Who is Ron Paul … Really?

Who is Ron Paul … Really?


What goes up must come down.  Since the recent Iowa State University/ Gazette poll has Ron Paul leading 27% to Newt Gingrich’s 23.5% and Mitt Romney at 17.5%, it only makes sense that Newt is getting knocked off his pedestal. It’s the way of this windsock Republican primary.

Many pundits have predicted Paul pulling an upset victory during the Iowa caucuses next month.

But, really: Who is Ron Paul?

At one point, no one was talking about the eccentric Texas Congressman with a flare for bizarre statements, dismissing him as a libertarian nut-job despite the fact he came within razor’s edge of beating Michelle Bachmann in the state’s straw poll.  Now, because of all the rampant Newt-hating out there, Paul is bigger than sliced bread.

But, with that newfound celebrity is unwanted scrutiny.  People of color and other minorities might want to pay close attention. During the 1980s and 1990s, Ron Paul published a paid subscription newsletter which included several issues laced with anti Semitic, anti-Gay, racist ramblings.  Standout quotes include:

  • On Washington, DC – “Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”
  • On Black men: “We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational.”
  • Following the Post-Rodney King beating LA riots, one article asserted that: “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.”
  • A piece referred to Martin Luther King Jr. as: “the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours” and who “seduced underage girls and boys.”


News of the newsletters first surfaced in the 1990s amidst Paul’s Congressional campaign. Predictably, he denied knowledge of the substance of the articles and denied having any editorial control over the newsletter despite the fact they were made under his name. He would later claim responsibility for them, apologize, disavow them, and of course given his rise in clout, once again, he is being made to answer questions about them.

Recently on CNN, Paul cried foul about being asked about the racist writings for a second night in a row.  He eventually removed his microphone and walked out on the interview when being hammered on the issue. Why is this old stuff he’s addressed being brought up again, he asks.  Never mind that Paul himself had been fine about attacking Romney’s flip flop past and Gingrich’s Speaker of the House “zaniness.”

Paul apologists want Americans to ignore those newsletters as if we would expect to be as dismissive of such toxic vitriol if they were published by President Obama or any other recent past president. Further, a man who wants to head the nation shouldn’t have a past of making money off of vicious verbiage that also demagogues’ chunks of the population he wants to lead.

Some, like the Black-people hating authors of SBPDL and others  will defend the statements as truth.  Others will point to a 1998 audio of then Houston NAACP Nelson Linder defending Paul against the allegations of racism and demand Blacks accept that as proof Paul isn’t racist.

At the end of the day, voters will have to ask themselves if this scandal is enough to stunt Paul’s momentum heading into the Iowa caucuses.  The outcome of that question will say a lot about Iowa Republicans and, we don’t hope, the rest of the country.


      • Nathaniel,

        I reference this video you send in my article so I've seen it already. See above.

        You do realize that just because one member of the NAACP, even a leader in the NAACP in 1998, stands up for Paul doesn't automatically settle the issue for All blacks.

        You do realize that thousands of blacks do not agree with the NAACP, follow it and support it. To those who don't hold NAACP in high regard, why do you think this one person standing up for Romney should make them all of a sudden not want to question these facts?

        You seem to think that the NAACP is the mouthpiece for all blacks in America. It is not.

        There is no black leader or organization that tells us all how to think. I know that is hard to believe for you, but it is true.

        Further, how is writing the truth equivalent to hate?

        Please point out specifically that you see as "hate" in this piece?



        • Because the origin of these claims is from the belly of hatred, I strongly believe. You're right about a speaker in the NAACP (and me not catching it in your article) not being a speaker for all black Americans, but you can understand the position that he is a RESPECTED portion of black Americans and a good reference.

          so it's really not hard to believe that there's not a speaker for all of you. I know being black doesn't make you a "brother". I know how all of that works because I talk to blacks from all around the country.

          but again… simply pestering the guy about where he's from and what he does and why things were said and how they blah blah blah, I explain all of that in my article. It's wrong. It's improper to even expect of him, given his Libertarianism.

          Please see my article.

  1. Ron Paul never jumped on the dump on Cain about personal issues, or Newt about marriages only about positions they took representing the people. Ron Paul is not a racist. At the time the newsletters came out he was in medical practice. As part of that he gave free and discount service to women of all races because he never accepted medicare or medicaid and wouldn't turn a patient away who couldn't pay. He had other people managing the newsletter and just sent it an article here and there.

    On the 'on black man' thing he was actually talking about the discrimination in the judicial system saying the vast disproportionate arrest of blacks over whites and how the jails being full of blacks as a result perpetuates the unfair image that blacks are somehow 'more criminal'.

