The American Spectator

Warrior| 10.27.11 @ 3:07PM

Mr. Lord:

I've seen people post blogs on this AS site in which some insensitive things may have said as to the current president's race and IQ and said not so nice things about his mother. I will take your lack of a specific response to these posts to infer that you support their racial theories and will not distinguish between you the writer of the blog and those thoughts of the people who leave a comment.

Dislike Ron Paul's foreign policy stances all you want, but your insinuations are ridiculous. Does Ron Paul scare you that much? If Romney and Perry's foreign policy are going to mirror what Obama and W have done, wouldn't that scare you more?

Quartermaster| 10.27.11 @ 6:16PM

The intellectual climate on as is declining. People like Lord have trouble differentiating between what we can control and what we can not. yet, on other threads we get morons that refuse to actually deal with arguments engage in the exact behavior as the Marxists we oppose, and nothing is done about it.

AS needs to police its writers, then come down on the morons I've seen elsewhere in the comments. It really is getting quite bad.

Jay| 10.27.11 @ 6:55PM

Paul terrifies Lord, and his Neocon knitting circle.

Ron Paul ad Portas! Ron Paul ad Portas!

Terrified Of Puppies| 10.27.11 @ 7:53PM

Why would anyone be terrified of Ron Paul? His poll numbers keep slipping back into the single digits. He's got zero chance of winning. He never did anything in Congress except add earmarks to bills he voted against. In a few months he'll be a historical footnote and his followers will be following someone else.

NumberTwoPencil| 10.27.11 @ 8:11PM

Single digits? Not so fast there. In a Florida straw poll from just a few days ago Ron Paul came in FIRST. With 38% ... yes that's thirty-eight percent of the vote. The next closest candidate had something like 16%. A total blowout.

Unfortunately the question asked was "Who would you least like to receive the Republican nomination to run against Barack Obama?"

http://www.teapartyfortlauderdale.com/news.html

Jonathan T| 10.28.11 @ 1:57AM

Well, why would anyone be terrified of puppies? Sorry, I had to.

But seriously speaking, it makes perfect sense that the media and the Washington "establishment" would fear him. He is a threat to the system. But you misunderstand cause and effect... Ron Paul's position in the polls - which you underestimated because in early primary states he's polling solid double digits; national polls are straight-up popularity contests and merely indicate the flavor of the moment - is not higher up precisely because the media has done everything it can to negatively portray Paul and treat him worse than any other candidate. It's just a fact whether you support him or not. I might only be 18 years old but I think it's still saying something that the indisputable bias through which he's had to contend for years is unparalleled in anything I've seen in modern politics.

A Ron Paul presidency is a threat to all of the bias and corruption in the media and Washington because Ron Paul transcends party lines. He isn't the cartoonish version of his party like most of the other candidates and he refuses to tow the political line. He is, therefore, a threat to the partisan "Democrats VS. Republicans" politics upon which Washington and most of the media literally thrive. Unfortunately, stations like MSNBC and FOX are both hopelessly partisan; one favors the stereotypical Democrat and the other, the stereotypical Republican. Is it any wonder that they'll do everything they can to squelch the success of one politician who is neither - one who offers a fresh brand of politics and argues that BOTH of those parties are essentially the same? What about if his message happens to catch on like wildfire when it's allowed to spread, through unbiased mediums such as Youtube?
His success and his message are poison to them. And considering Washington politics too thrives on the illusion that there's actually a legitimate difference between the two major parties - that, for example, the system ACTUALLY changed from the Bush administration to Obama's - hopefully you can understand why he isn't so well received over there either.

Had Ron Paul simply been given the fair shake that other candidates are given, he'd be competing with Romney for frontrunner. But since instead of a fair shake he's been treated like someone in an insane asylum, since that's been going on for almost 5 years straight, and since it's coming from the mediums through which the vast majority of the country gets its news... Well, frankly, that he's polling in any digits at all is just a testament to the caliber of his record and message. Because I can promise you, no either candidate would be able to withstand any showing in any poll for longer than a week if they had to withstand the kind of media blackout/"crazy" treatment that Paul did.

Steven| 10.27.11 @ 8:22PM

Mr. Lord. Thou doth protest too much. What I find more disturbing is your blatant attempts, time and time again, to discredit Dr. Paul. It seems like an obsession. You may want to speak with a professional about that. Now you're reaching for the anti-Semite card. Wow, are you desperate of what...

Cpm| 10.30.11 @ 9:42AM

Ron Paul is in a campaign, such as it is, for public office. The Spectator is a public forum for people of all stripes, including you. Big difference. What is it about Jeffrey Lord that scares you so much?

Chris| 10.27.11 @ 3:13PM

Warrior (+1). Lord is sick of the consistent intellectual beatdowns he takes from the likes of Paul and Rockwell, so he throws the anti-semite argument out to scare conservatives from researching more about Paul's brand of libertarianism. Keep trying Lord. The last refuge for a political writer, when all the logic runs out, is the smear campaign. Smear away.

NumberTwoPencil| 10.27.11 @ 3:20PM

Intellectual beatdowns? The Paulbots might wear out control-C and control-V on their keyboards but that doesn't count as an intellectual beatdown.

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 3:31PM

We should regulate the use of copy and paste to keep these "paulbots" from quoting and citing accurate information!

NumberTwoPencil| 10.27.11 @ 3:43PM

Are you saying that the Paul supporters who post in the highest volume here give an accurate impression of what the Paul campaign is really about?

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 3:57PM

What from my above comment has anything to do with what you just said? Please go put your words in someone else's mouth. I don't speak on behalf of anyone but myself, and do not frequent this website enough to know what impression Ron Paul supporters give. I do know this however, the only impression I am concerned with is the impression Ron Paul gives the public, not the people who support him.

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 4:52PM

Hows that for an intellectual beat down?

Jefferson| 10.27.11 @ 5:21PM

Pathetic argument you have here. You're crying because a good number of Paul supporters are willing to debate and post arguments and facts so we need to be regulated? Hah! Keep it up ... you're making yourself look as dumb of the rest of them.

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 10:01PM

Jefferson, I was being sarcastic, just making reference to how over regulated we are already. I myself am a Ron Paul supporter.

NumberTwoPencil| 10.27.11 @ 10:39PM

Don't feel bad, Freedom, Ron Paul supporters are often mistaken for making pathetic arguments and looking dumb.

Jay| 10.27.11 @ 6:57PM

This is the Neocon knitting circle's new meme.

You oppose war with Iran, therefore you are an anti-semite.

CalMark| 10.27.11 @ 3:14PM

Jeff Lord also missed one crucial connection: Ron Paul seems to support the OWS people. Birds of a feather, I guess...

Bill| 10.27.11 @ 3:21PM

That is simply not true. He just understands some of their frustration, misguided as they may be. Look it up, he's on record clarifying this many times.

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 4:25PM

We Tea Party Patriots And Our Co-Favorite Presidential Candidate Dr.Ron Paul Oppose TARP, The Stimulus, The QE's, FNMA, FHLMC, Want The FED Audited.

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.

Bill| 10.27.11 @ 3:15PM

These postings are horrible. There are evil people in all walks of life. These ones are responding to articles that imply Ron Paul is against Israel, which he is not. How can Ron Paul, or any candidate be responsible for what the media implies and the followers it attracts. Maybe, just maybe, the "journalists" should be more responsible and truthful about Ron Paul's views. Then this wouldn't happen so much.

Jacob Schans| 10.27.11 @ 6:50PM

Spot on. Your logic is impeccable.

Joe M| 10.27.11 @ 3:23PM

Oh my god this is as low as it gets. Agree with everyone else above. Every online forum is going to have a few fringe voices, that doesn't mean we're all personally responsible for what they say. Good lord. Such a cheap shot; I'm sickened by not surprised that AmSpec is trying to drum up more Paul hate.

AmericusSoul| 10.27.11 @ 5:33PM

Please don't say "Good lord" on this site. We don't want to risk encouraging him, even though it should be obvious that based on the omission of a capital on "lord" that we arent' talking about him, per se....

Goodness. Does anyone ever have to shake their heads in disbelief when comparing the clueless posts (of the non-Paul supporters) to the thoughtful, reasoned, considerate replies of those who support RP? Note to mental-midgets: considerate doesn't mean we consider your viewpoints. You're obviously mental-midgets (no offense to true midgets.. I love a few..).

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 3:28PM

Does disagreeing with Israel's Foreign policy make someone an Anti-Semite? Is everything Israel does off of the discussion table for fear of being called and Anti-Semite? Ron Paul is not responsible for the comments that I, nor any other of his supporters make. Israel is a country, not a Religion. They should be treated as such and talked about just the same as all the rest of us.

Sean| 10.27.11 @ 7:33PM

Yes not providing welfare to Israel means you are an anti-Semite to Lord and probably Levin. God forbid someone criticizes Levin and think he is unamerican.

charles ranalli| 10.28.11 @ 12:11PM

hear ! hear !
charles ranalli
albuquerque

Cpm| 10.30.11 @ 9:48AM

The views of Ron Paul's supporters (including every one of them here) reveal them to be anti-semites. Apparently Paul doesn't care enough to address it.

C Bowen| 10.27.11 @ 3:28PM

Just like a liberal calling the Tea Party racist, Lord's inner Trotskite shows again.

Jeff Lord was scared of Saddam--it's true he really was. The guy is scared of everything.

Jay| 10.27.11 @ 7:04PM

Ron Paul ad Portas!

dfreeze| 10.27.11 @ 3:36PM

So because he doesn't want to borrow money from China(40cents to a dollar) to aid Israel he is an Anti-Semite? Or because he doesn't buy into the war propaganda? Inferring that he is racist is a dirty trick and a low blow.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 3:41PM

Racist? Who said that? Not I.

William R| 10.27.11 @ 4:05PM

Ron Paul has no control over the internet. Hell for all we know that's you posting over at the Daily Paul just to make Ron Paul look bad.

Lord, you're truly a despicable individual.

Yes and Levin is an Israel Firster. What's the big deal about that.

Rienone| 10.27.11 @ 4:08PM

If antisemitism is in Paul's midst they are equally in yours. I could easily say that about spectator.org or YOU upon finding questionable comments on one of your stories. Your article lacks intelligence and basic correlation (or in this case, non-correlation) skills.

dfreeze| 10.27.11 @ 5:14PM

Antisemitism is a form of RAC(E)ism. And I said you inferred it you clown.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_antisemitism

Sam| 10.27.11 @ 9:50PM

Jeff

In all sincerity, can you address how many times Mark Levin has outright called Paul supporters both A**holes and B*astards? I'll look forward to your response. Considering Levin calls himself a Jewish man, he is sure doing a good job at representing jews. Then he wonders why many Paul supporters despise him, and of course you and the rest of the neoconservatives simply cite anti-semitism when it's simply Levin who is weak; won't debate anyone who challenges him; he's a bully like the Bill O'Reilly on talk radio. I have never witnessed such poor behavior from any mainstream talk radio personality than Mark Levin in terms of name calling and outright outlandish behavior. Limbaugh and Hannity have 10x the class Levin has, and they are not my favorite radio personalities.

