The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Classics of the Golden Age of Fringe, Or: Ron Paul Digs the Beatles’ White Album

Posted on | December 23, 2011 | 79 Comments


Question: What do Ron Paul and Charles Manson have in common?
Answer: Both warned their followers of an impending “race war.”

Maybe Lisa Graas isn’t the first blogger to make that comparison, and if some other blogger wants to accuse Lisa of “stealing” their material . . .

Well, lots of that going around lately. Back of the line, pal.

Being a huge Beatles fan myself — quick, somebody tell Charles Johnson — and feeling in a rather contrarian mood today, I’m going to hazard an extremely limited defense of Ron Paul on this newsletter controversy.

Stipulate from the outset that those newsletters contained a lot of bad, wrong, racist and paranoid stuff. Further stipulate that Ron Paul authorized some cranky ghost-writer to use such fear-mongering to raise money, thereby attracting to his core following a bunch of the kind of people who enjoy reading stuff like this:

“I’ve been told not to talk, but these stooges don’t scare me. Threats or no threats, I’ve laid bare the coming race war in our big cities. The federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS (my training as a physician helps me see through this one.) The Bohemian Grove — perverted, pagan playground of the powerful. Skull & Bones: the demonic fraternity that includes George Bush and leftist Senator John Kerry, Congress’s Mr. New Money. The Israeli lobby, which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica. And the Soviet-style ‘smartcard’ the Justice Department has in mind for you.”

Considering myself something of a connoisseur of lunatic gibberish, I stand in awe of whatever unknown genius wrote that demented paragraph of paranoia-for-profit. One of these days, when some shrewd publisher hires me to edit a college textbook (The Norton Anthology of Right-Wing Extremist Literature), I’ll probably cite this as a classic example of late 20th-century direct-mail fundraising appeals.

By God, he pushed every button, didn’t he? Racism, homophobia, secret societies, currency manipulation, Jew-hating, anti-communism, Big Brother surveillance — it’s all there in 94 cleverly crafted words of undiluted 100% pure fearmongering. You have to appreciate the prophetic vision of the thing, foreshadowing in the dead-tree era the subsequent development of e-mail solicitations from, Organizing for America and other such radical groups.

Lament this as politics, if you will, but as literature, it just might be the finest example of its genre ever written. It is to hate-hustling what Michelangelo’s David is to sculpture.

When future scholars of American kookdom some day speak reverently of The Golden Age of Fringe, we can be certain that this fundraising appeal from Ron Paul will be ranked with Bill Ayers’ Prairie Fire and The Collected Works of Amanda Marcotte as immortal classics.

We can stipulate as true everything in the case against Ron Paul, and say that it disqualifies him for our support as a presidential candidate, without demonizing Paul and his supporters as evil menaces. Because sometimes in politics, believe it or not, weird people out there on the scary extremist fringes are the first to glimpse the future drift of events.

Decent, intelligent, responsible citizens can “read the whole thing” — Reuters has the PDF of that eight-page 1993 letter — and not be persuaded of the truth of anything claimed by Dr. Paul (or the anonymous crackpot genius who ghosted it). And yet, for the target readership of tinfoil-hatters at whom it was directed, this newsletter served the invaluable purpose of sending them a crucial message:

You Have a Friend in Washington!

This is the beauty of democracy, a tribute to our nation’s greatness, that even the dangerously deluded are entitled to representation in the halls of Congress, where courageous men and women like Ron Paul, Maxine Waters, Sheldon Whitehouse, Alan Grayson and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz are unfraid to Speak Truth to Power on behalf on their core constituencies of kooks.

Moonbats, perverts, goldbugs, socialists, feminists, Alec Baldwin, environmentalists, freaks, geeks, Keynesians, disco fans, dopeheads, sodomites, animal rights activists, neo-Nazis, James Wolcott, MSNBC viewers, Boston Globe subscribers, Daily Kos contributors, Janeane Garofalo, Paul Krugman, Sean Penn, Chris Matthews — dangerously deranged people who in any sane and responsible society would be confined to psychiatric institutions are here, in America, free to speak and write whatever manic nonsense erupts from their addled minds.

These brain-damaged freaks are also free to support with their money and votes whichever dimwitted nutjob, cynical charlatan or hateful demagogue they believe best represents their neurotic interests.

And if there is no other blogger who will take a stand in defense of the Constitutional rights of these wackos and weirdos . . .

Well, I’ve been told not to talk, but these stooges don’t scare me.

Won’t you give $10 or $2o today to Help Save Our American Way of Life?