    You are trying to paint a good man who fights for civil liberties benefiting blacks as racist. That is beyond the pale, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

    • So we are to just ignore all the hateful rhetoric written under his name?

      You DO realize that the hate spewed in his newsletter reinforced stereotypes to subsceibers who PAID him money, don't you? So he made money off of HATE?

      Presidential? I think not!

      Why do you want Blacks to just swallow all that hate and accept it? Paul's own son has said he WOULD VOTE AGAINST the Civil Rights Acts and allow states to continue to discriminate against blacks?

      The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

      You should be ashamed of YOURSELF!

  2. More propaganda! First, the CNN interview was over, so naturally he would remove the microphone. Don't lie and try to make it look like he walked out on the interview. Paul was not even in Congress at the time these statements were written and did not write them as he has stated a million times. There are literally thousands of videos online of Ron Paul speaking and never has he made any racist remarks. Try to find one! In fact, he has been fighting for the freedoms and liberties of ALL americans regardless of race, religious beliefs etc. You should be ashamed of your ignorant piece of propaganda and maye next time, do some research prior to writing such lies.

    • to add to that, CNN kept hammering him even after he had repeatedly addressed the issue (twice the day before). Of course it was Wolf blitzer who kept pressing the issue bc he's on all fours for Israel. Is this the only dirt they can find on him? Referencing things he didn't even pen? He's got my vote!

  3. It is obvious that the MSM is going after paul, and paul has now said "enough".

    Should he just keep answering the race card day after day? some people think he should because that's "presidential".

    I tend to think we need a prez at this moment who is able and willing to tell those bent on manipulation of the american public to shut-up.

    The MSM is a cheerleading squad, nothing more.

    • MSM? Last I checked this blog is about how politics impact Blacks and Hispanics, a topic hardly talked about on MSM.

      If President Obama published hate, I think the righties would be hammering him on it daily as well. It's not cool robthebob. Not cool at all!

  4. Whats sad is that Dr. Paul would do more for Blacks and all minorities than any other candidate. For starters he would free all non-violent drug offenders held in federal prisons. Second he would end all these undeclared wars overseas and bring our troops home, which believe it or not consist mostly of minorities.
    Please do not fall for these media smear tactics, these are not Dr. Paul’s words or beliefs period.

  5. 365
    Real Racists use the poor and minorities as cannon fodder
    real racists keep the poor and minorities in Federal Prisons
    five very real dancing racists were arrested in NYC on 9-11

    • .
      Shameful is a nation that hypocritically passes legislation regarding civil rights and then proceeds to usurp those god given rights from its citizens and the people of the world. Please tell me how many Vietnamese men. women and children was Lyndon Johnson murdering in 1964 , when he and his criminal cohorts huddled together to pass a legislation that provided only lip service to the real racism and discrimination in America. Fast forward 47 years and today, African Americans represent 40 percent of the us prison population. Young African American males are more likely to spend time in jail rather than in college. I, for one, want real change and justice. Fraudulent legislation and phony promises from politicians are not enough. Ron Paul could see through that smoke screen. I hope you can too.

    • sacha10, do you know my writings? If you did, you'd realize that you are waaaay off in this obviously uninformed characterization. This piece asks credible questions and raise issues for those who may be unaware.

      The writings may not matter to you, but they may for some.

      I thought folks who supported Ron Paul were for freedom. You seem to want to name call and suppress speech you do not agree with much. So unLibertarian of you!

  6. yes and in the massive amounts of audio and video recordings of the man dating back to before the letters…not a single one has anything even mildly racist sounding. if he was racist there would be a clip somewhere. unlike some certain church pastors I will not point out whom.

  7. "The outcome of that question will say a lot about Iowa Republicans and, we don't hope, the rest of the country." That's an unusual statement, Janeba; what do you mean by this?

  8. Wow, I'm getting really tired of this shoddy journalism, what a joke. Why don't you people cover something of real substance for a change like everything Ron's been saying about the corruption in government for 20 years. What are you saying of your audience, that we're idiots? Anyone with a brain can compare what Ron's been saying for the past 20 years against these silly newspaper stories and see that Ron is not like this. Nice try, but we're not falling for this crap anymore. It just solidifies how vacuous journalists can be. I happen to love freedom, liberty, and our country, and I'd get agitated too when people such as yourself refuse to cover issues of real substance that affects our country.

    • kitkatt_1,

      All I did was publish facts. "You people"?? Ahh classic. We people cover lots of issues that affect our country. YOU must be new to this website because if you were not, you'd understand that you are ill-informed about the substance covered here.