Jonathan T| 10.28.11 @ 3:49AM

Anti-semitism is a form of racism. A subcategory if you will. It doesn't only apply to blacks and whites.

Sheldon71779| 11.2.11 @ 8:21AM

You didn't say it but you are setting him up for it. If he doesn't come out and make a statement against the poster of those comments what would be your conclusion?

keith| 10.27.11 @ 3:41PM

Hey Jeffy, keep up the good work of promoting passion in people. I'll explain. Think of it in the sense of the movie "Braveheart" where the people of the country rallied behind the one individual that had the wisdom to foresee what was coming and stood up to the lies that were being fed to the people. It is passion that wakes people up and compels them to do their research to know the truth when they see it. You are fueling the fire for those intelligent enough to see through your smears. Ron Paul 2012

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 3:48PM

How hard is it to distance oneself from anti-Semitism? When a pastor supporting Perry attacked Mormons...meaning Romney....Perry separated himself quickly. I don't get this....you're passionate about anti-Semitism? You're confused about it? Your're passionately opposed but shy about saying so? Speak up there Braveheart.

How's this for a suggestion:

"I passionately oppose anti-Semitism. "

Over to you Braveheart.

William R| 10.27.11 @ 4:17PM

Once again, this is the internet you blithering idiot. Hell it's probably you and Mark Levin posting over there.

We know who Perry's preacher is. No one knows anonymous posters on a blog.

You are so desperate to smear Ron Paul because the hideous Mark Levin has had his hat handed to him over and over by supporters of Ron Paul.

Reagan's Wisdom on the Middle East: Leave

http://orangepunch.ocregister......leave/619/

Noe| 10.27.11 @ 4:39PM

Well Mr. Lord's, I can't speak for Dr. Paul but I know what he might suggest and that would be that they have their first amendment right to say such things. It doesn't mean that he endorses it. If he would to speak against a few fringe individuals that would contradict his stance on freedom of speech, regardless of how controversial.

Margie| 10.27.11 @ 5:17PM

Uh, that pastor didn't "attack" Mormons, he simply spoke the truth about Mormonism, that it's a cult. And Rick Perry's pretty cowardly to "separate himself" from that, and tell the truth, and agree.
Genuine Christians don't put politics before God's Truth.

Warrior| 10.27.11 @ 5:35PM

Margie: I may disagree with you, but I respect your honesty.

Margie| 10.27.11 @ 6:05PM

Thanks, kiddo. :^).

Jonathan T| 10.28.11 @ 4:05AM

DEAR MR LORD,
I can't believe how unbelievably intellectually weak you have stooped to in your silly arguments to debunk Ron Paul at all costs.

How, in ANY way shape or form, does the Perry supporter that attacked Mormonism loudly in front of a crowd and made media headlines for the comment, even compare to a bunch of Paul supporters posting on the internet? I mean seriously? Yeah, if somebody introducing Ron Paul at one of his speeches attacked Jews and it made freaking news headlines, he'd speak out against it. But guess what: he probably doesn't even KNOW about these posts you're talking about! In fact there's no way in hell he's aware of them or anything like them. You might not believe it, but as a contender for the Republican nomination, he's actually quite busy campaigning and dealing with issues like how to get America back to work and other top priority issues on the future of our country.

That you seriously expect Ron Paul to take a break from his daily campaigning (speeches, interviews, meet and greets) and his focus on how he plans to restore America instead to deal with a bunch of his supporters posting in online forums that made questionable comments regarding Jews and Israel is.... well, it certainly indicates that you hold Paul to a different standard than you do any other politician. And it very clearly demonstrates the pathetic attempt to which you will go to bash him. Yeah, devoting an article to some supporters in online forums DOES count as bashing. And searching the online forums of his supporters to find questionable content DOES count as pathetic. I'd much rather you write a post attacking his policies, though even then you riddle them with ad-hominem attacks and historical inaccuracies that Tom Woods end up intellectually demolishing anyway.

At least you can pretend in posts attacking his policies that you are reasonably debating how he would impact the country as President, not attacking a bunch of his supporters that posted questionable content in online forums that Ron Paul probably never reads. Get real and get over your obsession with ragging on him.

Cpm| 10.30.11 @ 9:52AM

Then maybe you guys on the internet could tone down the anti-semitism, or if you can't do that, just go away.

Sheldon71779| 11.2.11 @ 8:29AM

This is pretty pathetic and it looks like this is the best he can come up with. This reeks of desperation.

CKilgore| 10.27.11 @ 3:41PM

Paul is not anti semitic bec he wants to get Israel and all the other nations off of America's welfare titty...Paul even said, "Why object to cutting off all foreign aid even to Israel when we give double the amount to other nations that hate Israel? How does that help Israel?"

Mal_Content| 10.27.11 @ 3:42PM

Jeffrey "Pageviews by Paul" Lord...at it again.

These RP articles must have your web traffic booming!

Jay| 10.27.11 @ 7:57PM

Nothing else he writes does.

Rienone| 10.27.11 @ 3:43PM

To try to hold the general American pubic up to the standard of honesty and morality of Dr. Ron Paul is losing battle and in no way do comments made on ANY site, including fan sites dedicated Paul himself, reflect in any way on Paul. Very poor attempt at smearing Dr. Paul. Why not just write an article about antisemitism on stories related to Israel? To associate the perceived wrongs of others onto Paul merely based on the venue in which they appear is wholly retarded. People must only be concerned with morality as it applies to themselves, and the only people you can cast judgement on for these grievances are the perpetrators themselves. IF you are comfortable even doing that!

aware| 10.27.11 @ 3:47PM

Pathetic.

Robert| 10.27.11 @ 3:50PM

What a joke article. You point out how it's stupid to build an article on random comments on a blog and then you build an article out of random comments on...a blog. O the irony...now that the policies of those who never-saw-a-war-they-didn't-support (with borrowed money of course) has destabilized the region and actually made Israel more unstable...all you have left is a baseless attack.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 3:53PM

Robert...

This means you are opposed to anti-Semitism? Just a simple yes or no will do.

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 4:08PM

Does disagreeing with Israels foreign policy make someone an anti-Semite? A simple yes or no will do.

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 4:11PM

Are You Aware Of The Smear Merchants & The Agendists Who Are Tryin' To Marginalize Dr.Ron Paul & His Supporters ?

Anybody ?

Anybody ?

Bueller ?

" RON PAUL'S “PLAN TO RESTORE AMERICA”

SPENDING:
Cuts $1 trillion in spending during the first year
of Ron Paul’s presidency, eliminating five cabinet
departments (Energy, HUD, Commerce, Interior, and
Education), abolishing the Transportation Security
Administration and returning responsibility for security
to private property owners, abolishing corporate
subsidies, stopping foreign aid, ending foreign wars, and
returning most other spending to 2006 levels."

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the.....e-america/

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.

Margie| 10.27.11 @ 5:20PM

Ron Paul has been marginalizing himself ever since he started thinking the way that he does... how many years has that been?

Namely, for blaming America for terrorism.
He's a Blame America Firster, and has a CULT following, of which you represent to the hilt.

I for one am pleased that at least one AMSPEC author takes him to task.

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 6:11PM

Uh Oh !

American Spectator's Resident Maniac Anti-Catholic Bigot, Margie Is In The Building.

Now, Tell All The Practicing Jews & Muslims Where You Say They Go When They Die, Joisey White Trash Bigot Margie.

You're Up.

Margie| 10.27.11 @ 6:28PM

NO. You're D-O-W-N, bubs.

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 7:04PM

Interesting, That American Spectator's Resident Religious Bigot Margie, Serially Badmouths Catholics & Mormons,While She Barely Can Hide Her Bigotry Against Practicing Protestant Sects,Practicing Jews, Practicing Muslims......

See A Religious Counselor & A Psychiatrist.

Margie| 10.28.11 @ 1:08AM

Clint (formerly known as Tim* the liar) knows not how to speak truthfully.

You are an anti-Christ, kiddo. Right now you are on your way to Hell because you do nothing but lie constantly.

I am a fool for Christ, and I care nothing about what you or anyone else says here when it is based on a lie.

The Bible (God's Own Words) tells us ALL we need to know in order to be Christian.
Accepting another gospel other than the one He teaches? Well, here's what He has to say about that:

"But even if we, or an Angel from Heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed.
As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed." Gal. 1:8 & 9.

Got it, filthy man?

Rienone| 10.27.11 @ 4:20PM

Do you think that if the US wasn't stroking Israel's inner thigh that it would make our foreign policy antisemitic? If you do, you're wrong. If anything it respects there sovereignty.

Robert| 10.27.11 @ 4:21PM

Ha, and so now you attack me? Why, the very absence of a defense must mean that I’m guilty, right?

Clearly, you are going to have to school me in logic! Why don't we meet out by the tornado slide after lunch period?

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:27PM

Robert...

No, I didn't attack you. I just asked if you oppose anti-Semitism...yes or no. The fact that you see that as an attack says...well...you tell us.

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 4:29PM

Does disagreeing with Israels foreign policy make someone an anti-Semite? A simple yes or no will do.

Cato| 10.27.11 @ 4:45PM

Well Mr Lord, I think a question has been asked twice:
Does disagreeing with Israels foreign policy make someone an anti-Semite? A simple yes or no will do.
Cato

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 5:02PM

He wont answer.

Le Cracquere| 10.28.11 @ 9:04AM

"I'm not hearing a no..."
--J. Zoidberg M.D., 1947

jr| 10.27.11 @ 3:53PM

the 1st amendment protects our right to critique positions we disagree with.This writer should ask Mr Levin if he is a zionist and clear things up.Mr Levin just might proudly accept the label.VP Joe biden is a proud zionist.youtube it.You do not have to be Jewish to be a Zionist.Their are Cristian Zionists as well.Please check the difintions of these words and act like a grown up.The antisemitism card is thrown around way too much

jr| 10.27.11 @ 4:04PM

I enjoy the Mark Levin show as well as Rush and Savage. Mark know his constitution very well.I enjoy watching him beat down the leftists that call in to his show. Ron Paul released his plan and it would cut 1 Trillion in the first year and cut 5 federal depts. Rush loves Ron Pauls plan.Hannity loves Ron Pauls plan. Most republicans love the plan. Mark Levin does not even mention the plan and just mocks Congressman Paul by calling him RuPaul. Why would Levin abandon the champion of the constitution? Is it only over his foreign policy?

Sean| 10.27.11 @ 10:15PM

Neocons would accept a socialism at home as long as their foreign policy is retained.

