They're back again…

[ohgodno]

He apparently did too well last night - they are pulling up the threadbare newsletters:

hXXp://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ron-paul-signed-off-on-racist-newsletters-sources-say/2012/01/20/gIQAvblFVQ_story.html

[swissaustrian]

=> media bias

[Tyler_Durden]

Supporter huh?

"Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Paul’s company and a supporter":rolleyes:

[ohgodno]

Yep, he did too well last night … so they run this so it gets play ALL weekend and up until the primary Tuesday.

They have two sources that say he didn't sign off on them - and one anonymous source that said he did - and they run the headline that you see there.

[robmpreston]

Weird, I wonder how the line of questioning was given to Renae. Seems like it might have been a coerced answer because she IS a supporter. I checked her Facebook page and she has an article from a few months ago about Paul's presidential run with the comment "Go Ron... most honest person I've ever known"

[goldpants]

Desperation...it's not Ron's fault Mitt and Newt can't inspire genuine support. Now Rick on the otherhand does have some inspired support...from homophobes and religious bigots. There is great irony in our society, produced by our corporate owned media.

[hazek]

Bwahahahaha man that corporate media propaganda machine sure knows it's stuff. Ron delivers in a debate, must knock him down a few notches with a bit of slander. :rolleyes:

I so told you this was going to happen, and you didn't listen. (and I will keep repeating this until I probably get banned)

[LisaNY]

he said/she said = weak.

when will they learn, no one cares about the freaking letters.

[ohgodno]

It's propaganda at its best - misleading headline.

People ONLY read headlines - the article disproves what is said in the headline. The headline should have been: "conflicting reports: Paul's newsletter involvement" - but the paper knows the headline will be repeated as fact throughout the blogosphere and tabloid media all weekend.

[randomname]

sigh.

here's an excerpt, don't give them any pageviews


Ron Paul, well known as a physician, congressman and libertarian , has also been a businessman who pursued a marketing strategy that included publishing provocative, racially charged newsletters to make money and spread his ideas, according to three people with direct knowledge of Paul’s businesses.

The Republican presidential candidate has denied writing inflammatory passages in the pamphlets from the 1990s and said recently that he did not read them at the time or for years afterward. Numerous colleagues said he does not hold racist views.

But people close to Paul’s operations said he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.

“It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it,’’ said Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Paul’s company and a supporter of the Texas congressman.

The newsletters point to a rarely seen and somewhat opaque side of Paul, who has surprised the political community by becoming an important factor in the Republican race. The candidate, who has presented himself as a kindly doctor and political truth-teller, declined in a recent debate to release his tax returns, joking that he would be “embarrassed” about his income compared with that of his richer GOP rivals.

Yet a review of his enterprises reveals a sharp-eyed businessman who for nearly two decades oversaw the company and a nonprofit foundation, intertwining them with his political career. The newsletters, which were launched in the mid-1980s and bore such names as the Ron Paul Survival Report, were produced by a company Paul dissolved in 2001.

The company shared offices with his campaigns and foundation at various points, according to those familiar with the operation. Public records show Paul’s wife and daughter were officers of the newsletter company and foundation; his daughter also served as his campaign treasurer.

Jesse Benton, a presidential campaign spokesman, said that the accounts of Paul’s involvement were untrue and that Paul was practicing medicine full time when “the offensive material appeared under his name.” Paul “abhors it, rejects it and has taken responsibility for it as he should have better policed the work being done under his masthead,” Benton said. He did not comment on Paul’s business strategy.

Mark Elam, a longtime Paul associate whose company printed the newsletters, said Paul “was a busy man” at the time. “He was in demand as a speaker; he was traveling around the country,’’ Elam said in an interview coordinated by Paul’s campaign. “I just do not believe he was either writing or regularly editing this stuff.’’

In the past, Paul has taken responsibility for the passages because they were published under his name. But last month, he told CNN that he was unaware at the time of the controversial passages. “I’ve never read that stuff. I’ve never read — I came — was probably aware of it 10 years after it was written.’’ Paul said.

A person involved in Paul’s businesses, who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid criticizing a former employer, said Paul and his associates decided in the late 1980s to try to increase sales by making the newsletters more provocative. They discussed adding controversial material, including racial statements, to help the business, the person said.

“It was playing on a growing racial tension, economic tension, fear of government,’’ said the person, who supports Paul’s economic policies but is not backing him for president. “I’m not saying Ron believed this stuff. It was good copy. Ron Paul is a shrewd businessman.’’

The articles included racial, anti-Semitic and anti-gay content. They claimed, for example, that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. “seduced underage girls and boys’’; they ridiculed black activists by suggesting that New York be named “Zooville” or “Lazyopolis”; and they said the 1992 Los Angeles riots ended “when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.’’ The June 1990 edition of the Ron Paul Political Report included the statement: “Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.”

It is unclear precisely how much money Paul made from his newsletters, but during the years he was publishing them, he reduced his debts and substantially increased his net worth, according to his congressional and presidential disclosure reports. In 1984, he reported debt of up to $765,000, most of which was gone by 1995, when he reported a net worth of up to $3.3 million. Last year, he reported a net worth up to $5.2 million.

The newsletters bore his name in large print and featured articles on topics ranging from investment advice to political commentary. Frequently written in first person, they contained personalized notes, such as holiday greetings from Paul and his wife, Carol.

The Washington Post obtained dozens of copies of the newsletters from the Wisconsin Historical Society. Texas news outlets wrote about them in 1996, and the New Republic published extensive excerpts in 2008. The issue resurfaced late last year, when Paul’s presidential campaign picked up momentum. The extent of Paul’s involvement and his business strategy had not been known.

Paul’s publishing operation began through a nonprofit organization he created in 1976, the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, which advocates for limited government and a free market. The group, founded the year Paul entered Congress, published Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, mostly a collection of his congressional speeches and commentaries.

In 1984, just before losing a Senate bid and leaving Congress, Paul formed Ron Paul & Associates. He soon began publishing the Ron Paul Investment Letter, initially offering mostly economic and monetary information. Texas tax records listed Paul as president of the business, his wife as secretary, his daughter, Lori Paul Pyeatt, as treasurer, and a longtime Paul associate, Lew Rockwell, as vice president.

Ed Crane, the longtime president of the libertarian Cato Institute, said he met Paul for lunch during this period, and the two men discussed direct-mail solicitations, which Paul was sending out to interest people in his newsletters. They agreed that “people who have extreme views” are more likely than others to respond.

Crane said Paul reported getting his best response when he used a mailing list from the now-defunct newspaper Spotlight, which was widely considered anti-Semitic and racist.

Benton, Paul’s spokesman, said that Crane’s account “sounds odd” and that Paul did not recall the conversation.

At the time, Paul’s investment letter was languishing. According to the person involved with his businesses, Paul and others hit upon a solution: to “morph” the content to capi*tal*ize on a growing fear among some on the political right about the nation’s changing demographics and threats to economic liberty.

The investment letter became the Ron Paul Survival Report — a name designed to intrigue readers, the company secretary said. It cost subscribers about $100 a year. The tone of that and other Paul publications changed, becoming increasingly controversial. In 1992, for example, the Ron Paul Political Report defended chess champion Bobby Fischer, who became known as an anti-Semitic Holocaust denier, for his stance on “Jewish questions.’’

Paul has said he wrote portions of the economic sections. The people familiar with his business said there was no indication that he wrote the controversial material.

Rockwell was the main writer of the racial passages, according to two people with direct knowledge of the business and a third close to Paul’s presidential campaign. Rockwell, founder of a libertarian think tank in Alabama, did not respond to phone calls and e-mails requesting comment. In 2008, he denied in an interview with the New Republic that he was Paul’s ghostwriter.

Paul “had to walk a very fine line,’’ said Eric Dondero Rittberg, a former longtime Paul aide who says Paul allowed the controversial material in his newsletter as a way to make money. Dondero Rittberg said he witnessed Paul proofing, editing and signing off on his newsletters in the mid-1990s.

