Is it the end for Ron Paul?

You can always tell when Washington's political establishment feels threatened by the rise of someone new. In 2008, opponents of President Barack Obama pitched a certifiable fit over his alleged lack of citizenship in an attempt to disqualify him from the race. It was a debate that lingered until well into his presidency, when he finally produced a "long form" birth certificate and put the charges to rest. Just recently, Herman Cain, the former front-runner in this year's GOP field, was forced to bow out over charges that he made inappropriate sexual advances to several women while he was president of the National Restaurant Association. And now, there's the controversy surrounding another surprising contender, Texas Congressman Ron Paul.
Paul, a perennial presidential candidate and well-known libertarian, has enjoyed a surprisingly successful run this time around. As of Friday, he was actually leading in Iowa as that state's caucuses rapidly approach. Right on cue, there came allegations that Paul made racially inflammatory comments in newsletters published under his name during the 1980s and into the 1990s.
Granted, the comments highlighted in recent news reports are, to say the least, insensitive, if not outright racist. Among other things, a comment on the 1992 L.A. riots, said, in effect, that the violence would stop "when the blacks stopped to pick up their welfare checks." Another comment referenced a coming race war. But should those unfortunate comments be enough to knock Paul out of the race? I don't think so.
What makes this situation particularly distressing is Paul's surprisingly naive response, especially since he's such a veteran politician. In response to the allegations of racism, he has basically said that not only did he not write the comments, but he was unaware of them because he failed to read his own newsletter. Even worse, he failed to keep track of what was being written in his name. That seems almost inconceivable to me.
How can Paul, who has served honorably in Congress for more than a decade, be so tone-deaf to what his own people are writing in newsletters that are published under his name? Are we really to believe that he never reads his own newsletters?
If I were Paul, I would do much more than simply disavow the comments, as he did recently. The first thing he should do is find the people who made the comments. If they're still working for him, they should be fired. Lay down a rule that nothing is to go out in any newsletter with his name on it without explicit final approval from him. Then, call a news conference to address the comments directly. Let the media and the American people know exactly what his current stance is on race relations. Answer all questions directly. Then, it's time to move on.
Let me be very clear. I in no way like or support the kinds of comments being attributed to Paul in his newsletters. Personally, I think someone who holds such antiquated views has no place as the leader of the free world, or our richly diverse nation. But the comments aren't recent. They're all 20 years old or older. Even if he held those views at one time, there's no guarantee he still feels that way. People change, and Paul should be judged on who he is NOW, not who he was 20 years ago.
I don't believe Ron Paul will be our next president. I don't even believe he has a realistic shot to be the GOP nominee. But I do believe he is someone who has maintained consistent support among a sizable bloc of Americans over a long period of time. He is someone who, if you stop to listen to him, actually makes sense in a lot of what he says. He is a breath of fresh air in a field of largely stale, career politicians. And he deserves a chance to get his message out to the American people. It should be the voters, not the media, that should be the final judge of Ron Paul's 2012 campaign.