-
Obama’s Mondale Moment
April 13, 2011 | 1 comment
-
Less Loser Leadership on Libya
March 8, 2011 | 10 comments
-
Serious Question Re: Newt
March 4, 2011 | 92 comments
-
Biggest Bore?
February 20, 2011 | 9 comments
-
“Mama Grizzlies, Joe the Plumbers, and Bitter Clingers”
February 12, 2011 | 29 comments
The Spectacle Blog
“I am a social conservative because I am a Christian. I am a fiscal conservative because I am a Christian. Why are you a conservative?” So asked Eric Metaxas, author of the new bestseller Bonhoeffer biography (disclosure: we share a publisher), at CPAC in a broadside against relativistic conservatism. He said that conservatism is about social order and social order ultimately derives from God.
Best joke: He speculated that many Nazis went along with Hitler because they figured he’d be a “one-term fuhrer.” He also told a tale out of school. George Bush told him of Barack Obama, “In one year, he went from Nobel Prize to an ass-kicking.”
Also, let me go on the record right now saying that Ron Paul is going to win the CPAC straw poll again this year.
View all comments (23) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Jeremy Lott
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/02/11/bonhoeffer-bush-and-ron-paul
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Celebrating Our Lady of Paris
- Back in the Fray
- A World Turned Right Side Up
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
Occam's Tool| 2.11.11 @ 12:29PM
Paul. Is. An. Antisemitic. Idiot. Kucinich. And. He. Vote. Together. Overseas.
Antony | 2.11.11 @ 1:17PM
Occam's Tool, please use reason, logic, context and knowlege of facts before talking points with no teeth. Paul is not antisemitic. he is an individualist, not a collectivist. Racism and individualism stem from opposite philosophies about human nature and interaction. If knowing a racist made you one, then all the progressives and elitists in Washington would be infected with race-hate... But even I know that is an irrational argument.
Also, as Paul is philisophically libertarian, of course there are some things he and Kucinich will vote together on. Fix reason firmly in her seat and look at the full context rather than doing as a racist would and judge a man by the acts of others around him or because others say so... Use your own intellect.
Ryan| 2.11.11 @ 2:02PM
Paleoconservatism doesn't equal antisemitism. I don't quite agree with his stance here, but it's not out of antisemitism, it's out of Paul's perceived practicality.
the repudiator| 2.11.11 @ 3:07PM
Ron Paul may be many things but he is no idiot. So often I see this word used in disagreements. It's an intellectually lazy word, overused to the point of meaninglessness. Like you go girl & out of the box thinking. Why don't you repost with some sort of a coherent idea as to why disagree with Dr Paul.
C Bowen| 2.11.11 @ 6:50PM
Occam is employing the Al Gore Method of Reason, that if you want to cut a subsidy, it means you want them to die.
Thankfully, as an American conservative board, we let these types post here.
Cpm| 2.11.11 @ 12:39PM
Paulbots love winning straw polls, but when the vote actually means something few people are really willing to board that crazy train.
Antony | 2.11.11 @ 2:18PM
Acctually, Paul had a number of delegates at the National Convention, but all were refused having their votes counted (as the establishment wanted it to look like it was unanimous for McCain). What with the massive media push to discredit the man and lable him 'quixotic' and 'crazy' and a 'moon-bat', but never debating the ideas themselves, he did much better than anyone expected, besides his supporters. Calling his supporters 'Paulbots', when the entire Tea-party movement derived from them, is, in my not so humble opinion, blind.
Derek Leaberry| 2.11.11 @ 12:50PM
George Bush got two ass-kickings- 2006 and 2008- even though he was not on the ballot. When he's off record, Bush is all mouth and no sand and a phony Christian to boot.
KS| 2.11.11 @ 5:32PM
Okay, support your assertion that Bush is a "phony Christian."
Wait, I just read that I shouldn't feed the trolls ...
Quartermaster| 2.11.11 @ 5:56PM
Derek is not a troll. He's quite correct about Bush. His lawlessness in refusing to secure the border and his drunken sailor spending pretty much score that mark.
Metaxas put it quite well, "I am a social conservative because I am a Christian. I am a fiscal conservative because I am a Christian." Conservatism and Christianity are intimately related. Bush was no conservative. he was, and is, a member in good standing of the Eastern Establishment. he just fooled the conservatives and they voted for him.
Clint| 2.11.11 @ 1:00PM
Ronald Reagan:
" If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path."
Red Phillips | 2.11.11 @ 1:07PM
I keep telling y'all interventionists that non-interventionism is on the rise. We see that abundantly on display at CPAC. But your reaction is usually whistling past the graveyard, mindless derison (see Occam's Tool above), or amping up the hysterics.
