Dr. Paul and the Neo-Confederacy
Submitted by Fecund Stench on Sat, 01/12/2008 - 2:13pm
I enjoy listening to Ron Paul. He definitely makes debates more interesting. And as he may not have risen in the polls, but certainly moved more onto the national stage, the detractors were bound to come out. Reports of years and years of racism and conspiracy theory printed in his name are damning enough to give one pause. But Jim Kirchik's article in The New Republic exposed even more tragic associations.
From Kirchik's TNR piece:
To understand Paul's philosophy, the best place to start is probably the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Auburn, Alabama. The institute is named for a libertarian Austrian economist, but it was founded by a man named Lew Rockwell, who also served as Paul's congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982. Paul has had a long and prominent association with the institute, teaching at its seminars and serving as a "distinguished counselor." The institute has also published his books...
Thomas E. Woods Jr., a member of the institute's senior faculty, is a founder of the League of the South, a secessionist group, and the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, a pro-Confederate, revisionist tract published in 2004. Paul enthusiastically blurbed Woods's book, saying that it "heroically rescues real history from the politically correct memory hole." Thomas DiLorenzo, another senior faculty member and author of The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, refers to the Civil War as the "War for Southern Independence" and attacks "Lincoln cultists"; Paul endorsed the book on MSNBC last month in a debate over whether the Civil War was necessary (Paul thinks it was not). In April 1995, the institute hosted a conference on secession at which Paul spoke; previewing the event, Rockwell wrote to supporters, "We'll explore what causes [secession] and how to promote it." Paul's newsletters have themselves repeatedly expressed sympathy for the general concept of secession. In 1992, for instance, the Survival Report argued that "the right of secession should be ingrained in a free society" and that "there is nothing wrong with loosely banding together small units of government. With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, we too should consider it."
Sorry Dr. Paul, I'm not laughing anymore.
From Tim Wise at WIP on the neo-confederacy:
Southern heritage means a good deal more than the Confederacy, and indeed, a good deal that is better that that: a tradition of struggle and triumph on the road to liberty; a tradition of music and literature, and artwork, and any number of things one could venerate without having to honor a government that openly proclaimed its belief in racial supremacy and sought to hold millions of other human beings in bondage. It says something, and not something flattering, that so many people would prefer to celebrate the machinations of those who desired black servitude, than the struggles of those blacks and their white allies, who struggled for freedom.
From a 2000 Southern Exposure Magazine:
"Gov. Bush has gone out of his way to embrace the agenda of the Old South - a position that, if made public, would alienate most forward-looking Southerners, not to mention the rest of the country."
Most disturbing, Kromm says, is Bush's support for the Museum of the Confederacy ball, held at the Tredgar Iron Works in Richmond, Virginia, where slaves worked to build war material for the Confederate Army. Each year, the ball draws hundreds of all-white guests in period costume to a hall festooned with Confederate flags.
In 1996, the ball drew "astonishment and outrage" from black leaders in the city - which is 55% African-American - according to the New York Times. Backers said the ball was designed "not to celebrate the era of slavery, but to tell a story," the Times reported. But detractors note the Museum and the ball show clear sympathy for the Confederate cause. The title of the 1996 event, "Bonnie Blue Ball," was an open celebration of the Bonnie Blue flag, the flag of secession of the Confederacy.
From the SPLC On the Sons of Confederate Veterans:
Calls for Sullivan's ouster came fast and furious from SCV members who ironically had earlier worked with Sullivan, and Wilson before him, to expel some 400 anti-racists from the North Carolina division. McManus, one of the main supporters of the North Carolina purge, wrote in a recent E-mail that Sullivan should quit.
Here's more on the purge:
Since Denne Sweeney took over as SCV commander in chief in August 2004, the group's executive council has been stripped of moderate former commanders. A purge of some 300 members, accused of disloyalty for criticizing racism in the SCV, was completed. An ancient alliance with the Military Order of Stars & Bars, a sister organization for descendants of Confederate officers, was scuttled, and a bitter war with another old ally, the United Daughters of the Confederacy, erupted. Sweeney suspended an entire state division of the SCV and replaced its leaders. He diverted money originally intended for the upkeep of a cemetery and building a museum to a brand-new political arm. He promoted followers with documented racist histories to key national leadership positions. Through it all, Sweeney presided over an exodus of fully 25% of the SCV's membership, which fell from 36,000 to 27,000.
What a shame this sordid story leads right to our back yard.
- Fecund Stench's blog
- 505 reads
Fecund Strenh and his racist Neo-Conism disinformation
I enjoy listening to Ron Paul. He definitely makes debates more interesting.*Fecund Stench
No you don't! You wouldn't be busting your ass trying to smear the Paul revolution as a racist campaign. It won't fly and one suggests that you get a better source than that Rudy G. supporter Kirchik's kid. You are aware that Kirchik only finish college last year and is a confirmed fascist Gay porn promoter?
The Hunt for Confederate Gold
by Thomas Moore
Decentralization. Anti-war. Anti-Empire. Evil federal agents thwarted in the 21st century. Lincoln 's handiwork unraveling. Gold standard restored. There is nothing for LewRockwell.com readers not to like in Thomas Moore's novel released July 21. The author is a disillusioned former Pentagon official and Republican insider who has accepted that the Empire is irredeemable and knows where some of its weak spots are. He has given us a near-plausible, near future, hope-raising scenario of how it might be driven into retreat. Alexandria VA : Fusilier Books, 318 pp., $17.50 (quality paperback)
Rachels Review:
I had the opportunity to read "The Hunt for Confederate Gold " by Thomas Moore. It is a good thriller akin to "The Da Vinci Code." I devoured the book and could not put it down.
It blends both the War of Northern Agression , better known as the Civil War, and the war in Iraq . And it leads the reader on a chase for the elusive Confederate gold . But more than just a good story is the philosophy behind the book.It is a tale of the out-of-contol federal prosecution and the FBI ran amok. It is a discussion of the Leviathan-like federal government and how our liberties have been trampled on and our culture deteriorated. It is a story of hope for our future. Here is an example:"The foundation of a stable, moral society is a stable, honest currency, yet few of our fellow Southerners think about that. They focus on who's getting elected to this or that office, on who'sgetting appointed to the Supreme Court. They focus on all all the trappings of two-party politics, which is a rigged, fraudulent and even irrelevant enterprise.... People have been badly duped for decades by their so-called leaders and the kept media, made ignorant by [g]overnment schools, and made vulnerable to financial panic by the money cartel. Most people are virtual slaves, dependent on a debt-and- fiat money system that sucks them dry of their wealth yet provides no real security. It's possible that our people no longer have the courage and good sense to grasp the lifeline they being offered."
It is a must-read for the serious student of liberty.