“The real big money came from some of that racially tinged stuff, but he also had to keep his libertarian supporters, and they weren’t at all comfortable with that,’’ he said.

Dondero Rittberg is no longer a Paul supporter, and officials with Paul’s presidential campaign have said he was fired. Dondero Rittberg disputed that, saying he resigned in 2003 because he opposed Paul’s views on Iraq.

The July 15, 1994, issue of Survival Report exemplified how the newsletters merged material about race with a pitch for business. It contained a passage criticizing the rate of black-on-white crime when “blacks are only 12 percent of the population.’’ That was accompanied by two pages of ads from Ron Paul Precious Metals & Rare Coins, a business Paul used to sell gold and silver coins.

“The explosion you hear may not be the Fourth of July fireworks but the price of silver shooting up,’’ said one of the ads.

Hathway, the former Ron Paul & Associates secretary, said: “We had tons of subscribers, from all over the world. . . . I never had one complaint’’ about the content.

Hathway described Paul as a “hands-on boss” who would come in to the company’s Houston office, about 50 miles from his home, about once a week. And he would call frequently. “He’d ask, ‘How are you doing? Do you need any more money in the account?’ ” she said.

The company also had an office in Clute, Tex., near Paul’s home, which it shared with Paul’s foundation and his campaigns at various points, according to Hathway and Dondero Rittberg.

In 1996, as Paul ran for Congress again, his business success turned into a potential political liability when his newsletters surfaced in the Texas media. Paul was quoted in the Dallas Morning News that year as defending a newsletter line from 1992 that said 95 percent of black men in the District are “semi-criminal or entirely criminal” and that black teenagers can be “unbelievably fleet of foot.”

“If you try to catch someone that has stolen a purse from you, there is no chance to catch them,” the newspaper quoted Paul as saying.

Paul won reelection, then dissolved Ron Paul & Associates in 2001. His nonprofit foundation is still in operation.

Staff researcher Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.

[speciallyblend]

he said/she said = weak.

when will they learn, no one cares about the freaking letters.

if they didn't care we would of won a state. your being niave if you think the newsletters do not hurt.

[odamn]

Weird, I wonder how the line of questioning was given to Renae. Seems like it might have been a coerced answer because she IS a supporter. I checked her Facebook page and she has an article from a few months ago about Paul's presidential run with the comment "Go Ron... most honest person I've ever known"
Can someone that facebooks send here a note about whats being claimed, in her name?
She needs the chance to respond. Maybe it can be turned around, in Ron favor ...

[Tina]

I so told you this was going to happen, and you didn't listen. (and I will keep repeating this until I probably get banned)

Not sure why you think you're the only one that thought this would happen. I've been waiting for it, as have others.

[randomname]

It is unclear precisely how much money Paul made from his newsletters, but during the years he was publishing them, he reduced his debts and substantially increased his net worth, according to his congressional and presidential disclosure reports. In 1984, he reported debt of up to $765,000, most of which was gone by 1995, when he reported a net worth of up to $3.3 million. Last year, he reported a net worth up to $5.2 million.

Nice yellow journalism, WaPo.

[ohgodno]

Yeah, the campaign never got out in front of these. If they had told the media everything, the story would have been long gone… they control how the information comes out now.

When he does well, another story comes out. This is well-scripted thought-control.

[hazek]

Not sure why you think you're the only one that thought this would happen. I've been waiting for it, as have others.

I know I wasn't the only one, but I was among the most vocal ones about it. You could argue there is no difference, but I think I have a pretty strong case that there is judging by all the heat and -reps I've received telling people what they didn't want to hear, that nothing they did would matter if they didn't first deal with the corporate media propaganda machine.

[dfalken]

That is a carefully crafter smear piece that in my eyes seems very damaging especially with the uninformed. They carefully chose their words throughout the whole piece to paint exactly the picture they wanted.

[dfalken]

That is a carefully crafted smear piece that in my eyes seems very damaging especially with the uninformed. They carefully chose their words throughout the whole piece to paint exactly the picture they wanted.

[pinkmandy]

Last time they did this his numbers grew.

Older SC voters boo him.
College kids go nuts for him.
MSM discredit themselves trying to paint him as a racist.

Not to mention that he's shining in debates. Last night's was great and he came across, imo, as a genuine and caring person and that makes people connect to him (and question namecalling more than they would otherwise).

[ohgodno]

Last time they did this his numbers grew.

Last time they did this he lost Iowa to Froth and Mittens.

[goldpants]

That is a carefully crafter smear piece that in my eyes seems very damaging especially with the uninformed. They carefully chose their words throughout the whole piece to paint exactly the picture they wanted.

Hmm, I came away with a different take. That article read weak, as there was no quotes from Ron or video of him saying such, everything was hearsay and speculation. The money "proof" was almost embarrassingly contrary to the writers and speculators claims.

[rp2012win]

Bad News...Ed Henry of fox news is picking this up. This story has gone national and it is spreading like wildfire on twitter. Good god leave this man alone.

Ed Henry @edhenryTV
ruh roh -- why is he still serious candidate? RT @postpolitics Ron Paul signed off on racist newsletters, sources say wapo.st/xA6wrx

[Teenager For Ron Paul]

So I guess they're trying to get the people who didn't watch the news over Christmas to know about this now?

[Feeding the Abscess]

Fucking Dumbdero.

[everlasticity]

It just doesn't matter. This is the worst the news media can throw at us in terms of actual dirt. The only people who take this crap seriously are the ones who don't want Paul to be president, period. No one actually thinks that Ron Paul is a racist, no one with any common sense. Those that like Ron Paul are not going to be dissuaded by one or two comments he may or may not have made. The left may take this stuff more seriously, but republicans, they just don't fall for this crap. It sucks for us, because it puts us on the defensive, so for us to even consider this article is really just a disservice to ourselves, and a waste of energy. Besides, the dirt we have on the other candidates is far more damaging to them, and yet they persist, their campaigns are not completely torpedoed. So why should we think it would be any different for us? If we just ignored these reports, they would go away, as they do time and time again. But we make the biggest deal at any mention of them, it just fuels their agenda.

[Schiff_FTW]

Fucking Dumbdero.

Gary Johnson is in league with Dondero. His campaign recently sent out an email linking to Dondero's "Libertarian Republican" site. Just thought people should know.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Gary Johnson is in league with Dondero. His campaign recently sent out an email linking to Dondero's "Libertarian Republican" site. Just thought people should know.

Serious?

[KingNothing]

Bwahahahaha man that corporate media propaganda machine sure knows it's stuff. Ron delivers in a debate, must knock him down a few notches with a bit of slander. :rolleyes:

I so told you this was going to happen, and you didn't listen. (and I will keep repeating this until I probably get banned)

But no one cares about the NL's anymore. They just don't matter because the campaign handled them perfectly.

[ohgodno]

This will dominate the news all weekend—this article was engineered to take press away from the good performance last night - he resonated with hispanics… so they again imply he's racist.

[MsDoodahs]

Gary Johnson is in league with Dondero. His campaign recently sent out an email linking to Dondero's "Libertarian Republican" site. Just thought people should know.

Good to know, didn't realize Johnson was an inside the beltway fake libertarian type.

[rp2012win]

This will dominate the news all weekend—this article was engineered to take press away from the good performance last night - he resonated with hispanics… so they again imply he's racist.it will go on much longer than that. Every single interview he does for the next several weeks will be newsletters. This is because the caucus states are coming up where he is a threat to do well. Another gloria borger interview should be forthcoming.

[Peace&Freedom]

One way for Paul to answer this question is to say, beyond stressing "I didn't write them, and I repudiate the comments," is to point out media hypocrisy. "Look, Romney was accused last fall of hiring an illegal alien. He explained the situation ONCE, end of story. Perry purchased a ranch with a racially provocative name, but when he explained himself ONCE, the media dropped the story. Gingrich's ex-wife brought up issues from 15 years ago, but when Newt denied the charges ONCE, the media basically dropped it. I've answered these newsletter questions from 20 years ago 50,000 times. What is it that you're looking for, exactly, that I didn't give you the other 50,000 times?"

