Some will defend Paul saying his racist newsletters are "old news"... He didn't write the damnable articles... he was just lazy in allowing the editorial content to slip past his review. This despite the fact that it was often written in the first person, clearly IMPLYING that the views were his own.
How does this theory hold up in reality? I read the James Kirchak's excellent New Republic article. Read the quotes in question. It defies all logic that ALL OF THOSE QUOTES "slipped through the cracks." After all, what politician allows THAT MUCH CONTENT to go out in his name without review? DId he have time to read ANY OF THE ISSUES? And, if not, who were the damn staffers who allowed that vile crap to go out?
There are so many despicable statements... it's astonishing. No wonder he's a darling of the white supremacy set. And you heard he refused to return the donation from that avowed racist bastard under the pretense that he would "do some good with it." RIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.
The Atlantic's Ross Douthat posits an interesting theory here. I'm not nearly as charitable in my opinions about Paul, but am thrilled that this "gold standard wacko" is getting some heightened scrutiny. After all, is there ANY OTHER CANDIDATE that could withstand the baggage of these quotes in a 21st Century American Presidential bid??? It's time for Paul to fade away...
How does this theory hold up in reality? I read the James Kirchak's excellent New Republic article. Read the quotes in question. It defies all logic that ALL OF THOSE QUOTES "slipped through the cracks." After all, what politician allows THAT MUCH CONTENT to go out in his name without review? DId he have time to read ANY OF THE ISSUES? And, if not, who were the damn staffers who allowed that vile crap to go out?
There are so many despicable statements... it's astonishing. No wonder he's a darling of the white supremacy set. And you heard he refused to return the donation from that avowed racist bastard under the pretense that he would "do some good with it." RIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.
The Atlantic's Ross Douthat posits an interesting theory here. I'm not nearly as charitable in my opinions about Paul, but am thrilled that this "gold standard wacko" is getting some heightened scrutiny. After all, is there ANY OTHER CANDIDATE that could withstand the baggage of these quotes in a 21st Century American Presidential bid??? It's time for Paul to fade away...
Comments