Thank you for your patriotic support,

Robert Stacy McCain

Founder and CEO,
American Institute for the Advancement of American Institutions


79 Responses to “Classics of the Golden Age of Fringe, Or: Ron Paul Digs the Beatles’ White Album”

  1. Patrick
    December 24th, 2011 @ 3:53 am


    I wrote a bit about it too Stacy. Here’s mine:

    The point I was making is this; did ANYONE at ANY POINT think, “ya know, Ron Paul *might* run for President, maybe we should put bylines on these things…” or “Maybe we should lay off the extremist stuff.”

    Not being able to think past the end of your “Schnoz” is not a smart thing, when your in the public eye like that.

    It’s one thing to be a unknown blogger, like me for instance, but it’s a whole other ballgame to be in RP’s spot.

  2. Gingrich Misses Virginia Ballot, Too : The Other McCain
    December 24th, 2011 @ 9:34 am

    […] all the “Anybody But Romney” voters in Virginia will have only one choice on March 6.“I’m not afraid of these stooges!”Category: Election 2012, Newt Gingrich, VirginiaComments AnonymousTruly the Party of Stupid.My […]

  3. republicanmother
    December 24th, 2011 @ 9:56 am

    You mean like this?
    “When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publically taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.” 

    –Ron Paul, Business Wire.

    He has said a variation of this statement over and over, but you know, when it’s all you got on someone, it’s all you’ve got.

  4. Pathfinder's wife
    December 24th, 2011 @ 10:04 am

    Adjjoran, Coolidge is long dead and thus not running. 
    What matters now is who is taking those ideas and running with them?  And that is Ron Paul.  Now, admittedly this also comes with a load of seriously questionable stuff, but instead of simply writing everything off with a dissmissive “he’s crazy and so are his supporters, blah, blah, blah” maybe everyone should take a look at what might be valid points and so some soul searching of their own?  Maybe it points to why the GOP has some problems right now, or even our country as a whole?

    Wouldn’t that better serve the republic?

  5. republicanmother
    December 24th, 2011 @ 10:20 am

    You mean like this:
    Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called “diversity” actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.
    –Rep. Ron Paul 

  6. Anonymous
    December 24th, 2011 @ 10:46 am


    No, I don’t mean like that. That is a more Clintonesque statement than even Clinton would ever be stupid enough to think he could get away with.

    It includes neither “I was wrong” nor “I’m sorry.” It’s 100% “I’m going to make three excuses for why you shouldn’t hold me responsible, then claim I’m taking responsibility, by which I mean that you must not under any circumstances hold me responsible.”


  7. Anonymous
    December 24th, 2011 @ 10:50 am

    While I’m not a Paul fan by any stretch of the imagination, I think it speaks well of his character that of the thousands of female OB/GYN patients he’s treated over decades, not one has yet come out to “Herman Cain” him.

  8. Anonymous
    December 24th, 2011 @ 10:57 am


    Actually, I think you have it backward.

    Those newsletters were written specifically to promote and raise money for a “paleo” presidential strategy which was specifically outlined by Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard, and which was predicated on leveraging racial  and sexual animosities.

    Paul formed an exploratory committee in 1992 pursuant to that strategy, then backed out and supported Buchanan. By 2008, the strategy was no longer sound (if ever it was), but the old stuff popped up to bite him in the ass.

  9. republicanmother
    December 24th, 2011 @ 10:57 am

    Geez. You guys are becoming like libs wanting a Soviet like denouncement. Are you aware of the psychological conditioning involve here? For him to be legitimate, he has to use YOUR words in his apology. 

  10. Zilla of the Resistance
    December 24th, 2011 @ 11:00 am
  11. Anonymous
    December 24th, 2011 @ 11:07 am


    On the contrary, there’s nothing I want from Paul at all. 

    I’m just paying attention to what he actually says, instead of pretending he said what you wish he’d said.

  12. ThePaganTemple
    December 24th, 2011 @ 11:18 am

    I think its pretty fucking sad when one of the things that is said in a persons favor is that he’s a doctor who has never molested his patients, or at least has never been accused of doing so. That’s supposed to be a god damn given.

  13. ThePaganTemple
    December 24th, 2011 @ 11:25 am

    Bullshit, how is it Ron Paul gets credit for wanting to balance the budget and reduce government spending, bureaucracy, regulations, taxes, and go back to small government and federalism?

    Bachmann, Perry, and to a lesser extent Santorum are all for the same things. Even Newt in some regards. Hell, you don’t have to limit yourself to presidential candidates, look at most of the Republicans in the House and many in the Senate, then look at the many Republicans in state and regional offices.

    Paul might be more extreme than most of them, but what it all boils down to, the rest of them aren’t booger-eating conspiracy theorists looking for a Rothschilde to pop out from under their beds at night.

