Thoughts, essays, and writings on Liberty. Written by the heirs of Patrick Henry.

“It only stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there's service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master.”     Ayn Rand

December 19, 2007

The Ron Paul/Stormfront Story Makes The MSM

by Doug Mataconis

Frankly, I was beginning to think that I was wrong in my prediction that the story about Ron Paul’s campaign receiving a $ 500 donation from the guy who runs the Stormfront website would eventually be picked up by the mainstream media as Paul became more of a story in the race.

It appears, though, that I was right after all:

Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has received a $500 campaign donation from a white supremacist, and the Texas congressman doesn’t plan to return it, an aide said Wednesday.

Don Black, of West Palm Beach, recently made the donation, according to campaign filings. He runs a Web site called Stormfront with the motto, “White Pride World Wide.” The site welcomes postings to the “Stormfront White Nationalist Community.”

“Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he’s wasted his money,” Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said. “Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom.”

“And that’s $500 less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does,” Benton added.

Black said he supports Paul’s stance on ending the war in Iraq, securing U.S. borders and his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants.

“We know that he’s not a white nationalist. He says he isn’t and we believe him, but on the issues, there’s only one choice,” Black said Wednesday.

“We like his stand on tight borders and opposition to a police state,” Black told The Palm Beach Post earlier.

On his Web site, Black says he has been involved in “the White patriot movement for 30 years.”

There really isn’t any other way to spin this. This is bad press. And it could have been avoided if they’d just return the $ 500, or even donate it to, say, the Holocaust Museum or something. Five hundred bucks doesn’t mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things, but the damage the donation does could be worth a lot more than that.

TrackBack URI: http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/12/19/the-ron-paulstormfront-story-makes-the-msm/trackback/
Read more posts from
• • •

30 Comments

  1. The headline does him damage…not sure about the article though…I think its pretty clear that Paul is not representing the views of Black that everyone finds distasteful, just the views that make him like alot of other government haters.

    Comment by Greg — December 19, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
  2. You’ve been obsessing the last 6 months over something like that article…lol

    If that’s the extent of his “bad press,” I say he was in good shape.

    Comment by Kaligula — December 19, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
  3. The headline should read “Ron Paul rejects white supremacists”, which is the truth of the matter when you read the story. This is just another attempt by the MSM to smear a man for adhering to worthy principles.

    Comment by Paul — December 19, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
  4. The media is what it is. If you’ve watched the coverage of the Republican and Democratic races closely, I think its fairly apparent that they sensationalize things about other candidates all the time.

    So I don’t think they are treating Paul any differently than they are treating anyone else. Heck, they hounded Hillary over her accepting donations far higher than $ 500 from a guy who violated FEC regs to the point where she ended up giving the money back.

    The point of the story is that the headline could have been avoided if they’d given the money back.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — December 19, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
  5. Happy Day for DM. Congrats Doug, enjoy and bask in the glow of your fondest wish realized. BTW, your boy Dondero sends his warmest regards.

    Comment by gmason08 — December 19, 2007 @ 4:22 pm
  6. funny thing, if you read the article, there’s nothing bad in there. It’s pretty innocuous. Black donated to Paul because he supports mainstream views that Paul espouses.

    A pro-choice, pro-welfare drug addict who donates to John Edwards is obviously doing so for the first two reasons. His drug addiction is irrelevant.

    Comment by John V — December 19, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
  7. Sounds like a good idea to me. Take Mr. Black’s money and then use it to advocate the antithesis of what Mr. Black advocates.

    Here’s a great answer by Ron Paul to Neil Cavuto on this subject:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcLSLGXypMY

    Comment by Ken H — December 19, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
  8. Ron Paul Still Clings To White Supremacist Cash…

    I first wrote about this in October — but it seems that Ron Paul is still holding on to that racist cash, despite his fund raising success. I guess that there is no contributor odious enough to be rejected –……

    Trackback by Rhymes With Right — December 19, 2007 @ 7:39 pm
  9. Giving back the $500 would be the economic equivalent of making a donation of $500 to stromfront, not to mention the wasted time and effort involved. The least useful thing to stormfront is keeping their money and not supporting their issues, not that $500 would buy any detectable support.