[pinkmandy]

Last time they did this he lost Iowa to Froth and Mittens.

He lost to froth because of the fake media surge and mitty has been pushed as the "electable" candidate and Iowa was close between the three. There are threads around here somewhere showing his support growing, not diminishing, after the last newsletter smear campaign.

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

I wish the campaign would take these attacks a little more seriously and do some major damage control. They need to gather like 100 people who have known Paul through the ages to vouch that they have never heard any such things come from him, and share stories to the contrary, like in the compassion video.

[ohgodno]

But no one cares about the NL's anymore. They just don't matter because the campaign handled them perfectly.

Uhhhh - Dr. Paul said he didn't write nor read them - an article comes out with "sources" to discredit that - and you say it doesn't matter. It matters big-time.

Are ya drinking some Newt moon-juice?

People care about the newsletters - it's brought up in nearly every piece of media. It's an underhanded subliminal device used to create negative sentiment in the public's mind. When reported they're called "racist newsletters" - over and over, again - whenever they're mentioned now - the publics subconscious completes that sentence - Ron Paul's newsletters = racist in the minds of the public now.

It's conditioning propaganda at its best.

This matters. Period. End-of-story.

[KingNothing]

Yeah, the campaign never got out in front of these. If they had told the media everything, the story would have been long gone… they control how the information comes out now.

When he does well, another story comes out. This is well-scripted thought-control.


You assume that people actually care about this stuff, though. There is no substance to the story. Everyone knows that now and voters just don't care.

[rp2012win]

What is it that you're looking for, exactly, that I didn't give you the other 50,000 times?"they're not looking for answers. They just want to ask the question so that it is cemented in voters minds. So whenever they think of ron paul they think of the newsletters. This will go away after the caucus states though. They had to bring it out for the caucuses.

[everlasticity]

This matters. Period. End-of-story.

Assuming it matters, all we can do is cry about it. It's not like we can sue. It's a waste of energy and takes the wind out of all the good things we have been accomplishing. Unless someone can come up with a good solution to this, better to just forget about it and let Paul handle it.

[ohgodno]

You assume that people actually care about this stuff, though. There is no substance to the story. Everyone knows that now and voters just don't care.

It's not about CARING it's about building a perception through conditioning. The substance doesn't matter - the tepetition of terms to create a reputation in the subconscious is the end goal.

Think of this as how you memorized your multiplication tables - repetition. It's the same device used for an evil purpose.

In 2008 the media made the immediate thing that comes to the public's mind when they thought of Obama to be CHANGE. They've crafted this to make the first thing that comes to mind when they think of Paul to be RACIST.

[ohgodno]

^^

[MsDoodahs]

Uhhhh - Dr. Paul said he didn't write nor read them - an article comes out with "sources" to discredit that - and you say it doesn't matter. It matters big-time.

Are ya drinking some Newt moon-juice?

People care about the newsletters - it's brought up in nearly every piece of media. It's an underhanded subliminal device used to create negative sentiment in the public's mind. When reported they're called "racist newsletters" - over and over, again - whenever they're mentioned now - the publics subconscious completes that sentence - Ron Paul's newsletters = racist in the minds of the public now.

It's conditioning propaganda at its best.

This matters. Period. End-of-story.

Seems like you and a couple of others sure do want it to matter.

[Peace&Freedom]

they're not looking for answers. They just want to ask the question so that it is cemented in voters minds. So whenever they think of ron paul they think of the newsletters. This will go away after the caucus states though. They had to bring it out for the caucuses.

But asking the counter question shines the spotlight on their tactic, and associates it with false accusations.

[KingNothing]

Uhhhh - Dr. Paul said he didn't write nor read them - an article comes out with "sources" to discredit that - and you say it doesn't matter. It matters big-time.

Are ya drinking some Newt moon-juice?

People care about the newsletters - it's brought up in nearly every piece of media. It's an underhanded subliminal device used to create negative sentiment in the public's mind. When reported they're called "racist newsletters" - over and over, again - whenever they're mentioned now - the publics subconscious completes that sentence - Ron Paul's newsletters = racist in the minds of the public now.

It's conditioning propaganda at its best.

This matters. Period. End-of-story.

"People" don't care about this story. Liberals who have no intention of ever supporting a Republican care about this story.

Stop falling into this trap. The best way to handle these issues is to completely repudiate the offensive claims made and speak strongly against the material. Dragging through the slop and garbage accomplishes nothing.

How don't you realize that? Paul does. Why can't his supporters?

[everlasticity]

It's not about CARING it's about building a perception through conditioning. The substance doesn't matter - the tepetition of terms to create a reputation in the subconscious is the end goal.

So what are you going to do about it? Be mad and lose all the positive energy we've been building?

[KingNothing]

It's not about CARING it's about building a perception through conditioning. The substance doesn't matter - the tepetition of terms to create a reputation in the subconscious is the end goal.

Think of this as how you memorized your multiplication tables - repetition. It's the same device used for an evil purpose.

In 2008 the media made the immediate thing that comes to the public's mind when they thought of Obama to be CHANGE. They've crafted this to make the first thing that comes to mind when they think of Paul to be RACIST.


....and you think the best way to keep this out of the narrative and collective subconscious is to... make a bigger deal about it?

You're being silly.

[MsDoodahs]

So what are you going to do about it? Be mad and lose all the positive energy we've been building?


Apparently that's the goal of certain folks 'round these parts...

if'n you know what I mean.

;)

[KingNothing]

So what are you going to do about it? Be mad and lose all the positive energy we've been building?


That seems to be his goal, in general.

[ohgodno]

So what are you going to do about it? Be mad and lose all the positive energy we've been building?

Nope - just been combatting it on Twitter. Breaking down the negative perceptions.

TO fight something you have to know what you're dealing with - we're dealing with conditioning. The battle we have is to undo it.

[hazek]

But no one cares about the NL's anymore. They just don't matter because the campaign handled them perfectly.

It's part of their propaganda that the 55+ year old electorate gets bombarded with and pitted against Ron. If you don't understand this you are totally oblivious to the reality.

[Schiff_FTW]

Bwahahahaha man that corporate media propaganda machine sure knows it's stuff. Ron delivers in a debate, must knock him down a few notches with a bit of slander. :rolleyes:

I so told you this was going to happen, and you didn't listen. (and I will keep repeating this until I probably get banned)

Maybe if we ask them nicely they'll stop :rolleyes:

[KingNothing]

It's part of their propaganda that the 55+ year old electorate gets bombarded with and pitted against Ron.


And?

"They" do the same thing about Newt's past. "They" do the same thing about Romney's wealth. The media is a smear machine. Period. There's nothing that can be done about it.

All you can do is mitigate the effectiveness of attacks by downplaying them if there is no substance behind their claims. The campaign did the right thing.

[Bruno]

I so told you this was going to happen, and you didn't listen. (and I will keep repeating this until I probably get banned)

Oh wise one!

No one but you had predicted they would bring up the newsletters again! We all naively thought the media would jump behind Ron, bury the past, and surge him to victory!! :rolleyes:

[KingNothing]

Nope - just been combatting it on Twitter. Breaking down the negative perceptions.

TO fight something you have to know what you're dealing with - we're dealing with conditioning. The battle we have is to undo it.

I'm a victim of 400 years of conditioning. The man has programmed my conditioning. Even my conditioning has been conditioned.

[KingNothing]

Oh wise one!

No one but you had predicted they would bring up the newsletters again! We all naively thought the media would jump behind Ron, bury the past, and surge him to victory!! :rolleyes:

They apparently want Ron to hold a major press conference in which he outs whoever wrote this stuff.

I'm sure that would go over well.

[Peace&Freedom]

That seems to be his goal, in general.

Indeed, I've seen a number of posters lately, most of them newer members, suddenly posting morale-deflating comments non-stop. Is that the real psy-op going on, to finish off Paul?