This will probably get me in trouble, but
I have a few questions, Max:
a) Do you really believe in all the secessionist Libertarian anti-government thinly-veiled racist bullshit you keep posting here?
b) If you do, are you aware of what this site (BlueNC) is about, and how much in conflict a lot of your comments are with the Democratic Party as a whole and progressives in particular?
I know many of your comments are made in good-hearted jest, but there's quite a few strong insults scattered through there also. You've hit me a few times with them and I've tried not to take it personal, but those days are probably over.
And I'm not going to sit by while you promote the ideas of lunatic-fringe bigots like Thomas Moore:
You can believe anything you want to, Max, and it appears you are free to post these beliefs on BlueNC whenever and wherever you like. But as long as I have the strength, I'm going to make sure people who read this blog are aware that your views are not shared by everybody here.
Stop him and waterboard Max right now!
This will probably get me in trouble, but* scharrison
Not really! Does Blackwater do the enforcing at this site?
I have a few questions, Max:* scharrison
Good for you! A open mind is always nice to know, but don't be so-open liberal minded that your brains fall out?
a) Do you really believe in all the secessionist Libertarian anti-government thinly-veiled racist bullshit you keep posting here?* scharrison
I am not aware of any third America revolution to succeed from the United States. Is there some movement out there and do they have a draft board in place like our present government? And stop calling me a war mongering liberatarian like Neal Boozt, Art Pope, Glen Beck and host of phony neo-con radio talk show village idiots....I am a seeker of liberty like that Great Democrat Thomas Jefferson....you might know him...the Democrats have a dinner and day name after him! After all, he was the founder of the Democratic party!
b) If you do, are you aware of what this site (BlueNC) is about, and how much in conflict a lot of your comments are with the Democratic Party as a whole and progressives in particular?* scharrison
Take that up with Thomas Jefferson and not me! Are you suggesting that the Democrats toss old Thomas out of the party like the Republicans do when disent comes forth?
I know many of your comments are made in good-hearted jest, but there's quite a few strong insults scattered through there also. You've hit me a few times with them and I've tried not to take it personal, but those days are probably over.* scharrison
You are too thin skin and focus on the wrong enemy.....Try Blackwater! They are the real racist fascist bastards in this State....
And I'm not going to sit by while you promote the ideas of lunatic-fringe bigots like Thomas Moore:* scharrison
Well! Stand up and attend the next anti-war meeting with Mr Moore!
The culture of death inherent in man-worship and God-hatred takes many forms, the most obvious of which are the insistence on abortion and infanticide, the aggressive promotion of homosexuality...
We should start by doing something about the godless Marxist indoctrination camps laughably called public schools...
Second, shut down Third World immigration. Only at our peril can we ignore the direct connection between mass immigration and mass killings. The Virginia Tech killer was an immigrant from Korea. No doubt his family are decent and hard-working people and are shocked and shamed by what he has done. But honestly, did we really need another laundry in Northern Virginia? Was having them here worth the price of 32 innocent dead?
So what is your problem? You want to start the civil war all again and prove you were right about Mr Moore being a bastard against a Federal Beast that is devoring your life and civil rights along with being out of control with war mongering polices?
You can believe anything you want to, Max, and it appears you are free to post these beliefs on BlueNC whenever and wherever you like. But as long as I have the strength, I'm going to make sure people who read this blog are aware that your views are not shared by everybody here.* scharrison
Well knock yourself out! And you are worry about me forcing some people to accept my opinions? You sound like some damn control freak neo-con republican with that kind of police state mind set......
Since you brought up Thomas Jefferson,
why don't we discuss the Libertarians' hero a little bit? Especially in light of the anti-Abe Lincoln approach Ron Paul and the Lew Rockwell gang think is going to impress black voters into joining up. Along the way, these geniuses actually believe blacks will also be convinced the Civil War was a mistake...I know, it's pretty far-fetched.
Anyway, Abe Lincoln is now being painted as a racist white-separatist, and there is some validity to this opinion. Like most successful politicians, he did quite a bit of waffling and/or flip-flopping in his time, and made more than one comment about keeping the races separate from each other.
And supposedly the real hero (Jefferson), even though he owned slaves, was not like that. He was a compassionate man who believed in liberty for all. The argument goes, if Jeffersonian philosophy had prevailed, the slaves would have been freed long before Lincoln even got into politics, simply as a natural product of a liberty-minded populace.
While that isn't a totally unbelievable scenario, we'll really never know (as BJ has said). But let's just see what Jefferson actually had in mind for the slaves:
Hmmm. Not only is that a White separatist viewpoint, that last one smells a little like opportunism...
Just as an added bonus (for those who didn't fall asleep reading), here's a little Jeffersonian jewel about taxing the rich more than the poor:
That's a great idea, Thomas!
Rabbit Trails in real time politics?
Since you brought up Thomas Jefferson,*scharrison
Not me! He was simply a reference to the founding of the Democrat party
why don't we discuss the Libertarians' hero a little bit? Especially in light of the anti-Abe Lincoln approach Ron Paul and the Lew Rockwell gang think is going to impress black voters into joining up. Along the way, these geniuses actually believe blacks will also be convinced the Civil War was a mistake...I know, it's pretty far-fetched.*scharrison
At far as I know, Jefferson is a hero to all Americans, including FDR who promoted and build a monument to him during the depression! I had no idea that Jefferson was a monopoly in certain political correct circles seize by the so-called libertarians that you rage about! No political group has a right to certain minority groups if they think in collectism and not individualism....Which appears to be your very weak link about the right of choice of the individual.
Black groups are many factions just like Democrats, so what is your problem besides thinking lew rockwell has some weird idea about seizing the black factions and forcing them to vote for Paul....That is like the Republicans thinking they have the black votes and the Latin vote in their back pocket given a couple of hundred of years more to promote....
Anyway, Abe Lincoln is now being painted as a racist white-separatist, and there is some validity to this opinion. Like most successful politicians, he did quite a bit of waffling and/or flip-flopping in his time, and made more than one comment about keeping the races separate from each other.*scharrison
He sure was! So what is the problem? Of course he said some terrible things about the Black race in his campaigning before the war.......He was part of the industrial northern corporate complex, so what else is new?
And supposedly the real hero (Jefferson), even though he owned slaves, was not like that. He was a compassionate man who believed in liberty for all. The argument goes, if Jeffersonian philosophy had prevailed, the slaves would have been freed long before Lincoln even got into politics, simply as a natural product of a liberty-minded populace.*scharrison
True! So what is the problem again? This country expanded into the start of a nation empire very fast with the slave states wanting to get the drop on non-slave states in the Federal control of the nation....
While that isn't a totally unbelievable scenario, we'll really never know (as BJ has said). But let's just see what Jefferson actually had in mind for the slaves:*scharrison
And don't forget that Jefferson father 3 sons by his black mistress Sally after his wife died which became a major campaign issue in a very nasty,nasty presidental campaign...Sorted blows your do not touch and mixed the blood theory to hell does'n it?