    Stormfront benefits most from the publicity that results when people pretend that this issue has any meaning. This means that the most identifiable fault lies with those bring up the issue and don’t look in the mirror.

    Regards, Don

    Comment by Don Lloyd — December 19, 2007 @ 10:14 pm
  10. Ron Paul mopped the floor with Cavuto in the FOX interview last night. Cavuto had no place to take the issue when Dr. Paul displayed the most common sense answers. Basically, Dr. Paul said if someone with those views were foolish enough to send his campaign money then sure, he would spend it and take if out of the hands of those intent on doing evil.

    He also said, in so many words, that it would be hypocritical for him to proclaim a message of freedom and yet screen everyone for his or her beliefs, picking and choosing who was acceptable and who wasn’t.

    This is a NON-ISSUE!

    Comment by Republicae — December 20, 2007 @ 3:51 am
  11. Doug, there’s a guy who panders at the drop of a hat, Mike Huckabee. Vote for him and be done with it.

    If Black’s Jewish neighbors have a major problem with him, they’d have run him out of town a long time ago. Isn’t this an area the press should be digging? Asking, ‘this is odd…why?’

    Comment by GeneG — December 20, 2007 @ 5:54 am
  12. The thing that’s difficult to remember is that even white supremacists have a place in a free country.

    If you believe that white people are the only people in the world worth acknowledging, you have a right to that belief, in a free country.

    There is only a problem when violence or any other form of force occurs. Your belief, however, is something that you have a right to, no matter what it is. That’s what it means to live in a free country.

    Ron Paul’s message of freedom is based on that principle.

    Comment by DK — December 20, 2007 @ 9:53 am
  13. Doug,

    This Stormfront/Ron Paul issue is easily the most ridiculous criticism of Ron Paul you’ve brought up…same as taking issue with the legal donors of pretty much any candidate is a ridiculous criticism because the only thing that actually matters is the voting record of the candidate and the platform that candidate is running on. The press publishes stories like this on slow news days because it whiffs of controversy (because it includes Nazis) and because they’re lazy. Why do you feel a need to constantly bring it up? And more precisely, where’s the pro-liberty angle in this “story?

    Comment by UCrawford — December 20, 2007 @ 2:43 pm
  14. Why does there need to be a “pro-liberty” angle ?

    And if this story costs one vote, its already cost more than the $ 500 they got.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — December 20, 2007 @ 2:46 pm
  15. And if this story costs one vote, its already cost more than the $ 500 they got.

    Yes, but will it cost one vote? I don’t know if you saw the video, but he gave Cavuto a pretty solid answer. I see it as neutral press and considering that his “awareness” is rated at 17%, I bet it helps at least as much as it hurt.

    The only people I’ve heard talk about this are people that already have a beef against him, Doug.

    Comment by Jeff Molby — December 20, 2007 @ 2:54 pm
  16. The only people I’ve heard talk about this are people that already have a beef against him, Doug.

    If Paul is going to do better than the 6-8% he’s doing in New Hampshire polling right now, he needs to attract independent voters who historically don’t vote on the basis of ideology. Stories like this turn people like that off.

    Of course, Paul could have a problem attracting independents in NH anyway. They seem to be breaking heavily for Obama right now.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — December 20, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
  17. Doug,

    “Why does there need to be a “pro-liberty” angle?”

    Because the Liberty Papers header says that’s the point of this site. And because continually nitpicking the only pro-liberty candidate in the race works against that.

    “And if this story costs one vote, its already cost more than the $ 500 they got.”

    If the point of this site were dispensing advice on how to run a flawless campaign I’d consider that a relevant point. But since neither you nor I work for the Paul campaign, and since the candidate has already addressed the reasons why he’s not returning the money, it’s not relevant. If you’re unhappy that Ron Paul didn’t take your advice, perhaps you should have volunteered to work for his campaign in a position where your advice was valued. Since you’ve rather proudly trumpeted your decision not to be involved with the Paul campaign, that’s really your cross to bear…and your continued harping about how the Paul campaign was unwise not to accept your unsolicited campaign advice has got nothing to do with pushing a pro-freedom position. Move on.

