Paul Haunted by His Newsletter’s Disparaging Remarks About Martin Luther King
Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, at a presidential debate in May 2007.
With popularity comes notoriety. That’s the lesson Ron Paul is learning as the nation observes Martin Luther King Day and the GOP presidential contender bears the burden of disparaging comments, made in a newsletter bearing his name, about the slain civil rights leader and the national holiday that honors him.
In a 1990 newsletter called the Ron Paul Political Report, which resurfaced earlier this month in The New Republic, Ron Paul — or his ghostwriters — called King an adulterer and seducer of young children, and questioned why the nation should celebrate the Civil Rights leader with the same glory as that given to its first president.
Click here to read the article.
“We are supposed to honor this ‘Christian minister’ and lying socialist satyr with a holiday that puts him on a par with George Washington?” the newsletter asked under an entry titled “‘Dr.’ King.”
Click here to read the PDF of the newsletter.
“What an infamy Ronald Reagan approved it!” another newsletter comment read. “We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.”
Paul, a 10-term congressman from Texas, has denied writing the comments, which appeared in various newsletters produced since 1978, according to the New Republic.
“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit,” Paul said in a statement issued by his campaign on Jan. 8. “Several writers contributed to the product.
“For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name,” he continued.
Paul did not respond to calls for comment from FOXNews.com.
Among the comments that were included in the newsletters:
“So now even the establishment press admits that Martin Luther King plagiarized his PhD dissertation, his academic articles, his speeches, and his sermons,” the December 1990 newsletter said. “He was also a comsymp [Communist sympathizer], if not an actual party member, and the man who replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration.
“King, the FBI files show, was not only a world-class adulterer, he also seduced underage girls and boys,” the entry continues. “The Rev. Ralph David Abernathy revealed before his death that King had made a pass at him many years before.”
Paul, who is a strong proponent of limited government and was the Libertarian Party nominee for president in 1988, left Congress in 1984 to return to his OB-GYN practice, but he continued producing newsletters. He was re-elected to the House of Representatives in 1997.
Click here to read another Paul newsletter.
In his Jan. 8 statement, Paul denounced his comments about King as “small-minded thoughts” and said he “never uttered such words.”
“In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person’s character, not the color of their skin,” he said in the Jan. 8 statement. “As I stated on the floor of the U.S. House on April 20, 1999: ‘I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.’”
On Monday, Paul invoked King’s name to aid his fundraising campaign.
“The whole world is watching how we do tomorrow in fundraising, on a day dedicated to the memory of Martin Luther King, the great champion of non-violence at home, peace abroad and civil disobedience against tyrannical government,” Paul wrote in a message on his Web site dated Jan. 21.
Last week, the New Republic reported that Paul was ready to out former congressional chief of staff Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. as the author of the incendiary statements about King in his newsletters.
Click here to read the New Republic’s story on the authorship of the Paul newsletter.
Rockwell, the founder of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Ala., called The New Republic’s style “hysterical smears aimed at political enemies” on his blog at LewRockwell.com.
[...] Paul Haunted by His Newsletter & Disparaging Remarks About Martin Luther King Foxnews is a little late to this party:http://elections.foxnews.com…arks-about-martin-luther-king/ [...]
[...] At the same time Paul is celebrating his boost in contributions and endorsements, he is being criticized for disparaging comments made in a newsletter bearing his name, about slain civil rights [...]
Jeez..did Bernard Kerik get this much attention?
No surprise wrote on 1/21/08:
“This shouldn’t shock anyone. I like a lot of what Ron Paul has to say about fiscal restraint, but there is a HUGE guilt-by-association factor with the guy. His supporters include:
- The tax protext movement, led by the incarcerated Irwin Schiff (father of Fox Business personality and vocal Ron Paul supporter, Peter Schiff). Ron Paul recently refused to denounce these people, who make the claim that paying income tax is actually voluntary. A number of people have gone to jail following Irwin Schiff’s tax “advice.” ”
–Actually…there is a lot of debate about this. Maybe you should go to youtube and check out America — Freedom to Fascism, Aaron Russo’s last film before he died. In it he details the facts (that he can nail down) of our tax laws, and asks the question, all the way up the chain to a former director of the IRS “Can you show me in the tax code where it requires us to fill out an income tax form?” Some of those people that went to jail are ex-IRS Agents. This is what MLK preached, civil disobedience. But our laws have gotten so draconian as to quash that, and our people have gotten so desensitized to a government that takes more and more of our hard earned money, like some bloated Sheriff of Nottingham. That being said, the majority of his supporters are taxpayers, because it is the law, but we would like to see that reduced. If you’re happy paying exorbitant tax rates and hidden taxes at every turn, by all means, take the savings you make and send it in to the government. Don’t ask us to do the same. The government can afford it.