"The improvement of the blacks in body and mind, in the first instance of their mixture with the whites, has been observed by every one, and proves that their inferiority is not the effect merely of their condition of life." Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XIV, 1782. ME 2:197
"Among the Romans emancipation required but one effort. The slave, when made free, might mix with, without staining the blood of his master. But with us a second is necessary, unknown to history. When freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XIV, 1782. ME 2:201
"I concur entirely in [the] leading principles of gradual emancipation, of establishment on the coast of Africa, and the patronage of our nation until the emigrants shall be able to protect themselves... Personally, I am ready and desirous to make any sacrifice which shall ensure their gradual but complete retirement from the State, and effectually, at the same time, establish them elsewhere in freedom and safety." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Humphreys, 1817. ME 15:102
No big deal Lincoln and the republican party promote it in their first political platform in 1856.....So who is the real racist in this corporate move? Same as below!
"Indeed, nothing is more to be wished than that the United States would themselves undertake to make such an establishment on the coast of Africa. Exclusive of motives of humanity, the commercial advantages to be derived from it might repay all its expenses." --Thomas Jefferson to John Lynch, 1811. ME 13:12
Hmmm. Not only is that a White separatist viewpoint, that last one smells a little like opportunism...*scharrison
So what? All slave societies in history have remove so-called barbarians from their state soil, including socialist counties, communist counties, half-ass democracy counties like the USA with the Japanese detention camps in WW2, not counting the American Indians for 230 years...Black Africa tribes do that all time either with war against another tribe or simply drive them off their land....It has been going on since the creation of humanity...So what else is new in your paradise of equality? Of course the Arabs are notorius for tribal warfare against each other for the past 1500 years....
Just as an added bonus (for those who didn't fall asleep reading), here's a little Jeffersonian jewel about taxing the rich more than the poor:*scharrison
zzzzzzzzzz! Why are you fighting the civil war over again, it proves nothing and there is nothing you can do about it, nor change the history of slavely against societies including whites who enslave other whites for the past 4000 years..
"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1785. ME 19:18, Papers 8:682
That's a great idea, Thomas!*scharrison
Oh come on! So Jefferson was a tax cutter and big on socking it to the rich who abuse the political system for power. You can give a little more credit to old Tom can't you? After all, you are using the main concept in the constitution that he gives you at this moment, the right to rip him apart about his so-call racist past convictions! Free speech! Enjoy it and please knock him some more to prove what a bigot you are as a fascist liberal and hypocrite?
Have you consider starting your own political paradise if somebody disagrees with you and has a gun to force you to believe their political system?
You should focus on the real enemies that are trying to screw you and this country at this time in reality, and not some academic rabbit trail bull shit debate on the internet...
Looks like I caught something deep.
Dispute the facts as cited, please.
Looks like I thought I caught something deep with my Empty Net
Dispute the facts as cited, please.*Fecund Stench
What facts? No doubt you come from the school where Lenin was quoted as saying " Useful navie idiots always help the cause"
New Republic Liar/Slanderer Funded by Neocon Foundation
Imagine my surprise to learn from an emailer this morning that the pimply-faced youth James Kirchick, who graduated from college barely a year ago, had his education funded by the neocon Olin Foundation. He apprently majored in warmongering and imperialism, referred to at Yale as "International Security Studies." (Scroll about halfway down the page). I was equally surprised to see on the web that the PFY has also written articles for Frontpagemag.com defending the Iraq war.
Get a load of the "grand strategy" mumbo jumbo on the Yale web site. How pompous must a "Professor of Grand Strategy" be?! Isn't it comforting to know that these neocon foundation-funded eggheads are busy plotting "grand strategies" for the entire planet? (Meanwhile, much of New Haven, CT, is a shambles. Perhaps some of these grand strategists could help out the town planners a bit).
Old Media, Big Government: They're Scared and Desperate
The James Kirchick article in The New Republic is so obviously a smear strategy that aims to shut down the campaign of a guy who is an unnerving candidate because he comes from outside The Establishment and he is representative of a very ominous grassroots power. The Establishment and its media stooges have no real strategy for combating, let alone defeating, a massive grassroots-Internet power that has discarded old media and old politics in favor of a grassroots revolution that is supported by a strong finanial network.
Now this whole smear is, of course, a very calculated attempt on the part of the neocon rag, The New Republic, to take down a candidate whom the establishment absolutely fears. This punk kid whole wrote it, James Kirchick, is a Giuliani lover, and one who would love to "make a name" for himself by bringing down the Ron Paul Revolution with a prehistoric strategy of pointing a finger at supposed acts of political incorrectness. As soon as Ron is making the charge into the primaries, in a good position to win one or two of them, out comes the smear cannons.
There's much to say on this topic, but I think that what people should take from this is the obvious: this story appeared at this point and time, using this very "hot" theme, because the old media establishment that tries its best to support the Washington DC political establishment is darn near spooked by the power wielded by a bunch of grassroots Moms, Dads, college kids, Grandmas, and blue-collar Joes who have had enough of the current system and its choke hold on their ability to live their lives unencumbered. Freedom has gained some popularity in the heartland and in the home, thanks to Dr. Paul, and that won't be tolerated by the controlling bastards in power or the inconsequential media hacks like Kirchick and the New Republic.
Oh No! More facts and opinions for Fec?
Release the New Republic Archives!
Make that the Fascist Republic archives. From Murray N. Rothbard, World War I as Fulfillment: Power and the Intellectuals:
In January 1927, Croly wrote a New Republic editorial, "An Apology for Fascism," endorsing an accompanying article, "Fascism for the Italians," written by the distinguished philosopher Horace M. Kallen, a disciple of John Dewey and an exponent of progressive pragmatism. Kallen praised Mussolini for his pragmatic approach, and in particular for the élan vital that Mussolini had infused into Italian life. True, Professor Kallen conceded, fascism is coercive, but surely this is only a temporary expedient. Noting fascism's excellent achievement in economics, education, and administrative reform, Kallen added that "in this respect the Fascist revolution is not unlike the Communist revolution. Each is the application by force …of an ideology to a condition. Each should have the freest opportunity once it has made a start…." The accompanying New Republic editorial endorsed Kallen's thesis and added that "alien critics should beware of outlawing a political experiment which aroused in a whole nation an increased moral energy and dignified its activities by subordinating them to a deeply felt common purpose." New Republic 49 (January 12, 1927), pp. 207–213. Cited in John Patrick Diggins, "Mussolini's Italy: The View from America," PhD diss., University of Southern California, 1964, pp. 214–217.
re: Ron Paul's Response to the New Republic Slander
Dave Weigel at Reason has an interview with Paul from a couple of hours ago on the TNR hit piece:
Ron Paul: All it is--it's old stuff. It's all been rehashed. It's all political stuff.
reason: Why don't you release all the old letters?
