-
Heritage, Levin Call for Immigration Debate
June 20, 2013 | 2 comments
-
The IRS Immigration Fraud Scandal
June 18, 2013 | 105 comments
-
The IRS Ten: The New Keating Five
June 13, 2013 | 54 comments
-
Mark Levin: The Constitution’s Churchill
June 11, 2013 | 215 comments
-
George Clooney’s Perfect Storm
June 6, 2013 | 91 comments
A Further Perspective
Iowa and Ron Paul
Paul takes off in the home of left-wing populists and pacifists amid the ghost of Henry Wallace.
There is a reason, you know.
One doesn’t eat cake and ice cream 24/7 and put on weight only to be curious as to reason for the weight gain.
There is a reason Ron Paul is doing well in Iowa (as seen in this recent story.)
And yes, it is directly related to the fact that Iowa is a caucus state rather than a primary state, where the organizational skills of a candidate with a small core of passionate supporters can make more of a difference.
But there is a second, hardly discussed factor at work in Iowa politics: Iowa is a state that has historically produced or supported political leaders whose left-wing foreign policy sentiments were somewhere in the same cornfield’s as Ron Paul.
The most prominent, of course, was Henry Agard Wallace.
Iowan Henry A. Wallace began his political life as a liberal Republican, or what in today’s world would be called a RINO (Republican In Name Only). His father had been Secretary of Agriculture for conservatives Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge, but the son, as sons can do, had a different view of the world. Born and raised in Iowa, a graduate of Iowa State College, Henry Wallace began his career working on the family paper Wallace’s Farmer, eventually taking over as editor. An accomplished farmer, he parlayed his knowledge of agriculture into a successful company known for breeding a high yield hybrid corn. Along the way, as with many RINOs then and now (think, say, Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter), Wallace’s leftist instincts led to changing parties and he became a considerable supporter of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. This resulted in FDR lifting Wallace out of Iowa to take his father’s old job as Secretary of Agriculture.
From this position Wallace became one of the leading voices of the American progressive movement. So much so that in 1940 FDR selected Wallace as his vice-presidential running mate for his famous third term victory over GOP nominee Wendell Willkie. For the next four years Wallace’s corn-fed Iowa leftism became so pronounced that nervous Democratic Party leaders began agitating for his removal from FDR’s fourth term bid, a strikingly unusual ploy that came about because of a considerable and quite unspoken fear. Democratic leaders had the uneasy feeling that FDR would win — and die. This was the middle of World War II, and by 1944, love him or hate him, Franklin Roosevelt had been at the helm of two of the most monumental events of the thus unfolded 20th century — the Great Depression and the Second World War. He was, at this point, a party icon and no one had the ability or the will to push him aside. What they could do was push Wallace aside and assure that someone else top Democrats considered as more responsible was in second place. They got their wish and did the deed with FDR’s exhausted consent — fatefully replacing Wallace with Harry Truman. And as feared, four months after inauguration day, FDR was dead. Truman, not Wallace was president.
He was, however, Secretary of Commerce by the grace of a guilty FDR who had appointed him as a sop for removing him from the ticket. But it wasn’t long before the progressive politics of Iowa farmer Wallace were clashing with ex-World War I Captain Truman over the budding Cold War. There was a spectacular clash between the two — and Wallace was out.
On September 19, 1946 Truman had angrily written in his diary — in terms opponents today frequently apply to Paul — that Wallace was “a pacifist 100 percent.” Truman bluntly accused the Iowa progressive of seeing “no wrong” in anything done by Stalin and the Soviets, including “Russia’s loot of Poland, Austria, Hungary, Rumania, Manchuria…. I do not understand a ‘dreamer’ like that.”
In short, as with Ron Paul today and as Paul demonstrated afresh in the latest Fox debate, Wallace believed that the cause of America’s difficulties was — America. It was America provoking the Russians to their behavior, not some messianic Communist urge to take over the world that was the real problem. The spreading Soviet presence in Europe and elsewhere be damned.
WALLACE’S BELIEF, OF COURSE, is now precisely the core philosophy of Ron Paul and his allies, although today it is applied to America’s struggle with Islamic fundamentalists. It was also the philosophy behind a Paul mentor, Murray Rothbard. Rothbard, a conservative with William F. Buckley Jr. and the rest at the beginning of the modern conservative movement, also believed with Wallace that the Cold War was America’s fault. Rothbard’s real philosophical alliance would eventually reveal itself in later years as he split with Buckley. Rothbard went on instead to ally himself with the leftist inclinations of the Students for a Democratic Society — the infamous SDS that birthed Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and Jane Fonda’s radical husband Tom Hayden. In addition to Rothbard, Paul is a big fan of the leftist intellectual and progressive writer Randolph Bourne, whom he cites favorably in his book The Revolution: A Manifesto. It is Bourne who inspires both Paul and his followers to frequently quote Bourne’s far left “wisdom” that “war is the health of the state.”
Free to be his own man after leaving Truman’s cabinet, Henry Wallace launched himself as an American champion of progressivism. In 1948 he became the presidential nominee of the Progressive Party. One of his delegates at that Progressive convention was a young academic from neighboring South Dakota named George McGovern — who in 1972 would lead the far left capture of the Democrats using Wallace’s (and now Ron Paul’s) philosophy, calling it “Come Home America.”
A comparison of Ron Paul’s beliefs with those of the 1948 Progressive Party Platform is instructive, the similarities decidedly not accidental. Masquerading as conservatives, Paul and his allies repeatedly use the principles of the Progressive Platform to champion a foreign policy view that, to cite but one example, Michele Bachmann calls “bizarre.”
That core belief is what Ron Paul and his allies attack as the philosophy of “Endless War.”
About the Author
Jeffrey Lord is a former Reagan White House political director and author. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (291) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jeffrey Lord
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/20/iowa-and-ron-paul
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 6:32AM
Our Tea Party Co-Favorite Dr.Ron Paul Gets It.
http://digitaljournal.com/article/316304
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Aleck| 12.20.11 @ 8:20AM
http://youtu.be/I8NhRPo0WAo
Jack in Wi.| 12.20.11 @ 8:58AM
Thanks for the link Aleck. Everyone who loves our troops should watch it. Vote for Ron Paul, the soldiers and vets best friend. He will bring them home to their families, to guard our borders and shores, not those of Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan, and Germany. That is why he gets over 2 thirds of all the money sent to the presidential campaigns, from the active military. All you warmongers here see the U tube put up by Aleck and tell me who the troops support.
Ron and Rand for Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty.
TarponGman| 12.20.11 @ 12:35PM
So, Paul gets 66% of all military donations? Another Ronulan told Wilkow last night it was 75%? Or is it really just 100% and you guys are being uncharacteristically bashful on this one? Please supply me with an UNBIASED source to support your claim of 66%.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:25PM
It's $38,000 from the military last I checked.
By the way, wars are less destructive to your country when they are fought on foreign soil, Jack. But a 4-F like you wouldn't get it.
Jack in Wi.| 12.20.11 @ 2:33PM
It was 113 thousand Occam of Tel Aviv. Go look at the video. The troops back Ron Paul. They are sick to death of chickenhawks like you and the other neocon posters here. End the terror. End the hate. Integrate the Israeli state. Why is America where discrimination on the basis of religion and race is forbiden subsidizing a racist theocracy with hundreds of billions of money stolen unconstitutionally from the American taxpayer? Israel is a cancer on the American body politic and must be removed. Let it be like a true democracy with equal rights for all the people under it's control.
jpeditor| 12.20.11 @ 4:45PM
"Integrate the Israeli state". funny how NO JEWS WILL BE ALLOWED TO LIVE IN "PALESTINE".
Someone should integrate you with the sword of jihad.
A.J.| 12.20.11 @ 6:49PM
"intergrate" the Isreali state? You would love that you Jew hating SOB wouldn't you? Sorry, but its not about to happen, not now or not ever. Your messiah isn't going to get elected either, a 75 year old person with an appeasement worship syndrome isn't going anywhere near the White House. Gonna be a sad day for you Ronulans, real sad! Save us Ron from the rath of the Jews, LOL! Save us Ron, the Jews control the world, run!!!
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 8:10PM
Israel has Arab legislators in the Knesset. WHERE ARE THE JEWS IN iRAN'S GOVERNMENT?
I live in MN, not Tel Aviv, you mincing Nazi boy toy.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 10:46AM
Ron Paul, "Treason's Friend" and Jack in Wisconsin---A traitor and a proud cowardly 4-F. A match made in, well, the other place.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 2:12PM
OK, let me state my position free of ad hominems:
Ron Paul votes in lockstep on foreign policy votes with uber-Liberal Dennis Kucinich. Why not admit that your guy is a fiscal uber- hawk and a foreign policy uber-dove and be done with it? Paul is farther to the right than Jim DeMint on fiscal issues, and farther to the Left than Obama on foreign policy issues. That's just the facts, unadorned and unvarnished. I happen to believe that foreign policy is going to matter very much over the next four years as political Islam continues its loathsome growth. Paul doesn't think so. I don't want him in office, therefore.
I admire a lot of his fiscal statements. I think he would condemn the US to nuclear attack. Therefore, I won't vote for him. Now, if your risk assessment is different than mine, vote whomever you please---but keep in mind that I have warned you that Ron Paul increases the risk of attack because weakness is provacative. Red Phillips, for example, who usually argues without too much personalness to his arguments, thinks there is no one to provoke with our weakness that has the ability to attack. I just hope he backs assurance up with a willingness to work in the hot zone for cleanup after the WMD hits. I certainly hope he is right and I am wrong. But I doubt it. My military friends don't agree with him. Among them are than Tom Kratman, former head of Rule of Law training at the Army War College and Infantry battalion commander, and my father-in-law, former member of the OSS.
Ok? Done without ad-hominem.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:40PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Warrior | 12.20.11 @ 6:09PM
I would disagree that he is further to the left of Obama on foreign policy issues. W and Obama have been basically the same on foreign policy (which I would argue is the leftist policy when looked at traditional conservatives of the past) and by the campaign rhetoric, Gingrich, Romney and Perry are all basically falling into a similar policy. If you believe that Paul votes lockstep with Kucinich, my question is, would it be better to vote lockstep with Obama's foreign policy? You can draw conclusions and imply ideological stance in this fashion, but I don't believe it serves a purpose.
I understand that you are never going to be a Ron Paul guy, and that is your prerogative, in fact, that is the beauty of our system. Let's debate the candidates on fact and substance instead of the verbal bullshit thrown out by Lord and the different zealot factions. If your preferred candidate is better across the broader spectrum, then let's support that candidate. However, the attacks on Ron Paul without the substance of explaining why another candidate is better is just a waste of time. I would be willing to debate you on the issues and I believe you would see that Ron Paul is clearly a difference versus the other leading candidates which is just more of the same. I would be more apt agree with you if you preferred Bachmann as she has shown some separation from the others, but the GOP has effectively marginalized her.
Sean| 12.20.11 @ 7:50PM
You are correct. Obama and Bush have basically the same foreign policy. Paul has the foreign policy of the right. No war without a declaration from Congress. Go in win and get out. None of this nation building.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:51PM
I don't BELIEVE that Paul votes with Kucinich, Warrior. I KNOW it. Have you looked at their votes in THOMAS? You are a bright guy. I will wait while you do so. Don't take my word for it---look at the votes yourself---they are on RECORD. If you think Kucinich is farther to the left than Obama (as he is), and Paul votes in lockstep with Kucinich on foreign policy issues (as he does), then he is, therefore, further to the Left than Obama is, de facto.
For example, Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich have voted against resolutions condemning Iranian persecution of Bahai's.
Honestly, Warrior, the man disgusts me. But please, please, go to THOMAS and LOOK at the voting records. How can you comment on his foreign policy views without looking at his voting records?
By the way, I do prefer Bachmann---look at my comments on her on this site---they are on RECORD.
Warrior | 12.20.11 @ 9:08PM
You're again not debating on substance. In fact you avoided every statement and question I posed. Bachmann voted the similarly to Kucinich on several budget votes. Does that give us proof that she agrees with him whole cloth on budget policy? The man disgusts you, again that is your prerogative and I will defend your right to express and vote in line with your beliefs. I have not only looked at Ron Paul's voting record but have listened to many of his explanations on why he voted the way he did. Let's examine Romney and Perry's voting records on foreign policy...can't, they don't have one so we should just take their word that they are conservative. What's Gingrich's voting record? Big government global warming loving RINO. Where do you want to take this? Gingrich, Romney and Perry equals W again. Which candidate offers a difference from all the bullshit big government and war loving political hacks elected since 1988?
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 10:50AM
Warrior, you are not looking at facts. I didn't say he votes once in a great while with Kucinich---I said, on foreign policy his voting record is in sync with Kucinich over 90% of the time.
You are entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts. LOOK UP THE VOTES. I have. The two have joked about including each other in their cabinets if elected regarding foreign affairs.
Paul also supports Manning. He is "Treason's Friend." Now, I am not talking about whether or not Manning is innocent. paul supports Manning if presumed "guilty."