[ohgodno]

Again - I just was posting this to bring light to what the media are trying to do - they're not reporting, they're building a subliminal mental connection between Dr. Paul and racist newsletters.

When we combat this make sure to never mention Dr. Paul and racism together - this furthers those mental connections. I'm not and admitting defeat - I'm suggesting we adapt to the tactics.

This is subliminal - the content doesn't matter - only the mental connections the words create.

[KingNothing]

Indeed, I seen a number of posters lately, most of them newer members, suddenly posting morale-deflating comments non-stop. Is that the real psy-op going on, to finish off Paul?


Yes. THEY are coming to get us, Barbara!

[KingNothing]

Again - I just was posting this to bring light to what the media are trying to do - they're not reporting, they're building a subliminal mental connection between Dr. Paul and racist newsletters.

When we combat this make sure to never mention Dr. Paul and racism together - this furthers those mental connections. I'm not and admitting defeat - I'm suggesting we adapt to the tactics.

This is subliminal - the content doesn't matter - only the mental connections the words create.

We know. We know how narratives work. Don't you think Paul does?

Again, you aren't saying anything groundbreaking. You're just completely off base when it comes to handling the issue.

[everlasticity]

http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/4282/youmadq.jpg

[Peace&Freedom]

They apparently want Ron to hold a major press conference in which he outs whoever wrote this stuff.

I'm sure that would go over well.

That would make the newsletters a current issue, and give the MSM new mileage to cover it as such, thus falling into their trap. Paul should just continue to dismiss the matter as he has, or counter 'condition' by bringing up the disproportionate punishment of blacks in the drug war and justice system, as he has in debates.

[KingNothing]

That would make the newsletters a current issue, and give the MSM new mileage to cover it as such, thus falling into their trap. Paul should just continue to dismiss the matter as he has, or counter 'condition' by bringing up the disproportionate punishment of blacks in the drug war and justice system, as he has in debates.


Exactly! You, my friend, get some positive reputation for this.

[CaptainAmerica]

a lawsuit should be made

[ohgodno]

Right. Sounds great - let's go back to our happy place and ignore it.

** falls in line with the rest of the 07/08ers **

…it's not like this story hasn't been picked up on 10 other websites by now and was just on the crawlers in the MSM.

[KingNothing]

Right. Sounds great - let's go back to our happy place and ignore it.

** falls in line with the rest of the 07/08ers **

…it's not like this story hasn't been picked up on 10 other websites by now and was just on the crawlers in the MSM.

So...... you want to do what, exactly?

[ohgodno]

Nothing. Soldier on.

[Hoax]

The campaign responded, not much else they can do.

http:// www .npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/01/27/145980547/spokesman-rejects-report-that-ron-paul-signed-off-on-racist-newsletters

[Peace&Freedom]

Right. Sounds great - let's go back to our happy place and ignore it.

** falls in line with the rest of the 07/08ers **

…it's not like this story hasn't been picked up on 10 other websites by now and was just on the crawlers in the MSM.

It's not like we're ignoring the right-brain emotional and mental connotation tactics employed by the enemy, we're just not being defeatist about it. These tricks can be countered, with methods already discussed on the thread.

[ohgodno]

It's not like we're ignoring the right-brain emotional and mental connotation tactics employed by the enemy, we're just not being defeatist about it. These tricks can be countered, with methods already discussed on the thread.

Yes, weve gone over this before here. The point of the thread was to bring attention to it happening again, thread title: "theyre back at it again."

Don't play into their hand, but just realize that anytime Paul gains momentum (quinnapeac has a 4 pt jump today in fla) they're going to pull this out again. The compassion ad deals with this perfectly, as did his response during the debate. The problem is that the demo in fla is not one that is internet savvy and one that relies heavily on the msm.

A friday publication date ensures that this will be on the repeat-tube all weekend long.

[Naraku]

No offense people, but you don't understand how good a hit piece this article is because you have tunnel vision. They are taking the "exploiting prejudice" tact, which goes at one of Paul's greatest strengths. Responding with the typical party line doesn't work for this kind of story and only makes Paul look bad. We need to find out more about Renae Hathway in terms of what her role was with the campaign, when she was working there, and what she was in a position to know concerning the newsletters. Her comments that he proof-read the newsletters is damaging. Most of the other stuff is weak, but that part is pretty bad. It would be hard to argue that he wouldn't notice what the newsletters were saying if he had proof-read them. Some point of clarification would be nice. When it was just Dondero, whose agenda was clear, it was nothing, but a supporter repeating the same substantive issues is a problem.

This article did give me pause and I am definitely wanting to see some sort of clarification on Hathway's statements. I don't trust the media, but I want to actually see some sort of response to these claims. For instance this quote, "It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it," has dots between the comment about proof-reading. What exactly did she say in between?

It is hard for Paul to claim that he did not know about the content and that he didn't read it if he was actually proof-reading the material. On the other hand, she may have said something in between that puts it in a different context.

[FCArchitect]

Just heard RUSH say Ron Paul is guilty for the letters. An unknown person - no investgation, one very week news report and Rush labels Paul as guilty. Amazing to think it was just a little while ago he was defending Cain and than Newt from the same type of unproven rumors. Guilty before your are given a chance to defend your self. Ruch is a protector of the constitution only when it is convientent!

[ohgodno]

Just heard RUSH say Ron Paul is guilty for the letters. An unknown person - no investgation, one very week news report and Rush labels Paul as guilty. Amazing to think it was just a little while ago he was defending Cain and than Newt from the same type of unproven rumors. Guilty before your are given a chance to defend your self. Ruch is a protector of the constitution only when it is convientent!

This will be repeated all weekend -

The solution is clear: come out and say she's a scorned woman because Dr. Paul had an affair with her.

[r3volution]

http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2010/117/f/d/Beating_a_dead_horse_by_pjperez.jpg

[Gimme Some Truth]

And?

"They" do the same thing about Newt's past. "They" do the same thing about Romney's wealth. The media is a smear machine. Period. There's nothing that can be done about it.

All you can do is mitigate the effectiveness of attacks by downplaying them if there is no substance behind their claims. The campaign did the right thing.

I don't think people would mind too much if Ron got as fair a shake as the other candidates. Sure, the other candidates get smeared but they also get talked about in a serious manner with regards to actual policies as well. Paul doesn't get that.

As a side note, whenever I type in "Ron Paul" into google the positive/objective articles are almost always from no-mark blogs (no offense to those bloggers, I hope they grow - just stating a fact). Every now and then a MSM outlet will cover him but it's almost always negative ... and a fair share of that negativity is straight up slander/lies. Maybe something is wrong with my internets tho :/

[ronpaulitician]

"People" is a bad way to descrive "this one individual and one other anonymous individual".

With newsletters spanning decades, it would be kind of important to know when Renae Hathway worked as the secretary.

It would also be nice to know what the "..." represents in her quote.

[pen_thief]

I left a comment (sometimes, don't know why I bother, lol) and quoted all of the racist things Santorum and Gingrich have said, as in verbally, on record this election cycle. Thumbed up the good comments, posted a link to a video that rebuts the article well, in my opinion. All I can say is, this is proof he did TOO well last night :D

[LisaNY]

mock and ridicule the washington post for publishing this nonsense. And hire a private investigator to look into Renae Hathaway's finances, business dealings, affiliations, etc. You have got to start pushing back against these mother f'ers.

[Schiff_FTW]

And hire a private investigator to look into Renae Hathaway's finances, business dealings, affiliations, etc. You have got to start pushing back against these mother f'ers.

I'd seriously chip in for that.

[Edward]

The sky is not falling. All Ron needs to do is answer the questions truthfully and dispel the implication within them. He can easily turn the question to show why he would be a better candidate for minorities to choose. All of you talking with others who are not RP supporters need to be on top of your s*** regarding Ron's positions. This is NOT a big problem.