Paul: I don't even have copies of them, because it's ancient history.
reason: Do you stand by what appears in the letters? Did you write these...?
Paul: No. I've discussed all of that in the past. It's just old news.
reason: Did the New Republic talk to you before they ran it?
Paul: No, I never talked to them.
reason: What do you think of Martin Luther King?
Paul: Martin Luther King is one of my heroes because he believed in nonviolence and that's a libertarian principle. Rosa Parks is the same way. Gandhi, I admire. Because they're willing to take on the government, they were willing to take on bad laws. So I believe in civil disobedience if you understand the consequences. Martin Luther King was a great person because he did that and he changed America for the better because of that.
reason: You didn't write the derogatory things about him in the letter?
Paul: No.
Giuliani Fan Smears Paul
New Republic hatchet kid Jamie Kirchick has had a bee in his bonnet about Ron Paul for some time now. Back in July, he was ranting about Dr. Paul's supposed homophobia. But he's not just a Paul-hater, he's also a Giuliani enthusiast. In December he whined about the Log Cabin Republicans not endorsing Mayor Benito: "Why aren’t they backing Rudy Giuliani, the most pro-gay Republican White House contender in history?" You can see where Kirchick's interests lie.
(Gosh, I just realized that by calling Giuliani "Benito," I've probably guaranteed that some future Kirchick will accuse me of harboring animus against Italian-Americans. That's the level of inference involved in Kirchick's sleaze-mongering.)
Paul unwisely let ugly rhetoric get published in a newsletter bearing his name nearly 20 years ago. That was a real mistake, but putting too much trust in a newsletter editor or writer is no hanging offense -- and we'll all be damned if Kirchick's smear winds up hurting the only candidate who stands for peace and civil liberties for all Americans.
Herbert Croly and TNR
The New Republic was founded by Herbert Croly, a "Progressive" who believed that the Constitution should be abolished in favor of the will of governing elites. Here is what Virginia Postrel wrote about him several years ago:
Crolyism overturned the ideal of limited government in favor of a combination of elite power — commissions to regulate and plan — and mass democracy.... Frustrated with constitutional limits, Croly wrote, “It remains ... true ... that every popular government should in the end, and after a necessarily prolonged deliberation, possess the power of taking any action, which, in the opinion of a decisive majority of the people, is demanded by the public welfare.” This statement, while extreme, pretty much sums up today’s governing philosophy.
So, keep in mind that this is the philosophy behind TNR. It is a view that the political elite need to tell everyone else what to do, and use lethal force against people who resist.
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-- Ron Paul of racism, homophobia and anti-semitism would be appearing online the nextthat his hit piece accusing day--which, by astonishing coincidence happens to be the very day of the New Hampshire primary.
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:
Hi Berin,
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"]
http://www.advocate.com/ exclusiv..._ektid50709.asp
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.]
Best,
Jamie
When I responded to ask him when his article might come out so I could read more, he answered: "Patience, my friend "
Patience, indeed.
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.
Ron Paul -- not as apealling as Ernest T. Bass, but
as Barney Fife would say, "He's a nut."
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke
Bass's good ole boy pro shop is open for fruit picking?
Ron Paul -- not as apealling as Ernest T. Bass, but
as Barney Fife would say, "He's a nut." *Brunette
As Sheriff Andy would say, It's takes a squirrely to know a nut"
Are you a appealing neo-con republican? Or have you simply lost your map to the top of the fruit tree?
What?
I don't remember Andy saying that.
Why would anyone need a map to the top of a fruit tree? Wouldn't a person just keep moving up?
I'm sorry, Max, but I don't understand why a person would require assistance knowing which way is up. My apologies if you are speaking from personal experience.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke
Uh?
What?*Brunette
I don't remember Andy saying that.*Brunette
He sure did say that! It was when they had Aunt Bee on trial in the MADLOCK series for stealing Barney gun during a drunken bar fight.
Why would anyone need a map to the top of a fruit tree? Wouldn't a person just keep moving up?*Brunette
I had no idea you were into the evolutionary business?
I'm sorry, Max, but I don't understand why a person would require assistance knowing which way is up. My apologies if you are speaking from personal
experience.*Brunette
Neither do I? So if you want to apologize to some monkey than that is your business.....
While we were being entertained.
I did some digging on Kirchik's source, Ed Sebesta. He has a sterling pedigree.
Cheers for Senator Lott in the Men's Room/
I did some digging on Kirchik's source, Ed Sebesta. He has a sterling pedigree.*Fecund Stench
Hell fec, my dog could have dug up that bone without a problem about Lott.....Have you check out Mr Sebesta last appearance at the Ugly Dog show and him placing no show in the last display of smear? By the Way! I really notice how you entertain the thought to put those facts to rest about Ron Paul being a secret Nazi and Klan member?
Has it occure to you that former Senator Lott might have been outed like Senator Craig since he was the only male cheerleader at OLD Miss during his college days?
Thanks for your patience.
Unfortunately, Sebesta has a website. And here's the summary:
I read almost the whole thing. This guy's obviously out to lunch.
Fec has the patience of a Crossdressering Republican named Rudy?
I’ll probably vote for Giuliani in ‘08 if he’s around,* Fec
We had no idea that you were into crossdressing Republicans, no wonder you are in love with Sebesta the chief crossdresser of the Southern Poverty Center and that pervert college kid who thinks he stop a Revolution.
The Wife spends all her time running her dress store empire, so I spend the days puttering around the house with the cats, blogging, doing the laundry, cooking, playing music and occasionally working.*Fec
Wait a minute! For a Republican, you sure are one lazy shiftless sucker making your wife work. Hell, you are just a retread hippy from the 60's. And stop playing that Mo-town music and get a full time job at Burger King, instead of trying to find Klan Ghost members in the Paul Revolution!
Some Republican you are?
Anyone interested in Ron Paul libertarians
Might be interested in checking out this diary on kos.
T'would seem that FS is right on the money.
Person County Democrats
Environmental Defense Fund
Myths from Republican Alien Lizards?
Anyone interested in Ron Paul libertarians
Might be interested in checking out this diary on kos.
T'would seem that FS is right on the money.*persondem.
Let me get this straight! You are scare to death that the Paul Revolution is loaded with secret Klan members because of some dude that nobody has heard of before, except in the kos world as a expert on racist secrets from the past. Good Grief Man, you would have a better chance claiming that Bill Clinton and Ron Paul were Alien Lizards from the movie " Independent Day"
Some of you guys are giving professional conspiracy theorists a good name with your weird neo-con republican smear attacks. I can't believe some of you progressives are that stupid like republican conservatives.
Paul is NOT some political messiah come
to lead us all out of the wilderness.
More like a load of Golden Bull.