Sorry, Warrior, the man is a traitor. He is a loathsome execresence on the body politic, and he will be destroyed come February, when the campaigning turns wholesale. The knives are coming out, and we are gonna fricasee his campaign.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:28AM
Ron Paul is a nut and I am the nut cracker.
Jack in Wi.| 12.20.11 @ 8:47AM
Boar Hunter has the intellectual vigor and argument skills of of the typical neocon. No pro war pro bankster, Republican can ever be elected President again. Ron Paul has already won. We are going to take over the party or we are going to replace it.
Ron and Rand for Peace Prosperity and Liberty.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:53AM
4f? Was it Jack-O? Still looking for another coward to be leader of the cowards? Not gunna happen! Nope to the dope.
Jack in Wi.| 12.20.11 @ 9:03AM
Boar Hunter: The troops support Ron Paul. They know he will put them first, not some other country, or the intrests of the plutocrats. They are sick of dying all over the world in senseless and endless wars.
Ron and Rand for Peace Prosperity and Liberty.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 10:05AM
First you start out by random, generic name calling then want to address me directly as if were friends?
To state it simply, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Ancient Greece: "If you want peace plan for war."
George Washington: " To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace."
Jack, peace always fails. It always has failed since the beginning of recorded time. There are always people who for some reason want to kill you and take your stuff.
Quit, for the love of God please quit blaming America for it. There are entire societies of people who have the same mentality as the aliens in Independence day (Some call them Muslims) and the only thing you can do to get along with them is die. Are you willing to do that? Are you Jack? Cause the people Ron Paul is telling you we can get along with will kill you simply because they believe you are not a muslim.
They kill their own daughters Jack. What part of that is failing to sink in to your thick head? This is not a movie script. This is not a TV show or some evil Jew propaganda. They cut the HEADS OFF of their own daughters Jack.
I suggest you read the post by "Don" below, although you will probably fail to comprehend what he is saying either.
Soserious| 12.20.11 @ 10:14AM
Hahahaha. That's so cute. You really believe it too. How charmingly old school bigoted of you. Its like a museum set piece.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 10:12AM
I reposted this from below to make it easier for you to find, cause I'm a giver Jack.
I guess he missed the Ron Paul loves the troops memo.
9thID| 12.20.11 @ 9:57AM
"Because when it comes to foreign policy -- Ron Paul is a Progressive." Yes, and when it comes to the Social plank -- Ron Paul is a neo-Liberal. My circle of veterans blood boils when Paul blames us for 9-11, calls us occupiers, and when he voted to force homosexaulity upon our combat troops via the repeal of DADT. Would love to see Paul indicted for treason alongside his comrades Hanoi Jane Fonda, and John Kerry...
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 2:00PM
Dear Jack: The tinfoil will not protect you from the Merkava tank the Israeli Consulate inChicago is sending to your house! Run, run!
Jack in Wi.| 12.20.11 @ 2:40PM
Those tanks got into about 2000 feet of Lebanon, the last time they were used Occam. the brave Israeli's could not suffer 100 dead in that war, without having a national breakdown. They could not stand having one prisoner of war without it becoming a national soap opera. Let Israel suffer for it's crimes by fighting and paying for it's own wars. Then maybe chickenhawks like you will come to your senses. Israel and the whole Middle East is not worth one drop of American blood or one American dollar.
TrueBlue| 12.20.11 @ 6:59PM
And yet if it is not fought there it WILL be fought here on our own soil. You can't have it both ways. No matter how you feel about Israel, the only reason Europe and the US don't have more terrorist attacks is because Israel is still standing. Without that point to focus on they would be on the rest of the Western world, and we've already seen how the French and Spanish react to terror attacks.
Britain already has a large Muslim population, so that would most likely be the next easy target. They'd leave Greece alone because the Greeks are already destroying themselves, would probably do the same with Italy if it weren't for Rome being such a juicy target to morale. Appeasement and Pacifism serve nobody but those who have no problems with conquest (WWII ring a bell?).
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:39PM
That was because scum like you would not let them be used properly.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 10:51AM
Dear Jack:
The problem with the last Lebanese invasion was due to scum like you.
Don| 12.20.11 @ 9:05AM
You need willing actors for Peace.
There appears to be a shortage of those who seek peace with the United States.
Any power vaccuum left by "us" will be filled by China, Russia, name it..
The desire/need for Natural Resources such as gold, titanium,oil,natural gas will force countries like China, to expand and most likely, become belligerent in attaining it.
It will certainly make them "friends" of distasteful entities such as Iran.
Yes, Give Peace a Chance as the poet John lennon wrote.... in theory...
The Practical ways of the world have, so far, after thousands of years of recorded history has presented strong evidence against it.
It is the triumph of "Hope" over "Experience".
Ron Paul will put us at grave risk .
The Way of the Warmonger?| 12.20.11 @ 10:04AM
We must warmonger because others will if we don't?
Do unto others before they do it unto you?
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 10:14AM
We tried it the other way around Neville Chamberlin, but they kept killing our guys.
Don| 12.20.11 @ 10:36AM
Thank you, Boar Hunter.
No, we don;t need to be warmongers.
But we must constantly be alert and "proactive" to avoid another Pearl harbor (we were sleeping and had withdrawn quite a bit inward) or another 9/11.
Like Boar Hunter noted, and I stated previously, other nation states have real needs, such as oil,water,natural resources.
THAT can and has in world history, created conflict.
If we are not proactively defending our interests, it will be taken, and quite possibly from us here in the States.
An EMP blast , for example,would neuter us, and render us defenseless. Who, then, would protect Iowa corn or Alaskan Oil from those who "need" it?
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:28PM
Umm, yes. This is foreign policy, not church. The President of the US has to be a very effective man, capable of manipulating and using Congress for his ends.
Paul has been a worthless backbencher who can't pass a bill.
TrueBlue| 12.20.11 @ 7:06PM
Agreed Occam's Tool.
Morales based on religious upbringing and beliefs (or any other system of morale teaching) are perfectly fine for everyday life, but when it comes to politics it is logic that should rule, not beliefs. Facts do not change, that's why they are called FACTS. There will ALWAYS be somebody out there willing to kill for power, whether they do so out of a sense of religious obligation or simple greed. That is FACT. To act like it is not is to invite disaster upon yourself and those around you.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 8:11PM
Merry Christmas, True Blue.
Breaking News: Paul supports Bradley manning: http://www.aim.org/aim-column/.....a-patriot/
Alan | 12.20.11 @ 8:22PM
Exactly TB, those who don't believe that are called food by those who do!
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:41PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:59PM
Mr. Hunter: Merry Christmas.
Margie| 12.20.11 @ 3:06PM
Haha!
Margie| 12.20.11 @ 3:16PM
That was to Boar Hunter's comment @ 8:28 a.m.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 3:30PM
We KnowThat Chairman Of The Bores, Barney Frank Said You Do His.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Timothy L. Pennell| 12.20.11 @ 8:36AM
Whadda ya know, one more reason to change the order of the Primaries. Reason #1 is the Parade of Politicians with their pants pulled down, and a Jar Of Vaseline in their hands, as they prepare to Bend Over, one more time, for MORE SUBSIDIES, for a Product - ETHANOL - that nobody wants. And, now this.
Apparently they don't get Mad Doctor Ron Paul's Newsletter version of Mien Kampf. Or, maybe they do? Which only makes it worse.
Hey. I like Corn (To EAT) and I like Farms. But, I also like the MARKET. And, like the saying goes: If it needs a subsidy? It's not worth Subsidizing. (I just made that up.)
As far as this IDIOT being in the lead? Well, that's just more fuel for the fire. One more reason to start in Texas, or South Carolina. Anywhere but here.
"You know what, Caleb?" "What's that, Earl?" "I don't know about you? But I'm voting for that Squirrely looking guy from Texas. The one that wants to Legalize Heroin, and Cocaine, and LSD, PCP, and Methamphetamines." "Oh, yeah? Why's that?"
"Cause he GETS IT."
He gets it, all right. Someone standing next to old Ron, heard a "SNAP" inside his head, a long time ago. Probably back hen he WAS reading what was in his own Newsletters. He doesn't know what's in them, now.
At least, that's what he's saying.
"SNAP"
Did you hear that? It sounded like it came from IOWA.
Jack in Wi.| 12.20.11 @ 8:37AM
Iowa is a one of the most conservative states in the country. It is full of churches and church goers. The whole Midwest has a populist tradition which Henry Wallace was part of. Mr Lord is just up to his old tricks. His job here is to smear Ron Paul everyday and everyway he can. None his nonsense has stuck yet. Win or lose this campaign Ron Paul and his supporters have changed America for the better. No prowar Republican will ever be elected again in this country.
Ron and Rand for Peace, Prosperity and Liberty.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:54AM
Its not hard to smear Ron Paul he is a nut
chuck| 12.20.11 @ 8:58AM
Just damn, I'm forced to break my own rule of not respond to this idiot. ARRRRGGGGGHHHH
"Iowa is a one of the most conservative states in the country". That's why they keep electing people like Tom Harkin, a well-known, rock solid conservative.
Ron Paul is a pacifist, that's why he appeals so much to you, Jack, Mr. "proud f-4, better a live coward, than a dead hero."
Better for you, worse for the country.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 9:08AM
Ahhh so you remember 4f too. It should be a clue about these cowards who habitually lie even to themselves. Why can't they ever tell the truth or accept it when they hear it? If someone has disparaging (factual) information about any candidate I can accept it and change my opinions accordingly. Ron Paul is a loser this time, he was a loser the last time he ran and he was a loser when he betrayed Reagan the time before that. Can Ron Paul supporters accept that...not so much.
Soserious| 12.20.11 @ 10:23AM
The thought of him being elected really freaks you out right? Take a deep breathe and let it out. Just breathe, in and out.
DTOM| 12.20.11 @ 12:23PM
You'll remember your own advice when Ron Paul falls to the wayside AFTER Iowa, won't you?
Old Soldier| 12.20.11 @ 10:22AM
Come on - you all sound like Democrats. Stop the name calling and debate the facts. I have not decided who I'm voting for - but Ron Paul is certainly not a coward or a nut.
His years as a Flight-Surgeon in the USAF should at least earn him that much respect.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:29PM
Being a rear echelon military doc does not require anything like military courage. You know who was also a military doc? Nidal Hasan. Higher ranked than Ron.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 3:39PM
"Dr.Ron Paul served in the United States Air Force as a flight surgeon for several years (1963-1965). While in the air force, Paul reached the rank of Captain. Directly after his service in the air force, Paul worked again as a flight surgeon for the United States Air National Guard (1965-1968).
During his military service Ron Paul spent time on the ground in Iran, Pakistan, South Korea, Turkey, Ethiopia and other countries."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:42PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Indy| 12.20.11 @ 9:12AM
One of the most conservative states in the country yet they vote for Tom Harkin over and over again, one of the most progressive senators? They support ethanol subsidies? No, I disagree, they are not as conservative as you portray. They like all the attention of being the first state but it's time citizens challenge the way primaries are held. Early primaries should be rotated among the states, voters in my state are just as informed and concerned about the future of our country as the early primary states, yet we have no say until very late in the game. The RNC and DNC must be challenged on this, it's too late for this election cycle but going forward, I would like to see this change...no offense to Iowans or folks in NH, SC...
Drunken Sailor| 12.20.11 @ 10:47AM
Bingo, Iowas is not that conservative. More like the Religous left.
Nunya| 12.20.11 @ 2:57PM
Jack, I'm originally from Iowa, and I can tell you that it is NOT "one of the most conservative states in the country", not by a long shot. They have the Uber Liberal Tom Harkin as one of their Senators, and squeal LOUDLY any time someone talks about ending farm subsidies. Conservative my butt.
While there are some stong conservatives in the state, it is absolutely not a conservative state. Now Utah, or Idaho, Montana, Alaska, or a whole number of states in the South, those are conservative states.
Eduardo| 12.20.11 @ 4:46PM
Nunya - you are absolutely correct about Iowans. My mother, aunts, uncles, cousins, wife and in-laws are all Hawkeyes, and to my Cornhusker eyes, they sometimes seem like Trotskyites. The ones that farm still genuflect whenever FDR is mentioned, getting misty-eyed over how he saved them 70+years ago. BTW, Iowa U is called the Berkeley of the Midwest for a reason. Believe me, Iowa has a deep blue streak, make no mistake about it.
Alan | 12.20.11 @ 8:24PM
Your full of shit if you think Iowa is conservative. Not in this dimension buddy.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 10:52AM
Iowa is not particularly Conservative. Read Bryson, who grew up there.
jpeditor| 12.20.11 @ 4:48PM
Gingrich won the Tea Party Poll. Nice try at lying, just like the "progressives".
And your video makes the authors point. Paul is an ostrich just like Henry Wallace; instead of coming up with suggestions on how our American military should not be handcuffed when they need to go to battle, you Paulists just surrender.
Ron Paul is to the Constitution what Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptists are to the Bible.
