On the day of the New Hampshire Primary last week (1/8/08) The New Republic published an article by James Kirchick, suggesting that Texas Congressman and GOP Presidential candidate Ron Paul was a “racist,” a “homophobe” and worse, due to views expressed in a newsletter published under his name in the 1980’s and early 90’s.

This allegation is patently absurd for multiple reasons, not the least of which that this is old news, and something that Paul himself has apologized for and taken “full moral responsibility” for when it first occurred. None of the quotes were written by Paul, who considers Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks models of what civil disobedience can accomplish.

This is my personal response to a Ron Paul supporter who was shaken by these allegations, reposted with permission:

(Article continues below)

Ron doesn’t have a racist bone in his body. As a long time right-wing commentator, whose been accused of being “racist” more times than I care to remember, there is no way anyone on the non-neocon Right will ever be able to run for office and not be linked to certain segments of the movement that have “racist” attitudes, real or percieved.

This same link could be made to the Left, btw, it just never is. For example, Barack Obama and Oprah Winfrey’s preacher is a man named Jeremiah Wright. Wright has stood on stage with Obama during this campaign, and Obama cites him as a spiritual mentor in his book “The Audacity of Hope.”

Wright is also closely aligned with the Nation of Islam, a black supremacist group led by Louis Farrakhan. Obama’s church awarded Farrakhan a “Man of the Year” award, that Wright helped sponsor and when Farrakhan went to visit Libyan dictator Moamar Quadafi in the late 90’s (a visit that was condemned by the U.S. House of Representatives) Wright went with him.

Does anyone accuse Obama of being a “racist?” Does anyone even ask about why a member of the Nation of Islam is praised by Obama?

Obama is not a racist, in my opinion, despite having some questionable friends. Neither is Paul, who has taken, in his words “full moral responsibility” for that newsletter, because it went out under his name.

Plus, the reporter who wrote that piece is a neoconservative shill trying to make a name for himself and a Giuliani supporter. His piece was designed to get some Paul supporters to abandon him, so Giulani wouldn’t lose to Paul twice in a row. Apparently it worked, although the vote was close in NH.

Here is a great piece on the reporter James Kirchick:

Click here

BTW, there are many rumors, if not outright evidence, that Giuliani has had ties to organized crime, which is at least as scandalous as the alleged “racism” of Paul. But they protect Rudy. They protect Obama. They want to destroy Paul.

If you believe in Ron Paul’s message, you must understand this: ANYONE who comes along with the same message WILL (not “if” or “maybe”) but WILL be accused of being a “racist” or worse by the establishment, Right or Left. It happens EVERY time. It’s all they have.

In 1996, when I supported Buchanan who echoed many of the same themes Paul does, Pat was a called a “nazi,” a “racist” and an “anti-semite.” Since Pat has retired from electoral politics and is an analyst for MSNBC, these same people have no problem working alongside someone they used to call a “nazi.”

That’s because he longer poses a threat.

If he was really so bad, a “nazi” as they said, why would they rub elbows with him again in Washington, DC? Because they know it’s BS. But it did work for a time in 1996 - and Bob Dole was the eventual nominee.

I’ll leave you with this - if you abandon Paul, this guy wins:

Click here

I hope you’ll reconsider and remember the nature, both politically and personally, of those making such allegations.

Take care

Jack Hunter - SA