Lautz| 10.28.11 @ 5:45PM

Accepting their foreign policy IS socialism.

Brett D| 10.27.11 @ 4:16PM

Funny, how you try to stretch as far as you can to smear Ron Paul and his supporters.

Don't you know Ron Paul has inspired most of us to read books into Von Mises, Rothbard, and Hayek?

These are all Jewish people and quite intelligent ones, might I add!

So much for your argument, moron.

Thank you for putting Israel last and continuing your support to funding her enemies, then limiting her sovereignty by forcing compliance with U.S. foreign policy.

This is exactly what Ron Paul supporters are against, while you equate it to being anti-semite? Maybe, we should start turning the coin on you?

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:20PM

Look Paultards, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton assured me that this was the best method of calling someone's character into question without actually addressing a specific issue.

If those two blue-gums led me astray...then I apologize.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:29PM

The Real Jeffrey Lord doesn't call Ron Paul supporters "Paultards." Or use racist terminology.

So the obvious imposter is showing off...what? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Rienone| 10.27.11 @ 4:38PM

LOL! You are alone on an island sir!

James Anthony| 10.27.11 @ 11:46PM

I have just been diffused by the writer's sense of humor. Thank God. Whatever I was going to say, I forgot, I am laughing so hard. "Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?"

JimH| 10.28.11 @ 8:25AM

So you write Ben Stein's column too?

Seanstr| 10.27.11 @ 4:32PM

I'm honestly curious, and I'll ask here since this site has attracted a whole swarm of Ron Paul "experts", has Ron Paul ever publicly denounced the anti-semites that tarnish his campaign? If you are aware of that happening, can you please offer some proof (a link or something)? Thx.

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 4:43PM

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and has the right under the first amendment to express it. By denouncing his "anti Semite" followers he would in turn be denouncing their right to free speech. Ron would never do that, and maybe that's why people like him, cause he will allow the people to have any opinion they want even if he disagrees with it!

Cpm| 10.30.11 @ 9:55AM

Pauln hasn't demonstrated that he disagrees with any of it.

Dan| 10.27.11 @ 4:52PM

Dear Seanstr-

I have heard from many of your internet supporters that you beat your wife, starve your kids, kick puppies, and have been known to push old women out into busy streets. I've never publicly heard you denounce any of this, so it's obviously true.

Unless you publicly denounce these claims, or can offer some proof (a link or something), I will continue to believe these statements.

Sincerely,
Unable to Think for Myself

Seanstr| 10.27.11 @ 6:36PM

Great points! Thanks for answering my request directly. I promise to publicly denounce all kinds of things when I decide to run for president.

r3volution| 10.28.11 @ 1:21AM

weak

Bueller| 10.27.11 @ 4:32PM

Don't drag me into your Yellow Journalism, Jeff.

martin j smith| 10.27.11 @ 4:35PM

Those who support Ron Paul how about " Greek Firsters ? Palistinian Firsters ? Muslim Firsters ?
How about French Firsters ? How about German Firsters ? Spanish Firsters ? How about Russian Firsters ? Italian Firsters ? Egyptian Firsters ?
Nigerian Firsters ? English Firsters ? How about Japanese Firsters and Korean Firsters or Iranian Firsters ? Irish Firsters ? Or Swedish Firsters ?

And I can name about 180 or more others most of whom have a lot more money and clout than . Israel. Until then when he see Ron Paul supports rail against Israel Firsters --You are dirty racist pigs and I will never in 2 gazillion years vote for Ron Paul even for dog catcher.

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 4:39PM

Can you edit that so I can understand it?

Dan| 10.27.11 @ 4:54PM

Are you trolling? Or was your point just too convoluted to decipher?

Jeffrey Lord II| 10.27.11 @ 4:38PM

And so, will the real Jeffrey Lord please stand up? Interesting how this just proves that one shouldn't make your point by pointing out random comments on the interwebs.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:39PM

Martin J Smith:

You said:

"Those who support Ron Paul how about " Greek Firsters ? Palistinian Firsters ? Muslim Firsters ?
How about French Firsters ? How about German Firsters ? Spanish Firsters ? How about Russian Firsters ? Italian Firsters ? Egyptian Firsters ?
Nigerian Firsters ? English Firsters ? How about Japanese Firsters and Korean Firsters or Iranian Firsters ? Irish Firsters ? Or Swedish Firsters ?"

Well said. Bingo.

Sean| 10.27.11 @ 10:22PM

Yeah we always put our interests aside for the interests of Nigeria.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:41PM

I have a blog so I can pontificate and blather absurd and poorly executed attacks on men more sophisticated, intelligent and moral than myself! What are you gonna do about it! Paulbots!

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:43PM

Poking holes in your perceived validity and importance of blog comments yet?

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:45PM

STOP PRETENDING TO BE ME!!!! :(

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 4:44PM

Have You Stopped Beating Your Wife ?

A Simple Yes Or No Will Do.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:44PM

I hate the other me. He is so antisemitic!

Dan| 10.27.11 @ 4:45PM

@Jeffrey Lord-
I don't know who you are, but I think this game you play by writing pieces like this is disgusting. It should be obvious to anyone who actually pays attention to the world (i.e. someone who regularly ignores you and others like you) that Ron Paul is not anti-Semitic, nor does he condone anti-Semitism. That's probably why people such as Charles Krauthammer, Juan Williams and Steve Hayes can sit next to Ron Paul without feigning at their supposed knotted panties (as you are wont to display).

Let me call you out your absurd Alinsky-style game: You have no intellectual avenues available to attack Ron Paul, so you must invent ways to try to discourage people from supporting him. After finding a few fringe (and weak) examples of anti-Semitism among Ron Paul supporters, you call Ron Paul to the carpet for such an outrageous offense. Your average reader sees your blog and [ignorantly] decides "Ron Paul = anti-Semite". Ron Paul supporters read your blog and [intelligently] decide "Jeffrey Lord = propagandist". The latter effect is still most likely intentional, as most people against Ron Paul love creating an "us vs them" mentality between Ron Paul supporters and other conservatives.

But this isn't the real trick to your propaganda. By creating this false negative and calling on Ron Paul to either dismiss fringe anti-Semites or admit to being an anti-Semite himself, you attempt a catch-22, where Ron Paul either loans you credibility by acknowledging your knotted panties OR proves himself to be an anti-Semite (according to you) because he [intelligently] ignores a [ridiculous propagandist] blog that has the audacity to suggest that Ron Paul is an anti-Semite.

Now... if you honestly think Ron Paul is an anti-Semite, then please, continue this ridiculous, self-righteous tirade. You'll continue to lose credibility, but at least you'll get to play the [Alinsky] game and fight against Ron Paul.

Leffrey Jord| 10.27.11 @ 4:45PM

Nothing says "journalistic integrity" like guilt-by-association.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

Dan| 10.27.11 @ 5:09PM

Bump.

Crickett| 10.27.11 @ 4:47PM

I am Jewish and support Ron, and did so in the last election. I guess even anti-Semitic people know a good President when they see one. Since Ron NEVER groups individuals by religion, sexual preference, gender, et.al., one can be certain that he would never hate nor love us by a collective name..well..maybe his "supporters", and that is all.
I find your article not only racist, Levin, but you can not see the forest for the trees. Constitutionally, our country was to be the FREEST one for any "group" to speak as they liked, and never hurt another being, but in self defense. I think you should ask yourself what kind of a President YOU want, because Dr. Paul is the one that can save this country. Even mean and sultry divisive type people like you will be welcomed to support him. We sure do not have to LIKE everyone who does.

LocalBoy| 10.27.11 @ 4:49PM

Mr.Lord

Where is the anti semitic comments ?
What I saw was anti Israeli policy rants.
What I saw was anti Israel first comments.

I saw no mention of being anti semite.

If one speaks ill of the Israeli government, are they anti semite ?
If one speaks ill of Israeli foreign policy, are they anti semite ?

Ignore all those, answer just one question. What is a semite ?

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:54PM

1
a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs

b : a descendant of these peoples

2
: a member of a modern people speaking a Semitic language

LocalBoy| 10.27.11 @ 5:38PM

Mr.Lord,
I ask more than one question. In the end I gave you an excuse to ignore the hard ones.
If one speaks for the native arabs, against the nation of Israel, they are pro semite, are they not ?

Mark Lundgren| 10.27.11 @ 5:39PM

Localboy asked a rhetorical question you moron. This issue aside, there is perhaps no dumber possible response than quoting the dictionary. I would look up "moron" in the dictionary and copy and paste it for you, but you seem good enough at doing it without my help.

It is both ethically wrong and Constitutionally illegal to force the American people, through taxation, to fund the state of Israel. As a neoconservative you are no doubt against a welfare state in the United States, but you are for giving foreign nations welfare and going to war for a foreign (against the will of the people and Congress no less)? Can't you see the contradiction in this logic? This is also a rhetorical question, by the way, because it is already obvious to me that a man with your intellectual inferiority is incapable of grasping that kind of logic..

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:49PM

Dan....

This foreign policy idea has a long history that predates Ron Paul. And in fact it has been well connected to anti-Semitism long before Ron Paul.

I have met Ron Paul. He's a nice man. But he is the only candidate out there who is attracting these people and it doesn't seem especially difficult to reject them and their both bigoted and dangerous ideas. I honestly don't get the hesitation.

Do you?

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 4:58PM

REAL Jeffrey Lord,

I could go scour message boards about other candidate and find the same kinds of comments. Maybe you just hate Paul enough to scour his!

Rienone| 10.27.11 @ 5:03PM

If you wanted to show some integrity, you would ask the man about it instead of hitting him with an association fallacy!

Dan| 10.27.11 @ 5:08PM

You speak in a lot of absolutes without addressing any real world issues. <snark>Let me rescind any previous statements and bow to your obvious intellectual purity. </snark>

<sarcasm>I agree with you, that Ron Paul is the only candidate out there with anti-Semite followers. It's obvious that you'd have to be a giant anti-Semite to attract such large swarms of dumb, stinky, anti-Semitic fatty fat fats, as Ron Paul clearly does. Ron Paul is obviously the only candidate that attracts fringe. Being such a fringe candidate himself, it's almost like he's a fringe magnet, picking up all sorts of weirdy weirds.

Keep up this Pulitzer level journalism. Who needs to focus on actual issues when something this huge comes along? </sarcasm>

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 5:21PM

Ah.

So you don't get it, is that what you're saying?

Why the animosity to Israel when foreign aid goes all over the place, as asked elsewhere?

Mark Lundgren| 10.27.11 @ 5:45PM

Ron Paul is against foreign aid to all nations, as are every single supporter he has.

You are lying and you know it Lord. By your own logic, do you support aid going to Iran and Saudi Arabia and every other nation in the world?