Ron Paul stood with America-hating nut-job Cynthia McKinney, and supported Chuck Baldwin over John McCain in the 2008 election.
http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09.....president/
Most Ron Paul supporters did not actively support nor vote for McCain in 2008, and they will vote for Øbowmao (again), or they will sit it out or vote "Third Party" in 2012, effectively helping Ø get reelected.
Ron Paul is not a Republican, he's not a Conservative, he's not even really Tea Party. The people flooding his campaign are for open borders, free drugs, and are pro-gay marriage; most are middle-class anarchist wing-nuts in khakis and/or closet democrats, and most are supporters of Iran continuing to acquire nuclear weapons.
And when Iran gets through nuking the JOOS and then comes after America, the Ron Paul and his Paul-bots will say we STILL DESERVE IT because we brought on / "faked" 9/11 / gave support to Israel.
A Vote For Ron Paul Is A Vote For Øbama.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:38PM
Ron paul, Treason's Friend: http://www.aim.org/aim-column/.....a-patriot/
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:38PM
Ron Paul calls Bradley Manning a patriot: (Clint, I think Pollard should rot in Jail---your hero supports Manning, who most Americans believe that, if he is guilty, should be killed by firing squad for treason. Ron Paul---treason's FRIEND!) http://www.aim.org/aim-column/.....a-patriot/
Lawrence D. Cannon| 12.20.11 @ 6:38AM
Iowa is definitely a part of the leftist isolationist Farm Socialism that sprouted up in the 19th Century and vestiges last today. All my ancestors through my Great-Great Grandparents were from Iowa, and both my parents were raised in Mt. Ayr.
Looking back at my ancestry, none of my great grandparents ever fought in any of America's wars, except for a native of Pennsylvania who moved to Iowa after the Civil War.
My grandfather and his brothers got out of World War II by becoming farmers.
When my dad decided to join the Marines while in college, my grandma was convinced that he'd be killed in a war (nevermind that he joined in 1955 and we were at peace at the time).
All my aunts and uncles, as well as my cousins on both sides of the family, are from fashionably liberal to out-and-out Socialists. I credit my dad getting out of Iowa and raising me in the South for me being the common-sense Conservative I am today.
Not to say I loathe Iowa. As a matter of fact, I dearly love the place. They got some good, solid folks up there and they have a reputation for being hard-working people. However, unless you're a farmer or a teacher, there are no job opportunties for folks up there. Of my cousins (aged early 30's-late 40's), the only ones left in Iowa are teachers, except for one who's a painter who does work at The University of Iowa. In other words, they have an excellent education system- for people to leave the State and become good, taxpaying citizens of other States.
Vern Crisler | 12.20.11 @ 12:59PM
Could the explanation be rather that people in Iowa are dissatisfied with Newt and Romney? They are moving to Paul out of desperation and because of all the negative advertising against Newt.
It's certainly not good news for the Romney camp that Iowans who are leaving Newt would rather bypass Romney and go to the foreign policy nutcase Ron Paul. Paul is simply the latest anyone-but-Romney flavor of the month. It'll change when people get a good look at what Paul really believes.
irish19| 12.20.11 @ 10:58PM
Interesting thesis.
JT| 12.20.11 @ 6:52AM
le sighhhhhh more zionist neocons thinking america is STILL listening to their delusional smut . Israel is the enemy, not the friend , Ron Paul speaks truth as always, if bachmann doesnt like being called out for her hate of muslims , then maybe she shouldnt act like such a goddamn islamophobe! Ron Paul 2012 , only REAL conservative left :)
Wayne| 12.20.11 @ 7:09AM
This is the type of post that just makes people detest the Paulites. Its too bad because he has been a good congressman.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:30PM
I was a consituent of his. No, he sucked as a Congressman. He was re-elected in one of the most useless Congressional Districts in the Country.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 3:45PM
You Weren't A Constituent, Israel Firster Propaganda Boy,Tool Job.
A Constituent Is A Citizen ,Who has Thew Right To Elect A Representative & You Didn't Qualify To Vote, As An Outsider Student There.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:54PM
Dickhead Clint---I voted in Galveston. My residence was there. I was not a resident for in state tuition purposes. I was a resident for voting purposes.
Do Your Homework, treason supporter. http://www.aim.org/aim-column/.....a-patriot/
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:29AM
Ron Paul is a nut
Mick Hawk| 12.20.11 @ 9:49AM
He's a Crackpot followed by a coterie of kooks. They are all posting today too.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 10:15AM
I feel responsible to harass them today as they are a nuisance to me on most other days
Soserious| 12.20.11 @ 10:27AM
And they all cry crooked catcalls at the crazy kooky world. Come now, lets all be calm.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 3:47PM
You're The Chairman Of The Bores.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Nemo| 12.20.11 @ 6:55AM
If only half this artocle is right, the US and te wotld are in BIG trouble.
Ron Paul looks like an elderly family doctor whose hands are just beginning to shake and who is beginniong to forget the names of Patients and drugs. I fear his looks are not deceiving.
Old Soldier| 12.20.11 @ 8:04AM
Well, if we are going to take that angle - Gingrich is easily the fattest most out-of-shape candidate since Taft. Seriously - at least make an effort.
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:32AM
You look like someone who is beginning to forget how to spell or use punctuation. Maybe you never learned.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 3:50PM
You sound like a butterhead.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:22PM
Sorry gaoxiaen,
My mistake.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:55PM
No, Clint, you are quite correct about nonsense name.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 7:00AM
Dr.Ron Paul's Tanned, Ready & Rested.
Ron Paul:, "I’ve offered to ride a bicycle for 20 miles in Houston when the temperature is 100° and the humidity is 100% and I will go 20 miles with them and then we’ll decide who’s the youngest."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Mike Hawk| 12.20.11 @ 7:36AM
I can't wait for the Presidential Bike Race. Should be exciting.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 7:39AM
Dr.Ron Paul Would Have You Suckin' O's after 10 Miles.
The tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Mike Hawk| 12.20.11 @ 7:57AM
I don't give a rat's rear end pal.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 3:51PM
You Ain't My Pal , Assface Hawk.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:55PM
Your are right, Clint. Mike is not your pal, as you are TREASON'S FRIEND: http://www.aim.org/aim-column/.....a-patriot/
chuck| 12.20.11 @ 8:51AM
Better than what you been sucking, Clintie-pooh.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 3:53PM
More Queer Talk From Chuckie.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:33PM
And Obama could outrun Paul. What's the point? Paul would let crazy mullahs get the bomb!
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 3:55PM
You're The Israel Firster RINO-CINO, Who Says He'll Vote For The RINO-CINO Frontman, Mittens Romney,Tool Job.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
chuck| 12.20.11 @ 8:37AM
LOL,
I can see it now, the old geezer drooling on himself, vs. the Bamster wearing that girly helmet riding all sissified.
Our enemies around the world would be trembling in fear..........or pissing their pants from laughing so hard!
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:50AM
So sad. We used to be feared and respected. Now if you say we should still be feared the Libs (like Clint) start crying and hugging themselves. Metaphorically speaking, bullies know who to pick on and do not pick on people they are afraid of. Point of fact Reagan enters office, end of Iranian hostage crisis. Those who do not respect America should be made to fear her.
It is not without reason that our eagle has an olive branch gripped in the talons on one side and arrows in the talons of the other.
Drunken Sailor| 12.20.11 @ 12:37PM
Excellent Point!!
Nunya| 12.20.11 @ 3:06PM
Agreed, excellent post.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:12PM
chuckie's the towel boy.
" Excelling in track and field, he graduated from Dormont High School in 1953 with honors. He had a best mark in the 100-yard dash of 9.7 seconds at a time when the national high school record for that event was 9.4 seconds; He was the 220-yard dash state champion, and was also on the wrestling team, played football and baseball, and was student council president.
Although he had knee surjery, a major university offered Paul a prestigious full scholarship in track, chancing he could regain his prior speed; he declined, refusing to endorse the risk. Rather, he paid for his first year at Gettysburg College with saved newspaper-delivery, lemonade-sale, and lawn-mowing money; he later received a small academic scholarship. He delivered mail and laundry in Gettysburg; managed the college coffee shop ("The Bullet Hole"); and joined the swim team. By his senior year, he was running track again; he set the third-best marks in college history in the 100-yard dash (9.9 seconds) and 220-yard dash."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Drunken Sailor| 12.20.11 @ 4:21PM
We all know he can run, question is can he stand his ground and fight?
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:24PM
"Dr.Ron Paul served in the United States Air Force as a flight surgeon for several years (1963-1965). While in the air force, Paul reached the rank of Captain. Directly after his service in the air force, Paul worked again as a flight surgeon for the United States Air National Guard (1965-1968).
During his military service Ron Paul spent time on the ground in Iran, Pakistan, South Korea, Turkey, Ethiopia and other countries."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Drunken Sailor| 12.20.11 @ 4:47PM
Went right over your head didn't it?
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 7:10PM
Tell It To Mr. Neutered, Sport.
"The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:56PM
Ooh, Iran under the Shah. Scary, scary.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:30AM
I heard Ron Paul wears a dress when he is riding his bike in the summer.
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:33AM
I heard that you sniff his bicycle seat.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:40AM
You forgot to add the part about the sun glistening off his well oiled body. Go back to smoking that weed and acting out on your Ron Paul homo-eroticism. Ron Paul is Tanned, Ready & Rested? Seriously Clint that was kinda faggy even for you lol.
Mick Hawk| 12.20.11 @ 9:52AM
I can't wait to see him in Spandex at the Tour de Farce next summer.
chuck| 12.20.11 @ 9:59AM
Just stop that talk! You're getting Clintie-pooh all hot and bothered with the "Paul in spandex" talk.
Dick Nome| 12.20.11 @ 2:35PM
Quit yanking his chain personally like that. He used to get really vile and insulting and to his credit he quit.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 10:54AM
When did he quit? News to me, Mr. Nome. (I have a friend in Nome...)
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:14PM
More Queer Talk From chuckie The RINO-CINO Towel Boy.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And Iowa.
irish19| 12.20.11 @ 12:46PM
That mental image made me throw up in my mouth a little. Now where did I leave that bleach?
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:38AM
What you're doing is called "projection". You're just another fat-assed jerkoff.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:32PM
Well, Ron and I can go for a walk in Minnesota in 2 months or so---if he's still running. Minus 20 ought to help him think.
Wayne| 12.20.11 @ 7:07AM
Lets face the obvious: 77 is just too old to run for President. His son would be the better candidate.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 7:29AM
Let's face it:
You ate that crap sandwich.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:51AM
Ron Paul is still a nut after three runs at the presidency
Soserious| 12.20.11 @ 10:43AM
After. After huh? Confusing future and present Bacon is never a good sign.
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:39AM
That's one testicle more than you have.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:16PM
You're Still The Chairman Of The Bores.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is here And In Iowa.
Mick Hawk| 12.20.11 @ 9:53AM
78 next August when he gets ready to retire.
Richard| 12.20.11 @ 7:24AM
Let's stipulate that Ron Paul will not be the nominee to emerge from the months' long "Republican Idol" reality show. But a Ron Paul victory in the Iowa caucuses (and, better yet, in New Hampshire) would be a great thing for the nation. A Ron Paul victory would for the first time in many years force to the forefront of our national conversation a reassessment of our decades-long slouch toward imperial overreach. We need to draw a distinction between providing for our national defense and a capability to project power swiftly and effectively when needed, and the confusion of mission creep, nation-building, and engagement in battles in which the US has no strategic interest. Most importantly, we need to confront the fact that a growing pattern of reach-exceeding-grasp diminishes rather than enhances our credibility abroad, and exposes potential weakness rather than commanding respect and awe. The shock of a Ron Paul victory would shatter the complacent and unquestioned assumptions that overshadow the Republican candidates' serial talk show chatter sessions. It would help us to begin to draw the critical distinction between prudent efforts to achieve national security, and hubris.
Louis Jenkins| 12.20.11 @ 9:40AM
Richard:
One of the best responses I have read.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 10:17AM
We already had the shock of Obama I don't know if the shock of electing a nut after a communist is the best approach for an american recovery.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 10:19AM
Oh sorry, I should have let you know who I was addressing Richard, or is OK if I just call you Dick?
Soserious| 12.20.11 @ 10:32AM
As long as I can call you BbbbbbBacon.
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:41AM
We'll just call you Boor.
Dick Nome| 12.20.11 @ 2:37PM
I'm the Dick around here. Gimmee a break.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:34PM
No, it would demonstarte that Iowans have too many meth factories hidden in the corn.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:58PM
Sorry: Demonstrate.
Cpm| 12.22.11 @ 8:18PM
It would also put the lie to the fact that the Iowa Caucus is anything more than a backwater taffy-pull.
Brian Mc| 12.20.11 @ 7:27AM
This article immediately caught my eye and which I found to be truly alarming since I'm an Iowan. There is only one way Paul would ever get my vote, and that is if it is Novemeber 2o12 and the other choice is the alien.