“- The extreme isolationists. They don’t just oppose today’s wars, but yesterday’s, as well. They will still argue with a straight face that the U.S. never should have gotten involved in WWII, for example, despite now being able to look at the result. Even the Civil War is not immune, and many Paul supporters sincerely consider Abraham Lincoln to be one of history’s greatest war criminals. I wonder how most Americans– black voters offended by the article above most of all– would feel about the notion that the South should have simply been allowed to secede. That’s the claim of these folks. After all, secession is a small government matter of personal choice, they’d argue!”
– There are very few ‘extreme isolationists’ out there, but it’s painting a bit of a broad brush to be able to find many who don’t feel that our participation in WWII was necessary. But, as it should be in ALL wars, no matter how small, it’s under the purview of the Congress to decide that. The president can ask for a war, and is commander of the armed forces, but it is the sole duty of the Congress to declare war. As for the civil war, you’re talking about a totally different group, in the extreme minority, and geographically situated in the south. “I wonder how most Americans - Black voters…” Now THERE’S a LOL. Faux already played the race card, you don’t need to do it again. As for “many of Paul’s supporters” considering Lincoln a war criminal. Where are you getting this data? Because honestly, it sounds like one of those “95% of statistics” that are made up on the spot.
“And the list goes on and on. The only thing about this article which might surprise some Ron Paul supporters is his talking about seducing children in a negative way, since some of them believe that as long as it’s consentual, it should be allowed, as should taking as many wives as one wants, etc.”
Huh? It was ghostwritten. If you had done more besides read the Fox rehash of the NR hit piece (google Stephen Glass sometime. They don’t really have the keenest editors that let such silly things as facts get in the way. Kinda similar to a certain cable news network I know) you would know that this STORY is old. It was brought up last year, it was brought up before that pretty much every time Paul re-ran for office. It’s old, it’s tired, it’s being brought to a new audience and packaged in a way that they think will hurt him most. Even Fox and TNR have to admit that it wasn’t written by him, so you can never say he talks in this.
Beyond that, your statement that “some of them believe that as long as it’s consentual (sic)…”
WAY random.
“as taking as many wives as one wants etc”
I think you’re thinking Romney on this one.
“Paul sounds sensible on the surface. Get underneath, though, and a completely different picture emerges. This article sounds exactly like something he would have written many years ago as a gadfly political outsider, before he ever imagined he’d be taken at all seriously as a Presidential candidate.
He shows he’s not completely out of touch, though: it turns out he backpedals just like all the rest of the candidates when it suits his needs. Some courageous idealogue.”
Your thesis that Paul only “sounds sensible on the surface” is flawed because it is backed by two statements, both of which I’ve responded already to, and a third statement that “the list goes on and on”. I appreciate your attempt to create an empathetic comment that probably just got lost in the slew of pro-Paul comments, and I’m sure you came here only to spew your half baked drivel and move on, but I thought your response was shillish enough to deserve a response.
This garbage isn’t being talked about anywhere else but Fox, and I think a lot of people’s eyes have been opened about them. But the big question is why are the rest of the media not talking much about him either. America loves a winner, and anyone who doesn’t think that this gray-out on Paul’s poll achievements aren’t trumpeted as loudly as a Giuliani 5th doesn’t realize that there IS a larger portion of people who get their news only from the mainstream and Paul is being robbed of the chance to get his message out to those people. Write more letters to your stations, encourage fair time for all candidates.
“Paul Haunted by His Newsletter’s Disparaging Remarks About Martin Luther King”
That headline is accusing Ron Paul of writing those newsletters. That is slander, I would not vote for Paul but I wouldn’t blame him for taking Foxnews.com to court. It seems Fox doesn’t like Ron Paul and isn’t scared to show it. I don’t need Fox’s opinion, I can form my own. I don’t want my family and friends watching or reading anything from Fox. Vote Romney!
Why won’t the “news” give equal time to Ron Paul? Stop telling me about the others for two seconds and report that Paul is doing VERY well! I am voting for Ron Paul!
to fox news: Why don’t you stop talking about these stupid newsletters and actually talking about the issues, and while your at it why don’t you give Dr.Paul some airtime in your debates. It is not right what you are doing to the American People. Instead of decision 08 it should be Fox’s decision 08, you guys make me sick.
RON STANDS FOR THE SAME PRINCIPLES THAT MARTIN LUTHER KING DID . PEACE, FREEDOM, THE GOLDEN RULE, IF YOU STUDY THE FACTS MLKS VIEWS ARE IN LINE WITH RON PAULS MESSAGE.PLEASE VISIT HIS WEBSITE GET INFORMED
It has been confirmed that the “unidentified sources” in the TNR hit-piece are notorious hatemongers that have been whining for years that Ron Paul takes their money but isn’t one of them.
ALL HAIL FAUX NEWS! the official news of the republic!