New Republic Slanders Ron Paul, Engages in Vile Dishonesty - Restored Audio Version

Originally posted on January 8, 2008 -- reposted here because YouTube turned the original audio to static.

The January 8, 2008, New Republic article, "Angry White Man" by James Kirchick is a blatantly false character assassination timed to bring about Ron Paul's defeat in the New Hampshire primaries. This article is a violation of journalistic etiquette and of human decency; Kirchick needs to be taken to task for his fraudulent portrayal of Dr. Paul.

Kirchick's vile and inaccurate character assassination of Dr. Paul:
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/angry-white-man?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac1...

Ron Paul's "Government and Racism" - his genuine views on the subject:
http://rationalargumentator.com/issue97/governmentracism.html

Ron Paul's Statement in Response: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/08/ron-paul-responds-to-new-_n_80513.html

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• commentary
• analysis
• ron
• paul
• new
• republic
• hampshire
• primaries
• primary
• james
• kerchick
• slander
• attack
• racism

[ZombieX13]

lol yeah you look super pissed, G. :p

[GStolyarovII]

@ZombieX13 I was indeed quite incensed at the time. I knew how the New Republic piece would be interpreted by people who did not know much about Ron Paul, and the timing of the article was calculated to derail Paul's performance at the crucial New Hampshire primary.

[ot63]

I agree it is wrong to call Ron Paul a racist for his believes on restricting racist behavior via the government. But I think it's one of his greatest blunders, politically. I don't think you can go around in this racial climate of today and proclaim that and not expect to be fired upon for it. Racism still pervades in this country and thus the government must be called upon to us its power to make sure it is limited as much as possible.

[GStolyarovII]

@ot63 I think that Ron and Rand Paul need to emphasize more that the reason for the prevalence of racism and segregation in the South through the 1960s was an abundance of state laws mandating segregated facilities. Surely, repealing these laws, at any level of government, is worthwhile pro-liberty.

[GStolyarovII]

@ot63 But there is a difference between combating racist and oppressive laws and creating laws that impose “reverse racism” via such policies as affirmative action. The most governments can do here is protect everyone’s individual rights irrespective of race.

Yes, there is still racism. It should be combated through (private) education, freer markets (to give minority individuals more economic opportunities), and a cessation of affirmative action programs that stigmatize minorities.

[DrunkenGodMode]

I've been reading different works by Kirchick and I've found him to be constant in creating false allegations with no actual fact to back it up.Just in his mind. Just look at his "racist code" nonsense. 

[GStolyarovII]

@anubis2814 Where has he done this? I would appreciate a source, so that I could ascertain this statement's validity or lack thereof.

[anubis2814]

@GStolyarovII Actually Ron Paul has endorsed the John Birch Society openly.

[GStolyarovII]

@anubis2814 I do not think that Ron Paul would support the John Birch Society, either. As for the states’ rights movement, that is a more nuanced issue. Sure, some people support states’ rights out of misguided Confederate nostalgia or racist bigotry – but many others support them out of adherence to the original ideas behind the U.S. Constitution of checks and balances among the federal government and the states – which today are increasingly being overrun by the federal government.

[GStolyarovII]

@anubis2814 I think that some unscrupulous people used Ron Paul’s name and the prestige it conveyed to write these repugnant racist articles in the 1980s and 1990s. Ron Paul probably did not keep as close a watch of their activities as he could have, but, if so, he can only be faulted for being inobservant and trusting, not for agreeing with them – which he emphatically does not.

[anubis2814]

@Akatam0t0ma If money was just money to the rich then it would be theft and coercion. However to the rich, money is no longer hard earned and it is now political leverage, power and influence. Power is one of the most addictive drugs in the world, & the rich now have one incentive, to get more power. Politicians have this same addiction but we can take their power by voting them out. The rich will do anything to acquire more power, & they have much more political sway, lawyers & opportunity

[Akatam0t0ma]

@anubis2814:

"we started taxing the crap out of the rich which forced them"

Oh, I see, so you are an advocate of coercion and taking people's wealth by force at the point of a gun. Aren't you such a nice guy?

"The Ron Paul Ideal has no historical precedent"

Yeah, because economically illiterate statist don't want it to happen, you prefer a nanny state over freedom, thinking as if politicians and bureaucrats know better than you how to spend your money.