Mike Hawk| 12.20.11 @ 7:56AM
If I understand it correctly, in the caucuses one doesn't need to be a resident or a registered voter. Like last time around, various disciples of the fringe appeared by the busload in their migratory rounds to skew things up. Next is the open primary charade of NH where the same thing happens, show up early and vote often and for whichever ticket you want to f**kup. In '08 by the time we got to priamry time in MAy in PA, it was all over. Capt. McQueeg, (the only man who could defeat Hildebeast or Obama) was already the presumptive nominee and the R ballot (closed Primary as it should be) was Capt McQueeg, Huckaphoney and Rube Paul. No choice at all, so I left the top of the ticket void and voted down the rest of it as did thousands of others. The Presidential primary was over. We got stuck with a dud anyway you looked at it.
Josh| 12.20.11 @ 1:27PM
ahem, completely untrue. You must be a registered republican to caucus with the republicans. You can register at the caucus however, which means that it is essentially an open caucus for Iowa voters.
Dick Nome| 12.20.11 @ 2:38PM
That's what he was alluding to.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.20.11 @ 7:45AM
All one must do is read the posts of the irrational Paul-bots here to understand the problem of Paul as president.
It seems every Paul-bot here is an "America's Faulter".
Screw em
chuck| 12.20.11 @ 8:42AM
Actually so far, as of 8:30 am, the Paul-bots are largely absent, except Clint, threatening to stomp a face or two.
But it is early, the teens are still sleeping, and the nursing homes must be letting the senility victims(like Jack) sleep in.
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:44AM
Not really. We just think it's the fault of assholes like you, Ken, MyCock, and Boor.
Old Soldier| 12.20.11 @ 3:56PM
Is Ann Coulter an "America's Faulter"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....r_embedded
winston | 12.21.11 @ 2:50AM
They are retards
aware| 12.20.11 @ 8:00AM
Here we have a prime example of distraction from a hack in the pay of the Status Quo. Tell us of the great "conservatives" that will save us, Lord. The most unconstitutional bill ever passes with flying colors(The National Defense Authorization Act) and hardly even a peep out of the so called "opposition" cause they are too busy telling us how "un American" Ron Paul is, like you Lord.
See the roll for all the "strong defense" "conservatives" who voted yea to the suspension of due process in the name of "keeping us safe from terrorists"(HA!). Here for those stalwart paragons of "conservatism" touted so often by writers and posters here, such as Ryan and Cantor, among others, in the House. Doing what they do best empowering the State: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll932.xml
And here for the "limited government" and "constitutional conservatives" like Rubio, Toomey, and Demint as they stand arm in arm with the likes of Shumer and Reid at the Senate: http://www.govtrack.us/congres.....=s2011-218
Just a little signature from our own "Dear Leader" and we are all set. Who needs constitutions, liberty, and due process when there's "terrorists" to be killed?
But has there been even an article of these nefarious goings on here? Nope, but plenty of covering what "threat" Ron Paul is. Of course, he is a big threat to activities like this, but I wouldn't expect a hatchetman like Lord to even perceive this, let alone understand it. He is wedded to the idea of the Savior State.
So in the 10 years of the "War on Terror" you can now be eavesdropped on without a judge's order, porno groped by agents of the State and even killed by presidential order. And after a little signing your nation will be declared a "battlefield", you can be "disappeared" into a shadow gulag system without ever being charged or facing a "jury of your peers", and even dissenting can be declared "an act of terrorism". Looks more like War on the Constitution to me.
But you keep up the good work Lord cause Trotskites are nothing if not useful idiots. But notice there is no Paul in the "aye" column of either of these rolls. Now what were those "principles of conservatism" again?
Louis Jenkins| 12.20.11 @ 9:43AM
Aware:
100% correct. Not even a bare mention of the National Defense Authorization Act here. It makes me asked who side are the authors on?
Old Soldier| 12.20.11 @ 10:27AM
The authors here and at NRO and other establishment GOP places are on their own side. They will pull for their Statists as hard as they can and smear on outsider with all the tactics usually reserved for Democrats.
Race cards, nutty extremism, name calling - where have I heard this stuff before?
DTOM| 12.20.11 @ 12:46PM
STATISTS are the problem, be they democrats, RINO's, CINO's. They get our freedoms and ability to earn taken away slowly, one at a time, piece at a time.
Libertarians are the opposite problem - they'll get us all killed all at once. In a very big war...
There is no surer invitation to an attack than to appear weak to your enemy. Anybody notice that even bin Laden said in the '90's that the world admires the 'strong horse.'
Retreating to our own shores shows the world we will not fight. As does blaming ourselves for the 1983 attack on the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the FIRST attack on the World Trade Center in '93, the skedaddling out of Mogadishu in 1993, no response to the 2000 attack on the Cole. Those non-responses earned us the 2001 version of the World Trade Center/Pentagon/US Capitol attacks.
Yep, Ron Paul has this so-wrongheaded that he could carry Iowa 100 - 0 and still lose the nomination. Which he will. America gets it, Dr. Do-Nothing does not.
There, I didn't call him a name until the very end. And the name refers to his principle flaw as a candidate.
I like his stance on the Constitution. The Fed is not the problem - it's function would replaced by either Wall Street banking firms conspiring or Congress. Take your pick, both are worse than what we have. And no you can't just end the Fed and expect nobody to assume the banking function. Be VERY careful what you wish for...
More of this will beget nothing but more of this - no matter what President Ron Paul, how ever many times, tells Ahmedinejad, Pakistan, Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood, that we are leaving, not stop shooting at us. Running only incites the attacks, it does NOT stop them.
Simon Templar| 12.20.11 @ 3:33PM
DTOM, great comment..very insightful, honest, and realistic. One of the best in this thread.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:57PM
Simon, Mr. Hunter: Merry Christmas, and G-d Bless you both for kicking Paulbot ass.
aware| 12.20.11 @ 4:05PM
I would point out that your loss of liberty is REAL and happening right now, and against this you present a possible future war as an "equal" threat? While no one can know the future, plenty of people exercise enormous power over you by claiming they do.
Can someone explain how we could possibly "look weak" when just 1 of our subs can devastate an entire continent? We admit to 18 of these. And that's just fraction of our navy, which is just a fraction of our military. Just think of what we don't admit to having, if you know what I mean. An attack by a nation state on us would be suicidal and even the really crazy "Dear Leaders" for the last 70 years understood that.
"Statists are our problem..." How you could understand this and not understand that nothing grows the State like war also escapes me. The rise of the State would be impossible without war. Even when war is forced upon us we should never lose a sense of distrust of those men who exercise enormous power through the mechanism of the State.
The Fed wouldn't "be replaced" by Wall Street banking firms, the Fed IS Wall Street banking firms. Congress controlling our money, you say? In that Constitution you like Paul's stance on Article 1 Section 8 says "Congress shall have the Power to...""...coin money, regulate the value of...". Now it sounds to me like no one but Congress can lawfully do this. "Money" issued by the Central bank also comes with an interest charge that we have to pay with their money which also cannot be had without its own interest charge too. As you see not only can the interest never be paid off, but it guarantees the perpetual issuance of debt based "money".
Paul's "stance on the constitution" is that Congress should debate and declare war and it should be issuing money, which is exactly what the thing says! Is this what makes him a "nut"?
By ignoring the growth of the State through war and the control of our economy by a banking cartel through the Fed, conservatives, and conservatism, are fatally handicapped in the eternal struggle to preserve God given liberty from the clutches of tyrants.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 7:59PM
And yet, when I mention nuking Teheran, which is well deserved, all of you little Paulbots get your panties in a twist.
There is no way you clowns would ever use US power to defend the US intelligently. Your leader is Treason's Friend: http://www.aim.org/aim-column/.....a-patriot/
aware| 12.21.11 @ 5:47AM
You are an ignorant little would be mass murderer aren't you? You don't even know that millions of Iranians hate their leaders but you want them all dead. Murderous neo cons always want to "nuke" someone. You're a tool alright and a knave.
Why stop there, why not "nuke" starving North Koreans for having the impudence to suffer a tyrant's boot on their neck too. And you say Paul supporters are nuts. Oh brother!
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 10:57AM
Sorry, but this is geopolitics. Islam has killed 270 million people. To stop it for the cost of several hundred thousand is cheap at the price.
How many Germans and japanese did we kill in our bombing raids in WWII? Oh, and by the way, here's a question: what was the most lethal bombing raid of WWII---was it Hiroshima or Nagasaki? (Answer below:)
It was neither. Tokyo, March 1945, conventional weapons.
NadePaulKuciGravMcKi| 12.20.11 @ 8:20AM
Jeffrey Lord and American Spectator
won't like Iowa & will call you names
if
you do not do what you are told to do
chuck| 12.20.11 @ 8:45AM
Just trying to decipher you moniker. Is that Nader, Paul, Kucinich, and I can't figure the last two. But Paul surely fits in that group.
NadePaulKuciGravMcKi| 12.21.11 @ 1:02AM
Nader Paul Kucinich Gravel McKinney
Baldwin Ventura Sheehan
Perot Carter
bill| 12.20.11 @ 8:25AM
Ron Paul sucks on foreign policy, no doubt.
He championed on fiscal policy, pledging to overhaul the federal bureaucracy and the spending.
He sounds Barry Goldwater when he promises to fix the fiscal crisis. I truely believe that he means when he says something. Last 30 years, he has been the lone voice on fiscal conservatism.
You can label Ron Paul whatever you want, but he is a legend, he is the "million dollar baby."
Old Soldier| 12.20.11 @ 10:58AM
I agree. He isn't going to get the nomination but I sure hope he helps reform and revitalize the GOP the way Goldwater did.
Bush, Frist, Hastert and the rest destroyed the Republican small-government brand (while Gingrich rooted them on and Romney did it at the state-level).
Somebody has the clean up this mess.
Don| 12.20.11 @ 3:03PM
Gingrich, as speaker, balanced budgets, and ended Welfare (for awhile) and blocked HillaryCare.
30 years puts us back to just about when Ronald Reagan was sworn in, in the lifetime of Jack Kemp and William E. Simon, and Wm F Buckley.
I would hardly put Dr. Paul in that group of esteemed Conservatives.
If we're going to have a debate on these pages, let's face some facts..Fair enough?
In the last 30 years Ron Paul has been overshadowed by serious Fiscal Conservatives, who also believed in keeping America safe.
THAT...is a potent combination...
Old Soldier| 12.20.11 @ 3:30PM
Then he encouraged the new Republican majority in 2001 to pass prescription drug benefits. Shot climate change ads with Nancy Pelosi and worked for Fannie Mae.
Gerard| 12.20.11 @ 4:50PM
Everything younsaid is true, Old Soldier, without doubt, as is everything I said is true. leave out Gimgrich for the time being. Does Ron Paul belong in the same sentence with Reagan, Simon, Buckley or Kemp?
My answer is no. His thoguhts on some issues are appealing, but on others downright scary.
my prayer for our great country is that a descendant of the class of 1980 emerges to save us from the mess we are in. we could conceivably go from our current bad...To even worse. Please feel free to share your thoughts, on mine. to wit: Conservatives ...fiscal, social, national defense along the blood lines of Reagan,Simon,Kemp, et al.
Old Soldier| 12.20.11 @ 5:46PM
What are you so scared of? I may not vote for Ron Paul in the primary because I don't like his foreign policy. I'm not scared of it.
I like his domestic policy ideas a lot more than any other candidate - particularly the other two current leaders.
gerard| 12.20.11 @ 7:39PM
I am concerned for our future. I fear for the country we may be leaving my kids, and their kids.
I am not nuts about any of these choices.
I had high hopes for Perry. That lasted about a week.
I always liked "most" of what Gingrich did and thought, but acknowledge that he has issues that may not get past the electorate.
I like a fair amount of what Paul says, but not nearly enough to vote his way, and his notions about withdrawing inward , to me, invites another test or blatant attack like Pearl Harbor.
And I do not think Romney has the fire..the burn..to really make the case against Obama.
I fear we could see a 2nd term , and that worries me.
Old Soldier| 12.21.11 @ 7:36AM
I have the same conserns. I am willing to at least consider Paul. I'm hoping Jindal or Barbour jumos into the race.
Gerard| 12.21.11 @ 1:57PM
That would be great.
Thank you for service Old Soldier.
We would not be the country we are without men and women like you.
Merry Christmas, and let's hope and pray for the best.
bill| 12.20.11 @ 8:29AM
When you have a "Madman" in the Oval Office, you need someone like, Ron Paul, who will never surrender and uphold the Constitution without prejudice.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:31AM
Ron Paul is a nut
bill| 12.20.11 @ 8:37AM
Ron Paul is a far better candidate than Mitt Romney or Obama.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:56AM
Yes he is! And he is a nut, so what does that tell you?
Goldstein Chickenhawk| 12.20.11 @ 9:30AM
You're grunting and moaning shows you to be nothing more then a collectivist.
You'd would have no doubt fit well in Stalinist Russia. He might even had a job for you, sending folks to the gulags.
I feel pity for you.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 9:37AM
Good, lol, Im glad you pity me. You are a hoot! The Stalin thingy was really amusing.
