PART II: My Absolute Contempt for “Leading” Conservative Punditry


All of a sudden the far right is discovering that Ron Paul is a bigoted, Anti-Semitic, white supremacist loving jerk.  There have been many of us trying to tell you that for years, but, it just wasn’t the right time for them to admit what a horrible little man he is.  That really doesn’t matter, the libertarian right is still feeling the love.

Just watch FOX.  If anything should tell you about their agenda, it is their continued promotion of this nasty little creature.   The only reason he is now being exposed is because they want Mitt Romney to win the nomination, and they need to take out Ron Paul so Romney can get the votes of his slobbering Bots.  The problem is Ron Paul supporters are so brain dead, they are going to do the lemming thing and follow him off a cliff.

“…In January 2008, the New Republic ran my story reporting the contents of monthly newsletters that Paul published throughout the 1980s and 1990s. While a handful of controversial passages from these bulletins had been quoted previously, I was able to track down nearly the entire archive, scattered between the University of Kansas and the Wisconsin Historical Society (both of which housed the newsletters in collections of extreme right-wing American political literature). Though particular articles rarely carried a byline, the vast majority were written in the first person, while the title of the newsletter, in its various iterations, always featured Paul’s name: Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, the Ron Paul Political Report, the Ron Paul Survival Report, and the Ron Paul Investment Letter. What I found was unpleasant.

“Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks,” read a typical article from the June 1992 “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism,” a supplement to the Ron Paul Political Report. Racial apocalypse was the most persistent theme of the newsletters; a 1990 issue warned of “The Coming Race War,” and an article the following year about disturbances in the Adams Morgan neighborhood of Washington, D.C., was entitled “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” Paul alleged that Martin Luther King Jr., “the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours,” had also “seduced underage girls and boys.” The man who would later proclaim King a “hero” attacked Ronald Reagan for signing legislation creating the federal holiday in his name, complaining, “We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.” …”

The very real problem is the fact that Ron Paul is a libertarian.  He is adored by FOX, Roger Ailes, Rupert Murdock, Neil Cavuto, Andrew Napolitano Lew Rockwell, the Cato Institute, the Koch Brothers, Americans for Prosperity, various anti-immigration bigots, Reason, and  some of the very same people who are now behind Mitt Romney’s campaign.  I know, it sounds crazy.

“…Yet a subsequent report by Reason found that Ron Paul & Associates, the defunct company that published the newsletters and which counted Paul and his wife as officers, reported an income of nearly $1 million in 1993 alone. If this figure is reliable, Paul must have earned multiple millions of dollars over the two decades plus of the newsletters’ existence. It is incredible that he had less than an active interest in what was being printed as part of a subscription newsletter enterprise that earned him and his family millions of dollars. Ed Crane, the president of the Cato Institute, said Paul told him that “his best source of congressional campaign donations was the mailing list for the Spotlight, the conspiracy-mongering, anti-Semitic tabloid run by the Holocaust denier Willis Carto.”

This sordid history would not bear repeating but for the fact that the media love to portray Paul as a truth-telling, antiwar Republican standing up to the “hawkish” conservative establishment. Otherwise, the newsletters, and Paul’s continued failure to name their author, would be mentioned in every story about him, and he would be relegated to the fringe where he belongs. But Paul has escaped the sort of media scrutiny that would bury other political figures. A December 15 profile of Paul in the Washington Post, for instance, affectionately described his love of gardening and The Sound of Music and judged that “world events have conspired to make him look increasingly on point”—all without any mention of the newsletter controversy. Though present at nearly every Republican debate, he has yet to be asked about the newsletters. Had Paul’s persona and views changed significantly since 2008, this oversight might be understandable. But he continues to say and do things suggesting that, far from disowning the statements he has claimed “do not represent what I believe or have ever believed,” he still believes them….”

I don’t know which is more interesting, but I’ll take a stab at it.  I suppose the most hilarious part of this puff piece about Ron Paul is that he has “stayed away from personal attacks”.  I suppose that ad he is running against Newt is chopped liver.  There is shock because he went on Leno and said that Michele Bachmann hates Muslims. What no one mentions is that evidently Ron Paul hates Blacks, Hispanics and Jews, but that’s okay?

ABC News

Hugh Hewitt is showing his contempt for anyone but Mitt.  They might want to rethink their praise for picking up the Nikki Haley endorsement.  She’s in hot water again.

Voting Under the Influence
Hugh Hewitt

Evidently the punditry doesn’t see things the way the rest of us do.

Blue Collar Muse