  14. Anonymous
    December 24th, 2011 @ 11:26 am


    What I meant, as opposed to what you seem to want to think I mean:

    I don’t  find it surprising that Paul never molested any of his patients. You’re right — that should be a given.

    I find it surprising that his opponents apparently haven’t been able to find even one who’s willing to accuse him of it. Yet.

  15. Dcmick
    December 24th, 2011 @ 11:55 am

    And what of the Left?

    Margaret Sanger come to mind?

    Ruth Bader Ginsburg recently remarked upon the social value of abortion by mentioning how it culls the number of undesirables.  Her phrase was so nakedly racist that it stunned the audience, and the MSM passed over her comments.


  16. » Mainstream mediocre
    December 24th, 2011 @ 2:43 pm

    […] Perhaps invoking the spirit of Roman Hruska, Robert Stacy McCain expounds on the wonders of represen… This is the beauty of democracy, a tribute to our nation’s greatness, that even the dangerously deluded are entitled to representation in the halls of Congress, where courageous men and women like Ron Paul, Maxine Waters, Sheldon Whitehouse, Alan Grayson and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz are unfraid to Speak Truth to Power on behalf on their core constituencies of kooks. […]

  17. Betty Liberty
    December 24th, 2011 @ 3:10 pm

    Be nice if there was still such a thing as ‘investigative journalism.’  Newt Gingrich is behind the desperate smear of Ron Paul, including Gloria Borger of CNN wrapped in the tentacles of DC firm Powell Tate.

  18. Bruce
    December 24th, 2011 @ 4:31 pm

    Y’know, there’s an old German woman 2 blocks from me  who repeats ad nauseum ‘Hitler was a gentleman’ because of his ‘MutterKinde’ program, which saved her life by giving her mother and her free trip to the warm mediterranean when she was a Tubercular child or something.  

    Women loved Hitler. Perhaps they, as a vote block, did more to bring him to power and keep him there than anyone. Screaming baby-tantrum speeches eh? They had to keep Eva Braun secret, just like they had to keep Paul McCartney’s marriage secret.  

    Ron is a neat inversion: baby-boy looks (gentle hands!), but quiet tough-talk (or what women understand as ‘tough’ ie weaselly dissembling of vicious bigotry, sorry ladies but admit it! That ladies prefer Brando-esque bad-boys to fair-handed sherriffs). Paul is the baby-faced bad-boy.

    We’re doomed!

  19. Pathfinder's wife
    December 24th, 2011 @ 6:21 pm

    My husband’s family is also from Germany, and would tell you it wasn’t just the women who went gaga over the nasty, little corporal — there were a set of circumstances in place that helped that vile man to rise to power and make some of the more weak minded (and most importantly weak charactered) fall for him and most importantly for many to consider him the lesser of two evils (and it should be remembered that at a certain point it was not a good idea to speak ill of him — if my husband’s grandfather was around he could tell you so).

    Hmmm, giving oneself over to a demogogue, looking vainly for a hiemat, willing to settle for what you think is the lesser of two evils — and above all else wanting to be in the “cool kids group” as well as to “stay safe at all costs”….kinda sounds familiar doesn’t it?

    Yeah, we’re probably doomed — but it won’t be because of women finding Ron Paul to be a baby faced bad boy (but thanks, I now have coffee up my nose…there are many ways I’ve considered RP…that was never one of them).

  20. Pathfinder's wife
    December 24th, 2011 @ 6:31 pm

    Well that is why I have thrown my support to Santorum (and Bachmann is supported by many in my family — for me she shot herself in the foot with some of her comments).

    Perry?  I don’t really trust that he is doing anything other than pandering — his record in Texas has not been supportive of the idea that he is truly that adverse to statism.

    As for the other Republicans — they aren’t running (and here is where I get to be remarkably free in my choice — my “guy”, the one I might have emotional attachments to that could cloud my thinking, isn’t running…a very liberating experience once you get over the disappointment).

  21. Bruce
    December 24th, 2011 @ 6:36 pm

    Yeah and women weren’t the only ones who liked the Beatles, but Beatlemania had everything to do with the new economic power of postwar women. Without postwar women, no Beatles surely. 

    People often blame boomers for stuff, but which group of boomers changed more than their grandparents? Just like every black voter doesn’t vote for Obama, but the black vote is essential to his success. It’s ok, women as aware individuals are always different. Just like I’m part Irish-Catholic, yet I think think the I-C’s as a (tribal) group bear responsibility for a lot of recent crap in democracies – I’m part of that group, and not. Kathy Shaidle often hints at the same point I’m making here too. 