Exactly how does my aversion to electing a nut to the office of president qualify me as a communist?
Old Soldier| 12.20.11 @ 10:37AM
Your enthusiasm for voting for people (Romney / Gingrich) who would take your money and give it to other people for healthcare, retirement, whatever indicates your socialist tendencies.
Your name-calling without any supporting evidence is a tactic typical of leftists as well. After a few times, it is dismissed as childishness.
Soserious| 12.20.11 @ 10:37AM
Tip- I'm fairly certain he wasn't calling you a communist but instead a thug for an authoritarian regime. Stalin wasn't really about communism so much as about taking out anyone with the slightest ability to oppose him. He did after all kill more of his own people than Hitler did. You can't really have people challenging the status quo after all.
irish19| 12.20.11 @ 12:56PM
Actually, I think it was pretty much a dead heat, pun intended.
bill| 12.20.11 @ 10:27AM
And how so ?
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:48AM
Your comment tells me that you're a Socialist.
Joe Ureneck| 12.20.11 @ 8:36AM
Jeffrey Lord bases his arguments on a false premise. Ron Paul is not a 'pacifist' .
Given the current overreach of our country's military however a touch of that instinct would benefit all of us and do wonders for the US. Fortunately more and more Americans are heading in direction. However, Ron Paul's political philosophy does recognize the need for a national defense while laying out the destructive nature of unnecessary foreign intervention.
If those with a vested self interest in the war industry can be kept at bay America has an opportunity to rebuild itself under a Ron Paul presidency.
chuck| 12.20.11 @ 8:49AM
No, it all fits, Paul is a pacifist. Over the weekend, a former staffer of his posted here on AS that Paul was going to vote against to use of force in Afghanistan, after 9/11. He was forced to change his mind at the last minute because half his staff threatened to quit, and his wife and his son Rand were berating him about it.
Paul is a pacifist, and the closest he should be allowed to the White House is an Iowa cornfield.
Old Soldier| 12.20.11 @ 4:00PM
Being reluctant to use force isn't pacifism.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 11:00AM
Being reluctant to use force when even a moron can see force needs to be used is the act of a loon. Paul agonizing about Afghanistan was like Obama agonizing about shooting Bin Laden.
Should have taken 5 seconds to make the decision to kill scum who killed Americans. There are many more difficult decisions that require use of Presidential time. Paul is an asshole.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:27PM
"Dr.Ron Paul served in the United States Air Force as a flight surgeon for several years (1963-1965). While in the air force, Paul reached the rank of Captain. Directly after his service in the air force, Paul worked again as a flight surgeon for the United States Air National Guard (1965-1968).
During his military service Ron Paul spent time on the ground in Iran, Pakistan, South Korea, Turkey, Ethiopia and other countries."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Renato D'Amico| 12.20.11 @ 8:46AM
The point of view that Ron Paul is a pacifist is false. Ron Paul believes that war should only start after congress declares it. Ron Paul wants to bring our country back to a free state. Listen to Ron Paul and you will notice your mind feeling much lighter. I find Ron Paul a breath of fresh air.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:58AM
BS Alert! BS Alert! BS Alert! Ron Paul is not just a pacifist he is a coward! Ron Paul is more Anti American than Obama...Well maybe not as much as Obama but he's pretty close.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 8:59AM
At least its only your mind that feels lighter, Clint hears Ron Paul speak and he gets light in the loafers. Oh come on now Clint, you gotta admit that was a good one!
Dick Nome| 12.20.11 @ 11:18AM
The breath of fresh air is curious considering where the Paulbots heads are stuck.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 11:02AM
See, Dick, you are a good guy.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 11:02AM
No, Boar, must disagree. (slightly) Paul votes with Kucinich on foreign policy issues most all of the time. Kucinich is to the left of Obama. You can finish the equation.
I keep asking Warrior to do this, but I am asking you, as a brilliant man whom I respect---please look up the THOMAS FP votes. Amazing.
Jon Bryden| 12.20.11 @ 9:01AM
Ron Paul has never said he is a pacifist. He has always said he is for a strong defense NOT offense. The use of force leads to more force. War cannot solve problems. Mr. Paul is the only true conservative in the race as he wants to reduce the size of the whole government and give the money back to the American people whom it belongs to.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 9:12AM
YOU SIR ARE AS CRAZY AS AN OUTHOUSE RAT.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 9:31AM
Ron Paul has never "said" he is a pacifist? Seriously?
Obama has never said he's an anti-American, anti-Christian, anti -business, Marxist muslim loving miscreant who breaks or ignores every law of the land. Actions sir! His actions mean things!
The fact you, and other anti-war pacifists, support Ron Paul is what some might consider a clue and by extension a substantial reason not to vote for a pacifist NUT like Paul!
The use of force leads to more force? What planet are you from? Where do your retards get these inane bromides?
War cannot solve problems? Why in the name of Zeus' butt hole did the bully ever stop hitting you? Did you give him candy? Your lunch money? That is conceptually so idiotic as to defy human comprehension. I seriously do not even know where to begin. After all why waste my time explaining something to someone so intellectually vapid.
You guys keep equating Ron Paul with the word "conservative" I don't think this word means what you think it does.
Oh and by the way...Ron Paul is a nut!
Soserious| 12.20.11 @ 10:40AM
Yup. Its definitely Ron Paul who's the nut.
Dick Nome| 12.20.11 @ 11:16AM
..and he is not a conservative.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:43PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:49AM
Takes one to know one.
Goldstein Chickenhawk| 12.20.11 @ 9:21AM
Pacifist?
LOL coming from the most effeminate looking guy on the entire internet!
Lord, you know you throw like a girl, and were always the last one picked for dodgeball.
That's one of the main problems for you guys. You have a long past lack of machismo, and now as an adult. You only feel you can rectify this by identifying with the strong arm of authority of the state. You are nothing more then the most pathetic of statists. Even worse then a liberal.
JimP| 12.20.11 @ 9:25AM
I find myself confused. Maybe because I got up late and haven't finished my coffee. I thought Progressives liked foreign military adventures. Wilson was a Prog and saw WWI as a Prog war for Democracy or something. LBJ was a Prog and we went into VN big time and tried to nation build while there, Clinton is a Prog and got us into the Balkans where we remain, FDR was a Prog and had no qualms about getting involved in WWII and Truman was a Prog and sent us into Korea. 'W' initiated nation building policies in Iraq and Afghanistan, but isn't considered a Prog- at least by many. So I'm confused about the adjectives/nouns. I'm not questioning our involvement in the above conflicts per se, just listing wars Progs liked, similarities with 'non-Progs and thus underscoring my confusion.
BTW, I don't agree with Dr. Paul's foreign policy positions [IMHO they are not presently or foreseeably practical and are dangerously naive at least in the near term], but I don't see Paul as a Prog/leftist per se. I see him as a classical liberal of the same mind as many of The Founders. Also, I am a Vietnam Vet volunteer, so please no static about me being against our effort there etc.
Highly amused| 12.20.11 @ 9:31AM
Jim,
your confusion has an easily identifiable source. Mr. Lord, in classic neocon fashion, has redefined terms and ideas to suit his agenda. Up is down, black is white, war is peace. "Conservative" values, and voters, are for Mr. Lord and his ilk, are convenient tools to achieve the greater goal, which is Jacobin, and fairly radical.
Everytime this nation has gone to war, we have seen a subsequent period of social experimentation/upheaval and centralization of power. Midwesterners, some of them at least, are wise enough to see this. Southerners are too excited about a future blood-letting, and to dependent on militarist welfare, to analyze the situation.
JimP| 12.20.11 @ 9:45AM
I see your point, but am confused about the Southerners wanting a blood letting. What Southerners want this? I guess I've missed something there also.
Highly amused| 12.20.11 @ 10:07AM
Southerners have been consistently pro-war since this nation's founding. There are always exceptions, but these exceptions, from John Randolph down to the Southern paleocons, tend to be ineffectual.
The true spirit of the South is not found in neo-Confederates or Southern-phile paleocons, which are too cerebral. It is found in the pro-open borders (cheap labor), low-brow, football lovin', faux-populist, war-lovin' GOP Chamber of Commerce types.
Ron Paul, despite his recent residence, and paleocon connections, reflects his PA German origins rather than TX sensibilities.
One can't be helped but amused by the predicament of the neocons, they must needs be make political alliances with people who they despise, Southerners.
Before anyone accuses me of being a Yankee hater. I am a Southerner, who has long since given up hope of developing an indigenously Southern, healthy form of conservatism. Jack Hunter et al can keep on dreaming.
JimP| 12.20.11 @ 10:41AM
As a fellow Southerner, I understand your comments, but think you overstate the case to the point of it becoming bigotry. Subjective opinions like low-brow, football lovin' and cheap labor loving ignore the exact same traits in Northern states. Jeff Foxworthy's Blue Collar Comedy Tour is merely the most recent evidence that the North has just as many hillbilly, redneck, football lovin' rubes as the South. Anecdotally, I lived in the North for quite some time and saw the same thing, except they had professioanl sports to be crazy about. Of course the big city sophisticates didn't participate with the same obvious ardour. Also I can tell you that there is no more parochial place on earth than New York City. They have their own culture that is just as insulated and 'backward'. Northerners have been exploiting illegal cheap labor just as much as Southerners. As for Southerners 'war loving tendencies', there is some truth in that, but you've overstated the case for the purpose of making your point and in the process emphasized the trait to the point of libeling the entire region, IMHO. I see your point about Mr. Lord's column and tend to agree with you, except for what appear to me to be the interpretations of a self loathing Southerner.
Thanks for the response and best regards.
JimP
Highly amused| 12.20.11 @ 11:20AM
Jim,
A very thoughtful response. Perhaps I have overstated the case, forgive the passionate argumentation. But here are the facts, supported by historical and anthropological studies, including self-descriptions:
The South is an honor-based society, with all the attendant pathologies, while not as socially crippling as "honor" is in the Middle East, Latin America or the Mediterranean. At first glance it might seem laudable, except "honor" in this case is face-saving.
Next, Southerners, in the secular and religious spheres, historically speaking, have overwhelmingly been anti-intellectual, distrustful of academics. There are exceptions, but we are talking generalities and cultural norms. While we might agree that such distrust is warranted in this day, earlier was this the case?
I agree with you about the omnipresence of low-brows, but two points. The Northern self-image, public presentation and notion of masculinity was not dominated by the Southern ideal of a status-conscious, book disparaging, active male. That is changing, unfortunately, as the entire country is coarsening. But I am talking about traditional WASP and German sensibilities. The centuries-old bourgeois gentlemanly ideal is disappearing, in the US and in Europe, thanks to leftist and "conservative" movements.
Also, not you, but others have cited examples of Southern-like behavior outside of the South. In many cases these examples are found in places where Southerners settled.
JimP| 12.20.11 @ 12:10PM
I guess where we disagree is on the feeling that the so called Southern character traits are necessarily negative. I don't see them that way. That you view them negatively, if I understand you, is of course your choice. In the interest of being brief, there is just as much evidence to condemn Northern character traits and history as Southern and the Northern character traits have lead to just as much 'evil' as Southern ones.
Best regrads again.
Jim
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:39PM
amused---I went to TCU (4 years), UTMB (4 years), and practiced in Alabama (7 years) and Kentucky (5 years). Two decades in the South.
I did not see what you saw. And I am a Yankee who would be living in the South were it not for the summers.
UAB, for example, is one of the best medical schools in the world, and the best in the US in AIDS research after UCSF.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:44PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Highly amused| 12.20.11 @ 9:27AM
Mr. Lord's only hope, and definition of "conservatism", it would seem, are Southern fire-breathers, hillbilly bellicosity, and Wallstreet crony capitalism. War-mongering and devotion to a certain heresy (Dispensationalism) are the litmus test for conservativism. Nothing else really matters.
The minute Iowans get away from the Trostkyite-faux conservative agenda they are fair game for mean-spirited aspersions.
Thomas L. Knapp | 12.20.11 @ 9:40AM
This article may be the poorest piece of anti-Paul argumentation I've ever seen (and no, I am not a Paul fan).
It goes from " comparison of Ron Paul's beliefs with those of the 1948 Progressive Party Platform is instructive, the similarities decidedly not accidental. Masquerading as conservatives, Paul and his allies repeatedly use the principles of the Progressive Platform ..."
To one short quote from Wallace, followed by a 20+ year leap into the void.
For your next trick, you can "prove" that Joe Biden is the new George Washington because Washington once crossed the Delaware and Biden is FROM Delaware.
Dick Nome| 12.20.11 @ 9:57AM
Actually, Biden is from Scranton, PA. He lives in Delaware. Rube Paul is from Pittsburg and still sounds like it. He has lived in Texas for awhile now. He and Biden have a lot in common, they both from PA and they are both goofy.
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:54AM
Yeah, he's goofy. He's not a snake-handler like you.
Thomas L. Knapp | 12.21.11 @ 8:51AM
I'm tempted to pretend that of course I remembered where Biden was originally from and that all that was just a clever hidden Easter egg in my analogy. But that would be wrong. Good catch.