[Indy Vidual]

He apparently did too well last night ...
At least he did really well last night. :)

[BillyDkid]

I see that Nick Gillespie and Reason are back at it again, dredging up the newsletters and getting all offended and self righteous. I figured it was about time for them to start trotting this shit out again. Killing people, destroying liberty, ruining the economy, yeah those are pretty bad, but NOTHING is as bad as thinking and saying the wrong thing and offending people's sensibilities. Obama may be murderous thug who sends drones to kill civilians is happy to thrown hundreds of thousands of people in prison for "crimes" that have no victim, but at least he talks pretty and doesn't say anything that hurts anyone's feelings. Liberty, apparently, is great in theory, but we don't want to risk ever actually securing it. Go Reason!!! One day our grand kids will thank them for their tireless defense of politcal correctness - on pieces of toilet paper smuggled out of the gulag.

[speciallyblend]

I know I wasn't the only one, but I was among the most vocal ones about it. You could argue there is no difference, but I think I have a pretty strong case that there is judging by all the heat and -reps I've received telling people what they didn't want to hear, that nothing they did would matter if they didn't first deal with the corporate media propaganda machine.

i am not going to say what i want to say about this campaign but it might be a lil too late now. If we do not have a game changer by feb 7th.

[Antwan15]

This is soooo frustrating, we need Rand!!!!! Where is Rand on this, he needs to come out and voice his disgust as well as the campaign....We cannot just take this lying down! I'm not sure what can be done, but, we gotta do somthing. Its funny because I was just thinking about this the other day and I thought to myself "wow, he did great in the debates, AND, the newsletter thing is behind us" were lookin good. idk, im just pissed!:mad:

[minusbear]

I could use some good talking points on this too. Pretty much everyone I talk to, these come up. They just don't believe he didn't know about them. The freeptards and restatetards are also claiming out that his story has changed on this (which it hasn't but they are twisting slight differences in his statements).

[phill4paul]

What years did Renae Hathaway work for him I wonder? Was it during the period in which the specific newsletters were published?

[minusbear]

What years did Renae Hathaway work for him I wonder? Was it during the period in which the specific newsletters were published?

Traitor to liberty or a liar (enemy of liberty)

[AlexMerced]

Bottom Line:

This does matter, I can tell you from people I've tried to turn into Ron Paul supporters, its a dealbreaker with the left, and those on the right use it as an excuse to confirm the idea that Ron Paul is unelectable it hurts on BOTH SIDES, and it also hurts because there hasn't been a decent response and "I hadn't read it" when there is video of his discussing the newsletters and a interview of him defending passages from 1995 makes it hard to convince people who arn't following close as we are.

This articles does more damage because it doesn't really paint Ron Paul as racist, I think the article clears him on that charge but paints him as someone who profited from racism intentionally which is a worse charge. Plus, pointing out the debt he had out of his senate run which was six figures it's easy for someone to understand how someone might act in desperation to pay something like that off and then hard to say to stop it when you see the good you do with the money elsewhere.

This is damaging stuff, doesn't hurt my opinion or enthusiasm regarding Paul, but people who casual observers will be put off by the idea that even Ron Paul succumbed to the pressures of debt.

I'm not sure what's true and what isn't and of course I realiz donderos testimony is suspect, but there is a lot of other stuff and I've heard very little in the way a plausible response...

Ron Paul is Ron Paul, and either way that doesn't change, but we just brush this off at our own peril if we are in this to win, which many are

[AlexMerced]

I could use some good talking points on this too. Pretty much everyone I talk to, these come up. They just don't believe he didn't know about them. The freeptards and restatetards are also claiming out that his story has changed on this (which it hasn't but they are twisting slight differences in his statements).

Actually his stories did change, when it first came up in 1995 he defended the statements and didn't deny him (a later interview he said he did this because aids said it'd be too confusing to deny them in 95), after 95 he's consistently denied it, but when the issue came out all of the sudden in his re-election campaign his response muddied the water for our attempts to defend today.

Honestly, at some point Ron will have actually tell his side of the story (and "I don't know" is no it, as much as I wish that was enough)

Being honest about what we're dealing with is not an indictment of Ron Paul, the movement, or the campaign and people who paint any desire for answers shouldn't be painted as traiters, that's the same kinda syncophantic behavior that the neo-cons used to silence us. We look immature as supporters if we can't tackle this in a productive way, period.

[AlexMerced]

I see that Nick Gillespie and Reason are back at it again, dredging up the newsletters and getting all offended and self righteous. I figured it was about time for them to start trotting this shit out again. Killing people, destroying liberty, ruining the economy, yeah those are pretty bad, but NOTHING is as bad as thinking and saying the wrong thing and offending people's sensibilities. Obama may be murderous thug who sends drones to kill civilians is happy to thrown hundreds of thousands of people in prison for "crimes" that have no victim, but at least he talks pretty and doesn't say anything that hurts anyone's feelings. Liberty, apparently, is great in theory, but we don't want to risk ever actually securing it. Go Reason!!! One day our grand kids will thank them for their tireless defense of politcal correctness - on pieces of toilet paper smuggled out of the gulag.

WTF, where did Nick Gilespie get brought up, in the article I just heard mention of Catos ed crane, and one person doesn't speak for all of Cato and Reason, both institutions have supports and non-supporters in their ranks that's like saying all the conspiracy theorist represent all of us... a gross generalization.

It just upsets me when we pride ourselves on our independent spirits bu result in using the same generalization and defensive smearing other use against us. We can let ourselves turn into what they are.

[ohgodno]

Bottom Line:

This does matter, I can tell you from people I've tried to turn into Ron Paul supporters, its a dealbreaker with the left, and those on the right use it as an excuse to confirm the idea that Ron Paul is unelectable it hurts on BOTH SIDES, and it also hurts because there hasn't been a decent response and "I hadn't read it" when there is video of his discussing the newsletters and a interview of him defending passages from 1995 makes it hard to convince people who arn't following close as we are.

This articles does more damage because it doesn't really paint Ron Paul as racist, I think the article clears him on that charge but paints him as someone who profited from racism intentionally which is a worse charge. Plus, pointing out the debt he had out of his senate run which was six figures it's easy for someone to understand how someone might act in desperation to pay something like that off and then hard to say to stop it when you see the good you do with the money elsewhere.

This is damaging stuff, doesn't hurt my opinion or enthusiasm regarding Paul, but people who casual observers will be put off by the idea that even Ron Paul succumbed to the pressures of debt.

I'm not sure what's true and what isn't and of course I realiz donderos testimony is suspect, but there is a lot of other stuff and I've heard very little in the way a plausible response...

Ron Paul is Ron Paul, and either way that doesn't change, but we just brush this off at our own peril if we are in this to win, which many are

THIS, THIS, THIS

Thankfully someone else is making sense. Must be a Brooklyn thing!!

[sylcfh]

They came up once in 2008 when he ran.

Before every single primary we've seen this story rehashed, with the highest volume of stories being before Iowa and NH. Ron Paul was in single digits in 2008, and now he's taking 2nd place even with this crap.

It's not working. People don't trust the media. Its effectiveness as a propaganda tool is declining.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

So, when Romney/Gingrich loses to Obama (way to throw away a golden chance by nominating a loser, GOP), can we look forward to this again in 2016?

Late 2015: "Frontrunner Rand Paul's father's name appears on the header of some questionable newsletters, CNN can confirm."

[AlexMerced]

So, when Romney/Gingrich loses to Obama (way to throw away a golden chance by nominating a loser, GOP), can we look forward to this again in 2016?

Late 2015: "Frontrunner Rand Paul's father's name appears on the header of some questionable newsletters, CNN can confirm."

yeah, probably, but that's bit of a harder sell

[Pisces]

I didn't read the article but does it say that Ron proofread the entire newsletter? I can see him proofreading just his contributions if he wasn't the editor. I don't get why the videos of him talking about the newsletters in the past are supposed to be so damning. He's never denied knowing that he had newsletters, he just denied knowing about all of the specific content. Since he was practicing medicine at the time the worst passages were written and he wasn't the editor, there's no reason to believe he proofed the pieces other people wrote or even read them at all.