When are you going to realize that you are losing your grip on the movement and are going to have to engage the non-interventionists on a serious intellectual level? And serious intellectual level does not include shrieking anti-Semitism and playing the WWII card as first resorts.
Derek Leaberry| 2.11.11 @ 1:40PM
Although most conservatives are still viscerally interventionist, today the money just isn't there. Even the United States can't continue to run up $ 1.5 trillion deficits for as long as the eye can see. This train appears to be heading for fiscal armageddon and then there will be no money for anything. What is funny is that intelligent men who call themselves conservative, men like Bill Kristol, are so self-deluded that the can't see what is coming.
Warrior | 2.11.11 @ 2:05PM
The question that never gets answered is where in the Constitution does it give the government the authority to intervene in the governance of another sovereign nation and/or provide other countries with foreign aid? George Washington was adamant about staying out of foreign entanglements. The attacks on Ron Paul would be amusing if they weren't fueled by sheer ignorance.
Clint| 2.11.11 @ 1:11PM
"The Huffington Post recently sunk to a new low by publishing an attack on “Ron Paul and the Tea Parties: States' Rights and the 17th Amendment” by one Leonard Zeskind, a “former” Stalinist rabble-rouser. According to Laird Wilcox, author of The Watchdogs, a book about contemporary political movements, Zeskind began his communistic career of agitprop in the '70s as a “front man” for the “Sojourner Truth Organization” whose stated objective was “to motivate the working classes to make a revolution.” The Organization quoted its role model, Josef Stalin, who insisted on the need for “iron discipline” in agitating for a communist revolution in America."
Sandy| 2.11.11 @ 1:20PM
Ron Paul isn't going to win the straw poll, he already bought it. I understand the Paulies at CPAC are acting their usual rude obnoxious selves. Next year they own it, lock, stock and barrel. The conservatives will have somewhere else to go. Support the Values Voters Summitt. I promise Paul won't be an invited speaker.
Red Phillips | 2.11.11 @ 1:27PM
I can't decide if Sandy's reply above falls into my "whistling past the graveyard," "mindless derision," or "amping up the hysterics" category. A little of all three really. Maybe I should add a category. The "taking your ball and going home" reaction.
I do agree that no one on either side should be rude.
Antony | 2.11.11 @ 1:56PM
Sandy, he hasn't bought anything... these are true supporters, which I know is a scary thing for most people used to politics as usual. His supporters rally to (gasp!) support him. This man started a movement, so trying to dismiss his impact is the more obnoxious road to take. It's also quite a lazy argument.
Ryan| 2.11.11 @ 2:06PM
It's not so much that he buys the things, it's that he has an awkwardly loyal following that attends all the straw-poll meetings and such.
Red Phillips | 2.11.11 @ 2:25PM
He has an "awkwardly loyal" (an unnecessarily negative characterization) following because he is the only national elected figure like himself. No other serious strict Constitutionalists are out there. No one else is even close.
Ryan| 2.11.11 @ 2:05PM
Nah, the Romneyites won't sell it to him.
jomo2009| 2.11.11 @ 4:33PM
Ron Paul will get 2% of the vote in the 2012 primaries and like it.
Clint| 2.11.11 @ 1:30PM
"When the Republicans retook the U.S. House of Representatives last November, it meant that Ron Paul would be in line to chair the subcommittee that oversees the Federal Reserve System. Despite the intense lobbying by Ben Bernanke and others who loathed the prospect of Rep. Paul being able to subpoena them to appear before Congress and then to ask them pointed questions about their secret operations, the Republican leadership still gave Rep. Paul his rightful position.
Obviously, the Usual Suspects on the Right and the Left are not happy, and today, I wish to concentrate on the attacks on Rep. Paul by another Paul, that being Krugman, who has deliberately misrepresented Rep. Paul’s positions in recent columns and blog posts. Krugman’s December 20 column called Rep. Paul a "zombie," and then proceeded to attribute false views to the congressman. All in a day’s work for the man whose name disgraces the Nobel Memorial Prize for Economics.
We can expect much, much more of this, and not just from Paul Krugman. Ben Bernanke has lots of friends in the media, and one can be sure that Bernanke will be the source of "anonymous" quotes that will denigrate Dr. Paul’s character and his understanding of money and the economy. For that matter, Bernanke was the chair of the economics department at Princeton when the university hired Krugman, so one can be sure that Krugman has Bernanke’s back.
Furthermore, one can bet that much of the banking and monetary establishment is going to try to destroy Dr. Paul’s character over the next two years, and given that the Washington media really does not care about facts and certainly not the truth, one can bet that every false rumor about Ron Paul will be bandied about by the mainstream media."