if it is a compilation of Ron Paul's writings...fine, but what about all those quotes? I dunno..shades of newsletters if you ask me. Why isn't Woods acknowledged? Where is his name on the book? Tones

MRoCkEd
09-02-2008, 06:17 AM
Thomas Woods wrote the racist newsletters!!!!!

just kidding

freelance
09-02-2008, 06:33 AM
Well...if it is a compilation of Ron Paul's writings...fine, but what about all those quotes? I dunno..shades of newsletters if you ask me. Why isn't Woods acknowledged? Where is his name on the book? Tones

That's why it's call GHOSTwriting. You get money but no credit when you ghostwrite.

Pete
09-02-2008, 06:43 AM
I assumed it had been ghost written or co-authored but I thought it was Lew Rockwell.

+1

How the hell could anybody write a book while running for President? Woods' contribution was very substantial, I'm sure, in making the book flow and be cohesive, but I have no trouble believing that the ideas and basic language are 100% RP.

Drknows
09-02-2008, 06:58 AM
Paul Is Here, and the RNC Isn't Happy
Amid Questions of His Book's Authorship, He Hosts 'Counterconvention'

yeah the sub headline should be the headline.


I knew he didnt compile the book but Its obvious those are his words. I mean shit hes been campaigning for a year do you think he had time to write the whole thing out and edit it?

itshappening
09-02-2008, 07:07 AM
I dont think Tom wrote it just compiled/edited, Ron Paul is lucky, can you think of anyone better to do that than an experienced author?

user
09-04-2008, 08:59 PM
Did RP say he wrote the whole thing? Anyone know?

mediahasyou
02-09-2009, 04:33 PM
i didn't believe Ron's book was written by someone else until i searched this. wow.

Knightskye
02-09-2009, 04:57 PM
i didn't believe Ron's book was written by someone else until i searched this. wow.

Not the whole thing.

Dr. Paul is a good writer. I'll bet he just had Woods change a few things around and make it feel more like a book.

tonesforjonesbones
02-09-2009, 05:13 PM
It is suspected that Bill Ayers, the communist , was the ghost writer of Barack Obama's tomes. tones

OhioMichael
02-09-2009, 07:15 PM
I just checked Amazon and I am pleasantly surprised at how well this book is still doing.

#2 in Books > Nonfiction > Philosophy > Political
#2 in Books > Biographies & Memoirs > Leaders & Notable People > Political
#3 in Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science > Political Doctrines

He's catchin' on I'm tellin' ya.

Conza88
02-09-2009, 07:24 PM
Sorry I'm going to believe Ron Paul over some bullshit hit piece from the Washington times.


How the hell could anybody write a book while running for President? Woods' contribution was very substantial, I'm sure, in making the book flow and be cohesive, but I have no trouble believing that the ideas and basic language are 100% RP.

Because you are Ron Paul. You've said the same stuff for 30 years. You just arrived, walk out on stage and talk. Back on the plane, or transport, over a whole year of 'campaigning'. He had MORE than enough time to write the book.

Put it together, edit etc. you'd get someone else to do. Doesn't change the content though.

Nathan Hale
02-09-2009, 07:38 PM
Sorry I'm going to believe Ron Paul over some bullshit hit piece from the Washington times.

Why do you call it a hit piece?


Because you are Ron Paul.

Perhaps Ron Paul can turn water into wine as well.


You've said the same stuff for 30 years. You just arrived, walk out on stage and talk. Back on the plane, or transport, over a whole year of 'campaigning'. He had MORE than enough time to write the book.

As the person you quoted said, the thoughts are Paul's, but it's likely that the thoughts were transcribed by a ghostwriter. It's not like this blows up Paul's credibility or anything. You'd be hard pressed to find a politician who writes his own book.

That said, writing a book while you're campaigning is not as easy as you're making it sound. You know what Paul probably did during his commuting times? Recuperated. Campaigning takes a lot out of the candidate - they're always in motion, they get MAYBE six hours of sleep a night, and they're always planning their next event. When the cameras are off the priority is rest, especially when you're 72. I've been on campaigns and followed candidates, it's no easy feat.


Put it together, edit etc. you'd get someone else to do. Doesn't change the content though.

Yes, this is what the person you quoted was saying. "Put it together" = "write it". The thoughts are Paul's, but they are likely articulated on paper by a ghostwriter.

MRoCkEd
02-09-2009, 07:39 PM
Who cares? lol

Conza88
02-09-2009, 09:15 PM
Why do you call it a hit piece?

Article header drew people in with a title that had largely nothing to do with the main focus of the piece.


Perhaps Ron Paul can turn water into wine as well.

