Ron Paul is leading the pack in Iowa. Yes Im surprised as well. The Libertarian may have a chance. But when you are in the lead, look out because your past will come to haunt you or at least be forced to resurrect from the grave in an effort to expose you and render you unqualified for the office. Just look at Hermain Cain and a host of others pass politicians.
Ron Paul is accused of allowing writings that were racist, anti-semitic, and homophobic to be printed in his newsletter in the 1990’s with such words as:
“a coming race war in our cities”,”federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS”, 95% of black men in Washington DC were either “criminal or semi-criminal,” that after the LA riots order was only restored because it was time for “blacks to pick up their welfare checks”, and it also criticized Martin Luther King Day as being “Hate Whitey Day”.
When these statements from the newsletter were brought to his attention, he denied that he had any knowledge of the content. Let’s say we believe him. Then ethically, where does moral responsibility lie?
What we have seen in the news these last couple of months in relationship to college scandals is that leaders, although not perpetrators of the accused crime, are indeed looked at in the moral scheme of things. Penn State Coach Paterno is an example of this. Syracuse Coach Jim Boeheim statements at at a press conference noting “we will see what happened under my watch” is another example of this. As a leader, that leader is suppose to oversee, manage, and protect the integrity of the organization in which it leads. When things happen that are allowed to continue, while also escaping the leaders oversight and leadership, then the leader has failed in its job, not only to manage but then must be held responsible for its failure… all of its failure just as he/she would be responsible for its success.
When a newsletter has your name on it, lack of knowledge is never an excuse. Part of the job of a leader is being “in the know”. Failure to know is never an excuse to be omitted from transgressions, it is rather a confession of the sin of ones inability to manage and protect ones and the creative project’s integrity.
Moreover, when anything is being created under your name, shouldn’t you want to be aware of the content? And if it is being printed under ones’ watch and is not repudiated after an error is “immediately” caught, shouldn’t Paul be held responsible?
When the interviewer asked him to understand the seriousness and the implications of the writings, instead of getting defensive and somewhat uncooperative, why not allow this to be a moment that you speak out (no matter how annoyed you may get) about the issue of racism, anti-semitism, and homophobia to those who truly have a reason to be offended? Perhaps lack of knowledge will be blamed for this as well.