Person County Democrats
Environmental Defense Fund
Golden Bull Corporate Globalism craps on you and the masses?
Paul is NOT some political messiah come
to lead us all out of the wilderness.
More like a load of Golden Bull.*persondem
He never claim to be the Jesus that Huckabee worships as a political hardball kick ass messiah, unless you consider Moses Hillary and slick Willie Arron as the nightmare from the political corporate Hell to the children of the World....
Who would you prefer? A champion of the Constitution or a tyrant who stomps it to death in a New York heartbeat like Rudy Benito?
Another political outbreak like that persodem, and I am going to make sure you clean up behind the Golden Bull who is crapping on the constitution and you!
Enough already.
I can't always follow exactly what Max is saying, but I think we might agree on one critical thing:
The most dangerous and hurtful monopoly in existence is the corporate (yes, corporate -- NOT government) monopoly that controls our money, and monetary system.
If you consider yourself a "progressive", you *must* come to terms with the consequences of a fiat currency managed by the international banking cartel. I think we would ALL agree that corporate monopolies are dangerous, and destructive. Even the most ardent pacifist and gun control advocate among us would rail against a system where only Blackwater was allowed to own guns.
Blackwater owning all the guns is the perfect analogy for our monetary system. Yes, you can spend Plenties in Carrboro. But those aren't guns, those are pea shooters.
One reason Ron Paul's message is attracting a surprisingly diverse crowd is because folks are beginning to realize that our monetary system itself has been leading us down the slope from capitalism to corporatism, and increasingly towards fascism and tyranny.
persondem, *please* look into this critical issue. Here's a video if you like that illustrates some of the problems, and consequences, with the current arrangement.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5232639329002339531
This probably won't surprise you, but we're not a free country. We're in debt to the tune of (now) $9.2 trillion to the international banking cartel. How do we pay the debt? We keep printing more paper currency, and making the average American's saving and income worth less. The slide towards a worthless paper currency has brought down empires many times throughout history.
That's corporatism at its absolute WORST. Ron Paul isn't perfect. But the smear and hit pieces will continue to the extent that his campaign encourages us to talk about these issues, and identify the real enemy among us. What do you think would happen if "conservatives" and "progressives" realized that we actually have a common enemy?
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
William (B.J.) Lawson, M.D.
Congressional Candidate, North Carolina's 4th District
You want to know the real reason he's gained
so much support from a diverse crowd?
It's not about people wanting to go back to the gold standard or some other monetary concern, no matter how much you guys want to believe that.
It's really very simple: people are frustrated with the status quo, and Ron Paul represents a radical change of direction. Mainstream Republicans don't like him, and that's a good enough reason for a lot of folks. He's also strongly against the Iraq war, and that's a good enough reason for a whole lot of other folks. There is a core of bonafide Libertarians who embrace nearly every platform issue he has, but they only represent a fraction of the "revolution"—the rest are merely disaffected for one reason or another.
As far as I'm concerned, you guys can have all the conservative votes you want. Ron Paul has absolutely no chance of securing the Republican nomination, but I'm pretty sure he will show up on the ballot in November. As such, he will be a "spoiler", possibly more than Nader or Perot have been in the past. Fine. Let him spoil the Republicans'chance.
But every pro-choice Democrat who votes for Paul needs to be aware they are voting against their beliefs, and supporting someone who wants to overturn Roe v Wade and make "life begins at conception" the law of the land.
Every black person who votes for Paul needs to be aware they are (probably) voting against their beliefs, and giving their support to someone who believes that almost everything that has been done to help them was a mistake. They also need to know the things he's written to his avid supporters over the years about how he views black people and crime, and it ain't pretty.
I'll be sure to tell my friends
who are Black and of other minority groups that they are voting against their beliefs with their support of Ron Paul.
Oh, wait! Maybe there is some diversity of thought within a particular ethnicity! Ya think?
:-)
By the way, he's said that he didn't write those hateful things. Having read much of what he HAS written, I believe him. Those newsletters are logically inconsistent with everything he's put into the Congressional Record, and said to his constituents.
It's unfortunate that some of his so-called supporters did write those things, and even more unfortunate that they did so in a newsletter bearing his name in which he had a minority interest. But I choose to judge a person by that person's words and actions, and underweight the actions of his supporters.
Here are some of his thoughts on racism:
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=982
In my experience, the (vast?) majority of Ron Paul supporters understand the fundamental immorality and danger of the corporate monopoly the controls our money, and system of credit. That's not a quantitative assessment, but I am heartened that more people are beginning to ask, "What is money, anyway?"
Finally, no one wants to go "back to the gold standard". But we need an honest monetary and banking system, and Ron Paul is the only politician to understand and acknowledge that fact.
Scharrison, what is your opinion of our monopolistically-managed system of credit and regulated fractional reserve banking system?
William (B.J.) Lawson, M.D.
Congressional Candidate, North Carolina's 4th District
I'm not an economist, BJ.
But I will say this: the behavior of financiers has moved from making sound investments based upon tangible current and future value, to the making of profits from the movement of money alone, with little or no consideration of tangible assets or risk.
This behavior devalues the money as well as the assets, as we have seen most recently with the sub-prime fiasco. We're in dire need of a move back towards true valuation and proper risk assessment, but I don't believe that will happen in the absence of new regulations or a debilitating recession.
That's probably all wrong, but that's my opinion.
I'm afraid we might get both...
...new regulations and debilitating recession, that is.
You certainly don't need to be an economist to explore and discuss this issue. Regarding your observations:
You're not wrong at all, and you're just a few layers above the root of the problem. Like medicine, it's easy to get distracted treating symptoms and ignore the underlying cause of the visible pathology.
When we understand the root of the problem, we will be in a position to address it.
Check out this video -- it's not 100% correct, and I don't agree with their proposed solution, but they do a great job of illustrating the basic problem with fractional reserve banking and money as debt.
BJ
William (B.J.) Lawson, M.D.
Congressional Candidate, North Carolina's 4th District
Ok, I watched most of the video presentation
Before I comment on that I would like to say that I agree that the deficit is a huge concern, that corporate influence on our societ and government is way too strong and that monopolies, especially media consolodation, are very bad things.
That said, while watching that video it didn't take long for my BS meter to peg. Good ideas shouldn't need to use lies or exaggerations to get traction. The opening segment portrays the time prior to 1913 as some kind of Camelot where the economy was humming along and all was right with the world. On the contrary the late 19th and early twentieth centuries were rife with panics, recessions and runs on banks all of which brought much misery to average citizens and small to midsized businesses. The advent of the Fed Reserve allows for a measure of central control and regulation that mitigates the wild swings seen in our economy prior to 1913. (Although, they did screw up with the 1929 Crash and Depression)
Also in the opening the narrator announces that the creation of the Fed and the start of the Income Tax both happened in the same year. Very ominous indeed. But then the text offers nothing to explain why that timing was supposedly so bad.
