Jamie Kirchick: "I don’t think Ron Paul is a homophobe; I'm just cynical"
slenderdog | January 8, 2008 at 01:43 pmby
1750 views | 7 Recommendations | 8 comments
Jamie Kirchick, assistant editor of The New Republic, appeared tonight on Tucker Carlson's show to announce--with a smirk on his face the size of Manhattan--that his hit piece accusing Ron Paul of racism, homophobia and anti-semitism would be appearing online the next day--which, by astonishing coincidence happens to be the very day of the New Hampshire primary.
You can read Berchick's article here. It's a smear job, and not a very good one. None of the quotes are referenced so they can't be substantiated. Like so many of Paul's opponents, Berchick has chosen the ad hominem approach, perhaps because there is so little that can be said to defend a bankrupt system against plain common sense.
I first met Jamie at a holiday party held by the venerable libertarian magazine Reason just a few weeks ago. When Jamie saw my "Ron Paul 2008" button, he snickered and said, "Oh, Ron Paul... I've been reading up on him. Have you read the stuff that guy's written? Nasty stuff! Racist, anti-semitic, homophobic!"
I emailed Jamie the next day to engage him further and to ask just what he found so offensive. His response:
Thanks for writing; and I’m glad you enjoyed by [sic] piece in the Boston Globe. I’ll try and make the [DC Log Cabin Republicans] party tonight, though [LCR President] Patrick Sammon isn’t particularly happy with me after I wrote this piece [attacking LCR for not endorsing Giuliani, whom Kirchick calls "the most pro-gay Republican White House contender in history"]
Anyways, I don’t think Ron Paul is a homophobe; I’m just cynical and enjoy getting supporters of political candidates riled up. If you were a Giuliani guy I’d have called him a fascist. But I must say, the Ron Paul supporters are the most enthusiastic of the bunch! [Emphasis added.]
When I responded to ask him when his article might come out so I could read more, he answered: "Patience, my friend :-)"
Let me not mince words. Jamie is a muckraker, a charlatan, and a hypocrite. For being so careless about concealing all these, he is a fool to boot. His bottom-feeding journalism dishonors The New Republic's history as a bastion of high-minded political discourse. His story was deliberately timed to inflict maximum political damage on a man of such uncommonly principled integrity that he is attacked for statements written decades ago by others in his name.
The richest irony is that the Ron Paul grassroots campaign in Washington, DC--Jamie's hometown--has found its earliest and strongest supporters in DC's gay community. It would not surprise me if our slate of delegate and alternate delegate candidates for Ron Paul is the gayest slate in DC (measured by number of gay individuals--not gayness of individuals), very probably the gayest slate in DC ever, and probably one of the gayest slates for a major party Presidential candidate of any state ever.