    Comment by UCrawford — December 20, 2007 @ 3:18 pm
  18. Well, Doug, if this $500 donation bothers you so much maybe you should consider supporting Mike Huckabee. Maybe he’s returned money from any unsavory contributors, with him being a former preacher and all. Surely Huckabee has an FBI check done on every donor, don’t ya think?

    If you do decide to support Mike Huckabee because he is only accepting “clean money” I, as a Ron Paul supporter, will wish you well with no hard feelings. 8-)

    Comment by Ken H — December 20, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
  19. It’s not a matter of saying I wouldn’t vote for Paul because of this.

    Its just a sign that the campaign is not run by people who know what they’re doing when it comes to public relations.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — December 20, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
  20. I’m not concerned about NH. They’re on track there. Another point or two before IA plus another point or two after IA plus another point or two due to turnout and we’ll be fine. If we pick up 4th in IA and 3rd in NH, we’re golden. A convincing 3rd in MI (maybe even 2nd) plus a 2nd or even 1st in NV and we’re golden going into Super Tuesday.

    Its just a sign that the campaign is not run by people who know what they’re doing when it comes to public relations.

    Likewise, it sounds like some of his supporters don’t know what they’re doing when it comes to public relations.

    Comment by Jeff Molby — December 20, 2007 @ 4:07 pm
  21. Somehow Doug missed out on the last 20 years of public life, buy trying to make nice with the Marxists doesn’t work: see leftie Larry Summers at Harvard, or Dr. Watson in England, and then look at the example of the most distinguished American libertarian intellectual (not that you have heard of him)Hans Herman-Hoppe, who fought back, and conceded no ground.

    I know you haven’t sent a dime to Paul, but I would hope they would return the money for misappropirating Pat Henry’s name, indeed a real crime.

    Comment by C Bowen — December 20, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
  22. Its just a sign that the campaign is not run by people who know what they’re doing when it comes to public relations.

    I don’t know, I’d say it’s been handled. The story has honestly come and gone, much like the false perpetuations of racism, and are only being held on to, as Jeff noted, by people who have beef with the Paul campaign. Outside of here and Cavuto, I haven’t even heard much about it, either due to it being a non-issue or just a sense of apathy/unawareness for the campaign.

    It just seems that you are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill here.

    Comment by Eli — December 20, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
  23. “Its just a sign that the campaign is not run by people who know what they’re doing when it comes to public relations.”

    Actually, it’s just a sign that the campaign is being run by people who have some guts to stand up to nonsense.

    Comment by Ken H — December 20, 2007 @ 7:40 pm
  24. Doug…here’s a little education on how things really work in the “hate industry.” The ADL depends on people like Don Black for their livelihood.

    BUSTED! SO-CALLED WHITE SUPREMICIST GROUP EXPOSED AS ISRAELI PROPAGANDA OPERATION!

    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/whitesupremicistisisraelishill.php

    Comment by GeneG — December 21, 2007 @ 1:32 am
  25. So you’re asking me to accept the word of a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists ?

    Thanks, but no thanks.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — December 21, 2007 @ 5:52 am
  26. No Doug, expect you to educate yourself…I know, silly propostion.

    Comment by GeneG — December 21, 2007 @ 6:44 am
  27. GeneG,

    Actually, since most libertarians don’t bother to read Stormfront and don’t have any interest in the majority of agendas they push most of us could care less who’s “really” running it. Doesn’t change my beliefs on anything one iota, even if your link proved it conclusively (which it doesn’t). It’s as much of a non-issue as bitching about the ideological purity of legal campaign donors.

    Comment by UCrawford — December 21, 2007 @ 8:13 am
  28. Loooossssseeeeeerrrr!!!!!! Yes Doug you are a loser

    Hey doug I forgot, which dead horse are you voting for again? Was it Rudy or McCain?

    Comment by Max — December 21, 2007 @ 11:40 am
  29. Max,

    At this point I will probably stay home on Election Day

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — December 21, 2007 @ 11:42 am
  30. GeneG,

    Education myself does not mean reading the inane rantings of anti-semitic losers.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — December 21, 2007 @ 11:43 am

Comments RSS

Subscribe without commenting

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by: WordPress • Template by: Eric • Banner #1, #3, #4 by Stephen Macklin • Banner #2 by Mark RaynerXML