[speciallyblend]

But no one cares about the NL's anymore. They just don't matter because the campaign handled them perfectly.

nonsense^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^hopefully you were being sarcastic, so perfectly ron paul didn't win iowa or nh.

[AlexMerced]

I didn't read the article but does it say that Ron proofread the entire newsletter? I can see him proofreading just his contributions if he wasn't the editor. I don't get why the videos of him talking about the newsletters in the past are supposed to be so damning. He's never denied knowing that he had newsletters, he just denied knowing about all of the specific content. Since he was practicing medicine at the time the worst passages were written and he wasn't the editor, there's no reason to believe he proofed the pieces other people wrote or even read them at all.

they are damning cause most people arn't thinking about all the details like we are, we got to stop thinking like us, and like people who don't have the investment we do in Ron Paul to see things clearly

[Pisces]

they are damning cause most people arn't thinking about all the details like we are, we got to stop thinking like us, and like people who don't have the investment we do in Ron Paul to see things clearly

I understand what you're saying. However, you're in New York City, I'm in Texas. I think how big a deal they are depends a lot on where you're at and the type of people you live around. And I don't live around a bunch of racists. I also have a lot of family in Nebraska, its not a big deal for them either. I think the only way this really hurts with Republicans is if people start panicking like its going to destroy the campaign.

And I don't mean this as a put down of New York City; I just don't think its very representative of the majority of people that will vote in the Republican primaries and caucuses.

[Peace&Freedom]

I'm also from NYC, and can tell you NO ACTUAL BLACK PERSON I KNOW or have talked to about Paul, whether they support him or not, brings up the newsletters. The MSM uses these topics to reassert what IT thinks people should think is "damaging," not what people actually think is damaging. Just as the word "mainstream" means "establishment approved" or accepted, when used by the major media. If they decree it appropriate to rehash every aspect of a 20 year old matter, that it is that, that makes the rehashing acceptable (note they don't have this standard when it comes to the grassroots re-bringing up, say, the Obama real/photoshopped birth certificate).

When the tea party was attracting some Democrats, this was not a MSM approved development, so out they came with charges of "racism" within the movement, to scare away Democrats. The fact that no actual regular Democrats had witnessed "racism" was beside the point. So it is with the attacks on Paul. The path to overcoming the smear is to call it out for what it is, and reverse it by talking up the the effect of the drug war and foreign wars on black and brown peoples.

[AuH20]

My feelings. Who cares? Nothing in that newsletter was overly offensive. Maybe abit insensitive in parts but nothing abhorrent.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/report-ron-paul-signed-off-on-incendiary-material-in-newsletters/


[P]eople close to Paul’s operations said he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.

“It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it,’’ said Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Paul’s company and a supporter of the Texas congressman.

[Gary4Liberty]

what was even actually said in these newsletters? I want to see them. They are only making themselves look like hypersensitive fools who are trying to create a story that doesnt exist. America is sick of this bs people trying to manipulate the system with fake allegations of racism. They need to go read the story of the little girl who cried wolf and see what happend to her.

[Peace&Freedom]

That's just it. THEY WEREN'T RACIST. "Racist newsletters" is simply the meme the MSM has latched onto to describe 4-5 ascerbic/insensitive lines (of the Ann Coulter, or RPF variety) out of thousands of sentences.

[guysenjem]

He only lost votes on the newsletters because of his pandering-like response to them. He lost some of his conservative base when he talked about letting blacks out of
death row etc. People saw his response as weak and pandering to racial leftists. If he would just completely dismiss the charge and that's it he wouldn't lose a single vote
on the newsletters. Please no more pandering and talk of how the criminal justice system is unfair to blacks (it simply isn't). He's supposed to be the candidate that sees
individuals instead of groups and the only one who opposes affirmative action. No surprise that he gained in the polls since the last debate when he used this argument
to the hispanic questioner instead of usually pandering to such and such racial group. No pandering! Support your base!

[Mark37snj]

These newsletter are having NO impact on the electorate. If they did the MSM would be talking about them non stop, but they are not. They have been jumping from one anti-Paul strategy to another trying to do damage to his campaign. They are desperatly throwing crap at the wall hoping something sticks. The initial newsletter crap didn't stick which is why they changed it up with the secretary BS. They didn't inform Ron of this supposed new info, they did not show the interview of the secretary, or have her on CNN. 20 years later and all the sudden this comes out with NO verification whatsoever. It was a cheap hit piece pure and simple and if the Paul campaign digs into this it will end up just like the Huntsman daughters video, dirty political tactics. The only people who would say this info affects their vote are those who are not voting for Ron in the first place and are just slinging mud because they support an establishment canidate. We all KNOW CNN doctors info and vids to support their hit pieces against Ron Paul. Do you really think any information CNN obtained was NOT skewed, misrepresented, taken out of context, or just a flat out lie?

EDIT: By the way, the fact that this was CNN tells me they are terrorfied of Ron Paul and know he will take Obama down in the election.

[phill4paul]

Please no more pandering and talk of how the criminal justice system is unfair to blacks (it simply isn't).

Statistics show that you are wrong.

[guysenjem]

Statistics show that you are wrong.

No, they don't. They prove that I am more than right. All you have to do is compare racial demographics
of those who commit felony homicide vs. the racial demographics of those who are executed. Now go do your homework this time.

[phill4paul]

No, they don't. They prove that I am more than right. All you have to do is compare racial demographics
of those who commit felony homicide vs. the racial demographics of those who are executed. Now go do your homework this time.

I have done my homework. To do so one must know the correct pretext for the answer one seeks. In this case it is not about felony homicide statistics it is about the "War on Drugs."

[Shellshock1918]

He apparently did too well last night - they are pulling up the threadbare newsletters:

hXXp://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ron-paul-signed-off-on-racist-newsletters-sources-say/2012/01/20/gIQAvblFVQ_story.html

this is freakin ridiculous. the media are scum.

[cdw]

Weird, I wonder how the line of questioning was given to Renae. Seems like it might have been a coerced answer because she IS a supporter. I checked her Facebook page and she has an article from a few months ago about Paul's presidential run with the comment "Go Ron... most honest person I've ever known"
Then instead of a dishonest sellout she's a damn fool. I'm having a lot of trouble here coming up with one good reason why a supporter and former secretary of Ron would do a fudging interview with the scum MSM about Ron's newsletters after all the crap that's been said. Does she not have a tv? Does she not pay attention to the news? The Washington Post of all people call you up and want to ask you about your time working with Ron, and you oblige? How stupid can she be! Of course she knew this was a hit piece in the making, and the word 'newsletter' should have ended the convo, period the end. Instead she gave an answer that anyone with half a brain knows could be printed in a way that furthers the narrative.

If there isn't a damn good explanation by her for the ineptness displayed here, as in "I truly sincerely did not think the story would be a hit piece, the reporter told me he/she worked for Ben Swann, and the ...... was me saying that during that time those things were printed Ron had no knowledge of that and would have immediately axed the idea of printing those because it's everything he stands against", then I'm going directly to the assumption that she was paid off. This crap is ridiculous, and I'm getting sick of attention whores popping up to try to mess up this man's bid for the Presidency. If you have nothing of positive value to add that would clear Ron completely then STFU already.

[Lucille]

Tragic how people care more about un-PC things that Ron didn't write 20 some years ago than they do the things going on now--the perpetual wars and the enemies and blowback they're creating, the crushing debt, the bailouts and other forms of corporatism, unemployment, inflation, corruption in all three branches of govt, the rapidly growing police state, and the destruction of the middle class--all of which will continue under Newt Romney O'Bama.

Americans' priorities are all f'ed up, and they will get the government they deserve. If only we all didn't.

[Naraku]

I can tell you all right now that this story does have an effect. On one forum I frequent a supporter started a thread on the subject and said he could no longer support Ron Paul because of it.

[phill4paul]

I can tell you all right now that this story does have an effect. On one forum I frequent a supporter started a thread on the subject and said he could no longer support Ron Paul because of it.

I usually just challenge anyone to come up with just ONE additional piece of information, besides the newsletter, be it news article, t.v. interview, speech or legislation that can undeniably support these claims of racism. Just ONE. I've yet to receive a rebuttal.

