I believe Paul when he says he did not write them, and that he is angry, hurt, and embarrassed that they have been attributed to him. Let me explain why.
Alien to Paul
The controversy over these newsletters is not new. They first surfaced as an issue in Paul’s 1996 congressional race. In 2001, Sam Gwynne, executive editor of the prominent progressive magazine Texas Monthly, noted in a lengthy profile of Paul: “What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U. S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this.”
Similarly, in early 2007, New York Times Magazine writer Christopher Caldwell wrote that Paul had disowned the comments "quite believably, since the style diverges widely from his own..."
Former TNR editor Andrew Sullivan, who had endorsed Paul prior to the TNR article, calls the material “ugly, vile, despicable tracts,” but notes: “I've listened to him speak a great deal these past few months and either he has had a personality transplant or he didn't write this.”
They are correct. The offensive newsletter articles are indeed wildly, ludicrously, grotesquely out of synch with Paul's lifetime writing style, voting record, public statements, and personal conduct. They are, to those who are familiar with him and his record, very clearly not his own. Few if any in the mainstream media believe he actually wrote them.
Even the TNR article doesn’t seriously argue they are his words. According to Berin M. Szoka of Gays and Lesbians for Ron Paul, a few weeks before the TNR hit piece was published, the author, Jamie Kirchick, emailed Szoka: “I don’t think Ron Paul is a homophobe; I’m just cynical and enjoy getting supporters of political candidates riled up.”
The obvious question, then: If, as Paul claims, he did not write them, how did they appear in a newsletter with his name on it?