I can find nothing in the constitution that would make the Fed illegal. Congress can print money as only the states are prohibited from printing "bills of credit" (Art. II, sec. 10).
It would seem that the expansion of the money supply through the deposit-loan cycle is some great evil. WHile I'll grant that there is some risk inherent in that system (should all depositors want their money at once) the backing of the government via FDIC is designed to make such and event unlikely.
From some research the USA maintains about 880 billion in paper and coin currency. 95% of the money printed every year, about 750 million dollars, goes to replace the money in circulation which wears out. 5% of that 750 million amounts to 37.5 million dollars a year which is a trifle next to our GDP of 13 trillion. Bottom line here, the inflationary effect of that 37 million "extra" dollars will be miniscule.
One other idea from that video was that the USA should return to a gold standard so our money won't be "fiat" money. The medium of exchange though really doesn't matter. The value of gold is just as arbitrary as that of a piece of paper. So what if we want to decide that paper has value instead of a hunk of metal? From an objective standpoint it makes no difference.
If we did return to the gold standard, a good chunk of that 880 billion dollars in currency would have to be destroyed. The resulting economic chaos would make the Great Depression look like a bounced check. That horse left the barn long ago.
Basically that whole video was wrapped in this conspiracy theory cloak that really doesn't amount to much at all. That secret meeting that resulted in the Fed being established was exposed 3 years later. That info has been available for 90 years.
Our economy does have it's troubles, but Paul's ideas are extreme and based on questionable fundamentals. Socially, because of his racism and homophobia, he has way more negatives than positives. As stated in another response to your comment, Paul has caught on because he advocates change and a new direction. The quality of his offered changes are unfortunately secondary to many people.
I do thank you for persisting in this as I have been able to learn more about a topic that I was (and still am, really) not too well versed in.
Regards.
Person County Democrats
Environmental Defense Fund
Great place to start!
Persondem -- I agree that much of the media surrounding this topic is rife with hyperbole. But let's start with your observations.
You're right that a characterization of "stability and prosperity" prior to the Federal Reserve's founding is inaccurate. In fact, the persistent turbulence in the financial system prior to 1913 was a large part of how the Federal Reserve System was sold to the public, and justified. A more nuanced portrayal of this period in history is presented in this post:
http://blog.lawsonforcongress.com/2007/08/29/what-cnn-doesnt-understand-fractional-reserve-banking/
As you can see, the Federal Reserve System was presented as a "solution" to an already corrupt system characterized by banks issuing their own notes backed by debt and a (very) small amount of hard currency reserves. Such an inherently unstable system is already insolvent, and creating a "central bank" to provide "stability" doesn't address the underlying problem of fractional reserve banking.
Here's my favorite quote on how to read the Constitution, from Thomas Jefferson: "On every question of construction let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning can be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one which was passed."
Now the debates are not available on YouTube, but the language used at the time is quite clear:
"The Congress shall have the Power: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of Foreign coin" [from Article I, Section 8]
"No State shall: coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts" [from Article I, Section 10]
Why did the framers go to such great lengths here? First of all "coining money" explicitly refers to only commodity-backed currency. The idea that a fiat, debt-backed currency would be circulated by the federal government is flat-out rejected by their choice of words, "coining money", and the historical context at the time. Having just gone through a painful Revolution, and watching the (debased) Continental dollar go to essentially zero value (hence the phrase, "not worth a Continental"), the Constitution uses the verb "coin" (not "print"!) to reiterate that only commodity-backed currency was money. More specifically, the word "dollar" itself is also in the Constitution. What is a dollar? In Constitutional terms, a "dollar" is a silver coin weighing 371.25 grains fine, a.k.a. Spanish "pieces of eight". There is absolutely no historical basis to accept a "dollar", or "money", being a paper Federal Reserve Note with zero intrinsic value. Here is a great speech that explains the history behind the dollar (and thus money's) Constitutional definition.
Finally, even if Congress was given the power to "print money" (which it was not), it was absolutely not given the power to delegate control of "printing money" to a private banking cartel. We have been through three banks in our nation's history. Each time, the decision to charter/authorize a central bank has been contentious.
McCulloch v. Maryland was the seminal case where judicial precedent for a "central bank" was established. So you might say that while a central bank has been declared "Constitutional" based upon judicial precedent, it was certainly not one of the enumerated powers of the federal government. Thanks, Marshall Court, for your judicial activism!
Furthermore, our current central bank, the Federal Reserve, is not even owned by the government or "we the people". It is owned by its member commercial banks, so it is literally a private monopoly to which our Congress has unconstitutionally delegated the unconstitutional power to "print money". (Two wrongs don't make a right in this case, either!)
Yes, exactly! The "turning loans into new money" cycle IS the great evil! Here's the sad truth -- the "backing of the government" via FDIC or any other "deposit insurance" is simply a confidence game. As this article so eloquently documents, the FDIC is "worse than useless." Here's a key quote:
The simple truth is that when bad things happen, the Federal Reserve (or Bank of England in the case of Northern Rock) simply "injects liquidity" (or another uses euphemism for printing money) to get us out of the mess. As a result, your salary and savings buy less... but the integrity of the system (and the bonuses of the banking execs) are preserved. The video at the bottom of this post is priceless.
This misunderstanding is extremely common. When commentators use the words "printing money", we're not talking about printing paper currency. We're talking about bringing new electronic currency into your (and the U.S. Treasury's) checking account. THAT'S the source of inflation, and one that is largely misunderstood. Read this post, and check out the Public Debt News press release from the Treasury.
Here's what happens: when the government needs more money, it sells Treasury bonds. If there are not enough bidders for the bonds at the desired price (or interest rate), the Federal Reserve can pick up the slack. Here's the catch: when the Federal Reserve buys the bonds with a Federal Reserve Check, there is no money in any account to cover the check. But the Treasury puts these "newly printed" dollars in its checking account from "depositing" this worthless check, and then has the funds to pay off retiring debt, or pay bills from Halliburton, KBR, or (gulp) Blackwater.
Sounds crazy, right? It is. Crazy, immoral, and if you were to try it, illegal. But the Federal Reserve justifies it by classifying the Treasury Bond it purchased as an "asset" that offsets the "liability" of its worthless check. So the books are balanced :-).
Even worse, once the government's new money filters out through the commercial banking system (i.e., after Blackwater pays its salaries, which go into checking accounts throughout the country), those new deposits become "reserves". Assuming a typical 10% "reserve ratio", if a bank receives $1 million in new deposits, only 10% of that amount must be held "on reserve". So $100,000 are "reserves", and $900,000 are "excess reserves". That means the bank can create $900,000 in new loans from that $1 million deposit.