Perhaps he can expose the crap for what it truly is, bullshit.


As the person you quoted said, the thoughts are Paul's, but it's likely that the thoughts were transcribed by a ghostwriter. It's not like this blows up Paul's credibility or anything. You'd be hard pressed to find a politician who writes his own book.

"But although the congressman from Texas has repeatedly called the book his own work, it was largely written by an unacknowledged ghostwriter, and it is unclear how much Paul contributed to the final product. "

= Did he even write it? Why is he lieing saying it's his own work? Maybe he just wrote the intro? :rolleyes:

"The name of the letter's recipient was redacted." = This doesn't surprise me. :rolleyes: I'd like to see the letter. You know, primary material.

"Woods confirmed in an interview that the letter is authentic" = I'd like to see the interview. I'd like some hard evidence.


That said, writing a book while you're campaigning is not as easy as you're making it sound. You know what Paul probably did during his commuting times? Recuperated. Campaigning takes a lot out of the candidate - they're always in motion, they get MAYBE six hours of sleep a night, and they're always planning their next event. When the cameras are off the priority is rest, especially when you're 72. I've been on campaigns and followed candidates, it's no easy feat.

In promoting the manifesto, Paul has always described the words as his own. In the interview, Paul described his writing process, saying he wrote the book in long-hand on yellow legal pads as he stumped for votes in the run-up to the presidential primaries. Asked if he had any help writing the book, he said, "The publisher provided editing services."

PWN3D. :cool:

When asked if Paul used a ghostwriter, Jesse Benton, his spokesman, said "They are all Dr. Paul's words."


Yes, this is what the person you quoted was saying. "Put it together" = "write it". The thoughts are Paul's, but they are likely articulated on paper by a ghostwriter.

Nope. That's not the connection and they are not synonymous.

I'm sorry, I'm more inclined to believe Ron Paul and his spokesperson, than the Washington Post... :rolleyes:

Nathan Hale
02-10-2009, 08:30 AM
Article header drew people in with a title that had largely nothing to do with the main focus of the piece.

The title alluded to Paul's counterconvention, which was the subject of the opening paragraph, which connects the headline to the story. I also don't see how the title is a hit on Paul, as it's entirely true.


Perhaps he can expose the crap for what it truly is, bullshit.

Perhaps.


"But although the congressman from Texas has repeatedly called the book his own work, it was largely written by an unacknowledged ghostwriter, and it is unclear how much Paul contributed to the final product. "

= Did he even write it? Why is he lieing saying it's his own work? Maybe he just wrote the intro? :rolleyes:

"The name of the letter's recipient was redacted." = This doesn't surprise me. :rolleyes: I'd like to see the letter. You know, primary material.

"Woods confirmed in an interview that the letter is authentic" = I'd like to see the interview. I'd like some hard evidence.

Excellent questions. Always drill down and seek more info.


In promoting the manifesto, Paul has always described the words as his own. In the interview, Paul described his writing process, saying he wrote the book in long-hand on yellow legal pads as he stumped for votes in the run-up to the presidential primaries. Asked if he had any help writing the book, he said, "The publisher provided editing services."

PWN3D. :cool:

As I stated earlier, this can mean a lot of things. I used to work in publishing on the editorial side. Sometimes "editing" meant collecting the author's thoughts and building them into a marketable product. When this is done in-house, a ghostwriter is used rather than staff editors.

I don't deny that Paul put a lot of effort into his book while campaigning, but I highly doubt he wrote 170-odd pages longhand on legal pads. I don't doubt this because the Washington Times said so, only because I have experience with both political campaigning and the publishing industry, and it is my opinion based on that experience. Perhaps I'm wrong - I never claimed my assertion to be absolute truth. I said he LIKELY used a ghostwriter and PROBABLY spent his down time recuperating. My larger point was that it doesn't matter if he DID use a ghostwriter because it's still Paul's thoughts on the page, I simply don't consider this article to be a hit piece against Paul.


When asked if Paul used a ghostwriter, Jesse Benton, his spokesman, said "They are all Dr. Paul's words."

As a person with experience on the campaign trail, that's how I'd answer the question too.


I'm sorry, I'm more inclined to believe Ron Paul and his spokesperson, than the Washington Post... :rolleyes:

I don't believe the Washington Post. My point is that it doesn't matter.

MRoCkEd
02-10-2009, 11:07 AM
Once again, who cares?

Austin
02-10-2009, 12:26 PM
Once again, who cares?

People are shocked that someone other than Ron Paul had a hand in The Manifesto. They simply wish it was not true, it makes it less significant, somehow.

I don't mind, it's all Ron Paul's ideas and words.