So let's take Ron Paul for example. He is viewed by many as the most reasonable of the field (as is at the top of the polls in Iowa), yet he allowed a racist and homophobic newsletter to be published in his name as recently as the 1990s. He claims that these were not his views, yet they were espoused under his masthead! I don't buy it. It's easy to say NOW that these are not his views, but surely he had some kind of editorial review before the crap was published. The newsletter said that people with AIDS should be banned from restaurants and claiming that 95 percent of all black men are criminals.
These issues matter. As Phillip Klein writes in the DC Examiner:
"[I]f you're a public figure, it's your responsibility to monitor what is being published under your name. And if your best defense is massive disorganization within a business you ran that had just a few employees, it's a pretty severe indictment of your management abilities as you seek the presidency. And this is where we get to the double standard part.So why is Ron Paul allowed to get away with it? It goes without saying that there is an awful lot of hate going around among the Republican candidates. They all hate someone--whether they be gays, Muslims, blacks, or immigrants. I just have to pray that the majority of Americans see the bigotry and hate for what it is.
Rick Perry and Mitt Romney have both attacked each other for what was written in their respective books. If either of those books had included a number of overtly racist statements, their candidacies would be over before they started. If they used the Ron Paul defense – that they didn't write the words themselves, they didn't know what was in the books and don't even know who wrote them, it would only make matters worse. They could kiss their political careers goodbye."
LATE-BREAKING NEWS (since I posted this): Ron Paul walked out of a CNN interview because he got so peeved. Classy!