What happens to those new loans? They become deposits in yet ANOTHER bank account! So the process repeats itself, with 90% of the value of the new loan being available for yet ANOTHER loan. Lather, rinse, repeat a few times and you have a massive pile of "money" on top of a massive pile of debt. Does that sound stable to you?
It makes a huge difference. Read this post, and this post with Alan Greenspan's quote at the bottom. A few years ago, one paper Federal Reserve Note would buy 1/400 oz of gold. Today, one paper Federal Reserve Note buys around 1/900 oz of gold. It's not just gold, though. What's happened to your grocery bill over the past four years?
Nope, not at all. No one is talking about "destroying" Federal Reserve Notes. They are (and can remain) a currency. We just need to eliminate legal tender laws that make them the currency, thus legalizing Constitutional money, and allow folks the option to earn, save, and spend in silver and/or gold in an honest banking system.
We will see economic chaos if we allow our government and Federal Reserve to continue debasing our currency through endless wars and spiraling debt. We can get off the treadmill to oblivion, however, if we provide an "release valve" that lets us choose honest money instead.
The transition I'm describing is already happening. Folks who are financially savvy don't save in Federal Reserve Notes because the government is debasing them so quickly. Shouldn't the average American also have the option to pay, or be paid, in commodity-backed currency, and save in a bank that doesn't steal from his savings by inflating the money supply?
Federal Reserve Notes are a good medium of exchange, but a horrendous store of value. But the average American (if they even save) is being eviscerated by inflation, which is simply the declining purchasing power for food, energy, and other essentials of life.
Perhaps Edgar Allen Poe's The Purloined Letter is a good analogy: "D— knew the police detectives were highly intelligent and would have assumed that the blackmailer would have concealed the letter in an elaborate hiding place. Realising this, D— then hid the letter in plain sight, but disguised."
There's little covert or conspiratorial about the monetary and banking system -- everything is in plain sight. But there is no discussion of it in our schools, or in the media, and we seldom question implications of the system and how it works. Fortunately, that tide is changing. Thanks for at least considering it, and I only hope that people will continue seeking the root causes of our social and economic problems.
The Constitution only seems extreme because we are so far away from it. I look at a debt-backed currency controlled by private banks as *much* more extreme that the alternative proposed by our Founders, and advocated by Ron Paul.
Regarding the social issues, please find a single example of Ron Paul writing or speaking in an intolerant fashion. I've read his works extensively (start with ronpaullibrary.com) and found none. Again, he has attracted a big tent of supporters, not all of whom would be labeled tolerant. But please judge the candidate by his own words and actions, not the words and actions of a few extremist supporters. Oh, and you can listen to an interview with the Austin director of the NAACP concerning this topic.
My pleasure. We're all learning, and I don't claim to have a monopoly on truth either -- I've just always tried to ask good questions, and tackle cognitive dissonance. Life isn't a dress rehearsal, and our children and country are worth the effort!
BJ
William (B.J.) Lawson, M.D.
Congressional Candidate, North Carolina's 4th District
I appreciate the better RP support comments.
I believe I've related my opinion that many of RP's statements and beliefs are compelling. I took a hard look at Kirchick's damning piece and have stated that his neo-confederacy source, Ed Sebesta, also has some real problems. Other than the SPLC, he is a lone nut crying out in the wilderness.
Commenters like MTD2 only help RP's detractors.
I love Barney and Ron Paul now? saz fec?
I appreciate the better RP support comments.
Fecund Stench
I believe I've related my opinion that many of RP's statements and beliefs are compelling. I took a hard look at Kirchick's damning piece and have stated that his neo-confederacy source, Ed Sebesta, also has some real problems. Other than the SPLC, he is a lone nut crying out in the wilderness.*Fecund Stench
And I just don't understand Max at times* Paraphasing BJ
I write and speak in code like the George Bush persona...pay attention or attend my next Skull and Crossbones secret coffin meeting. I might let you ride the Goat if you are a good boy....
More stuff for fec to think about beside looking at his belly button as a educational skill tool.
--------------------------------------------------------
Kirchick has a promising future in conservative journalism, having mastered the time-honored techniques of rising through the ranks without any demonstrated ability in fields other than arguing with straw men and making things up about his opponents. - Matthew Yglesias
Christopher Hitchens wannabe James Kirchick, a kid who looks like a blowfish (watch his pathetic interview with Tucker Carlson, linked to below), has gotten himself a mess of undeserved attention lately by digging up some old quotes from newsletters published under Ron Paul's name. None of this should have passed as news of course, as these quotes have been used against Paul in the past, and have already been explained:
1. Paul denies writing any of the quotes in question, and no evidence has been put forth contradicting his denial.
2. The "weird" (as Tucker Carlson described them) quotes were aired in low budget community newsletters that Paul published but did not edit, nor, obviously, attempt to exert complete control over.
3. Not all the quotes are impossible to defend and in the land of free speech, there's no reason why people shouldn't be able to express and debate them.
Ron Paul recently defended himself here. Basically, the worst Paul can be accused of is negligence, and he has repeatedly apologized.
But nevertheless we are told by Kirchick's "friend" and Pajamas Media sidekick Michael Weiss that Kirchick's infamous TNR piece is "conversation-stopping" and additionally informed by Kirchick's other Pajamas Media bed buddy Daniel Koffler that Kirchick's piece is "devastating" and that "the defense of Paul is now, itself, indefensible."
These rich boy fascists won't even let people weigh the evidence and decide for themselves. Instead, they just tell us that the case is closed, rather than actually closing the case with evidence and reason. Weiss's post "The End of Ron Paul" reveals this sort of dictatorial, wishful thinking.
Kirchick wasn't even able to impress Tucker Carlson, the smarmy MSNBC host who one would think might be sympathetic to the anti-Paul case. Tucker asked Kirchick point blank if he had any evidence that Ron Paul himself ever said anything racist or homophobic, and the silly-billy Kirchick was forced to admit that he had no such evidence. (And this was after Jamie had been passing off the quotes in the newsletters as things that "he" (Paul) had "said.")
Feeling cornered, Kirchick was then reduced to falsely asserting that Ron Paul attended a "neo-confederate" conference in 1995 (it was actually a pro Northern secessionist meeting) and that Paul "speaks in code," that "he's a transmitter" of covertly racist ideas to people with the right ears for it. At this point, Carlson kindly ended the segment with a puzzled look on his face and this polite insult, "Boy, I must say, it's gone right over my head." All in all, it was an embarrassment for young Kirchick.
I stopped reading Andrew Sullivan awhile ago, but apparently he has smartened up a bit. He's not buying the Kirchick line either. Sullivan responded to the Kirchick article by writing, "I am not persuaded he [Ron Paul] is a bigot (like Jamie, apparently), and I remain impressed by the message and spirit of the campaign he has waged."