      • OK Jeneba, I think that your hypocrisy needs to stop. When I first wandered onto this website, I thought, "Oh, seems like another black wanna-be journalist just recently discovered these newsletters (even though they've been reported off and on for the past 10 years) and is talking about it now because she erroneously thinks Ron Paul is a racist and feels an obligation to warn other blacks about him." However, I then took the time to scroll through some comments, and I noticed that you have been provided ample evidence that Ron Paul is NOT a racist, but rather than replying to those comments, you choose to instead focus on comments attacking you or this website. This leads me to believe that you are not trying to "publish facts" at all, but instead are trying to use these newsletters to sully Ron Paul's good name. Why else would you completely ignore the fact that Ron Paul has publicly proclaimed his admiration for MLK and Rosa Parks repeatedly, or that every black who has ever come in contact with him have unequivocally stated that he is not racist, or that his policies would benefit blacks and minorities more than those of any other presidential candidate?

        Get off your high horse about the "substance" being covered here; true substance would display ALL sides of the story in an unbiased manner, and allow your audience to decide for themselves. Your story obviously does not do that. And BTW, I am also black.

  9. Obama killed hundreds of thousands of poverty-stricken middle-easterners.

    Obama supports and wages a war on drugs that is unjustly waged ostensibly against blacks, even though only a minority of blacks are involved with drugs, besides trampling on states rights and arresting people using medical marijuana where it is authorized.

    Obama will sign the single greatest blow to American Freedom in all its history: The NDAA, that allows for the executive branch to arrest people forever based solely on flimsy evidence of terrorist activity such as paying for a hotel room in cash and dying your hair, without trial, without charges, without the right to a lawyer. That's USSR stuff right there, folks.

    All the other candidates support the same policies.

    Ron Paul supports NONE of that, had his name on a racist newsletter twenty years ago that he didn't write and has made more than clear that he doesn't agree with any of that stuff and has been hailed by the head of the NAACP in Austin.

    Who's worse?

    Who's worse for the minorities?

    Stop being fools.

    • Daniel,

      What does this article questioning racist language written under Ron Paul's name have to do with Obama?

      Further, you do realize that just because the local chapter president of the NAACP in Austin backed Paul back in 1998 mean all black people all over America are supposed to stop using their brains and think this issue out for themselves, don't you.

      I know it's hard to believe but the NAACP is NOT the leader of all black people neither tells us all how and what to think.

      How condescending and small minded of you to even mention that.



  10. Jeneba,

    Your article is very misleading from the title to the body of information. If you were really interested in trying to know the "real" Ron Paul then you would have objectively discussed some of the issues that Dr. Paul stands for and let your reader make up his/her mind about the truth. Instead, you chose to rehash the same "tired" information that's been circulated around 1,000 news sources in the last 24 hours and throw in your two cents about how you think he is a racist. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't try to mask it in the form of objective or credible journalism.

    • The article is not meant to mislead but simply to present factual information that is out there.

      It's sad that all these Libertarians who are against government suppression are so those upset about these facts being presented.

      It's quite hypocritcal actually. If someone is interested in candidates, don't you think they should know all there is out about them? The good, the bad and the ugly?

      We do about the other candidates and why do you guys want to shield Paul's skeletons?

      Thanks for your comments, wildmoments.


      • Jeneba,

        You are not being honest with yourself or truly understanding what I wrote. Selectively presenting facts that support a certain agenda is not objectivity and is not true journalism by the very definition of the word. You wrote an opinion piece based on selective facts accompanied by a misleading headline. Some facts you ignored that contradict your opinion are:

        1) Ron Paul has stood against racial profiling and the drug wars, which has disproportionately imprisoned black people.
        2) Ron Paul is known for his uncanny ability to be honest and direct. There isn't anything on record (other than these newsletters which he disavowed) that he has ever said that would indicate he is a racist. If you can find something: please post.

        For the sake of time I'll wrap this up, but please don't act innocent or that you don't have an agenda. What you are presenting is mostly a smear piece under the guise of "I am merely presenting facts" that's why you are getting called on it even by other black people.

        PS – I believe the words "people of color" is a disingenuous term.

        • Jeneba presented a piece of the puzzle that she felt was an appropriate piece. It wasn't the entire story and I think she probably believes that the entire story is not even possible to cover at this point. That belief of lack of an entire story may have inspired her to present this portion in itself. Perhaps she will follow up with conclusions or other information that she finds. "people of color" is scientifically proper.

          keep up the GOOD fight for Paul.


        • She is only promoting what she has been told, doubt if she has ever read the whole of anything Paul has written. But that is how most of the "writers" operate – keep printing partial information while ignoring or covering up Obama falsehoods of black theology.