Steven| 10.27.11 @ 9:17PM

This will be my last comment. In fact, I'd like all us Dr. Paul's supporters to not be lured in next time. Although, it would be interesting to see all the "hits" this pole dancer gets if we don't bite.
Anyway, Mr. Lord could quasi-redeem himself if he just answers one question; If one is critical of Israel, is one an anti-Semite? Very easy Mr. Lord.

Warrior| 10.27.11 @ 5:15PM

Mr. Lord, Ron Paul has called for an end to all foreign aid, not just aid to Israel. Since I obviously do not have the intellectual prowess of you and Mr. Levin, how about explaining which enumerated power allows the federal government to collect tax money to redistribute it to another country? Which founding father wrote or advocated a foreign policy with military intervention as a preemptive measure instead of a defensive one? Name one empire that has survived once it has placed itself in perpetual war? Here's the best question, name the last time the United States, in accordance with the Constitution has legaly declared and budgeted for war?

Paulhroids| 10.27.11 @ 7:07PM

You typify the Paul drones. In order to make Paul look good by comparison, you accuse the sane of advocating perpetual wars, boots in every country, and supporting big government.

You Ron Paul fans are the creepiest fawning fools I have ever seen. No matter what Ron Paul says, no matter how ridiculous or foolish, you support him no matter what.

Ron Paul say that the US can be defended by just a few submarines. Ron Paul blames America for the Islamic Caliphate that started in the 7th Century. Ron Paul accepts Pork Barrel Money from us working folks to pay for stupid government boondoggles like "Wild Shrimp". Ron Paul frequents the Alex Jones show. Ron Paul associates himself with Storm Front.

But the Paul Drone keeps supporting him like he is a god.

Warrior| 10.27.11 @ 9:52PM

Nice triangulation. I'd love to here an explanation of how perpetual was is sane. We now have established a drone base in Ethiopia. We provide much of the military security for Europe, Korea, Japan and sections of the middle east. We are 15 trillion in debt and sinking fast. Let's have a discussion on which candidate has the best policies and record for restoration of fiscal sanity to our country. I have not supported any candidate, however, I would love hear your answers on the constitutionality of foreign aid and conducting multiple military actions without the formal declaration of war and proper budgeting which is what the Constitution calls for.

I realize for many of you the Constitution is inconvenient at times. Let's discuss who you consider to be the best candidate and what you believe they would do to bring us back to a Constitutional government.

Warrior| 10.28.11 @ 9:41AM

I thought so. Once it becomes necessary to discuss the Constitutionality of all this, the response is either at attack or silence.

Jonathan T| 10.28.11 @ 4:20AM

Yeah, because a) he probably has no idea that they exist since he doesn't read them b) though their comments were certainly questionable and some were anti-semitic, some maybe even most that you quoted just criticized others for putting Israel's interest before America's, criticized Judaism on a serious intellectual level.

What do you expect him to do Mr. Lord? Even if he did read those online forums regularly... Release a statement saying: "I've noticed that some of my supporters have made questionable statements regarding Jews and Israel in some online forums. I just want to clarify that even though I've spent my entire life fighting collectivism and racism and anyone who has ever heard me talk knows that I'm not a racist, but I'd just like to say that those comments in some online forums that openly claim aren't representative of my views, are not representative of my views."

Don't be ridiculous. This clearly indicates that you hold Paul to an unreasonable standard, and that you will try your best to find ways to bash him or detract from his support. It's very lame and profoundly unjournalistic. Write an article actually criticizing his policies perhaps (and this time can it not be filled with historical inconsistencies and ad hominem attacks that Tom Woods ends up totally dismantling anyway?)

Inspector Clouseau| 10.27.11 @ 5:09PM

Ah ha !

And where were you Monsieur Jeffrey when all this internet besmudging occurred ?

Do you have an alibi ?

And do you have a license for that minkey ?

revgen| 10.27.11 @ 5:12PM

Ron only needs to address what's really important.

Ending the federal reserve.

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 5:15PM

Jeffery Lord,

If you have any self respect you will answer these three questions.

1) Does disagreeing with Israels foreign policy make one an anti-Semite?

2) Should American-Israeli Dual citizens be permitted to serve within our government?

3) How can someone pledge their allegiance to two countries with different constitutions?

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 5:19PM

I will not respond to any of your questions. I will ignore the people on here making the best points, and reply to a couple of the others with something like "blah blah blah, anti-semite, blah blah blah".

I also think that bickering with anonymous posters on my blog makes me look extremely professional.

Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 5:28PM

Thank you for the compliment. However I am not sure who the real Jeffery Lord is on this website, and I would very much like to hear from him.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 5:15PM

I was just thinking...maybe writing an article based entirely on a handful of carefully selected comments from a website unaffiliated with a candidate was a dumb idea?

It turns out, there are literally DOZENS of websites on 'the internet', and upon further investigation, I realized I could go to any one of them with a comments section and piece together any narrative I wanted by hand-selecting comments that suited that narrative, and ignoring the ones that didn't.

I, Jeffrey Lord, would like to extend my sincerest apology to the Ron Paul campaign, and to my keyboard for forcing it to type out this garbage.

Ron Paul| 10.27.11 @ 8:05PM

Apology accepted.

jr| 10.27.11 @ 5:15PM

Woods already tko'd Mr Lord. It is his last ditch attempt to try and get some hits to his blog .everyone knows Ron Paul is popular.

Rich Rostrom| 10.27.11 @ 5:16PM

1) Ron Paul has a long history of dangerously close association with the racist dregs of the extreme right: for instance, the neo-Nazis of Stormfront. Repeated - not just occasional - manifestations of virulent anti-semitism from professed supporters of Paul have to be addressed by him.

2) It's not really fair to attack a movement (even OWS) for the endorsement of some attention-whore political scum like Duke. Such scum jump on any handy bandwagon. It happens to other movements that generate any popular support. And being almost totally disorganized, OWS can't formally repudiate Duke.

(It is fair to attack well-organized groups like SEIU for conscious and deliberate association with Communists. The redoubtable Zombie has documented how the SEIU co-sponsored the "May Day" parades in Los Angeles with the CPUSA, the neo-Stalinist Revolutionary Communist Party, and the Workers World Party.)

Burningsirius| 10.27.11 @ 6:03PM

Ron Paul is an Austrian Economist. He is not a socialist. Mises fled Austria to get away from the Nazis since being a free market Jew was the opposite of what the Nazis wanted. Also, these agents could be Cointelpro. Wake up!

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 6:08PM

Do Your Homework Before You Run Your Smear Artist Mouth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gKXyBgr24c

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 6:14PM

That CounterPunch Was For Rostrom.

Milton| 10.27.11 @ 5:22PM

I strongly oppose anti-Semitism. I have read comments like those mentioned in the article before, and they make me sick.

Unfortunately, positions which advocate certain beliefs on sound principle, can sometimes result in those less principled to attach themselves.

For instance, those who object to illegal immigration, for the most part, do so for principled reasons. However, racists who simply hate Mexicans, for whatever reason, will often join their principled counter-parts in calling for similar results. Therefore, it is not particularly surprising to me, that those who simply hate the Jewish people, for whatever reason, would attach themselves to a philosophy or candidate which contends that the role of the United States should be the avoidance of intervention, or alliance, with foreign countries, coincidentally including Israel.

I don't believe Ron Paul should have to answer for a group of internet dirtbags, no more than conservatives should have to answer for a group of dirtbag racists.

Perhaps I'm way off the mark here, but hey, it's just my thoughts.

Red Phillips| 10.27.11 @ 5:22PM

Wait a minute now. I have no use for arm chair theologians rambling about the Talmud or Jew obsessed conspiracy theories, but to deny that concerns about Israel play an inordinate role in shaping American foreign policy is willful ignorance. When the issue of ending foreign aid comes up, the defenders of foreign aid to Israel are quick with undisguised special pleadings for why it should be continued. When the issue of Iran getting nukes, which they obviously have no delivery method to get to the US, comes up it is always brought up that the nukes could be used against Israel, as if that is somehow automatically an American military concern. You cannot have it both ways. You can't object to people complaining about the undue influence of Israel on US foreign policy considerations in one breath, and then plead "what about Israel" in the next. If you don't want people to complain about the exaggerated importance of Israel then when the issue of Iran getting nukes comes up, don't bring up Israel. When the issue of cutting foreign aid comes up (which any conservative worthy of the name should support reflexively) don't say, "Well except Israel." Do we have a deal Mr. Lord?

Also, it is disingenuous to ask why Paul's campaign alone attracts the Jew obsessed and you know it. Who are the Jew obsessed supposed to support? Mitt Romney? Rick Perry? Paul is the only candidate who takes a neutral position toward Israel so therefore he is going to differentially attract those who are opposed to our obviously Israel deferential status quo foreign policy compared to a candidate who is openly supportive of it. Some of those people who oppose the status quo will be authentic conservatives and libertarians who support non-intervention. Some will be the Jew obsessed. This is not rocket science, so quit playing your Cultural Marxist games.

David T| 10.27.11 @ 5:23PM

I don't know if Ron Paul's an anti-semite, but I know he's certainly not pro-Israel. He seems to be more disposed toward Iran...

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 5:40PM

Exactly! His problem is that he seems to have some sort of crush on America or something. He thinks it's silly for us to give $3 Billion a year to Israel, when we're in $15 Trillion in debt.

And I agree he does love Iran. Why doesn't he want to invade them like everyone else? Just because they have a third-world military and they haven't attacked another country in 100 years, and they have no capability to attack us?

We should be very afraid of Iran. Our tens of thousands of intercontinental nuclear bombs, nuclear subs, and nuclear aircraft carriers are no match for them. Oh and the terrorists!! They hate us because we're free and they're crazy Muslims. That's why you hear all those reports about suicide bombers in Canada and Finland. That's also why there were 270 times as many suicide attacks in 2010 as there were in 2000. It's because we got 270x freer and they got 270x more Muslimy!

Paulhroids| 10.27.11 @ 7:20PM

I have never accused a Ron Paul supporter of being smart, and it certainly is the case here too. Ron Paul is an isolationists. Sure we currently have lots of armament, but not for long if paleo-Paul gets his way...which thankfully he will not. In fact, I can't wait until he goes back to his strait-jacket in Lake Jackson and stops fooling idiots like yourself that he is "Mr. Constitution". Maybe he can get a job at one of the many Pork Barrel institutions he allowed in his district?

Anyway, in a Ron Paul suicide-foreign policy world, we would just have "a few submarines" like your god-like father figure has been quoted as saying already. Now is the time for you to accuse me of 'wanting boots in every country' and 'endless wars', which both of is know is not what I am saying. BTW, the mullahs in Iran love RON PAUL!!!! You have lots in common with them now.

axbucxdu| 10.27.11 @ 8:05PM

If Paleo Paul doesn't "get his way", some one else in that vein will, because Chinese, Russian, and Arab central banks are without doubt going to get their way.

sprt_pilot| 10.27.11 @ 9:55PM

@Paulhroids, it always comes down to cheap shots and personal attacks doesn't it? Judging from your grammar in the above post, no supporter of Dr. Paul will ever accuse you of "being smart". Just sayin'.

axbucxdu| 10.27.11 @ 10:06PM

Don't be fooled by the carefully placed camouflage.

r3volution| 10.28.11 @ 1:28AM

Dondero is that you?