The larger question is, why is all of this being brought up now? Ron Paul stands absolutely no chance of winning the Republican nomination.
The simplest explanation is that neocons like Kirchick just really hate Paul's guts for speaking out so eloquently against US wars. And they despise his grass roots campaign and ability to attract support from both Left and Right.
But there may be something else going on here. The establishment, and its apologists and suck-ups like Kirchick and Weiss (not to mention their leader Hitchens), fear a Ron Paul third party run in the general election. Which could, after all, take votes away from the war-crazed McCain (the likely GOP nominee). So the smear campaign, the attempt to destroy Ron Paul, is already well underway.
Ultimately, this is all about the War on Terror. Hitchens has said that he is a "single-issue" voter, and he means that he decides who to support based solely on who is "serious" about waging his glorious wars. Many of us are "single-issue" voters but in the opposite direction: we are most inclined to support whomever we think is most seriously interested in ending US war and occupation.
The neocon attack on Ron Paul is obviously motivated by Paul's opposition to war, and not by any genuine concern for race issues. Paul is seen as a potential 'threat' and so willing clowns like Kirchick are dispatched to write dishonest hit pieces about Paul in order to try to kill the threat.
I wrote on another thread that one of the reasons why I came to like Ron Paul was because all of the ugly neoconservatives were trashing him. I still think there's something to this. Paul must be doing something right in order to attract so much hatred from the neocon establishment.
AND THE BOOKIES IN VEGAS SAY?
Ron Paul in for Long Haul With Martin Luther King Day Money Bomb Planned
Ron Paul supporters will not be daunted. Despite less than exciting finishes in both Iowa and New Hampshire, the Ron Paul supporters march on. Once again another "money bomb" is being set in motion. This time it is planned for Martin Luther King Jr. day on January 21st. It will be doubtful that they can break another record and top the last record they set of just over six million dollars, but with this bunch, one never knows.
Once again, the event is being planned entirely by grassroots activists. No one person is in charge. No one person developed the idea. This comes simply from the supporters who are not letting go of the dream of a Ron Paul Presidency.
Even though only two races out of fifty have been held, and even though that represents less than one half of one per cent, a lot of people are ready to write Ron Paul off. Well, I can tell you this, the Ron Paul supporters in general will not be voting for any other candidate. Once people have had a taste of freedom and liberty, they cannot go back. Only a smattering of Ron Paul supporters would be caught dead voting for another Republican. It would be really interesting to see what would happen if he did decide to make a third party bid.
Sadly, it has become clear that without a fair shake in the media, it is really difficult to make a realistic run for the White House. On a very unscientific survey of anecdotal evidence (something that seems to be just as reliable as the polling methods these days that all but inaugurated Obama in New Hampshire) I have found that roughly 90% of the population has never heard Ron Paul's message. However, of those that hear the whole message, and not the twisted distorted filtered garbage the main stream media puts out, 80% become supporters.
Seems the answer to the dilemma about how to win is pretty simple: get the message out. Of course with all simple answers, the how-to portion of that formula is not easy.
If only poker players would come out in support of Ron Paul. There are over 30 million players in the U.S. by some estimates, and that is more than enough to take every state. America seems to be in a state of depression. Over and over I hear that people like Ron Paul, would love to have him as President, they believe in his views, but alas, they don't think he can win so they are willing to vote for someone they don't like who will give them things they don't want and take away their rights and liberties. It boggles the mind.
I say to every poker player reading this. If you want to be able to play on the Internet unfettered, untaxed, unregulated, and unwatched, then vote for Ron Paul. You don't have to settle for less. You can have what you want. Maybe they need some incentive? How's this: I dare you, no I double dog dare you to vote for Ron Paul.
Oh, and for those of you so inclined, January 21, 2008, Martin Luther King Jr. day come out in support of Ron Paul. Despite recent smear tactics claiming Ron Paul is racist because a newsletter published under his name had some terrible articles in them decades ago, Ron Paul did not write them, did not sign off on them and his record of supporting human rights is unparalleled. Did you know when it came to giving Rosa Parks a medal, Ron Paul stood up in Congress, took a hundred dollar bill out of his pocket and put it on the table? He dared all of the congressmen to match him so that they could give Rosa Parks a medal but not steal the money from the people of this country to do so. Not one person matched him and then proceeded to vote to spend YOUR money on the medal. Ron Paul was forced to vote against the measure because he does not believe in theft. It is one thing to spend his own money on the medal, but to take it from taxpayers is simply unconstitutional.
Ron Paul also wants to put an end to the racist drug war. We all know that when it comes to drug arrests, the sentences and even the arrests are not meted out proportionately. Ron Paul wants to end all of that. The drug war is working no better than prohibition and it has taken away most of our civil liberties. Know any other candidate that really cares about the races and really wants to do something to help or are they all talk?
Ron Paul is the only man with solutions. The rest are just filled with slogans. Ron Paul is the man for the people and the worst part is that the people don't know that and the main stream media is keeping that information from them. The way he is treated at debates, well, he might as well not be there because after what I saw in South Carolina, I was embarrassed to be an American. To think, a bunch of grown men on stage, making fun of freedom and liberty and giggling at Ron Paul like little school girls. Is that how they are going to behave when it comes time for diplomacy? I suppose they would have laughed at Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson too.
This race is long from over. Don't forget, Ron Paul has a significant war chest and supporters who are willing to keep it filled. Time will tell.
----
Jennifer Reynolds, Gambling911.com
Um, yeah...
I ain't reading all that, so maybe this has been said, maybe this hasn't, but:
1. According to Ron Paul's spokesman, the Congressman has written for the newsletter on some occasions. If so, he has to know who kept up the newsletter and who might be responsible for these newsletters--why not pass along the names?
2. How do you not read a newsletter that's going out with your name on it? That's Alberto Gonzales style incompetence right there.
3. I could care less if these things have been brought up in his past campaigns in Texas. He wasn't running to try and represent me then. If everyone else's record is fodder for public debate, Ron Paul ought not to be an exception.
----
There are people in every time and every land who want to stop history in its tracks. They fear the future, mistrust the present, and invoke the security of the comfortable past which, in fact, never existed. - Robert F. Kennedy
----
There are people in every time and every land who want to stop history in its tracks. They fear the future, mistrust the present, and invoke the security of the comfortable past which, in fact, never existed. - Robert F. Kennedy
At this point, it's not about "all that" any more.
Just see if you can read:
http://bluenc.com/dr.-paul-and-the-neo-confederacy#comment-77125
and:
http://bluenc.com/dr.-paul-and-the-neo-confederacy#comment-77158
and:
http://bluenc.com/dr.-paul-and-the-neo-confederacy#comment-77176
Oh, and you can listen to this interview with Nelson Linder, Director of the Austin NAACP.
:-)
William (B.J.) Lawson, M.D.
Congressional Candidate, North Carolina's 4th District