  11. Dear Jeneba,

    You are right to point out the quotations from Ron Paul's newsletter and his weak and ineffectual explanations regarding those comments. The fact that he casually dismisses those quotations, gives the appearance that he does not appreciate the hurt that those words caused at the time of their publication and now, during their deserved resurrection. I want and expect Ron Paul to make a categorical statement that he disavows those words and would never support them today or tomorrow. Here's hoping.
    But now, please let me explain why every person of color should not only support Ron Paul but also actively campaign for Ron Paul. In 2011, there is only one power that is devouring America and the world. That power is international finance. For past five decades (centuries?) international finance has feasted on the poor throughout the world, particularly in South America, Asia, and Africa. Not satisfied with the consumption of millions of children, its appetite has grown to include the middle class in America and Europe. Ron Paul is the only mainstream candidate, who recognizes this evil. Ron Paul is the only candidate from both major parties who is prepared to fight this monster. Everybody else, including President Obama, only pays homage and subservience to these demons.
    Is it asking too much to ignore Ron Paul's weaknesses at this moment in history? My answer is a resounding no! If the people vote for Obama or any other Republican we will get four more years of war, economic depression, unemployment and all the unfortunate social consequences that arise from that twisted elixir. If, instead, the people vote for Ron Paul, Americans, of all backgrounds and ethnicities, will finally take a united stand against the forces that are destroying our lives, our families, our religious roots, our social fabric and, most importantly, our children’s' future.
    Politics is often about compromise. Since the establishment of the Federal Reserve Bank in 1913, it has only lead to the exchange of good for evil. If all Americans unite behind Ron Paul, even with his blemishes, it will represent the triumph of good over evil.

    Once the bankers are defeated, we can get back to bickering about why we do or do not like each other.

  12. This is all irrelevant.

    The bottom line is they are not Paul's views, and they never have been. Pay attention to the consistent message Paul has been preaching for 30 years, it is the exact opposite of this nonsense.

    He wasn't even aware of these letters until years after they were written – he was busy working as a doctor at the time. Doctors don't have time to monitor every newsletter, he had patients and kids of his own to keep an eye on – much less some goofball writing this stuff. Anyone who thinks this changes his character or electability might as well forfeit support of all the other candidates.

    Gingrich and Romney have both flip-flopped against their own words, among other things, and we have a President who did cocaine and has broken numerous promises to his troops. Give me a break, this attack on Paul is laughable. That's the best the mainstream media can dig up? Not being able to find real dirt on Paul only legitimizes his authenticity.

  13. Thank you for finally writing about Dr. Paul, however reluctantly.

    If you think that me and my family are going to be dissuaded to vote for this honourable man, you are surely mistaken.
    Do you realise that people own computers and they can Google or Youtube Ron Paul?
    And within 2 minutes all this garbage that you spew , is thrown back at you . He is the ONLY HOPE , the only man that represents REAL CHANGE.

    Ron Paul 2012

  14. Seems you can't write an article trashing or even calling anything Paul has done into question without getting a barrage of his constantly on the job supporters barking down your throat about how he is a champion of civil liberties. Don't get me wrong, I think he's … well, okay, I suppose. I think people are fooling themselves however if they think he can do all the things he talks about doing just because he's elected President. You only think you've seen a President who can't pass a single bill with Obama. Just you wait until Ron Paul is elected.

    The people just want to believe in something, I suppose. And they're fooling themselves if they don't think racists and enemies of multiculturalism don't make up a sizable portion of Paul supporters, as well as new age libertarian hippies.

    • that's all she seems to do. Obama keeps blacks on the "plantation" as Dem's have done for generations yet she complains about a man who has a record of defending Constitution vs Obama who has a record or circumventing it or being "absent' from even voting.

  15. Dear @CalebNaquin,

    I am a Ro.n Paul Supporter but I agree with many things you have stated.
    Here's why.
    The dire state of our nation should be beyond doubt to anyone with a conscience and a memory. Has American been perfect before today? Of course not, but it is currently on a trajectory to get much, much worse. In these horrific and tragic times, good people of all persuasions need to put aside their differences and find the common ground to protect themselves and preserve their liberties (there's that word again). Right now all working people are getting destroyed by the major banks at the behest of the federal reserve and the US government. This crime is an equal opportunity destroyer. It is indifferent to race, age, gender. The vilest most backward cracker and the most militant anarchist are both on the target list. Does it really matter if the guy sitting next to you is a bigot, if the car you are both driving is about to go over a cliff. Right now we need to unite. Right now we need to put aside differences and face the common threat. Will a Ron Paul victory mean business as usual. Will there be no change from the status quo. I hope not and I believe it would bot be that way. However, If it is business usual then we can put aside the charade, pass out the rifles because the Revolution is ON!