Red Phillips| 10.27.11 @ 5:54PM

So the standard is that to be the President of the United States of America one must be "pro-Israel?" (Your words.) I would have thought that the Prime Minister of Israel should be pro-Israel and the President of the United States should be pro-America. Silly me.

r3volution| 10.28.11 @ 1:30AM

Yeah, I guess we need to change the focus of our pledge of allegiance.

Burningsirius| 10.28.11 @ 1:35AM

I pledge allegiance to foreign aid that goes to Israel and her Arab neighbors. For the money from which we borrow from China, generational debt, bondage, slavery with labor camps for all.

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 6:25PM

Do Your Homework.
Dr.Ron Paul Is An American Patriot, & Not An Anti-Semite. He's About As Pro-Israel, As He's Pro-France Or Pro-Canada.

" While President Obama’s demand that Israel
make hard concessions in her border conflicts may very well be in her
long-term interest, only Israel can make that determination on her own,
without pressure from the United States or coercion by the United
Nations.

“Unlike this President, I do not believe it is our place to dictate how
Israel runs her affairs. There can only be peace in the region if those
sides work out their differences among one another. We should respect
Israel’s sovereignty and not try to dictate her policy from Washington."

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.

vhan| 10.27.11 @ 5:26PM

Obviously Paul doesn't have to comment on every commenter. Also Paul is focusing on real issues, & not antisemitism. This issue is a dividing one. I could care less about Paul's supporters, & even less about Paul. What is more important is Paul's message, & that is mostly ignored in the mainstream media.

Paul has even been labeled anti semetic for not wanting to give Israel money. People see through this charade & talk about it. Then they too get labeled anti semetic like they have been now.

Of course this is a two way street & focusing on the hate of antisemitism all the while ignoring the hate to others you yourself have typed is very hypocritical.

Anyways, Paul shouldn't have to comment on who supports them because he believes it is their right to hold their own beliefs even if they don't float your boat. Instead he is focusing on real issues. Something we should be discussing instead.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 5:32PM

ZEIG HEIL!

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 5:35PM

Just out of curiosity...

When the same standard was applied here to a presidential candidate named Barack Obama because of the anti-Semitic ravings of his pastor - that would be Jeremiah Wright - where were all the objections? Hmmm.....

AmericusSoul| 10.27.11 @ 5:39PM

What???

What the HECK does Israel have to do with America?

Who cares any more about Obama? He SCCCCREWWWED us. Wake up.

Who cares about whether or not J.Wright was a piece of sugar or mouthpiece of some hater group?

Who cares???? DO YOU GIVE A FLYING F?

I don't.

Get a job. You are failing us. Unless, of course, US is you in a different country. Maybe you work in Greece. If you do, please stay there.

Audi| 10.27.11 @ 5:45PM

So let me get this straight: you equate a few random people commenting on a post on a pro-Paul blog with being the same as coming from his personal Pastor?

Wow. Just...Wow.

AmericusSoul| 10.27.11 @ 5:36PM

Reminder to self: don't waste time on Lord's blog.

He's here to waste our time and energy.

Just like the 100's of others getting paid in owoanother by Perry or Obama or Romney --- to keep real change from happening.

Audi| 10.27.11 @ 5:39PM

"Congressman Paul, in fairness, you cannot be held responsible for every nut who scribbles on a blog favoring your candidacy."

- Correct.

"But isn't it fair to ask you to directly address this problem?"

- No. Not at all.

Tell me Mr. Lord - are any of these few aforementioned quoted supporters linked to his official campaign? Are they former pastors or friends from the past? Are they advisers? Did anti-Semitic words once appear on a stone belonging to a hunt club Ron Paul attends? DOES RON PAUL ASSOCIATE WITH THE INDIVIDUALS IN ANY MEANINGFUL CAPACITY?

No.

Essentially, to summarize your article:
Jeffrey Lord went to one of the numerous Ron Paul fan websites and a few people (he has no idea who they are - random strangers) said some anti-Semitic things in the comments section of a story about him. Therefore, according to Lord, this means that his campaign is tarnished by Antisemitism and Ron Paul needs to come out and address it or otherwise risk proving himself to be antisemitic as well. After all, an anti-Semite would only like Ron Paul if he were an anti-Semite. It simply could not be for any of the myriad of non-Semitic related topics he has taken a principled stand for over the course of nearly 3 decades in the public eye."

All I want to know is when can I expect your next article about some comments I once read on a website called HermanCainForums.com. Some posts: "Elect him [Cain] and he will make a lot of money for the country, and destroy all the Islemitist fascists as well as all other foreigners, leaving America #1 again!!!". Another: "Yes, because you dig deep enough and you get to the underworld, and there you will find Satan, the mastermind behind all the events of these End Times, such as Ron Paul who is playing the part of the anti-Christ! Do some research and Biblical study and you will see that I'm right. It's scary, but true!"

So apparently, Herman Cain attracts supporters who are genocidal xenophobes who want to destroy all foreigners and are convinced that Ron Paul is the anti-Christ. I eagerly await your call for Herman Cain to address this.

Americus Soul| 10.27.11 @ 5:48PM

Thanks.

What I want is for Lord to tell us what piece of establishment crap he supports so we can proceed to systematically uproot and shred the living tissue out of every aspect of their past, present, and assure their future is fully castrated.

Enjoy that thought, Paulites.

And Lord, you better thank the "lord" I'm not a millionaire/billionaire. You are out of line and if I had a spare month I make a point to buy your feeble employer and put a real journalist in your place in an instant.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 5:49PM

Audi..

Go here (link below) to see of Ron Paul taking a contribution from Neo -Nazis.

http://www.americanthinker.com.....d_its.html

C Bowen| 10.27.11 @ 5:57PM

Alex Linder use to work for The American Spectator--should we infer Am Spec is closet neo-Nazi?

Burningsirius| 10.27.11 @ 5:58PM

Why would National Socialists fund Ron Paul who is a free market economist and who's greatest influences are Mises, Rothbard and Hayek (all three Jews)?

Americus| 10.27.11 @ 6:09PM

rotflmao

Don't Spect a sensible answer, man. Didn't you hear from Levin? Our man's got Jew jerky in his smoker out back, didn't you hear? They smelt it next door.

This is the biggest piece of sht website I've ever come across.

Red Phillips| 10.27.11 @ 6:11PM

If this is the real Jeffrey Lord, Ron Paul did not "take" a contribution from a Neo-Nazi as you imply. He received a contribution from a Neo-Nazi, and when it was pointed out refused to return the money. He did the right thing in refusing to return the money and should be commended for not caving into the braying PC fanatics. First of all, money is fungible. He would not be returning the $500 that Black gave him. He would simply have made a $5oo debit from his campaign account. There is no point to this except to satisfy the demands of the right think enforcers. The demand that people give back allegedly tainted campaign contributions has always been political and PC grandstanding, and I have said the same thing in the past when liberals gave back the money some undesirable gave them as well. There is no way to satisfy this demand. If you give back Black's contribution there will be a demand from rabid secularists that you give back the money of some religious rightist. Or from rabid feminists that you give back the money of some pro-life traditionalist. It never ends and it empowers the PC thought policers. It is dancing to their tune. Better to just not give any contributions back and tell the PC Gestapo to get lost.

Burningsirius| 10.27.11 @ 5:57PM

I wonder where the column condemning all the hateful things said about Osama, Al-Awlaki, and his son's macabre death celebrations. I wonder when he will write the article condemning random internet posts saying '1 down 1 billion left to go'. Of course, all three men were Semites as well. Guess that article will never come since it undermines the foundation of Lord's world view: Islam is most dangerous. I guess hating Arabs is what the Neo-Cons do best, but... Arabs are also Semites... uh oh.

I wonder who was with Ronaldus Magnus (Ronald Reagan) in 1976 to challenge Ford for the Republican nomination. Here is a hint, It is not Santorum, Bachmann, Romney, Perry, Cain, Gingrich, Huntsman, or Johnson. Who was with Reagan on that fateful plane ride to challenge the corrupt Republican establishment? Answer this Lord to all your readers and Mark Levin who is oblivious of the ONE MAN who supported Reagan in the current Republican field.

What did Reagan say about occupying the Middle East? (Hint it is the same position of 'He Who Shall Not be Named')

I still would like for the all knowing Lord question: If you disagree with Israel's foreign policy, are you an anti-Semite? Guess if you disagree with either Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney you are a loon. I love the narrow spectrum of political thought in the US. Thanks Lord for re-enforcing it.

Defunding Israel restores their sovereignty and also cutting all foreign aid reduces the coffers of the Arab states around Israel by 9 time that of Israel's reductions so in reality this is actually pro Israel. But do not let that get in the way of Lord. He won't answer: Who was on the plane in 1976 with Reagan?, Is disagreeing with Israel's foreign policy anti-Semetic, and Can we disagree with both Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton?

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 6:07PM

Actually, Mark Levin worked for Ronald Reagan in 1976. And he didn't renounce him in 1988 - like Ron Paul did.

Rob A.| 10.27.11 @ 6:20PM

He "denounced" Reagan because Reagan grew the size of government, raised taxes, increased the debt, and spent like a drunken sailor. And defense spending only accounted for a small portion of the total spending increase.

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 6:29PM

Exactly.

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.

r3volution| 10.28.11 @ 1:44AM

Don't bother bringing in facts. This lord character isn't concerned with facts or logic. He's just trying to build a case any way he can even if the facts get in his way.

Burningsirius| 10.27.11 @ 6:25PM

Oh you mean this Sir Lord?

http://gallery.fanserviceftw.c.....h=ron_paul

Ron Paul renounced his Republican Party membership, not his affiliation with Ronald Reagan. He was DISAPPOINTED in Reagan. Read the letter!! Look at all the promises Reagan did not deliver! If anything Ron Paul said that Ronald Reagan was not being Reagan enough!! Of course, your rose tinted glasses do not account for this little tid bit. Ronald Reagan said that Ron Paul was FOR OUR TROOPS!! Imagine that!!!

http://www.ronpaul.com/images/.....reagan.jpg

You sir dishonor Reagan's legacy by trying to make him some sort of demigod. Reagan was not perfect and it is completely legitimate to critique his presidency from a conservative angle. Ron Paul is a purist. The purists you all demand save for the bloodthirsty sabre rattling that you and others love to spew. Without that lynch pin in that foreign policy, you sir have aligned yourself more with Obama than with Reagan or Paul who both said that war in the middle east is insane.

