Friday, December 23, 2011

Did Ron Paul appear on white supremacist radio show?

According to a contemporaneous blog post by a Ron Paul supporter, Ron Paul appeared on the nation's most popular white supremacist radio program, The Political Cesspool. That program is associated with the Council of Conservative Citizens (formerly known as the White Citizens Councils) and had been supportive of David Duke and others of that ilk. It's sponsors include the Institute for Historical Review, the nation's largest organization devoted to Holocaust denial.

The blog post announcing Ron Paul's appearance on the show (which can be read here) reads as follows:

One of the only truly conservative Congressmen in office today, Ron Paul, will be doing a live interview on The Political Cesspool tonight. The show is from 7-8 PM Central time and can be heard locally (Memphis) on 1380 AM WLRM or the live stream or archives if you miss it live will be at No matter what your opinion of the Cesspool is you will not want to miss this interview. I have heard that No Child Left Behind and possible Bush impeachment will be discussed, but I am not 100% sure on that. Tune in to find out.

Oddly, the recording of that day's interview does not appear in the show's otherwise meticulous archives. Searching the August 2006 archives (here: The Political Cesspool Radio Program), reveals the one day gap in their records. Could it be that the people at Political Cesspool scrubbed Ron Paul from their archives because they understand that an appearance on their show might damage his reputation?

UPDATE: (12/23/2011 3:00 PM):

It turns out that the blogger who listed Ron Paul as a guest on Political Cesspool was Austin Farley, the program's co-creator and original co-host.  (Read here: This lends considerable credence to his post.

UPDATE (12/24/2011 11:00 AM):

 I've found conflicting evidence concerning whether Ron Paul appeared on the Political Cesspool show. First, confirmation that he was scheduled to appear on the program has been found in a notice written by the program's host posted on the neo-Nazi Stormfront website. A screenshot of the notice can be seen below. For those who want to see the original, click here.

Don Black, who runs Stormfront, has claimed in a post on the website that Ron Paul was scheduled to be interviewed on Political Cesspool, but that his campaign cancelled the interview at the last minute. (A screenshot of that post is below. The original can be read here.)


Anonymous said...

g'bye, ron.

Christopher said...

The Ron Paul opposition is truly grasping at straws now.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Adam Holland said...

Gratuitously obscene, threatening or libelous comments most likely won't be posted.

Benjamin H. said...

I think Ron Paul supporters tend to see through a straw when it comes to anything criticizing the dear leader.

he who scoffs at danger said...

so, the answer to your question is "no. ron paul did not appear on the white supremacist radio show." answered by the same source which led you to the question in the first place.

yet the question appears to remain open for you. you appear to trust a racist malefactor only when he's telling you what you want to hear. weird, that.

considering that every popularly-trafficked conservative blog is bludgeoning paul with the "racist newsletters" story every bit as earnestly as their progressive counterparts, and that the latest run of this story was begun by the conservative publication, the weekly standard, when do we get to the part where we discuss how progressives were starstruck and in love with ron paul from 2004-2008, roughly a decade after the "racist newsletters first came to light?

e.g.,: "i've always had a lot of admiration for the way you've run your campaign..."

Adam Holland said...

Mu original source for the story was the co-creator of the Political Cesspool. The only indication that the interview didn't actually occur comes from the neo-Nazi who runs Stormfront. I don't regard him as a reliable source.

With respect to Ron Paul's racist newsletters, I want to know how they came to be written and published, who was responsible, how much money was made by publishing them and who got that money. I would also like Ron Paul to explain his shifting defenses for the newsletters, from his initial statement that he wrote them and that they were inoffensive in context, to his current claim not to have ever read them.

You clearly want to sweep it all under a rug, but that isn't going to happen. Racism is a serious matter and Ron Paul and his supporters have got to start treating it as such.

he who scoffs at danger said...

Actually, there is one other indicator that the interview never happened: the interview doesn't appear to actually exist (a frustration for you, apparently).

Adam Holland said...

The fact is that the archive for the Political Cesspool has a one day gap where the Ron Paul interview was scheduled. Why do you think that is? If the program appeared in the archive, it would be easily verifiable whether or not Paul appeared. It may be a coincidence that this particular date is missing from the archive, but, to my mind, it raises more questions than it does answers.

he who scoffs at danger said...

Perhaps only if you're really committed to an arrangement where you're walking backwards from a conclusion.

I was surprised at your implication that don black is some out-of-the-loop nobody who is significantly disjoint of the political cesspool show. A cursory googling yeilded numerous first-person accounts of his collaboration with the show's host.

Adam Holland said...

I haven't reached a conclusion about this. I only raised questions. You're the one who's reached a conclusion without sufficient evidence.

With respect to the reliability of Don Black, the man who runs the world's largest neo-Nazi internet forum, that really speaks for itself, doesn't it? I don't claim that he is "out of the loop", as you for some reason think. I think that he is someone who lives to lie, so I take his words with a grain of salt.

he who scoffs at danger said...

...but the guy who runs the premier broadcast format white supremacist radio show lives to tell the truth, such that he is to be taken at his word when he claims to have landed an interview with a major party presidential candidate. Even when that interview failswith to materialize. Do you see my point?

I don't asctually assume one or both were lying about it. I'm content actually to follow ehat the evidence indicates: ron paul had been scheduled to do an interview and cancellsd at the last minute, causing the show to be cancelled at the last minute, leaving the purportedly suspicious gap in the archive. It's called occam's razor.

Adam Holland said...

he who scoffs:

1) You can't seem to grasp the distinction between raising legitimate questions, as I'm doing, and dismissing those questions, as you attempt to do.

