It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul's family newsletter profits

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Ron Paul's family newsletter profits


www.reason.com

Besides Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell, the officers of Ron Paul & Associates included Paul's wife Carol, Paul's daughter Lori Pyeatt, Paul staffer Penny Langford-Freeman, and longtime campaign manager Mark Elam (who has managed every Paul congressional campaign since 1996 and is currently the Texas coordinator for the presidential run), according to tax records from 1993 and 2001. Langford-Freeman did not respond to interview requests as of press time. Elam, president of M&M Graphics and Advertising, confirmed to reason that his company printed the newsletters, but said that the texts reached him as finished products.

The publishing operation was lucrative. A tax document from June 1993—wrapping up the year in which the Political Report had published the "welfare checks" comment on the L.A. riots—reported an annual income of $940,000 for Ron Paul & Associates, listing four employees in Texas (Paul's family and Rockwell) and seven more employees around the country.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 08:50 PM
link   
It was not something as little as he claims if it raked in that much cash with his family members on the payrole.

www.reason.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 09:08 PM
link   
The swift boating of Ron Paul continues.




posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 09:58 PM
link   
What I think is funny is that I read the same article yesterday, and it pretty much blows the "Ron Paul is a racist" story out of the water.

Yet you want people to get mad because he made money on his newsletters


I thought Republicans were supposed to be "pro business?"

Anyway, the real news in this story is that the racism-tinged newsletter articles were almost certainly written by Lew Rockwell, who administered the newsletter at the time, and that Ron Paul is keeping his mouth shut because he doesn't want to stab one of his best friends in the back for political points.

Lew Rockwell, for those not familiar with him, is a well-known conservative Libertarian writer. He is not generally racist in his writings, but there seems to be a conscious strategy behind those particular writings at that particular time:


During the period when the most incendiary items appeared—roughly 1989 to 1994—Rockwell and the prominent libertarian theorist Murray Rothbard championed an open strategy of exploiting racial and class resentment to build a coalition with populist "paleoconservatives," producing a flurry of articles and manifestos whose racially charged talking points and vocabulary mirrored the controversial Paul newsletters recently unearthed by The New Republic. To this day Rockwell remains a friend and advisor to Paul...


The article elaborates a lot further, I highly recommend anyone interested in the subject read it.

Reason in general is usually a good read, I am sorry to say I let my subscription lapse a couple of years back.



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 10:44 PM
link   
No the real story is that Ron Paul dismisses it because of its insignificance in his life when his own wife and other family members were on the payrole sharing up nearly a million dollars a year, along with a lot of his longtime buddies and current associates. That is proof it happened for profit which is just as bad as penning it himself.
This is worse than the excuse he had of a bunch of hired hands running around and he never knew what was going on because it didn't matter. Well it mattered in the family pocketbooks, proven by filed tax records.

The only conspiracy of msm staying away from this man now is to not associate themselves in the muck he is wading in.



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Hmm ok so a million a year. Now let's divvy that up among say ten people, add in some expenses, and you come in with what about $70,000/yr. each? And then after taxes what? Pretty modest really, considering the scope of the operation.

The man gives back thousands every year to the treasury of his own free will, and does just about everything on or under budget. You can try, hehe, have lotsa fun, cause so many of us already have. He's solid.



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Wow I had no idea how lucrative hate filled rags could be.

Well he may not have read them...
...but I bet he remembered to cash that check.

Who really would subscribe to such nonsense anyway, and what made them think this was a part of Ron Paul's ideology? Makes you wish that Ron Paul had a friend to let him know this was happening but I guess he never spoke to anyone that worked for him, and that his family never once glanced at the printed newsletter of such a famous relative.

Curious....also quite sad.

- Lee



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Hmm ok so a million a year. Now let's divvy that up among say ten people, add in some expenses, and you come in with what about $70,000/yr. each? And then after taxes what? Pretty modest really, considering the scope of the operation.

The man gives back thousands every year to the treasury of his own free will, and does just about everything on or under budget. You can try, hehe, have lotsa fun, cause so many of us already have. He's solid.


What part of having bigotry for profit done in your name do you not understand? This is now a double standard for Ron Paul campaign. This new revelation of his wife involved makes his claim of being oblivious to the facts even more outlandish.



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by SectionEight
What part of having bigotry for profit done in your name do you not understand? This is now a double standard for Ron Paul campaign. This new revelation of his wife involved makes his claim of being oblivious to the facts even more outlandish.


Not really. Ron has published many, many articles over the years, and worked tirelessly doing them. After so many years income from those diverse sources is bound to happen. But it is probably only a fraction of what he made in other areas, and was really not all that important to him in the grand scheme of things. Not to mention he probably spent a lot more time researching constitutional law, medical journals and the like and it is possible some stuff slipped under his radar. The rest of his outstanding record would tend to indicate that.

We're not talking about somebody who was sitting there just soaking up all the stuff underneath him and staring at the mailbox. Keep trying.



posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Income from his newsletters happened each year, year after year.
More double standard spin is all you seem to come up with. Him and his wife should tally up all their income from those offensive years and donate them on a silver platter to rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Media figures like the Dogg had to do it for one non-profit phone conversation, and they are not even running for public office.

Edited to show who replying to.


[edit on 16-1-2008 by SectionEight]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 12:17 AM
link   
So Ron Paul had a newsletter go out about riots with some racist remarks.

George Bush willingly killed 1,500 people New Orleans, allowed 3,000 to die on 9/11, sent 4,000 soldiers to their deaths, bombed and starved tens of thousands of foreign citizens.

Clinton dumped 15,000 tons of Depleted Uranium on Europe and cruise missiled a Chinese Embassy.

Somehow Rons remarks, his or not his, are really like dust in the wind.