Paul may be goofy. I didn't come here to argue that one way or the other. I doubt if he's as goofy as this particular attempt to indict him, though.
Louis Jenkins| 12.20.11 @ 9:52AM
Mr. Lord:
Can't fault a man for trying. Maybe we need to look at Paul as a total package rather than trying to weed out his faults, and yes, there are plenty. If Paul is the nominee, I'll vote for him. Everyone points to Paul as the scatterbrained uncle, but then Perry has a lead in that. Fat and out of shape, well Gingrich is in the lead there. And Romney, well, he's kinda washed up although he did interview rather well last Sunday. And Joe Biden has crossed the Delaware River a bunch of times.
Neither nor| 12.20.11 @ 9:56AM
The comparisons between Ron Paul and Wallace in this piece are abjectly apples to oranges, and proffering Iowa as the nesting and bolstering ground for both is a sweeping generalization if anything...
If Wallace was an isolationist, does that make Paul one, too? No. Are they both left-field? Certainly not.
Paul is neither isolationist nor interventionist, with interventionism being the direction that both political parties tack, with the political left favoring humanitarian interventionism (Serbia/Kosovo under Clinton to stop mass slaughter of Muslims and Libya under Obama to stop the supposed slaughter of Muslims). Yet why didn't Clinton intervene in central Africa when hundreds of thousands were slain and why didn't Obama intervene in Costa Rica recently?
Neither Serbia/Kosovo nor interventionism in Libya were for the sake of our national interest but rather to bail Europe out.
And if we constatly intervene in an unbiased way to free all the downtrodden, how many future wars will that entail?
Enough interventionism already. Neither that nor isolationism is needed.
9thID| 12.20.11 @ 9:57AM
"Because when it comes to foreign policy -- Ron Paul is a Progressive." Yes, and when it comes to the Social plank -- Ron Paul is a neo-Liberal. My circle of veterans blood boils when Paul blames us for 9-11, calls us occupiers, and when he voted to force homosexaulity upon our combat troops via the repeal of DADT. Would love to see Paul indicted for treason alongside his comrades Hanoi Jane Fonda, and John Kerry...
Highly amused| 12.20.11 @ 10:16AM
So Ron Paul, and Ron Paul alone, is responsible for DADT?
How is Ron Paul a neo-liberal? Obama, certainly. Many of Bush's allies, certainly.
A central tenet of neo-liberalism is humanitarian interventionism, which isn't what one associates with Ron Paul. In many ways neo-liberalism is close akin to "compassionate conservatism," a Bushian fallacy and oxymoron.
R. Paul also was in the military during Vietnam, so your final statement is pretty low-down. Perhaps you might want to direct your ire at those gents who had something else to do during 'nam, start with Cheney and Gingrich.
Better yet, direct your ire at the arrogant, wise fools in the Kennedy admin, who promoted Cold War liberalism and interventionism and were responsible for Vietnam. Or direct your ire at those weasels Johnson and Nixon, who kept a war going to save their own sorry hides.
It would seem that unless one is a mindless militarist in the cause of feel-good Jacobinism, one isn't a conservative. Remember this, you serve the wishes of people whose motives and goals you don't understand.
Ward Bond| 12.20.11 @ 10:08AM
We have two very dangerous men wanting to be President.Obama wants to destroy America all by himself,Ron Paul is perfectly willing to let somebody else do it for him.
Boar Hunter| 12.20.11 @ 10:21AM
Excellent Sir! May you have a wonderful day and I thank you so much for brightening mine!
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 11:57AM
Thank God for small pleasures. It must be very depressing to be you.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:40PM
Mr. Bond:
Paul was obviously very shaken as a child; his political arguments do not stir me. Superb, sir.
crookedwren| 12.20.11 @ 10:09AM
Thank you, Mr. Lord, for attempting to explain Ron Paul and Iowa -- and Ron Paul and "conservatives" -- and Ron Paul and his leftist fundraisers from Russia Today.
The Big Bully on the Block image that Paul portrays us as is not exactly fitting nor does it reflect our conflicted State Department whose actions have been at odds with the speeches we have gotten from various POTUS's since Woodrow Wilson. (Read Whittaker Chambers' "Witness" and then "None Dare Call It Treason" -- for decades we helped establish and maintain Communist regimes while speaking out against them -- again reflecting the infiltration into our Republic the ideologies fostered by Marx and Lenin and Stalin and Mao and . . . ). I can't help but wonder about the leftists who have been involved in creating policies regarding the Middle East.
There was a time when appeasement and "non-interventionism" seemed to be the best route, but Neville Chamberlain's attempts failed to appease those who wanted more than just power in their own little corner of the world.
When we KNOW that Iran is seeking nukes and we KNOW that Iran is being led by a "twelver" who wants to create mayhem in the world -- when we KNOW -- because it has been said on more than one occasion -- that SOME (not ALL!) Muslims see the destruction of Israel and the US as doing the will of Allah and that SOME of those jihadist types have come to -- and are in the process of coming to -- power -- well, add it up. I'm not sure a Neville Chamberlain approach is going to work, especially when we are de-nuking and they are nuking up.
It's a bit akin to Obama's apology tour of the world after his inauguration. Obama, I thought, was going to speak in soothing, dulcet, Chamberlain-esque tones, incorporating a profound neo-post-American vocabulary and TALK AWAY the hostilities we faced. I mean, Obama loves the Islamic call-to-prayer he enjoyed when he spent some of his formative years in Indonesia. Certainly he should know how to kneel down to the Saudi King -- and America would be seen as the dismantled and dimmed City on a Hill, its light appropriately besmirched.
To be fair to Paul, I am somewhat in sympathy with the reality that we can't continue to play policeman of the world. We haven't the money, and with the left denuding us of our prosperity and our defense budget, we won't have the money for some time to come.
Yet his accusations that Bachmann and Santorum "hate" all Muslims are revelatory. Paul rejects the complexities that make up both our policy and the dangerous complexities that are currently at play in the nations around the world.
Lenin once said that capitalism and socialism could not, ultimately, coexist. Perhaps he was right, and we are at that tipping point right here, right now.
Whittaker Chambers KNEW that the fight of our time would be between Communism (Marxism in all its forms) and the lovers of individual liberty. When the Berlin Wall toppled, many of us were duped into believing that the battle had been won -- and by the Right side.
The Communists have indoctrinated our youth for many decades now -- and the "Progressive" label has taken away the sting of Revolution. Now it's infiltration and evolutionary "fundamental transformation" -- it's redistribution of wealth using every soft form of coercion possible.
I've gone on far too long here, but I'm trying to sort it all out.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:45PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Peppermint Tea| 12.20.11 @ 10:40AM
I agree with Crookedwren above. I think. I understand Paul wants to reduce our military outreach and be defenders of America and the standardbearers of freedom but not with guns. I disagree--despots only understand guns. But I think the USA is running out of money to do these things, and when the dollar falls our troops will be stranded around the world and without money will need to plunder those who they were protecting, or get on a plane and go home and leave the base and equipment.
Thus I think if we don't cut the federal spending, we will eventually have a "Ron Paul" world with a weakened America at home and a non-player America abroad.
What to do? Who could balance the budget and still remain strong?
Right now I am thinking Romney with a Rand Paul veep. And ouch that hurts to say.
chuck| 12.20.11 @ 10:52AM
Defense spending, one of the very few areas of Federal spending that is actually authorized by the Constitution, is a very small percentage of the Federal budget. Cut out some of the other crap, and there are plenty of funds for the military.
This, we don't have the money argument, is just nonsense. Paul wants to cut $1 trillion next year, I say that a good start! But we still need to defend the country, support our allies, and defend our interests around the world.
nathan| 12.20.11 @ 11:06AM
For the record George McGovern wasn't a pacifist either. He flew B-24's over Germany. What he was opposed to specifically was the undeclared war in Vietnam, a war we had no business fighting and that "conservatives" had no business supporting. When you look at what Kennedy and Landsdale, so brilliant in the Philippines, so horrible wrong in Vietnam, engineered, the anti war people, McGovern included, were sadly correct.
Ron Paul is easy to understand and much of what he is saying has been said before. Pat Buchanan said in 1999 that if we insist on being in places where we have no real need or legitimate right to be, sooner or later people will come at us asymmetrically. Two years later he was proved right.
We tend to forget that one of OBL's main complaints was the stationing of American troops in Saudi Arabia, infidels in the holiest of Islamic places. He had complained several times before 2001 and been ignored. Imagine if you will how Catholics in this country would feel if Iranian troops were stationed, for any reason, in Vatican City. Imagine the outrage. Is it lost on all of you that after the attack the troops in Saudi Arabia were withdrawn? OBL also complained about the Versaille Peace treaty. He had lots of company. Lawrence of Arabia did too and spent the remaining years of his life trying to undue the injustices done to the people he had fought with.
Paul favors a strong defense, he favors telling anyone who attacks us that we'll kill them, but he does not favor this neocon democracy jihad so many of you seem to want to engage in. Show us the article in the Constitution that supports that. The late Jeanne Kirkpatrick, as conservative as they come challenged her fellow conservatives to show her the article of the Constitution authorizing the action in Iraq. None of them could.
OBL had at most 500 to a thousand men. That was it. As spectacular as the attack was, one thousand men is a police action, it's not a world war action. Abu Sayyef in the Philippine (currently under a cease fire with the authorities there) and others tend to be strictly local and don't care about us until we put our nose in their business. Paul understands this which is why he's saying, don't interfere/intervene where our national interests are not truly at stake. No more "world's policeman", no more "white man's burden", not more empire. He is right.
OBL used an asymmetrical means of coming at us. But again, this is not unusual and not unprecedented. Did we expect him to use tanks and aircraft? He and others were not looking for favorable editorials in the New York Times, they are trying to win. The Israelis acted EXACTLY the same way and yet you all are doing your Stephen Decatur Israel right or wrong nonsense. In 1948 the Irgun blew up the King David Hotel and killed over 100 civilians. Human rights activists like Hanna Arendt and no less a person than Albert Einstein forthrightly condemned the action. But not only did Ben Gurion not proscecute or do anything against the perpetrators, but in 2008 Israel did a commemorative plaque at the site regarding two Irgun members who lost their lives there much to the outgrage of Great Britain. Netanyahu attended the ceremony. One member of the Irgun, Begin, was elected prime minister. Where was the outrage from the "right" in this country over that?
Again, Paul is saying as did Washington (you do remember him do you not) no entangling alliances. Nothing Bush/Cheney did, the invasion of Iraq, being in bed with human rights violators like Mubarak, torturing people (Washington was adamant that all detainees must be humanely treated), throwing the Constitution under the bus like McCain and Graham did with their ghastly amendment to the defense authorization bill, Paul apposed and opposes all of this as would all the Founders if they were alive today. So who is the conservative here and who are the liberals?
We need to be honest, Iraq was a ghastly failure, 4500 dead soldiers, a "democracy" that is sharia based, over one trillion dollars lost, no WMD's, our principles thrown under the bus with people being beaten to death at Abu Ghraib, the Christian community destroyed, maybe one million civilians dead, cities in ruin. That folks is failure not victory. Ron Paul and only Ron Paul is saying we will not cannot do this again. Newt and the others are eager to duplicate the "success" of Iraq by invading Iran on the flimsiest of evidence, engaging in another war we cannot and will not win, a war that will devastate our economy and that of the rest of world.
Pacifist, no. Neocom empire builder equally no. I submit to all of you, Bush/Cheney put enough names on the walls for Afghanistan and Iraq due to rank utter total stupidity and incompetence. I don't want any more walls created. Newt and others like him are for too eager to go out and create those walls. Support him and the others and those walls will be built. Support them and your civil rights, your constitutional rights like the Fifth Amendment courtesy of McCain and Graham, will be abolished. The choice in these primaries is so very clear.
1-2 Punch| 12.20.11 @ 11:53AM
Ha, ha, ha, what a funny post. "We tend to forget", "OBL was upset about this-n-that", mecca, medina, holy land, bla, bla, bla. When do the descendants of the polytheists of Saudi Arabia get their justice. OBL wasn't to happy (nor is the rest of the islamic community) about Andalusia. How long will your post be for these issues?
nathan| 12.20.11 @ 2:03PM
Try actually reading what I said. We did remove our troops from Saudi Arabia after 911 didn't we? You did sort of notice that right? Maybe just maybe if they hadn't been there in the first place, maybe if we weren't, like Buchanan wrote in 1999, in places we had no legitimate need to be, maybe those two towers might still be standing?
I don't agree with attacks on helpless civilians at any time. I don't believe it's justified. But that means I don't support the Israelis doing it either. Chatila and Sabra mean anything to you? Sharon allowing the Phalangists to go crazy in those two refugee camps outside Beirut? Hundreds if not thousands of innocent women and children dead while the IDF looked on and even pushed women and children back in who were trying to escape, all too much of a reminder of those ghettos in Europe? Did you speak out against that outrage too? Or did y0u do your Stephen Decatur "Israel right or wrong" imitation?
