On December 15th, Jeff Lord predicted that Ron Paul would have to “seriously answer” for his newsletters as he ascended in the polls in Iowa. As Jeff points out these questions were raised in January 2008 in Reason by David Weigel and Julian Sanchez. I would add that their reporting built on the groundwork laid by James Kirchick in The New Republic earlier that month.
Six days later, Paul failed to formulate anything resembling a serious answer in an interview with Gloria Borger of CNN and ran away with his tail between his legs when the questions got too tough. This a tactic Paul simply cannot deploy in the White House.
Now, of course, it may very well be the case that Paul didn’t write the actual content of his newsletters but it’s hard to imagine he was unaware of it especially considering it was being released under his name. And it isn’t like this was a one time incident. The incendiary language kept popping up again and again. Thus a reasonable person could conclude that the views expressed in the Ron Paul Newsletter are the views of Ron Paul.
But let’s say that Ron Paul was, in fact, completely unaware of the content of his newsletters. In that case, it demonstrates a lack of judgment, responsiblity and due diligence on his part. Such shortcomings neither inspire confidence nor are they the makings of an honesty and trustworthy President.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?