Who would get such racist newsletters? Oh man, you'd be surprised.

In 1988, I went to some backwater Florida shack with this cute punk rock chick, walked into a tiny bedroom with ten skin heads in it, was handed a stack of racist newsletters to read.
Oh joy!

Every time I look back at that evening I can only think "WTF?!?!?"



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Legalizer
 


Non of what you listed is proven facts. Besides you better finish your story because it sounds like you got it on with a punk rock chick and ten skinheads, I don't even think the porn industry thought of that one yet.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   
i think its funny as hell that some people will grasp at what ever straws they can find just to try and make dr.paul look bad. is his stance on the issues realy that scary.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by krill
i think its funny as hell that some people will grasp at what ever straws they can find just to try and make dr.paul look bad. is his stance on the issues realy that scary.


Since when are discovered facts of a persons record straws? Straws are fabrications, there are non here.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 01:14 AM
link   
I'm gonna get flamed for this, but I still haven't heard anyone make a convincing argument as to HOW exactly, the offending articles were blatently racist or offensive. I've read them, and granted, I'm not a person of color so how do I really know, right? I'm just putting this out there for consideration.

I find no offense in saying (paraphrased) "The blacks only stopped rioting when it came time to cash their welfare checks." To me this sounds like an observation. Whether it's based on fact is another matter, but my point is there's nothing in that statement that's racist, unless you count the term 'blacks'. It reads like the observation of someone sitting in their living room watching it on TV and noticing that the police did next to nothing to stop the rioting, yet it seemed to stop spontaneously on it's own. Another one: " if you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be". Again, sounds to me like the personal observation of someone with experience in such a thing, not a racist rant. If a black teenaged male were to rob me, I would expect him to run away very fast--common sense to me.

To quote Glenn Beck: Where am I wrong on this?



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 01:33 AM
link   
yes but all that connects paul to this is it was published in his news letter he dident wright, edit or compile them . so in my oppinion yes your grasping at straws.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 02:05 AM
link   
Colbert said ron paul was the anti christ on his show today anyone else see that my mouth dropped. I know Colbert was NWO. Damn Stephen can you tone it done a bit I do like you even tho you are in satans army.


Anyways so let me finish this Ron paul hates gays balcks little martian men and at nite he sacrifces goat blood to moloch the owl god of death.


And im still voting for him.

Keep making up lies they only get funnier.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by NWOmaskedman
Colbert said ron paul was the anti christ on his show today anyone else see that my mouth dropped. I know Colbert was NWO. Damn Stephen can you tone it done a bit I do like you even tho you are in satans army.

And im still voting for him.

Keep making up lies they only get funnier.


You do realize that Colbert Report is a comedy/satire show, right?

These are not "lies," every bit of it is true. Yes, a newsletter with his name attached published racist comments. That is undeniably the truth.

But it's all part of a conspiracy to destroy a candidate who had no hope of winning the nomination in the first place, right?

This is why I stopped supporting Ron Paul; in addition to all the slimey, sketchy things in his past, his supporters act like absolute idiots. Deluded zealots in a cult of personality.



[edit on 17-1-2008 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 11:56 AM
link   


But it's all part of a conspiracy to destroy a candidate who had no hope of winning the nomination in the first place, right?


The recent flap over the newsletters is not new, it was an issue in his last Congressional campaign. It's been well established for years that Paul did not write the newsletters in question, and was an absentee editor, leaving the newsletter in his friends' hands and choosing instead to focus on his duties as a physician and a Congressman.

Funny how it didn't stop Paul from winning convincingly, in a very multiracial district... "racist" my behind


The reason it's become an issue is due to a journalistic feud between The New Republic (which published the recent article about the newsletters) and Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard (who probably wrote them.) The author is well aware of this fact and chose to ignore it, choosing instead to make his name (and please his bosses, no doubt) by smearing rep. Paul.

So while it's not a "conspiracy" - a conspiracy is done in secret, this is being done in the open - it certainly is a smear campaign, recycling old accusations that the people of Texas have already rejected.

I'm not voting for Dr. Paul because of some kind of "cult of personality" thing. I am too skeptical of "leaders" and "leadership" in the first place.

I am voting for Paul because he is the only candidate advocating the kinds of changes this country desperately needs.

Chief among them:

1] Ending the US's policy of overseas interventionism that cost us 3,000 lives in NYC and DC and left untold numbers of young soldiers dead or maimed.

...and...

2] Ending the failed "Drug War" that is turning our cities into free-fire zones and imprisoning ludicrous numbers of young black males, leading otherwise innocent citizens into a vicious cycle of criminality.

No other candidate has the guts to take such an uncompromising stand against these public policy disasters, they all seem to be too compromised by the status quo.

Even Obama, who I like, but on the drug issue, he should really know better.


[edit on 1/17/08 by xmotex]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   
good god, why does this keep getting brought up, how many times do supporters have to defend Dr. Paul? How many times must the haters keep digging up OLD NEWS trying to prove their little distorded view of reality that Dr. Paul is an evil man? Sorry sectioneight, but when you start saying he needs to tally up his money and give it to Sharpton, or Jackson, right there you let your insanity shine through. They are such positive figures in ending racism, they are the people that keep racism alive for christs sake. They are the ones that pay attention to the color of someones skin, and justify right and wrong based on that.

www.hscca.org...

www.wnd.com...

blogs.abcnews.com...

There is more on those wonderful warriors of civil rights, but I dont have time to post them all. They are both color blind, if your white your wrong, and if you are black your right. Or like Jackson said about Obama from the Jena case that he was "acting like he's white". WTF, How in the hell is that not racist? That would be like me catching my brother smoking crack and saying, oh stop acting like you are black.




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join