I want to know your opinions on both those pictures. You all smear Paul as hating the military when Reagan said the exact opposite. I trust Ronald Reagan's judgement over yours.

Note: We do realize that Reagan was betrayed by the Democrat Congress. He also caved in to the Establishment Republicans by naming tons of CFR people into his administration. He tried his best to buck the establishment, but he could not.

Ron Paul is the man to finish what Reagan started.

LocalBoy| 10.27.11 @ 6:28PM

Ron Paul, as a sitting Congressman and not a junior shill, supported Reagans rhetoric in 1976. In 1988 Paul was still supporting hte ideas reagan ran on and Levin was idolizing the man. Which is the point of Paul supporters, he has fidelity to his principles unlike Reagan.
Paul did not sell cocaine to American youth to buy weapons from Iran to fight an illegal war in a foreign land. I am not surprised Levin supported this, he is after all a chickenhawk.

Good point, Mr. Lord.....thanks

Burningsirius| 10.27.11 @ 7:07PM

Lord loves Iran-Contra because it involves buying weapons from Iran meaning that Iran might have weapons lol. What a joke.

Jonathan T| 10.28.11 @ 4:31AM

Lol. Ouch, he renounced him! As if he's some infallible figure that shouldn't be called out on systematically rejecting so many of the things he campaigned upon in 1976 and 1980! That's like accusing certain Democrats of "renouncing" Barack Obama just because his foreign policy was antithetical to the one he campaigned upon and is more or less a continuation of George W. Bush's. Yeah, renouncing clearly has a negative connotation.

I love how people like you view Reagan as a freaking demi-God and when people criticize him,, they're criticizing conservatism. Actually Ron Paul was being intellectually honest and sticking up for the true conservatism that he endorsed in the Reagan campaigns of '76 and '80.

Here is the letter of Paul's resignation of the Republican Party. You tell me whether or not his "renunciation" indicates a support of true conservatism or not. Maybe you'll realize in deeming Reagan infallible you support big government.

http://www.textfiles.com/politics/ron_paul.txt

Americus| 10.27.11 @ 6:15PM

Can't we just get crazy and agree to hate everyone equally? Until proven worthy of love?

I'm all for that.

Speaking of which, it's time for some uninoculated unwed copulation-of-love, including some threatening mouth fun.... that which, if you listen to supporters of Dick Perry now is sure to give me some tongue or throat cancer shortly.

No, thanks Perry... I'm not taking the shots. No matter how much money you get paid by the pharmas. Be sure to check out the Rolling Stone about the best little whore in TX. I bet that's Lord's pimp.

What say you, Paulites?

garvan| 10.27.11 @ 5:59PM

My favourite part about anti-semitism is where people forget that semites refer to an ethnic group of people that includes Muslims, Christians, and Jews.

But somehow it's been warped into this idea that all semites are Jews.

Of course don't tell Israel that.

C Bowen| 10.27.11 @ 6:12PM

There is a guy who posts here, Occam's Razor, who openly calls for holocausting Semites--literally nuking the Middle East (save Israel)--that's an anti-Semite.

He posts all the time, and never gets banned. He thinks Jeff Lord is dreamy too.

Fins4Freedom| 10.27.11 @ 6:11PM

Jeff,

What does it mean to be an "anti-semite"? Does it mean to actively work against the nation of Israel, or does it mean to not show a special bias towards them vs. other nations?

If the first, then I agree. It should not be America's goal to undermine Israel. If the second, then how much special bias should we show so as not to be considered "anti-semetic"? Should we sacrifice our men and women in the armed forces to protect them? Should we tax Americans and drive us further into debt so that Israel can have what they need? Should we allow the people of Israel to vote in our elections and run our country?

The reason for frustration is politicians use Israel to justify our continuing involvment in every affair in the middle east. Thus when someone says we should defend America only, they are called an anti-semite for mearly wanting to protect and support the people of our nation.

Brent| 10.27.11 @ 8:56PM

Exactly.

Joshua| 10.27.11 @ 6:20PM

Let me start by saying that I am a Zionist. I am an anti-war Zionist. I am first and foremost an American lover of freedom. I support Ron Paul because I believe in God. I am a Christian who believes in the old testament. Israel IS the most Holy entity because it was created by God.

God made the Jews his chosen people. God also says that Israel is to be judged more harshly because they are more special. The Jews have the absolute responsibility to be true to God.

I think Ron Paul is the best candidate as an Israel supporter because he gives them the freedom to do what it takes to fulfill prophecy. I am not a wacko I don’t want the end times, Armageddon or war. I want America to take its hands off. We shouldn’t be involved in overseas wars that provoke Islam and try to facilitate the Final war. This is not good for America or Israel. Prophecy happens on its own it can’t be pushed along.

These people writing anti-Semitic comments are obviously attracted by Paul’s stance to cut off aid to Israel thinking that this hints that he might really believe deep down inside what they believe. Freedom is an absolute. Freedom always attracts some fringe characters.

I think Paul would be politically wiser to pay homage to Israel, but he is no ordinary politician. He will not tell you something to alleviate your fear if it is pandering. That is why he is so intense, there is something to love and something to fear for everyone.

The Paul community is very good about self policing regarding this and other potentially controversial subjects. If you go to a large Paul event there will be a couple of whacko’s that are weeded out intellectually just as when you go to a left wing rally there are a few freaks roaming around. If you go to any event even a mainstream Romney group and probe there will be controversial thoughts.

I am no paranoiac but I would suggest it is possible that some of these posts could be from provocateur’s after all this is high stakes politics. There are certainly real anti-Semites who repeatedly re-post hate filled rants under aliases. They are NOT welcome by the other 98% of Paul supporters who are fair minded and mostly very pro-Israel or would be if they thought deeply about the subject.

There are probably some Paul supporters who don’t know the difference between Israel or Lebanon, although we are generally smarter than the average Joe. There are probably Paul supporters who couldn’t give a hoot about Israel one way or the other.

Paul’s campaign is a revolutionary and exciting campaign and it will attract a small fringe element no matter what. Paul IS smart so I am sure if he becomes the candidate he will address this and other controversial issues at length. He has to explain the old newsletters, his anti-abolitionist views, and many, many other subjects.

I am sure he has a rational and well thought response to this charge but has never been given sufficient media time to explain in detail his logical conclusions regarding these issues. I look forward to his answering these questions also because he is so logical that I am sure his explanations will enlighten the situation.

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 7:10PM

Dr.Ron Paul Already Responded.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gKXyBgr24c

Burningsirius| 10.28.11 @ 1:30AM

Lord does not care. He loves guilt by association. Remember all those times conservatives were called Klansmen or racist? Well obviously Lord is a total hypocrite to the entire conservative movement.

blklibertarian| 10.27.11 @ 6:47PM

Jeffrey Lord has made a rather weak blog posting. He sees anti-Semitism, but he fails to validate his sentiment. Firstly, the dislike of an individual Jew does not mean dislike for all Jews. Second, opposition to Zionism is not opposition to Jewish people worldwide enjoying life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Thirdly, the supposition that every American must support Israel is an ideology and not a metaphysical imperative. Israel is a sovereign state with it's own interest. A U.S. citizen has allegiance primarily or only for the U.S. Fourthly, the influence of Zionists over American foreign policy is indisputable, and the recounting of such facts is not bigotry.

Zionism is a form of collectivism bolstered by mysticism and tribalism.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 6:51PM

Joshua...

Thank you for a solid, thoughtful response.

The irony here is that while I may disagree with Ron Paul on foreign policy, these are old arguments and absent the tinge of anti-Semitism that has become attached like a barnacle they are worth discussion. But there is a considerable tendency to go the anti-Semitic route among Paul supporters and I am trying to plumb the depths and ask the obvious: why?

And get people to understand that any tolerance of this is unacceptable for reasons of history that are all too plainly obvious.

Thanks.

Clint| 10.27.11 @ 7:14PM

Dr.Ron Paul Already Responded, Long Ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gKXyBgr24c

jb4rp2012| 10.27.11 @ 9:17PM

Gr8 clip... It seems that the posters have not watched it nor has Jeffery Lord... This video seems to answer this article and all the doubters...

Burningsirius| 10.28.11 @ 1:25AM

Sir Lord will still use guilt by association. Ron Paul is a man who is a free market economist with four Jewish intellectual influence (Jesus, Hayek, Rothbard, and Mises). Obviously National Socialist would flock to him in the Lord/Levin world.

AS| 10.27.11 @ 6:58PM

Freedom.

How about we set the Jews free to do what they want to do. Without us (in the USA).

How about we free ourselves of the financial burden of the Jews. (If they are a burden. If they aren't, well... I like their cuisine -- let's party on some grub)

But stop the inane insane talk, please. We (as a nation) have some serious problems with misdirection, misallocation, and mistakes of the past 20,30,40-90 years. Money mainly. Not bigotry, not racism, nothing like that.

Why is it that some people can't get it?

Oh, that's right. They do get it. Getting it just doesn't pay. They would rather get paid to spread lies and twist and squirm until people feel sorry for them. Then back their notions, no matter how ill-conceived or poorly-founded they are.

Truth doesn't pay. Too bad. I don't get paid either for this crap.

Hence my drive to stop it asap.

Enjoy, Paul supporters. I know you love, and love your jobs (like I do).

Best to you all. Even to you, Lord. But let's be real once in a while, ok?

Leffrey Jord| 10.27.11 @ 7:07PM

Due to some of the comments in this article I'm going to have to warn Jeffrey Lord that he might have some unscrupulous individuals that are associated with something that has his name on it on the internet.

Now I'm not so sure if I can look at him in a positive manner.

At first I thought he might have a valid point of view, but after this I suppose I'm just going to have to do something more worthwhile than check this site again!

Tharms| 10.27.11 @ 7:27PM

Putting America first does NOT make one an anti-Semite. Much of the criticism of Israel and its supporters is appropriate; some of the comments are indeed offensive. In neither case is either the candidate or the publisher responsible for policing the rabble. What is more offensive is the idea that America should sacrifice a two-hundred plus year old tradition of free-speech and tolerance for ideas to accommodate Israel and anyone who claims to feel persecuted. Demanding that only lends credibility to the more extreme anti-Israel comment makers.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 7:29PM

Tharms...

No opposition to free speech here.

Where did you get that?

Burningsirius| 10.28.11 @ 1:22AM

I mean you are a part of the Commissariat that dictates whether or not you can criticize Israel's foreign policy. You use guilt by association to then demonize those who say that we should allow Israel to be sovereign. You then cherry pick comments from the Daily Paul to bolster your guilt by association. It is not a free speech issue. It is a Commissariat issue.