And I take it when Secretary of State Albright when asked about the 500,000 children who died because of the embargo against Iraq, and she casually, oh so casually just said well, we were remaking the Middle East, you spoke out in righteous anger over that statement too? Or did 500,000 dead Arab children not register on your radar? Imagine for a moment if you will if some terrorist group blew up a school in this country killing 1,000 students and the leader of the group said, "well we're remaking North America." Imagine how we would react to that. And yet when Albright said that America collectively yawned, no doubt you did too. But not the people watching Al Jareeza folks. Children mean something to them too. They don't like burying them any more than we do.
So keep laughing. I'm sure you even laughed when McCain and Graham amended the defense bill so that the Fifth Amendment no longer exists. So that American citizens, purely on some sort of "information" can be indefinitely detained by the military. Are all of you laughing about that? Seeing your rights taken away in front of you, not by liberal democrats, not by bleeding heart liberals, but by so called conservatives. James Madison (I know here I go again, the bleeding heart liberal quoting a Founder, how rude of me) told the Constitutional Convention that "A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companion to liberty. The means of defense against foreign danger have always been instruments of tyranny at home."
Still laughing? Still "LOL'ing"? Because that's what Bush/Cheney did, they used the threat of the bad guys to throw the Constitution under the bus. And it's still happening.
So go on laughing as people like McCain take your liberties away. Keep laughing while we are in roughly half the countries in the world without good reason. Keep laughing while we waste tens of billions of tax dollars so that Cheney can say incredibly stupid things like, let's launch a missile at the downed drone. Folks, launch missiles into other countries without provocation, and they tend to throw missiles back.
Keep laughing sir. Keep laughing.
1-2 Punch| 12.20.11 @ 3:52PM
By your rationale we should have catered to the whims of a murdering madman(OBL) not wanting us in HIS "holyland" rather than the people in charge of saudi arabia.
Chatila and Sabra, Stephen Decatur, Isreal first. WTF! Change your drool cup and stick with your original post and my response!
The regime in Iraq was responsible for the starvation of its own people, not us.
Not worried about being "detained indefinently", I'm not calling uncle mo' in Pakistan plotting an attack.
My children and others here in the USA register on MY radar. The majority of children in the middle east are taught that my children should be killed if they do not submit to their beliefs. The boys are also taught that, if it need be, in the name of honor, that they can murder their daughters. I'm raising my three children differently.
When RP bails from his run you will vote for Obama, again. No free weed for you.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:46PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Margie| 12.20.11 @ 7:48PM
In a Ru Paul administration, he would have Dennis Kucinich the chicken S!@#, amongst other chicken s!@#'$, I'm sure.
James| 12.20.11 @ 11:15AM
"Ohhh, the Mooselimb Boogeyman will getcha if you vote for Ron Paul!" is becoming a tired refrain.
He is not some lefty pacifist, but would be a CinC who uses military force only where our direct interests are involved. Certainly that would not take 900 US military bases.
Why is no mention of the man's other views, like using the Constitution as it was written to run this Republic?
Well that means that the entire Inside-The-Beltway trough feeders will be looking for real jobs.
Republicans and Democrats have been stealing us blind for decades. Can't have Ron Paul upset that applecart.
Over-extended militaries have brought down empire after empire. It will be no different here.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.20.11 @ 11:19AM
If the American Republican people go crazy and nominate Ron Paul...
Start building your fall-out shelters and filling sand bags on our beaches.
Red Phillips | 12.20.11 @ 11:43AM
OK big mouth Ken. Sand bags on beaches is a clear, unambiguous allusion that if Ron Paul is elected we will be physically invaded by sea. So big talker, work that out for me please. Please describe for me the scenario, with some specifics, whereby we are physically invaded by sea. What country? Cuba? Iran? What are their naval and marine capabilities? Etc. And please do not refer me to your book. You made the statement. Now you back it up. I anxiously await your reply.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.20.11 @ 12:42PM
Well, Red, you are either too young or too ignorant...or both... to remember the last time America dug machinegun nests on our beaches.
You probably don't know why either.
(Actually, I only use the machinegun nest as a metaphor. It saves a lot of typing for ignoramuses like you and Ron Paul.
Bottom line, we are under existential attack, no less than Pearl harbour in 1941. The weapons can now jump over our beaches into our essential infrastructure, along our coasts (refineries), or be destroyed covertly by teams of Jihadists in our interior.
I thank God daily for our forward deployed Navy and our intelligence community doing their best.
Idiots like you and Ron Paul are being carried on our backs. Just say thank you and sign off.
Red Phillips | 12.20.11 @ 2:04PM
Oh, I see! So when hawkish interventionists tell us that unless we bomb Muslim Country X we will all be bowing to Mecca, is that just a Metaphor also? When clueless bellicose gum beaters like Michelle Bachmann tells us we know "without a shadow of a doubt" (her words) that Iran will use a nuke preemptively if they get one, is that just a metaphor? Perhaps, when you are trying to whip up war fever, you might want to inform us listeners when you are just using a metaphor. I would be a shame, would it not, to start a war and kill people based on a metaphor?
I served this country so spare me the carried on our backs BS. Perhaps that’s why I’m not so gung-ho to send other people off to die fighting fear mongered threats.
Red Phillips | 12.20.11 @ 2:04PM
Oh, I see! So when hawkish interventionists tell us that unless we bomb Muslim Country X we will all be bowing to Mecca, is that just a Metaphor also? When clueless bellicose gum beaters like Michelle Bachmann tells us we know "without a shadow of a doubt" (her words) that Iran will use a nuke preemptively if they get one, is that just a metaphor? Perhaps, when you are trying to whip up war fever, you might want to inform us listeners when you are just using a metaphor. I would be a shame, would it not, to start a war and kill people based on a metaphor?
I served this country so spare me the carried on our backs BS. Perhaps that’s why I’m not so gung-ho to send other people off to die fighting fear mongered threats.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:52PM
Red:
up through Mexico, down through Canada. Borders porous; ripe for nuclear smuggling.
New Zealand very chummy with Arab countries---EXTREMELY POOR airport security (look it up). Non-stop flights every day from Auckland to San Francisco, Los Angeles, Honolulu.
I don't expect a massive invasion at first. I expect attacks by WMDs. We get visits to our ports by ships under foreign flags every day. Have you tracked where the National Shipping Company of Saudi Arabia sends its ships?
Whatever makes you think it requires a military commitment to bring WMDs to US shores and place them? Saudi Arabia, for example, has consular offices in New York, and its airline has offices in Houston.
Do you have any idea how little it would take to destroy Texas City, site of many US refineries? It blew up in the 1940s, after all. Put a WMD in the Port of Galveston and wave bye-bye (and UTMB also has many of the State of Texas' best burn specialists, as well).
Some of us are paid to deal with disaster scenarios as part of our jobs, say, a psychiatrist serving the State in a rural area planning aftermath disaster scenarios and required psychiatric care.
You also have no clue how centralized and delicate our refinery systems are.
Red Phillips | 12.20.11 @ 2:18PM
Occam, you certainly won't get any disagreement from me that our borders are porous.
But the rest of your post makes my point. None of what you say is a military issue. How does bombing Iran or Syria or whoever make it less likely for there to be a terrorist attack in Galveston? In fact, there is NO WAY to prevent such a thing except through intelligence, law enforcement and local security. It would not be possible to thoroughly inspect every container entering this country. Shipping as we know it would grind to a screeching halt and the effect on commerce would be huge.
Your plan, and unfortunately I don't kid, is just to kill all the Muslims. Well there are 1.2 billion of them the last time I checked.
Don't forget I was in the AF, so I am very familiar with disaster planning scenarios.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 11:09AM
When one fights one's wars off one's soil, one's damage is reduced.
I don't plan on killing all the Muslims. I plan on killing until they stop attacking us. Re: Germany and Japan.
I don't support closing our borders and ports. I support letting the vermin know that an attack on us would be catastrophic.
You, on the other hand, would wait until we were in desperate straits. I doubt you were an officer. You show more concern for those who would kill my children than for my children. So does Ron Paul.
That is why your views are unfit to be represented as POTUS.
Red Phillips | 12.20.11 @ 11:38AM
I get it. When your attacks on Ron Paul aren't working, then attack the people who vote for him.
First, you continue with the lie that non-interventionism is inherently left-wing. You have been corrected on this so many times, and I know you read these responses since you reply, that you have no excuse. You are engaging in demagoguery.
Second, you are making the case against yourself and don't even know it. It is not a coincidence that non-interventionism was the preferred policy of heartland Americans in flyover country. And it is not a coincidence that support for war came from elite internationalists on the East Coast. So if you want to throw your hat in with elitist internationalists then be my guest. I'll throw mine in with parochial Americans in the Heartland. Lord, you are a shill and you don’t even realize you are a shill.
gaoxiaen| 12.20.11 @ 12:02PM
I disagree. He's a shill and knows that he's a shill.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.20.11 @ 12:44PM
See response above...cowards.
Red Phillips | 12.20.11 @ 2:23PM
Yeah because it takes a big man to fear monger and send other people off to fight wars.
You're the one wetting your pants about exagerated threats. Not me. That makes you the coward.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 11:11AM
When they hit us, please volunteer to go in and clean things up. Without protective clothing. On September 10, you would have been locked up for suggesting that aircraft would be taking down the Twin Towers within 48 hours. Believe me, I know---I'm the guy who would have been doing the locking up.
Red, you are a poltroon. You are not fit to be around children.
1-2 Punch| 12.20.11 @ 4:03PM
@Red Read the history of Islam. Read about the Islamic Crusades. Islam and the Nazis, to current day. You may detect a pattern here. Nobody is advocating killing all muslims, just the ones who are actively working to kill us.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:47PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Bill| 12.20.11 @ 11:49AM
How about my fantasy politics:
Queen of pop: Lady Gaga
Queen of conservatism: Margaret Thatcher
King of pop: Michael Jackson
King of conservatism: Barry Goldwater
King of libertarianism: Ron Paul
Legend in music: Alvis Presley
Legend in conservative govern: Ronald Reagan
Louis Jenkins| 12.20.11 @ 1:29PM
Bill:
Don't you mean Elvis Presley? I'm sure Alvis was the twin who died.
JP| 12.20.11 @ 11:49AM
Progressives for Ron Paul blog:
http://progressivesforronpaul......moral.html
Casey Abell| 12.20.11 @ 12:06PM
I'm enjoying this smackdown between Lord and Antle over the nutcase bigot. Congrats to the Spectator for allowing it.
H Abdullah Shabazz| 12.20.11 @ 12:11PM
Ron Paul
He is almost alone in opposing your insane American Empire, and how its bankrupted us.
Look at Brazil. A big country bordered by weak neighbors and the ocean. Plenty of oil and other stuff.
They spend 4% of what we do on the military.
And what does Brazil get? Security!
They never lost a war, never been invaded, never worrried about atomic attack, dont need body bags.
If we had followed Paul's lead for the last two decades, we'd be solvent! Run the numbers. The national debt would be $2 trillion, not $14 trillion.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.20.11 @ 12:48PM
Abdullah,
kiss my pig!
You are my enemy...... BRING IT ON!
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:55PM
Shabazz: learn better English---"he is almost alone in opposing YOUR American Empire, and how it has bankrupted US." Huh?
Brazil is secure because the US protects them, as it has since the 1800s.
Gerard| 12.20.11 @ 5:01PM
We should explore and develop our own Natural Resources ( like Brazil)..then..we will keep our dollars here and noy support crazies in the Middle East. we can then draw down oir Military and be a self sufficient , energy efficient, non dependent Nation... oh yes... We should also fully develop Nuclear power, hydro wind and solar if ,when and where it probes efficient.. Did leae out coal and natural gas? the byproduct would be JOBS and more Jobs, taxes beimg paid as a result, and those workers off unemployment...
I kinda like the way all that sounds and comes together in a nice,neat tidy package...
George S| 12.20.11 @ 12:16PM
When Ron Paul is finally weeded out, American Spectator's bandwidth will drop all that ice cream and cake weight put on by the RP crowd.
William R| 12.20.11 @ 12:38PM
The Neocon Chicken Hawks are in full meltdown mode. This is hilarious.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.20.11 @ 12:54PM
wILLIAM r,
WE CHICKENHAWKS KILLED YOU NAZIS THE LAST TIME AROUND.
Margie| 12.20.11 @ 3:11PM
I like that statement of yours, Reprobate.
Too bad you're a Liar, though, and God gives you no points for it.
"Sir."
William R| 12.20.11 @ 6:20PM
You were institutionalized during World War 2 for serious fantasies about being a war hero.
bill| 12.20.11 @ 1:28PM
I hate bureaucrats and those big labor unions.
Ron Paul vows to dismantle bureaucracy and restore fiscal sanity. That's good enough for me.
His foreign policy puzzles me but I don't care so much about who invades Georgia or who how many people gets killed by the sucide bombers in Iraq.
Ron Paul will end the federal bureaucracy and get us out of the fiscal mess we have now.
He will never surrender because he never did in the past.
