Comments on: “The Ruins of Detroit”

By: Me

Me — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 16:21:17 +0000

The fact that Ron Paul’s newsletters in the 80s and 90s were filled with racist and anti-Semitic rants is methodically substantiated. So substantiated, in fact, that Paul himself said, “I do repudiate everything that is written along those lines …”

Here is more: http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2010/02/24/more-on-ron-paul/

And I never claimed Paul wrote them (Reason pretty much proved it was Lew Rockwell who did, which is no surprise).

At the time I wrote:

“It’s exceedingly difficult for me to believable that Paul was unaware of the content in a newsletter bearing his name. Judging from what I’ve read and heard from the man, I do not believe he wrote these things. But I’m not sure it matters.”

By: Anna

Anna — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:14:11 +0000

I never said that you wrote in quotes “Ron Paul was an anti-Semite or a racist.” I said that you called him an anti-Semite and a racist. This shouldn’t be news to you as you wrote “Paul’s newsletters of the ’80s and ’90s were filled with anti-Semitic and racist rants…”.

Were we to interpret this in some other way than that you find him anti-Semitic and racist? Or is saying or writing anti-Semitic or racist things not what makes you an anti-Semite or racist? I don’t see why you would distinguish between: “X is a racist.” “X writes racist things.” Or did you mean that he was a racist in the ’80s and ’90s but is not anymore? I didn’t get the point of that paragraph. Just looked like unsubstantiated ad hominem attacks to me which do not belong in “Reason Magazine”.

By: Me

Me — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 00:16:57 +0000

Anna, can you provide the quote in which I write that “Ron Paul was an anti-Semite or a racist” because it’s news to me.

By: Anna

Anna — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:38:58 +0000

Matthew,
well supported? Calling someone an anti-Semite and racist without backing it up with a single quote or another shred of evidence is not something I would call well thought out or well supported. In fact I can imagine fewer things in poorer taste.
Upon further examination I could not find anything that indicated that Ron Paul was an anti-Semite or a racist. In fact he regularly quotes Jewish economists so I doubt he has much of a problem with them.
I must say I expected more from someone writing for Reason Magazine.

By: Me

Me — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 02:49:35 +0000

I don’t really write here, Quint, but thanks for checking in! You can catch my column in the Denver Post — or RealClearPolitics/Reason.com/TownHall.com/Washington Examiner, etc …

By: Quint X

Quint X — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:43:32 +0000

Haha! Really, Mathew? No citations at all, none. Just a bunch of rehashed ad hominem, poorly written at that! It is no surprise to me that virtually NO ONE reads your blog. Hack!

By: Matthew

Matthew — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:37:34 +0000

Dear David,
Forget all of these other commentators. Your attack on Ron Paul was well written, well thought out, and well supported.
Keep it up,
Matt

By: Eddie

Eddie — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:25:15 +0000

Seriously, what’s with the anti-Ron Paul stance?
Limited government in the form of sensible foreign policy (no wars unless declared) and reigning in the Fed.
Sounds like a Libertarian stance to me.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:15:56 +0000

Dear David,

Thank you for making me even more of a supporter of Ron Paul after that smear attack of yours on Reason. Its one thing to offer a intelligent critique of his policies, but your article is just ignorant name calling.

By: DrewJ

DrewJ — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 19:26:17 +0000

David,

What kind of libertarian argues for a “robust and proactive” national defense?

That means perpetual war.

DrewJ