Paying Some Attention To Ron Paul

Annie

Diamond Member
Nov 22, 2003
50,848
4,827
1,790
I'm glad to see a conservative publication providing some coverage on what purports to be mainstream conservative/libertarian. It's not.

The American Spectator : Ron Paul and the Neoliberal Reeducation Campaign

Ron Paul and the Neoliberal Reeducation Campaign

By Jeffrey Lord on 8.23.11 @ 6:09AM
To bring about radical and permanent change in any society, our primary focus must be on the conversion of minds through education.
-- Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul



Sigh.



Somebody needs to say this.



Does Ron Paul have a lot of interesting ideas he puts forward as a presidential candidate?

Yes. From his honestly libertarian views (he was the 1988 Libertarian presidential nominee, so he's been at this a long time) to his willingness to challenge the status quo on economics (questioning the role of everything from sugar subsidies to the Federal Reserve) to his emphasis on the Constitution and the Founding Fathers, Congressman Paul has been fearless in sticking with his principles. And in bringing new ideas -- or old ideas -- to an American electorate that has been staggered by the far-left reality that is the Obama Administration.



But as complaints surface in the wake of his strong showing in the Iowa Straw Poll, complaints from Paul supporters and candidate Paul himself that he is not receiving the attention that is his due -- someone should say the Congressman and his supporters are correct. There should be -- must be -- more attention paid to the Paul campaign.



Why?



Because the Paul campaign is not just a campaign for president. This is a campaign -- a serious campaign -- to re-educate the American people to an alternate universe of reality. A campaign that goes far beyond whatever will happen at the polls in 2012.



And sorry to say, this re-education campaign does not present a pretty picture of itself.

Looming over the interesting and appealing ideas of the Paul campaign is a veritable political tornado of allegations involving anti-Semitism, racism, pacifism, far left-wingism and, at the edges, a tiny flicker of intimidation.




So let's spill it all out on the table and take a look...

That's the intro, takes up about 3/4 of the first page. The article is 6 pages long. Enjoy.
 
Republicans are terrified of Ron Paul.

Only the corrupt republicans.

Corrupt Republicans (most Republicans), All Democrats are afraid of Ron Paul and neither of the groups have your best interest in mind. If we want good government to return to Washington we have to do it without the help of either party. God Bless Ron Paul. No I'm not part of the christian conservative militia just a regular American wishing Ron the best.
 
I'm good with Paul right up until he starts talking about legalizing ALL DRUGS. That alone makes me think the man must be insane.

Pot, yes. ALL DRUGS, no freegin' way.
 
I'm not terrified, I am concerned about racists though, whatever the party they call themselves.

To infer that Ron Paul is a racist is utterly absurd. I can't believe you would even fall for that bullshit.
 
I'm good with Paul right up until he starts talking about legalizing ALL DRUGS. That alone makes me think the man must be insane.

Pot, yes. ALL DRUGS, no freegin' way.

The insane ones are people like you who think continuing to do the same thing over and over and over will somehow eventually lead to a different result.
 
I'm good with Paul right up until he starts talking about legalizing ALL DRUGS. That alone makes me think the man must be insane.

Pot, yes. ALL DRUGS, no freegin' way.

The insane ones are people like you who think continuing to do the same thing over and over and over will somehow eventually lead to a different result.

Well before you get any more of your PUKE on yourself, perhaps you should give some proof that I believe doing the same thing over and over and over will lead to a different result... dumbass fuck.
 
Show of Paulists hands! How many bothered to read the article? What 'facts' are wrong?
 
Show of Paulists hands! How many bothered to read the article? What 'facts' are wrong?

I'll be truthful, I didn't. I'm not voting for him anyway so I don't care. What I know about him already turns me off.
 
I'm good with Paul right up until he starts talking about legalizing ALL DRUGS. That alone makes me think the man must be insane.

Pot, yes. ALL DRUGS, no freegin' way.

The insane ones are people like you who think continuing to do the same thing over and over and over will somehow eventually lead to a different result.

Well before you get any more of your PUKE on yourself, perhaps you should give some proof that I believe doing the same thing over and over and over will lead to a different result... dumbass fuck.

When you feel like growing up let me know and we'll discuss.
 
The insane ones are people like you who think continuing to do the same thing over and over and over will somehow eventually lead to a different result.

Well before you get any more of your PUKE on yourself, perhaps you should give some proof that I believe doing the same thing over and over and over will lead to a different result... dumbass fuck.

When you feel like growing up let me know and we'll discuss.

No, when you're able to back up your shit talk, we'll discuss. Til then, STFU.
 
I'll do my best to address some the claims in this article.

"When it comes to foreign policy, Ron Paul and his supporters are not conservatives."

Well I'm a Ron Paul supporter and when it comes to foreign policy or any other issue it's true that I'm not a conservative. However, that doesn't mean that Ron Paul's foreign policy views aren't conservative. Isn't conservatism based on the idea that government should be limited? If so then what could be more conservative than a non-interventionist foreign policy? Robert Taft saw this, Russell Kirk saw this, and Ron Paul sees this. Are we really going to argue that Robert Taft and Russell Kirk weren't conservatives? The author of this article tries to say Taft's non-interventionism was a break with conservatism, but that's obviously ridiculous. Taft's goal was to limit government, and he knew that you can't limit government at home while supporting big government abroad. The author doesn't bother mentioning Russell Kirk at all.

Anti-Semitism

The argument here is because that some people in history who have agreed with some of Paul's ideas, and they might have been anti-semites, which is not very convincingly argued in and of itself, and because Ben Stein once accused Ron Paul of anti-semitism, and Ben Stein is oh so wonderful, Paul must be an anti-semite. Not convinced? Well then it's clear, according to the author, that when we "Paulists" throw around the term "neocon" we really mean "Jew." The author then goes on to define neoconservatism and states that it has nothing to do with being Jewish. I'm pretty sure Ron Paul would agree since he would include George Bush and John McCain as neocons, and I don't think he's mistaking them for Jews.

The author then goes on to list a bunch of "conservatives" and says that Ron Paul hates them. Well, again, if we define a conservative as somebody who wants to limit government then none of those "conservatives" listed are conservatives.

If you're not convinced after reading these very "intelligent" arguments the author then throws in some stuff about how we "Paulists" hate Abraham Lincoln, and calls us neo-confederates.

So there you go. This is an article by an obvious neocon, and I don't mean Jew, who has an axe to grind with Ron Paul because he doesn't like his foreign policy of anti-imperialism, and seeks to slander him so that people won't want to associate with Ron Paul or the "Paulists."
 
At times when he is speaking, I say right on brother the man knows what he is talking about, but then he goes off the boat with, businesses don't need to check immigration status. Get rid of the CIA, DHS, FBI, DEA, Border Partol, Coast Guard, INS, NSA etc and I say the man is nutz and he frightens me AS AN AMERICAN!

He is the only guy who would could screw up America more than Obama (OK, Palin and Bachmann could screw it up close to the Big O, that is why I would go 3rd party with them) and the only guy who would make me vote for the Big O!
 

Forum List

Back
Top