Tyler| 10.27.11 @ 7:43PM

So, Mr. Lord, I'd like to see you clarify your stance that No other candidate attracts anti-semitism but Ron Paul. You yourself blew that claim out of the water on this comment board. You made comments refering to Perry's pastor who called Mormonism a "Cult". I'm sure that there are a lot of Mormons out there who would take high offense to this comment, and wouldn't be beyond calling it Anti-Semitism.

What do you have to say about this?

Also, why is it that you'd prefer to write an article that slams Ron Paul for his supporters comments, instead of an article about Rick Perry himself being an anti-semite with his N-wordhead rock?

I deem this article, and from every other article I've read of yours, an utter failure.

Thanks for getting the word out there though via your comments section, that most of the US electorate actually does prefer Ron Paul

Ron Paul 2012!!!!!!!!!!!

Brent| 10.27.11 @ 8:49PM

Tho shalt not use the word Zionist or call someone that supports foreign policy that appears to put Israel's interests ahead of American interests an "Israel-Firster." If you do you'll get called an anti-semite and if you're an anti-semite then you're basically Hitler, right?

So is it that we can't use the word "Zionist" or is that we can't hold a view that American foreign policy is in relation to Israel is harming the interests of Americans (and Israeli's according to Dr. Paul). Please Mr. Lord tell us the bounds of acceptable debate on foreign policy.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 9:19PM

Pick on Sweden too?

Red Phillips| 10.27.11 @ 11:20PM

That's just the point Mr. Lord, if that's really you. When someone suggests cutting all foreign aid we don't hear the special pleadings chorus squawking, "Except Sweden." When someone mentions Iran getting nukes we aren't told this is a problem because they might be used against Sweden. If you don't want people to complain about the undue influence of concern for Israel on American foreign policy then don't bring Israel up. If you insist on bringing Israel up, then don't whine and name call like a little schoolboy when someone complains about it.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 9:20PM

Jeffrey Lord (the phony ones)

Boring...a tad transparent, no?

Leffrey Jord| 10.27.11 @ 9:36PM

You know what else is boring?

This article.

Burningsirius| 10.28.11 @ 1:19AM

Word

John Giles| 10.27.11 @ 9:54PM

Game over.

Jon S.| 10.27.11 @ 10:04PM

What about the rabid anti-Muslim/Arab sentiment among neocons? Are you serious?? Not a peep from the right. I don't advocate hate speak of any kind but get real. Hypocrisy at it's best.

Burningsirius| 10.28.11 @ 12:59AM

Their Neo-Jacobin blood thirst to kill the 'enemy' means that they celebrate when someone dies even if it is a 16 year old kid based on the corruption of blood doctrine. They are more aligned with Obama than our founders. Washington would be sad to see that the Jacobins really did win.

alfred kawika| 10.27.11 @ 10:28PM

Hey Lord, Dr. Paul has said countless times that he is in favor of cutting ALL foreign aid, not just to Israel, and he's been consistent. So the question is why are you so concerned about pointing out so strongly what a few people wrote? Are working for Romney or Obama, and trying to drum up charges of anti-Semitism against Paul? Or are you trying to make a name for yourself as an enterprising and incisive journalist? Well, it's not working.

Dan| 10.27.11 @ 11:01PM

everyone knows ru paul is a antisemite. hes also a jew hater racist complete nutjob conspiracy theorist who needs to be locked up in a concentration camp. him and his suporters. at least hill be dead soon anyway since hes so freaking old bu twhere will his supporters go. cant wait til he gets bood off stage in the next debate. cain will probly kick pauls ass again.

Burningsirius| 10.28.11 @ 12:57AM

Why would Ron Paul hate Jews when 4 of his most powerful intellectual influences are Jewish? Mises, Hayek, Rothbard and Jesus?

Edward Keithly| 10.27.11 @ 11:26PM

***The other day I came across my name on an Internet site called "The Daily Paul."... You are a smart guy, Congressman, and a decent man. Don't you see anything wrong here?***

Something wrong... with what? People exercising their First Amendment rights, albeit in a disagreeable manner?

What on Earth should anyone who has any measure of respect for the US Constitution see wromg in that picture?

***So the question: Congressman Paul, will you speak up and separate yourself from these anti-Semites? Can you explain why they seem to be drawn to your candidacy and no one else on the GOP side?***

For Dr. Paul to acknowledge these people would require him first to acknowledge Mark Levin. And frankly, why should he?

Mark "I could have gone anywhere but I went to Temple" Levin is a third-rate hack in a slowly declining medium. Mark can enjoy his view from the cheap seats in the bunker, while Dr Paul caps his career in the trenches with a pretty exciting run in Iowa and New Hampshire... and who knows haw far, really?

At very least we know it will be farther that Mark Levin. That's for damned sure...

Jeffrey Lord| 10.27.11 @ 11:54PM

I have never seen a message board descend into total anarchy like this one has. Ron Paul spammers, if I want your opinion I'll give it to you! Let's just forget the whole thing, Nebbishes! I need an aspirin!

Burningsirius| 10.28.11 @ 1:52AM

Did someone say anarchy? Maybe free market economist, intellectual influence of Ron Paul and Jew Murry Rothbard would like to school you in some Austrian Economics ;).

James | 10.28.11 @ 1:15AM

Jeffrey,
At the heart of it, you disagree with Ron Paul's foreign policy. I'm a military officer and a student of Sun Tzu. I would say that no-one ever gives Al Queda and these organizations the credit for forumlating a very good strategy, a strategy that Neo Conservatives bought hook line and sinker, a strategy to pull us into petty squables all over the earth and bankrupt the US. I would like to chase every damn one of these killers to the ends of the earth, but at some point you have to look at the strategy and make decisions that dont put the US in danger of bankruptcy. Is it really cost effective to spend trillions chasing these jokers with the entire US military? I ask you, is it good strategy to borrow trillions from China to keep the leviathan going? Where do we get the money?

Burningsirius| 10.28.11 @ 1:44AM

My dad who has a master's in warfare says the exact same thing. He is a retired NCO and has been concerned for a while about these matters. I had to break through the Neo-Con brainwashing that Ron Paul was some sort of socialist goon to try to help him out. Now that he knows that Ron Paul is the only candidate that believes in free markets he is 100% behind him. The stats speak for themselves. Of Vets and Active Duty Military half of them gave to Ron Paul above all others.

r3volution| 10.28.11 @ 2:04AM

I'm Jewish American and for the life of me I can't figure out why it is now PC to have more allegiance to Israel than our own country. I've never been to Israel and I have no interest in ever going there. I think we should stand by our own people and stop sending money to all other nations, including Israel. Israel has become like a DC lobbyist and has the ear of our government. The ear of government should be on the American people not some state in the middle east. Just like Germany, and Korea, Israel should be cut loose from our welfare and they should negotiate foreign policy the way they see fit without our interference. They would probably do a better job of it without us always meddling in their affairs.

JG| 10.28.11 @ 4:11AM

Ron Paul has repeatedly said that Israel, as well as all other countries, would be better off without our military aid and has elaborated on this premise. Also, do you really think we helping to make peace in the Middle East by picking favorites and providing weapons all over the place. I suppose you support war mongering as opposed to peace. Yes, his non-internationalist policies have garnered support from some wackos, but do you seriously think that Ron Paul supports or condones this type of commentary? That's like saying that Obama is a marxist, simply because he has marxist sympathizers and does not speak out against them supporting him. Your entire is like some sort of vicarious strawman attack. Use some logic or stop writing. What a waste of five minutes reading this pointless nonsense.

JG| 10.28.11 @ 4:12AM

Ron Paul has repeatedly said that Israel, as well as all other countries, would be better off without our military aid and has elaborated on this premise. Also, do you really think we helping to make peace in the Middle East by picking favorites and providing weapons all over the place. I suppose you support war mongering as opposed to peace. Yes, his non-*interventionist* policies have garnered support from some wackos, but do you seriously think that Ron Paul supports or condones this type of commentary? That's like saying that Obama is a marxist, simply because he has marxist sympathizers and does not speak out against them supporting him. Your entire *article* is like some sort of vicarious strawman attack. Use some logic or stop writing. What a waste of five minutes reading this pointless nonsense.

James Bell| 10.28.11 @ 4:30AM

I started to let this go... but I can't! I was part of the military first response to 9/11 and a former cryptologist. I have read and understand all the threats to the US and Israel. I am also a Christian and a strong supporter of Israel both as a people and as a nation. So with that said please hear me out everyone! Right now the federal government takes our tax dollars which is filtered through Washington then divided out to various "good" causes in the case of Israel giving 6 times the amount to Israel's enemies as to Israel. This to me doesn't seem like we are supporting Israel at all but instead using Israel as a puppet to claim that is what we are doing. I use the exact same argument that I use for private schools, private health insurance, private charity over government to explain why I believe it is the responsibility of the individual, the churches, and the charities to support Israel in this country. If the individual fails to act on there responsibly then that falls on that particular individual not on a nation with a limited government. The idea at the founding was to let people succeed and fail as they wanted to, freedom was what it was all about! The Idea that you can never force an individual to be "good" that you can't force a person so support anything! If you do force someone then the very merit of the good is lost because it is not freewill. Its the same idea as why God allows us to sin, it is freewill! The idea is to allow people to do what ever they want with the hope that they will choose the right path themselves, not by the hand of God or government. When you argue for the individual being responsible for there own health care it is the exact same argument that the individual should be responsible for there own treatment of a nation like Israel. Imagine all Foreign aide in this country handled by individuals, churches and charities. Imagine every "charitable" cause being handled not by government but by the people, by the individuals. This is why I support Ron Paul, because I believe in the power of the individual to gain from there own merits not that of government to use the people and their resources to gain their own power! Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!

WhoDat| 10.28.11 @ 7:48AM

I am dead serious... very little difference I see between the orgasmic devotion to Ron Paul Supporters today and the Obama Cultists in '08. Fine, RP supporters want to end the Fed. But I run across enough of them cospiratists that think everything is either controlled by the Jews (media, banks) or is the Illuminati working its sinister hand for a New World Order.

Teflon93| 10.28.11 @ 9:25AM

When Ron Paul stubs his toe, he blames a Jewish conspiracy.

9thID| 10.28.11 @ 11:19AM

There is no doubt that Ron Paul’s anti-Semitism, along with that of his Liber-tarian followers, stems from their conspiracy theories of “Zionist control of the worldwide banking sector”. This is also confirmed by the same sentiment in their Liber-al cousins down at the OWS protests.

RCP has also reported, among others, that Ron Paul is NO longer ruling out running as a 3rd party candidate when he loses the GOP nomination. No surprise here, as he jumped ship in ‘88 to join his true buds like Russell Means in the Liber-tarian Party. Since Paul and his supporters basically agree with their Liber-al Democrat cousins on 2 of the 3 main political issues (social and national security policy), a 3rd-party Paul run would pull more votes away from Obama than from a Reagan-esque GOP candidate.

When the real SHTF I have little doubt on whose side most the Liber-tarians will show up on. Liber-tarians & Liber-als are two sides of the same coin of Libertinism...