[Mark37snj]

I can tell you all right now that this story does have an effect. On one forum I frequent a supporter started a thread on the subject and said he could no longer support Ron Paul because of it.

If somone changes their support for Ron that fast then they were not a supporter in the first place. Everyone of us KNOWS this is bull and would not even consider the possibility of this being true, its been vetted, its all bull, and we know it. To magically change sides that fast without it even being investigated is all I need to know about this persons supposed support for Ron Paul. Its just like all those fake supporters who can no longer support Ron now because of the video attack on Huntsman, made by Huntsman's very own daughters. They were never Ron Paul supporters in the first place and just slinging mud to prop up the establishment canidate that they do support.

[liveandletlive]

If Ron Paul talks about anti-racist things, he loses racist voters. Saying the drug wars are racist, the justice system is racist will piss off some white folks

the newsletters hurt him with politically correct or well meaning people

its a no-win situation at this pointin time.

[mosquitobite]

I usually just challenge anyone to come up with just ONE additional piece of information, besides the newsletter, be it news article, t.v. interview, speech or legislation that can undeniably support these claims of racism. Just ONE. I've yet to receive a rebuttal.

They're trying to tie in the newsletters with his speech in front of the confederate flag.

It WILL affect soft support, no doubt about it.

Most soft support isn't going to go digging to find out more. They're just going to switch candidates.

[AuH20]

If Ron Paul talks about anti-racist things, he loses racist voters. Saying the drug wars are racist, the justice system is racist will piss off some white folks

the newsletters hurt him with politically correct or well meaning people

its a no-win situation at this pointin time.

They are racist systems of exploitation, however there is an element of personal responsibility that you cannot discount. Blacks shouldn't be going to jail in such disproportionate numbers and it's largely due to the fact that have no legitimate support system in place, thanks to the destruction of their family unit. I think if somehow their family unit was restored, they would veer away from the poisons targeted at their communities.

[AuH20]

He only lost votes on the newsletters because of his pandering-like response to them. He lost some of his conservative base when he talked about letting blacks out of
death row etc. People saw his response as weak and pandering to racial leftists. If he would just completely dismiss the charge and that's it he wouldn't lose a single vote
on the newsletters. Please no more pandering and talk of how the criminal justice system is unfair to blacks (it simply isn't). He's supposed to be the candidate that sees
individuals instead of groups and the only one who opposes affirmative action. No surprise that he gained in the polls since the last debate when he used this argument
to the hispanic questioner instead of usually pandering to such and such racial group. No pandering! Support your base!

In this case, Ron surprisingly is talking about the symptoms and not the source of disease. High incarceration rates are a result of black children being generally discarded during their formative years and being literally raised by the streets. Drugs certainly play a role but the justice system is merely a fait accompli. If you have a strong family unit, in that you know your past, in turn you will know where you are going, you will be empowered by this knowledge and see through the schemes the TPTB is constantly launching. The late Malcolm X talked about this vicious cycle extensively when he was alive.

[Naraku]

If somone changes their support for Ron that fast then they were not a supporter in the first place. Everyone of us KNOWS this is bull and would not even consider the possibility of this being true, its been vetted, its all bull, and we know it. To magically change sides that fast without it even being investigated is all I need to know about this persons supposed support for Ron Paul. Its just like all those fake supporters who can no longer support Ron now because of the video attack on Huntsman, made by Huntsman's very own daughters. They were never Ron Paul supporters in the first place and just slinging mud to prop up the establishment canidate that they do support.

Oh don't go with that bullshit "you aren't a true supporter!" retort. Cognitive dissonance like that doesn't get anyone anywhere and only makes us look bad. I can tell you definitely that this person was a supporter. This stuff about the newsletters wasn't new to the person I am talking about, but the media have gone after this story so much and befuddled just about everyone with their perfidy at times. My impression is that for people like him this story brought down their last wall of dissent to the overwhelming anti-Paul echo chamber of the media. Honestly, I myself was shaken a bit by the report.

Now, I am trying to talk to that person about it, but the reality is that there are indeed people who have supported Ron Paul, yet because of some disagreement with him change their minds. I am personally aware of it happening in several cases. One thing I don't do is tell them they never honestly supported Ron Paul in the first place. The maker of the Huntsman video was different because it was a blatant setup, but if some people less cynical about politics and the media bought into the hype that does not mean they did not truly support Paul.

We have to understand that this is much bigger than one election. This campaign is going up against all the machinery of the corporate and political establishment and seeking to expose, then end, their various misdeeds. It is to be expected that disinformation and propaganda will be used to break the weakest of his supporters then slander the rest. Going after every person that is taken with hate and accusatory language will only play into the hands of those seeking to defame our cause.

Now, on another matter I have looked a bit into Renae Hathway and found the following link, it's a Google cache since the actual page is gone:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:CFRo2iOeSqIJ:www.victoriaadvocate.c om/comments/cr/172/8047/+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

What we have there is a report saying she was a "subscription manager" not someone involved in the actual editing of the newsletter. More to the point it is noted that she was not working there the entire time, as she started working there in 1991. Quite a bit of the most horrific material was before she was there. You also have the fact that no mention is made of how long she was there. If she had left a year later, for instance, she may not have even been around when any of the offensive material was published. Of course, it also doesn't change that her role means she was less like to know the ins and outs of the editing process for the newsletter so her statement Paul proof-reading them may only attest to what Paul himself has said, that he occasionally read them.

After 20 years people tend to be less clear about things like this, especially the frequency of something. I couldn't tell you with any level of certainty how often I saw something or did something even just one year ago.

[Mark37snj]

Oh don't go with that bullshit "you aren't a true supporter!" retort. Cognitive dissonance like that doesn't get anyone anywhere and only makes us look bad. I can tell you definitely that this person was a supporter.

So are you saying all Ron Paul supporters are made equal. There are no die hard supporters, there are no tepid supporters, there are no fair weather supporters, and there are no false supporters, etc etc. One size fits all huh. People who are "die hard" or "true" Ron Paul supporters, those who allegience to Paul can not be swaned by some bias media story, have done their homework. Those like that person on the forum you mentioned obviously did not do their homework because if they did they would know this story is BULL or at the very least reserved judgement till more facts became available. So what should our reaction be to people who don't educate themselves on the truth? Lump them in with the rest of us and give them credit for doing research they have not done. They didn't think it was important enough to learn the truth about Ron Paul and the MSM Bias. Instead they just abandon ship. They believed what the MSM said without any proof whatsoever and disregard what Ron Paul said in the flesh. You call that kind of person a Ron Paul supporter, I don't. I call them undecided, fence sitters, trolls, something other than supporters. Some supporter, first lie/unsubstantiated claim and they are off to another canidate. Maybe its just a difference in what yours and my definition is of what a supporter is. Either way you forum friend didn't do their homework, belevied a MSM story with no proof and completly disregarded what Ron Paul himself said over and over and over and over again. Undecided...sure, Fence sitter...sure, but not a Ron Paul supporter. So you said your friend was definately a supporter, and after hearing an unsubstantiated claim from the MSM with no proof whatsoever and hearing Ron Paul himslef denounce it, choose to believe the MSM and not Dr. Paul. We OBVIOUSLY have different definitions of what a "Supporter" is and is not. And hold your diagnosis of Cognitive Dissonance there Doc, Ron Paul is the only physicain I listen to on this forum. :p


I can tell you all right now that this story does have an effect. On one forum I frequent a supporter started a thread on the subject and said he could no longer support Ron Paul because of it.

He even started a thread on it. What kind of supporter starts a thread like that given the facts, or more appropriately absence of facts?

[RonPaulFanInGA]

To do so one must know the correct pretext for the answer one seeks. In this case it is not about felony homicide statistics it is about the "War on Drugs."

Wow, way to inadvertently claim that black people collectively possess/use/sell illicit drugs more than any other racial group.

