James Kirchick’s Smear Piece in the New Republic

Despite the fact that Paul has a strong personal approval ratings and polls well against his competitors; the media has deliberately—and very successfully—kept him out of the public eye. That will be more difficult to do now that his campaign war-chest is packed with contributions and his base of support is expanding across the country.

We expect the media to ditch its failed strategy of simply ignoring Paul and take the more aggressive approach of attacking him outright. Now that Paul has established himself as a credible threat to the warmongering, autocratic corporate elite; he will have to be discredited through a coordinated media-blitz which will target his voting record, his character, and any other trivial foible which may incite public scorn.

He’s got a bull’s-eye on his back.

The Media’s Plan to Ambush Ron Paul - by Mike Whitney - 11/07/07 - Information Clearing House

” … Ron Paul is not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are backing–but rather a member in good standing of some of the oldest and ugliest traditions in American politics.”

Angry White Man: The bigoted past of Ron Paul - by James Kirchick - 01/08/08 - The New Republic

***

What can be learned about James Kirchick by reading his racist smear piece - Angry White Man: The bigoted past of Ron Paul - in the New Republic?

He opens noting how Ron Paul’s presidential bid has garnered support across the political spectrum from antiwar conservatives, to disaffected centrists to young liberal activists. Of course, were this not the case, Kirchick’s piece would not be much worth publishing now would it!

That’s about it for a discussion of Ron Paul’s actual political activities, however. Except, that is, for a series of newsletters that Paul faced up to some time ago disavowing any knowledge of their contents. These newsletters were published over the years under various “Ron Paul” type banners from the late 70s up to the 90s. These letters - or parts of some of them apparently largely in 1990 - are flat out offensive, as the quotes Kirchick chooses to highlight show. Nonetheless, it is to these newsletters and to these newsletters only that James Kirchick builds his smear campaign. There is no discussion of Paul’s voting record, no direct quotes or written materials attributed with certainty to Ron Paul, no discussion of Ron Paul’s 10 terms in office and of the countless interviews with countless media. The sole material basis for the Kirchick-slur-fest, rather, is on newsletters Ron Paul had already publicly disavowed knowledge of but accepted responsibility for, back in 2001. Of course, that Paul should have allowed such racist tripe to be disseminated under his name and without his knowledge is not something to dismiss outright. One must seriously question the managerial/organizational abilities of a person that allows such to be disseminated without knowing about it. But committing such an egregious error is not the same thing as actually writing or stating such things oneself now is it? The truth of matters here, however, are not obvious. Nonetheless, what does seem obvious is that Kirchick wanted to make a racist accusation against Paul and his sole basis for this were some newsletters of disputed authorship.

[Read more →]