Melancton Smith| 10.28.11 @ 11:30AM

So when liberals use terms like racist to describe conservatives that is wrong, but when conservatives use the same tactic against someone they disagree with, that's not bad; in fact it's perfectly reasonable.

Kate| 10.28.11 @ 11:40AM

I am a follower of Jesus Christ the One and Only Savior. Does this fact now allow you Mr. lord to label me antisemetic? Your article is very sad indeed. Remember to label ALL supporters of Ron Paul is to label ALL of your readers racists and mormon haters due to many of your readers(followers) past responses concerning your past articles. The Israel of GOD isnot built by mere human hands, and HE is worshipped not of the flesh, but IN SPIRIT and IN TRUTH. I FOLLOW JESUS CHRIST ONLY, I support congressman Paul due to his stance on abortion. You should be ashamed labeling ALL bloggers to fit into your tiny little box. I forgive you, though you would be too pridefilled to ever seek forgiveness.

Dan Phillips| 10.28.11 @ 12:17PM

if you suport ru paul sorry you are a antisemite. pauls a gay old man who hates jews hates blacks and hates women and the troops. oh and america to. how can you suport him if you dont aslo hate those groups. you say you are a christian but how can a christian like all those things. there are plenty christians running for prez. why not vote for them. I was for perry but it looks like cains gonna wrap up the nomination. i will definately vote for him. I know you wont cuz hes black but hes got actual solutions for america and he obviously has the support of the people unlike your white old racist man. your guys not gonna win! how many times do we have to tell you. he has no chance! if you really want to beat obama get behind the real black guy cain 2012!

Kate| 10.28.11 @ 4:38PM

Dan? The real black guy? You sir are the racist of the worst kind! Christians are to love our neighbors as ourselves and that means ALL nationalities and ethnicities. In case you haven't noticed, GOD doesn't have a favorite color! Ron Paul doesn_ either. Your hatred for Conservative Ron Paul.by calling him gay is standard for anyone who doesn't know how to win the argument with facts, but settle for silly namecalling Alinsky/Trotsky tactics. You lose.

Dan phillips| 10.28.11 @ 12:27PM

oh and ru pauls not prolife. hes prochoice. he dosnt want to do anything about abortion. he says leave it up to states. thats code for if you wanna kill your baby then you have that right. not to mention he also wants kids to take heroine crack and pot and any other drugs. how can anyone support this fool. these are the kind of fools that will end up killed and noone will feel sorry for them. did we feel sorry for hitler when he got killed. see my point?

9thID| 10.28.11 @ 1:56PM

Like many career politicians, Ron Paul is “Christian In Name Only” for political expediency. Ron Paul only gives lip service to being Pro-Life by saying he would have each state decide if they want their own genocide laws. Paul’s wanting to give genocide/abortion rights to the states would be a thousand times worse than letting each state decide if they wanted to return to slavery. Ron Paul is a reprobate of the worst kind...

James Bell| 10.28.11 @ 2:48PM

"Paul’s wanting to give genocide/abortion rights to the states would be a thousand times worse than letting each state decide if they wanted to return to slavery"

obviously you don't believe in the power of the states to resolve these issues nor that of the individual over the state. our federal masters must tell us what to do think and how to live because people can't possibly be good on there own. so much for free will we must all be slave to the system and as it says

Kate| 10.28.11 @ 4:23PM

All of the media favorites are proAbortion. Not Ron Paul. He supports life at conception. He has delivered over 4000 babies! Romney was proabortion and flip flopped, Perry loves the power Texas executions give him,Bachman has 30 plus foster kids all pay for her farm subsidies etc..Cain is pro increase taxes on the poor and middleclass with his 999 TAX. Paul is the real choice.

Tom| 10.29.11 @ 1:27PM

Your Cult Master is a nothing but a "pro-life" FRAUD. He maintians that the unborn have NO rights under the U.S. Constitution, nor should they ever have any. Protection of unborn is a matter left entirely to the states.

Paultards like you who bill this Libertarian fool as "pro-life" are LYING.

Dale Stewart| 10.30.11 @ 7:26AM

Are you insane? This lie borders on the pathological.

Tom| 10.30.11 @ 9:48AM

You have already cross that line, and are adding your lie to his.

Dr. Nutjob is NO pro-life candidate. His position is little more than the old, "Well, I may be personally opposed to abortion, but don't believe I should impose that opinion on others."

Again, Paultards are defending the frauds, lies, and outright stupidity of their Cult Master.

Dale Stewart| 10.30.11 @ 7:24AM

This is utter nonsense. Do even the slightest bit of research before posting, would you please. Ron Paul loathes abortion and has spoken profusely and passionately against it.

In thirty some odd years as a practicing OB Gyn he never found sufficient reason to perform a single abortion.

Here's one you are really going to like. Ron Paul refused to participate in government funded programs such as Medi-caid, etc. So what did the good doctor do when patients came to him with no other means of making payment? He treated them for free. Oh yes, it's factual, you can look it up.

Your comment was not based on any factual information whatsoever. A reprobate? Seriously?

One last thing. The greatest successes for the pro life movement have almost exclusively come at the state level. Where do you get your information exactly, or do you just make this stuff up on the spot? Very sad, very sad indeed.

Tom| 10.30.11 @ 9:49AM

Undeer Ron Paul's ideology, what rights do and should the unborn have under U.S. Federal law?

Dale Stewart| 10.31.11 @ 6:35PM

Ron Paul believes that a fetus, rather than a collection of cells or an unwelcome parasite to be destroyed and removed, is actually a human being with all the unalienable rights that humans naturally possess.
Ron Paul is ideologically committed to the Constitution. His passionate, principled and unwavering devotion to the rule of law is well documented. Ron Paul's position is that the federal government has no constitutional authority in the area of abortion. Before Roe v. Wade abortion was a criminal offense in the majority of States. Repealing Roe v. Wade and restoring legislative authority to the States is the best and most effective way protect the rights of the unborn.
For more information on Ron Paul's stance on the abortion issue you can go here
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/abortion/
and here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctity_of_Life_Act

Tom| 11.1.11 @ 4:44PM

Thanks you for verifying my assertion that according to Dr. Nutjob and his sick, perverted libertarian ideology, the unborn now, nor should they ever, have any rights or protections under the U.S. Constitution.

Tom| 11.1.11 @ 5:53PM

"the unborn now"

That should be::

"the unborn DO NOT now"

Dale Stewart| 11.2.11 @ 1:49AM

My response verified nothing but your own ignornce and irrational hatred of an honest, principled man.

I know an illogical, irrational, agenda based argument when I see one. Straw men and ad hominem attacks are it's hallmarks.

May God have mercy on your lying soul.

Good day sir.

Tom| 11.2.11 @ 6:14AM

"an honest, principled man."

We are not discussing and "an honest, principled man," we are dicussing Ron Paul.

Paultards like you are experts when it comes to an "illogical, irrational, agenda based argument," because that's about all you idiots have.

and contrary to your baseless, ignorant, Paultard slander, I haven't told a single lie. all I have is spell out the truth about your Cult Master and his utopian delusions.

But for Paultards like you, the truth is just too difficult to deal with.

The TRUTH is that Ron Paul is a "pro-life" FRAUD.

Dan Phillips| 10.28.11 @ 3:22PM

Dan Phillips, at least not this Dan Phillips, did not write the above. Unless the person who wrote it is also named Dan Phillips, that's uncool.

Dan phillips| 10.28.11 @ 8:59PM

isnt it possible to have the same name.

Dither| 10.28.11 @ 3:29PM

Replace all reference to Jews/Israel in those comments with Muslims and Islam, and you have the standard commentary offered by Mark Levin and other neoconservatives. How does it feel?

Dan phillips| 10.28.11 @ 8:57PM

idiot. muslims and islam are terroists. jews and israel are are allies. our friends. how does that feel.

Mark| 10.28.11 @ 9:08PM

I called someone a fag once...I didn't really mean to and I felt bad about it after. Does that make me a bad person? I'm sorry!!!

Dale Stewart| 10.30.11 @ 7:08AM

If I don't care for the policies of King Hussein Obama, I am clearly racist. But wait, he's half white, oh... nevermind.

If I believe strongly that America should stop giving billions of dollars to Israel, and tens of billions to her enemies, I am an anti-semite.

If I believe that a child should be protected from dismemberment and disposal when in the presumed safety of it's mothers womb, I'm a misogynistic control freak.

If I embrace the proven argument that dropping bombs on innocent women and children around the globe is bad foreign policy, I hate my country and would like to see it over run by muslims.

If I'm cool with gays having the right to openly defend their country at the risk of life and limb, well I guess I just don't love and understand Jesus.

If I support the one honest man in Washington, the only one it seems who actually takes his oath to defend the constitution with any kind of seriousness, I'm an under educated dope smoking looney toon cultist.

If a preponerance of the evidence leads me to the conclusion that Jeffrey Lord is a small man with a large agenda...

Dale Stewart| 10.30.11 @ 7:33AM

Sorry, preponderance. I surely wouldn't want to give anyone the impression I was a D'ist.

Richard Channing| 11.1.11 @ 2:36PM

Yawn.

Remnant| 11.1.11 @ 5:04PM

Mr. Lord,

Do you believe the ad hominem is a logical fallacy or a logical way to deductive inference? Like a liberal, it seems the answer is the latter. You think like one.

Imagine Russell Kirk, author of _The Conservative Mind_, looking at you as an ally! He was against the wars in the Middle East. A defender of non-interventionism. Against the Utopian idea of Micro-Managing the World.

But you have the audacity to claim Kirk as on your side! Please!

To be charitable is to assume that Ron Paul doesn't want to have anything to do with Nazis, Mr. Lord. Do you really think would not oppose a friendship with them? Answer that, Mr. Lord. This is so silly.

Also, if a man doesn't want the U.S. to support Israel OR any other nation with foreign welfare, does it then follow that he is probably an anti-Semite?

Radical ideas can sometimes attract other radicals. But it doesn't follow that those other radicals are of the same kind.

Anyone can pick up nasty quotes. I can find quotes of people who hate Obama because he is Black and will vote for a Republican for that very reason. Does this prove a connection between racism and the Republican Party? No, of course not.

Why don't you look at ideas. You lost the debate of ideas with Tom Woods. So now you are going into an ad hominem attack. Big surprise.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YpP80_J5N8

Sheldon71779| 11.2.11 @ 8:15AM

If Ron Paul is crazy and doesn't matter why are you spending so much time on a pro-Paul website looking for anything you can to use against him? Sounds to me like he scares you or else you wouldn't waste any time trying to discredit him at all.

carlhoward| 11.11.11 @ 1:13PM

Congress is screwing up this country.
AIPAC owns congress.
therefore, Isreal is screwing up this country.
Q.E.D.