More On The Ron Paul Newsletter Storyby Doug Mataconis
Julian Sanchez, who co-authored a Reason article detailing the history behind the Ron Paul newsletters, responds today to some of the criticism that has been thrown his way:
First, Paul was not going to be the next president, or even the next Republican nominee, in any parallel universe remotely close to ours. We have not deep-sixed the Paul Administration. The movement behind Paul is a good thing to the extent it raises awareness about our ideas, and demonstrates that there really is a constituency for a candidate who talks about peace and small government. And the best thing that could happen from that perspective, I think, is for Paul to come clean and ensure that people don’t start thinking of “property rights,” like “states rights,” as some kind of bad-faith codeword for racism.
Second, do people think this story wouldn’t have come out if we hadn’t run it? Jamie Kirchick was on exactly the same trail we were, and so was John Tabin at the Spectator, and so, probably, were others. The question was whether we’d break it, dispelling the impression that libertarians are happy to wink at racism, or whether someone far more hostile to Paul would.
Sanchez’s entire post is worth a read, and I pretty much agree with everything he has to say there.
In other news, David Weigel reports some interesting news:
I just had a conversation with Tom Lizardo, Ron Paul’s longtime congressional chief of staff, who wanted to say this on the record:
Last week, a statement was prepared by Ron Paul’s press secretary Jesse Benton, and approved by Ron Paul, acknowledging Lew Rockwell as having a role in the newsletters. The statement was squashed by campaign chairman Kent Snyder