[KingNothing]

In this case, Ron surprisingly is talking about the symptoms and not the source of disease. High incarceration rates are a result of black children being generally discarded during their formative years and being literally raised by the streets. Drugs certainly play a role but the justice system is merely a fait accompli. If you have a strong family unit, in that you know your past, in turn you will know where you are going, you will be empowered by this knowledge and see through the schemes the TPTB is constantly launching. The late Malcolm X talked about this vicious cycle extensively when he was alive.

That's all well and good until you look at the actual numbers.

On a percentage basis, black Americans use drugs at the same rate as white Americans. On a percentage basis they are arrested at a far greater rate. Once arrested, they are tried and found guilty at a much higher rate. Once found guilty they are given harsher sentences and face prison time at a far higher rate. The system IS racist and it is that system, not some moral or familial failing of African Americans that has caused their plight relative to white America.

[Lucille]

Ron on John King (vid):

Ron Paul: Report on newsletters 'completely false'
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/27/ron-paul-report-on-newsletters-completely-false/

[Naraku]

So are you saying all Ron Paul supporters are made equal. There are no die hard supporters, there are no tepid supporters, there are no fair weather supporters, and there are no false supporters, etc etc. One size fits all huh. People who are "die hard" or "true" Ron Paul supporters, those who allegience to Paul can not be swaned by some bias media story, have done their homework. Those like that person on the forum you mentioned obviously did not do their homework because if they did they would know this story is BULL or at the very least reserved judgement till more facts became available. So what should our reaction be to people who don't educate themselves on the truth? Lump them in with the rest of us and give them credit for doing research they have not done. They didn't think it was important enough to learn the truth about Ron Paul and the MSM Bias. Instead they just abandon ship. They believed what the MSM said without any proof whatsoever and disregard what Ron Paul said in the flesh. You call that kind of person a Ron Paul supporter, I don't. I call them undecided, fence sitters, trolls, something other than supporters. Some supporter, first lie/unsubstantiated claim and they are off to another canidate. Maybe its just a difference in what yours and my definition is of what a supporter is. Either way you forum friend didn't do their homework, belevied a MSM story with no proof and completly disregarded what Ron Paul himself said over and over and over and over again. Undecided...sure, Fence sitter...sure, but not a Ron Paul supporter. So you said your friend was definately a supporter, and after hearing an unsubstantiated claim from the MSM with no proof whatsoever and hearing Ron Paul himslef denounce it, choose to believe the MSM and not Dr. Paul. We OBVIOUSLY have different definitions of what a "Supporter" is and is not. And hold your diagnosis of Cognitive Dissonance there Doc, Ron Paul is the only physicain I listen to on this forum. :p



He even started a thread on it. What kind of supporter starts a thread like that given the facts, or more appropriately absence of facts?

Seriously, attitudes like yours do far more damage than the MSM could ever hope to inflict. :(

[sylcfh]

James B. Powell wrote the offending articles in a handful of newsletters from '90-'93...

Why are they quoting Ed Crane and some secretary with only one sentence for a statement?

Why is the media ignorning Powell?

He is now a director at Forbes (owned by News Corp)...

http://people.forbes.com/profile/james-b-powell/53743


http://i.cdn.turner.com/ireport/sm/prod/2012/01/05/WE00688982/1955447/JamesBPowellpng-1955447_p9.jpg

[cavalier973]

The "Racist Newsletters" story isn't really about whether Ron Paul is or was a racist, or if he profited from putting racist remarks in his newsletters. The "Racist Newsletters" story is about his foreign policy--just like every other objection ("he's the king of pork!", "he's too old!") that people bring up. The anti-Paul coalition are afraid to face the truth that our government is a nasty piece of work when it comes to foreign relations, and they resent Dr. Paul for continuing to bring it up. If Ron Paul espoused a neo-con foreign policy, or backed off some of the anti-war rhetoric, then he would be in a lot better position politically. Of course, he would have sold out his soul, his country, and the cause of liberty by doing so. It is imperative that people grasp that perpetual war is killing the nation as we know it, and replacing it with a hideous, deformed clone of itself.

[KingNothing]

James B. Powell wrote the offending articles in a handful of newsletters from '90-'93...


Do you have any proof to back that up, other than the one article that we know Powell wrote that isn't in any way racist or offensive?

I hate the way that people just shoot from the hip around here regarding the NLs. We're no different than the dumbed-down media, or the controversy-loving sheeple sometimes.

[sylcfh]

Do you have any proof to back that up, other than the one article that we know Powell wrote that isn't in any way racist or offensive?

I hate the way that people just shoot from the hip around here regarding the NLs. We're no different than the dumbed-down media, or the controversy-loving sheeple sometimes.



The writing style is very similar.

Powell still has a newsletter to this day.




El Problema Grande

Last month, I wrote my third article about the growing instability in Mexico and the danger it poses for the U.S.17 Since then, the violence has become even worse, and more Mexicans than ever are trying to get into America.

Even people in Monterrey, which has long been one of Latin America's richest and safest cities, are joining the exodus.18 Caterpillar took the extreme measure of ordering its executives with children to leave the city. The U.S. State Department also ordered its diplomats out. These unprecedented actions show how serious the situation is becoming in Mexico. Much of the country is disintegrating.

I believe the number of Mexican refugees – for that is what they are — will soon become a flood. The pressure from Mexicans within the U.S., and internationally, to help them will be overwhelming.

It's possible that the Mexican government will ask Washington to send in troops to attack the drug cartels, as Columbia did during the Clinton administration.19 That program established seven U.S. military bases in Colombia to fight the drug-supported left-wing insurgency.

Iraq On The Rio Grande

However, I doubt that such an action will be taken with Mexico. The country is too large and there are too many combatants. Moreover, the cartels would probably call a temporary truce and combine forces to push the U.S. out.20 Mexico could quickly become another Iraq.

But even if Washington should undertake such a folly, the added violence would actually increase the number of refugees.

The United Nations recognizes two types of refugees. The first are people who are leaving a country primarily for economic reasons. The U.S. already has between 8 and 11 million of them. This group is given little or no assistance.

The second group are political refugees who are fleeing to save their lives. Such people qualify for help by the United Nations High Commissioner For Refugees (UNHCR) and many non-governmental charitable organizations (NGOs). There are also international agreements that require countries to give shelter and sustenance to political refugees from adjacent areas.

An Unprecedented Threat

If large numbers of refugees are allowed to enter the U.S. and go wherever they wish, it will create enormous problems. As we saw with the Mariel Boatlift from Cuba in 1980, many criminals would also come in with the refugees. With Mexico we would also get the terrorists I warned about last month. The result would be chaos.

The rising violence in the Southwest would also widen the divide between America's haves and have-nots, which is already an explosive issue. The haves will fortify themselves in gated communities with armed guards and electronic systems. The have-nots will live in free-fire zones. To survive, many people outside the protected areas may have little choice but to join the cartels, just as their counterparts in Mexico often do now.

I think the financial strain of a Mexican refuge crisis could also shatter the fragile U.S. economy.

The Most Likely Solution

Outside of the Hispanic population, I doubt the American people would stand for an emergency open border policy and thousands of Mexican refugees. I believe the only politically acceptable solution for Washington would be to let the refugees come in, but put them in camps. That's what the government is doing already with people from Haiti.

That's also what the U.N. does with most political refugees it helps throughout the world. To give legitimacy to such camps in America, Washington may ask the U.N. to help manage them.

Last month I ended my article about Mexico by saying, "What's happening in Mexico is a far bigger threat to the U.S. and its citizens than what is happening in Afghanistan or Iraq." That is even more true today.
What to do:

For years there have been reports that FEMA has plans to establish camps on several of America's many unused military bases. Most of the mothballed facilities have barracks, single family housing, schools, stores, clinics, and the necessary infrastructure to support them. The bases are actually complete towns inside secured areas. After being refurbished, they would make excellent refugee camps. If Mexico continues to disintegrate, I think that's what they will become.

http://www.powellreport.com/newsletters/index/sample




Sounds very familiar, doesn't it?