Ron Paul is a legend.
bill| 12.20.11 @ 1:46PM
Good News!
According to CNN national Poll, Ron Paul is polling 14%, behind Newt and Mitt, remember the 2008 GOP Primary, John McCain was polling behind Rudy and Fred, and McCain was the ultimate GOP nominee.
Any clue? It's Ron Paul time.
Josh| 12.20.11 @ 1:48PM
An excellently written piece, and historically very interesting. There is, however, a big problem with Mr. Lords arguement. In fact this issue is so great as to invalidate his entire article. As it is, it is a great arguement against a Pacifist foreign policy, the problem is that it conflates Pacifism with the foreign policy that Paul argues for. Paul argues that we are overextended militarily, which is a threat to our national security as our military is overcommited worldwide. He is not, however, a pacifist, but merely believes the proper constitutional role of president is ONLY to prosecute wars which are declared and authorized by congress. As Paul has stated Islam is not a threat to our country, but this is borne out by the fact that many millions of Muslims live in the United States peacefully. Mr. Lord tries to exagerate this quote into an implication that Paul does not view RADICAL islam as a threat . He also cofnflates this with the truely naive pacifism displayed by wallace et. al. as to the threat of Communism to this country at a time when it clearly was an agressive expansionistic ideology worldwide. Islam has a history of expansionism to be true, but has not achieved this on any scale for over 1000 years, and overall cannot be said to be expansionistic anymore than the western world can be viewed as such. To mix Pauls commonsense minimalist foreign policy with Wallaces/MCCarthy's wild eyed pacifism is at best a tough sell, and at worst a nasty effort at propaganda.
Occam's Tool| 12.20.11 @ 1:57PM
Josh: the Battle of Lepanto was in 1571, the Battle of Vienna was in 1683, and the Barbary pirates were in action around the time Lincoln was born. Your historical knowledge is piss poor.
Seek| 12.20.11 @ 2:09PM
We need a foreign policy realist in the White House, someone worthy of the name of Richard Nixon. Nixon was the ultimate statesman.
rhoetus| 12.20.11 @ 2:52PM
Nixon gave South Viet Nam to the communists and betrayed our ROC allies in recognizing Mass-murder Mao. Barry Goldwater said he was the most dis-honest man he ever met.
W| 12.20.11 @ 4:45PM
rhoeus
Nixon saved Israel in 1973. Nixon had won the Vietnam War after LBJ had messed it up.
South Vietnam fell when North Vietnam invaded full force in January 1974 after the Democratic Congress cut off all aid to South Vietnam. Nixon had resigned in August 1974, and Jerry Ford was president.
Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 11:13AM
And he saved millions of Jews, Nixon did.
A POTUS needs to be capable of being a bastard.
Savrola| 12.20.11 @ 2:25PM
Jeffrey Lord is chimping.
rhoetus| 12.20.11 @ 2:46PM
George Wallace was correct when he said: "There's not a dimes worth of difference between the two parties."
Margie| 12.20.11 @ 3:13PM
Jeffrey Lord is doing God's work.
I hope he continues.
"He who speaks the truth gives honest evidence, but a false witness utters deceit." Prov. 12:17.
He is giving honest evidence. The Paul-bots spew deceit.
e pearse | 12.20.11 @ 3:15PM
Some conservatives - and most Libertarians - think there is no harm in voting for an extreme candidate during the primaries even though they know well that it has no chance of getting the nomination.
That is wrong headed and foolish.
In the case of Ron Paul, what they are doing is encouraging a man whose psychological makeup would propel him to run as an independent third party in order to have the national stage where to expand on its views, and by doing so, assure the election of Obama.
If these extreme - and foolish - conservative voters think that Ron Paul is not the type of man to do that damage to the conservative cause and to the country, they better think again.
(Disclosure: The thesis was lifted from www.RAmericaChronicle.com )
Savrola| 12.20.11 @ 3:16PM
Margie,
u mad?
Savrola| 12.20.11 @ 3:18PM
Mitt Romney 4 President.
Universal Healthcare Subsidies for all Insurance Companies and War on Iran.
Hey, we haven't bombed any babies for almost six months.
1-2 Punch| 12.20.11 @ 4:20PM
I'm new in posting here at AmSpec. It would really baffle me when there would be no response to posts that could easily be picked apart by the regulars here(conservatives). I now know why some are just left alone. I'm heading out right now to do 80k and 5600' of climbing. This will be a piece of cake compared to reading the idiocy being posted up in here. To Boar Hunter, Ken(Old Texican), Margie and any others of like mind, you are certainly better than me. I'm outta here!
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:38PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette.
The Chickenhawk Hall of Shame
name:
Willard Mitt Romney
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
March 12, 1947
home state:
Michigan
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
excuse:
None to speak of
preferred activity:
Trying to talk people into becoming Mormons
occupation:
Climbing ambition's greased pole
When your daddy's a Governor and a Cabinet Secretary, it's amazing how your odds of being drafted diminish."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is here And In Iowa.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 4:39PM
" The New Hampshire Gazette
The Chickenhawk Hall Of Shame.
name:
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich
rank:
Chickenhawk First Class with Distinguished Fleeing Cross
date-of-birth:
June 17, 1943
home state:
Georgia
missed opportunity:
Vietnam War
preferred activity:
Attending grad school
occupation:
Congressman
A virtuoso in the art of hypocrisy, the former Speaker of the House now claims the Vietnam War was a splendid idea, but at the time he opposed going himself. Newtie also speaks highly of morality, but as a serial adulterer he doesn't want to get too close."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Dick Nome| 12.20.11 @ 7:52PM
I hate reruns.
Drunken Sailor| 12.20.11 @ 4:45PM
Welcome and come back. As you have learned (the painful way) Ron Paul articles bring on the foaming at the mouth. As you state, some are better just scrolled right on past. These are usually the ones that some of us have had the same arguments with over and over. They just are not worth the frustrastion. Just wait until after the primaries and things will change. Hopefully by then, we can all rally behind the canidate running against Obama. Even if it means holding your nose when you do. For now, welcome to the circular firing squad, grab a rifle and load up.
rhoetus| 12.20.11 @ 4:24PM
Tweedle-Mitt or Tweedle-Newt?
Some say, compar'd to Bush43
That President Obama's but a Ninny
Others aver, that he to Obama
Is scarcely fit to hold a Candle
Strange all this Difference should be
'Twixt Tweedle-Mitt and Tweedle-Newt!
Savrola| 12.20.11 @ 5:22PM
Taxed Enough Already?: Vote Ron Paul.
Feel the Need to Bomb Iranian Babies so that Iran, like Libya can enjoy the blessings of Central Banking?: Vote Mitt Gingrich.
Dan Mathewson| 12.20.11 @ 6:48PM
yip-yip-yip-yip-yip-yip-yip-yip!!!!!!
The sound Paulicans make when their favorite candidate Ron Paul is criticised.
Alan | 12.20.11 @ 8:57PM
Thats what cultists usually sound like.
Clint| 12.20.11 @ 7:17PM
We Tea Party Patriots Who Support Our Tea Party Co-Favorite Dr.Ron Paul Are Happy.
" Ron Paul, Polls and Panic
The conservative media flips out over the latest front-runner
The Ron Paul Panic is officially under way.
The Texas congressman has been gaining strength in Iowa all year, but the media—and the Republican establishment—have been content to treat him dismissively.
Oh yeah. Interesting character. Seems to have tapped into something. Has a cult following. He can’t win the nomination, the refrain goes, but he’s an interesting sideshow.
But a couple of Iowa polls showing Paul bursting into first place—past the previously hot Newt Gingrich and the slow but steady Mitt Romney—are forcing the press to take him more seriously."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Alan | 12.20.11 @ 8:56PM
No what he's gonna get is an anal exam like all the others got theirs and it isn't going to be pretty. Now its HIS turn. This is gonna be ffffuuuuuuunnn!
Resist We Much! | 12.20.11 @ 9:40PM
Wallace wasn't a pacifist. He was a Zamestitel.
BackToBasics| 12.20.11 @ 10:33PM
Even if we pulled our troops out of all foregin bases our enemies would not rest until America was in ruins. Even so, the so-called progressives would no doubt continue to blame the continued carnage and troubles all on our past "imperialism." They would wake up when it was too late to do anything about it.
I'd like Paul more if he could manage to even be just a little to the right of a liberal Democrat on foreign policy. A Republican Senate and House may be able to push him there but he wouldn't be even that far to the "right" on his own.
Mike W| 12.20.11 @ 10:43PM
This Jeffery Lords guy just flat out looks like a dick.
Nick| 12.20.11 @ 11:23PM
What a brilliant argument and refutation of Mr. Lord's essay.....I think NOT!
Go back to kos-kids or huffpo, or where ever you crawled out from under, brainiac.
POST American| 12.20.11 @ 11:46PM
---------------------BOTTOM LINE----------------------
"America better watch out
or in a couple of decades we're going
to be little more than a minstrel show
for RED China."
-GORE VIDAL
(1985)
During the very height of the CFR hijacked
BUSH-Reagan era. Take heed, Reagan himself
NEVER took a stand on this. In fact, he
was instrumental in pushing the empty
franchise slum service economy which has
gutted our economy and culture.
No one dares deny now that WAL-Mart
etc were put out there by Globalism to
destroy locality --and flood and addict
America, and the world, to RED China
wampum.
We've had quite enough of CFR/Trilateral
front op 'Republicanism'.
RETRO-active IMPEACHMENT of our past
4 cfr Globalist front op administrations.
----The Globalist-RED China set up, sellout,
TREASON and world EUGENICS OP
remains ----THE SUPREME ISSUE of
the century.
---------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012------------------
Jerry G.| 12.21.11 @ 1:03AM
Im pretty sure that the anti-Ron Paul posters on this site are the weathered blue hair leftovers of the Republican Party. As a young person, I think it's fine that you hate him so vehemently. It's not your fault you grew up in the stupid old days of the Cold War which deformed your ability to imagine a world where where the U.S.'s foreign policy isn't to be everywhere at all times. As a Ron Paul supporter, I'm not concerned with whether he wins the caucus or not, because I know our younger generation are not the chickenhawk cold warriors that want to fight pre-emptive wars and be the policeman of the world. So he might not win in 2012, but all we have to do is wait for you chickenhawk old farts to die off, and then we can change things for the better. Peace.
Drunken Sailor| 12.21.11 @ 8:56AM
Where have I heard this before? Oh yeah, the 60's, woodstock, and the "Flower Power" generation. Then they grew up, faced reality and "Sold out". Don't worry Jerry, with age comes experience and wisdom.
winston | 12.21.11 @ 2:47AM
Brilliant analysis. I knew this guy wRONg Paul was a progressive communist but now I know why and how. Thanks, sir.
thesquareglobe| 12.21.11 @ 6:41AM
Paul will Iowa and he'll win New Hampshire and from there he'll go into the South and of course win!
Putting pundits aside, those newsletters will help actually help him in some parts.
Why the establishment was so dumb, Gingrich was never the enemy...
Q: On a separate note, if FOX NEWS isn't willing to criticize Paul who else will?
A: Nobody, other than the Internet
...
It's all about demo's, ad clicks and hits.
There's no way Paul isn''t going to in Iowa and there's no way Paul isn't going to win in New Hampshire and leading into the south.
Have fun kids...
Rob A| 12.21.11 @ 5:46PM
So, Ron Paul's foreign policy is progressive? How would you describe the Wilson's, FDR, Trumans, LBJ & Clinton's Foreign policy? Conservative or Progressive?
Rob A| 12.21.11 @ 5:48PM
I heard this American Spectator is only for people over 55!?!? You dried up geriatrics will be gone soon enough....You and your Progressive Neo-Conservativism
john dubose| 12.21.11 @ 5:56PM
This guy makes my head explode. There is a huge difference between the pacifism of the left and the non-interventionism of Ron Paul and the other treaditional conservatives. It is not necessary to send our troups to fight all over the world to counter every trend we do not like. Ron Paul thinks the bad guys can be finessed and defeated in other ways. Leftists pacificists would be happy for some of the bad guys to win.
POST American| 12.21.11 @ 9:57PM
'----little more than a minstrel show
for RED China.'
----------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012---------------
Tenn Slim| 12.22.11 @ 10:22AM
RP, observed in NH Caucus. Articulate, but rambling. He got caught several times with incorrect data. RP probably does resonate with the Iowa folks.
Problem is, the Left would like to see him as the Obama advesary. Obama would eat him alive in the debates, going Center, Left, Right, and Center.
RP could not mentally keep up. He is a repeater of paraphrases. No depth, no specifics, lots of emotion. Obama this time will be Mr Cool
Semper FI
Christianus| 12.22.11 @ 2:27PM
How is wanting to bomb every country on the planet and run a global empire "conservative?"
Perhaps Mr. Lord can explain.
Frankly, some of us are getting tired of GOP/neocon hacks calling anyone who disagrees with the "left wing" or "unpatriotic conservatives."
These are false charges.
Real conservatives side with Buchanan and Paul, not with Podhoretz and Kristol.