  22. Pathfinder's wife
    December 24th, 2011 @ 6:41 pm

    I would consider it more an ugly form of tribalism, but I could see where it could be called collectivism.  However, I believe it is part and parcel of human nature and thus can never be truly extinguished by anything but the equality of the grave.  Thus both RP and the very thing he argues against here are disengenuous — the best we can hope to do is keep our tribalistic urges in check so they don’t become too nasty.

    And it would have been better for your canidate if he’d come out with that more and less of the insanity in those newsletters (and the Bradley Manning thing was a serious screw up, much like some of his foreign policy).

    It is a pity that the more agreeable parts of his platform have to be couched with the ones that just can’t be abided by — at least for me.

  23. What Do Ron Paul and Charles Manson Have in Common? « Catholic Bandita
    December 24th, 2011 @ 6:58 pm

    […] Linked by Don Surber in his Daily Scoreboard…/ Stacy McCain / Zilla of the Resistance […]

  24. The Wondering Jew
    December 24th, 2011 @ 10:44 pm

    Cute Zingers are no substitute for an actual argument or a set of facts actually supporting your position.

  25. K-Bob
    December 24th, 2011 @ 11:19 pm

    I’m done arguing with the Ron Paul folks.

  26. Pathfinder's wife
    December 25th, 2011 @ 10:30 am

    You know, the more I think about this one the more it was a bad analogy on your part Angela.

    Islam isn’t a race — you are in it by (some) choice.

    And Islam does want to kill non-believers (not all muslims subscribe to following the letter of the Quran, but many do and it is there) — so a fear and loathing of Islam (aka. Islamophobia) isn’t such a far fetched thing to feel as Islam does set forth an organized declaration of future slaughter which it encourages its adherents to pursue (we are fortunate that quite a few of them do not, but…).

  27. Pathfinder's wife
    December 25th, 2011 @ 10:35 am

    Bruce, one of the biggest problems in trying to keep such evil people away from reins of power is that others like to say “oh, this group or that group is responsible for him/her”.  Actually what they are trying to do is say “not me, I’m innocent — heck, I”m a victim!”

    Nope, everybody is guilty when that sort of stuff goes down — even members of the loyal opposition (because they didn’t really oppose all that hard now after all, did they?).

    Sorry buddy, women were guilty as sin…but so were men.  Nobody gets to ride for free.

  28. ThePaganTemple
    December 25th, 2011 @ 3:16 pm

    Yep, I bet Newt wrote those nasty racist, antisemitic newsletters and put Paul’s name on them starting more than twenty years ago, didn’t he Betty? LOL

  29. Red Phillips
    December 26th, 2011 @ 1:40 pm

    This post makes me sad. As does my recent discovery at AmSpec that you apparently are backing or are at least sympathetic to Santorum. It would appear that the former “paleoish” or “paleo sympathetic” RSM has gone completely mainstream native.
    Back when you were defending Rush, some of my paleoish friends at that time decided that you were no longer a crypto paleo and had gone full mainstream movement con, but I defended you saying you were just defending Rush against moderates which you could still do and keep your paleo credentials intact, although some qualification of that support would be in order. Sadly, it appears my friends were right and I was wrong.
    I would think that given the attempted purge of you by Charles Johnson and his band of PC thought policers that you would be very reluctant to join in on the attempted purge of Ron Paul by the same politically correct forces of Cultural Marxism, but apparently not.
    I agree that the language sited above is over the top and an obvious attempt to sell newsletter subscriptions to the type of people who subscribed to newsletters in the late 80’s and early 90’s, but NO ONE who has any fondness for Santorum has any business accusing anyone else of fearmongering. Ever since Santorum lost his Senate seat, he has been attempting to carve out a niche for himself as most absurd fearmongerer. Santorum even warned us that we need to be afraid of the rising Venezuelan menace. (I wish I was kidding, but I’m not.)
    I don’t excuse over-the-top language, and I have said that Paul should have apologized for the language without conceding to the accusation that the newsletters contained things that were inherently racist. I haven’t seen anything that was overtly, inherently racist. But Paul’s ghost-writer’s over-the-top language was in the service of selling newsletters and making a buck. Santorum’s over the top fearmongering is in the service of sending US soldiers off to kill and be killed in more needless wars.
    And your use of thought stopping slurs like “moonbat” “kook” “tin-foil hatters” and casual references to mental illness, etc. is simply inexcusable. You fought Charles Johnson yet you have become Charles Johnson. Is it worth it Stacy? Is all that mainstream acceptability really worth it when you look in the mirror every morning and know you sold your soul and have become that which you used to buck?
    I have obviously not been keeping up with your career path. I assumed you were still paleoish, and I just assumed since you opposed the invasion of Iraq and I thought had non-interventionist leanings that you were supporting Ron Paul, although perhaps secretly. What a difference a few years and a brush with the PC police can make I guess. Well at least we still have Jim Antle.