2) When a guest cancels an interview on a radio program, that program isn't cancelled. The host fills the time with something else. Now, about that gap in the archive... Political Cesspool's archive is filled with shows where the hosts talk among themselves without a guest, per se. Remind again how Occam's razor explains this particular gap.

Anonymous said...

You do know the logical fallacy you're making here, don't you?

Possibilities that fulfill occoms razor:

1. The archive was lost
2. They re-broadcast a prior show

Possibilities that don't fulfill occoms razor:

1. He did the show, and they're covering it up, and zero people have the file on their computer to come forward.

2. He didn't do the show, and there's a conspiracy to make it look like he did.

So, looks like your position loses in 100% of the likely options and 50% of the unlikely options.

Seriously, LACK of the show's existence is NOT evidence of his being there. You should know better.

he who scoffs at danger said...

in the summer of 2006, as it has been for most of the show's run, the political cesspool was being "broadcast" online. in other words, we're dealing not with a real radio program, with contracts to advertisers that must be satisfied, but with what is essentially a podcast.

with that in mind:

3) in the summer of 2006, the political cesspool podcast was being streamed from the servers of don black's stormfront. this would be the same don black you dismissed as some unaffiliated third party. in fact, don black has facilitated, co-hosted and appeared as a guest on the political cesspool show and his word about it is as germane as that of anyone else involved.

2) there is no entry in the show's archives for friday the 18th when ron paul is supposed to have been been scheduled and to have canceled. this is "suspicious" to you. there is also no entry for wednesday the 16th of that week, or the teusday of the previous week or the first monday and thursday of september. so, what do you suspect of those? is it reasonable to suppose that these are also shows which were "redacted" from the archive, perhaps to protect the reputations of the people who appeared? or is it more likely that the political cesspool podcast is typical of voluntary activist efforts in that it's only as consistent as the interest level of the people doing it?

1) i deserve a gold star for not so far making a cheap shot comparing the manner and substance of your
"question raising" to the sort that progressives famously identified with glen beck.

if all you made of the thing was that ron paul's brand of libertarianism attracts the interest of creeps and cranks, i wouldn't be here needling you. it would be a weak case of the form "hitler liked dogs, therefor people who like dogs are hitlers", but at least it follows the facts.

you want to dismiss facts you discovered yourself because you can't allow yourself to entertain the possibility that paul was talked into appearing on a show which was unknown to him and that he cancelled when its white supremacist theme became known to him. rather, you must have it that paul appeared on the program and the evidence of this was subsequently erased in a mutual collusion designed to protect paul's electoral viability. and this because you're walking backwards from the conclusion that paul himself is a seekrit white supremacist.

Adam Holland said...

You are wrong. Quoting from the show's website (here): "In March of 2005, The Political Cesspool moved to sister station AM 1380 WLRM and began broadcasting live, Monday - Friday, from 7pm - 9pm CST." and " It was also during this period that James tapped Eddie "The Bombardier" Miller to come aboard as an additional co-host, bringing the current staff roster to six. James, Winston Smith, Eddie and Art Frith were typically in on a nightly basis, with Jess Bonds and Bill Rolen coming in-studio as needed."

The program was a nightly broadcast on an AM radio station and had a large staff of regular co-hosts.

Your assertions with respect to Don Black are red herrings. First and most importantly, I don't argue that he was not involved with the show, just that he's not a reliable source. If you take him at his word, that's your business, but don't distort my reason for disagreeing with you. Moreover, in making this argument, you have inflated Black's role in the show. He posted the podcast on his website, he promoted the show's radio broadcast, and he appeared as a guest. You claim he had a greater role, but offer no evidence of this.

I should probably share with you the fact that several close associates of Ron Paul appeared as guests on Political Cesspool, both before and after Paul's scheduled interview in August, 2006. I intend to write about that soon. I'm sure you'll have some explanation for why appeared on the show, and why you believe Ron Paul was tricked into appearing on the show and cancelled at the last minute because he objected to the show's politics. Remind me again of your evidence for that?

he who scoffs at danger said...

It's moot point now that someone you trust implicitly has come forward to confirm that ron paul did in fact cancel his appearance (link: ) , but i did want to note one thing before moving on. I didn't "distort" or "misrepresent" your reasoning for dismissing don black as a source. You never actually presented any reasoning for your axiom that i had to guess. They're both racists, so it can't be that. Perhaps you believe radio to be a truthful mediun and the internet a mendatious one, but that seemed less likely than my conclusion that you, like many people, believe only what you,re prepared to and hate having your beliefs disconfirmed. It's a common human fraility.

It wouldn't really blow my mind to discover that someone who is associated with paul was a guest on the show (per my comments above about cranks and creeps). Given your treatment of this scoop, however, i'd have to wait and weigh what you're likely to portray as an "association" to paul, and particularly a close association.

Adam Holland said...

In other words, I was correct that Ron Paul was scheduled to appear on the country's foremost white supremacist radio show. Now, that program's host has said that the interview was scheduled by Jesse Benton, Ron Paul's campaign manager, and that the two of them remained on good terms. Don't you think that Ron Paul and Jesse Benton have some explaining to do?

he who scoffs at danger said...

With whom were you arguing whether paul was scheduled to be on the show?

Adam Holland said...

You argued that my asking whether Ron Paul was interviewed on a racist radio show reflected a bias on my part. You reached the conclusion that it hadn't happened and hypocritically accused me of reaching a conclusion by dint of my asking the question.

You also provided several bits of false information to support your case, none of which you have acknowledged. You falsely said the radio show wasn't broadcast via radio, merely via podcast. You falsely said that it was produced by Don Black. You falsely said that it wasn't a regular nightly broadcast.

You clearly don't want Ron Paul to be held to account and are willing to distort the facts to help him out. Why do you hold yourself and your candidate to such a low standard?


adamhollandblog [AT] gmail [DOT] com