-
Farewell to the Spectator
December 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
Tentative Praise for Ryan’s New Bipartisan Medicare Plan
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
-
The Day Ahead: Thursday, December 15
December 15, 2011 | 0 comments
-
Examiner for Romney, National Review Against Gingrich
December 14, 2011 | 39 comments
-
Paul Ryan to Introduce New Medicare Plan with Democrat Ron Wyden
December 14, 2011 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Jeff Lord’s complaints about Ron Paul leave me confused. It doesn’t strike me as wrong or hypocritical that Paul accepts campaign donations — as opposed to personal payments — from large companies. Has Paul ever publicly denounced allowing corporate funding of campaigns?
There are plenty of criticisms of Paul as a candidate. But I don’t think that charges that he’s an insider and a hypocrite are among them.
View all comments (14) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Joseph Lawler
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/12/02/re-ron-pauls-hypocrisy
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- Public Nuisances
- Wincing at Cumberbatch
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Sean| 12.2.11 @ 1:50PM
Lord is an intellectual lightweight. Ron Paul has the more small donors than anyone else in this race. Lord can't distinguish between taking money for working as a "historian" and campaign contributions.
SOGTP | 12.2.11 @ 1:51PM
Jeffrey Lord is an establishment Republicrat. I hesitate to call him a NEOCON for fear he will rage that I'm anti semetic. J. Lord is incapable of grasping the uniqueness of Ron Paul's constitutional stance, because he'd prefer a big
"Republicrat" government. He will find a place in this government from which he can enrich himself at the taxpayers expense.
Clint| 12.2.11 @ 3:29PM
Apparently, The Israel Firsters Are Gettin' Very,Very Cranky & Upset With Our Tea Party Co-Favorite Presidential Candidate, Dr. Ron Paul.
"Republican Jewish Coalition Bars Ron Paul From Presidential Debate, Saying He's Too "misguided and extreme"
Matt Welch | December 1, 2011
On Wednesday, Dec. 7, the Republican Jewish Coalition will host a presidential-candidates forum featuring Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, and Rick Santorum. Not invited is the GOP candidate currently polling around third in New Hampshire and second in Iowa: Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas). The explanation:
Paul was not invited to attend the RJC's candidates forum because the organization - as it has stated numerous times in the past - "rejects his misguided and extreme views," said [RJC Executive Director Matt] Brooks.
"He's just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican party and this organization," Brooks said. Inviting Paul to attend would be "like inviting Barack Obama to speak."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Sean| 12.2.11 @ 3:38PM
I won't vote for any candidate in the general election attending this forum. Any group banning Ron Paul is not looking after America's interest.
Twinkles| 12.2.11 @ 5:30PM
"He's just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican party and this organization," Brooks said. Inviting Paul to attend would be "like inviting Barack Obama to speak."
What utter nonsense! You'd have to go much further to the left than Obama to find a Democrat who would agree with Ron Paul's position on Israel. Ralph Nader would be one example.
Red Phillips | 12.2.11 @ 7:59PM
So you're saying there is a centrist, Establishment, bi-partisan consensus on Israel? And there is supposed to be some shame in being outside that?
Ed| 12.2.11 @ 4:03PM
Yes, deep thoughts of Ron Paul. He's playing 6th dimensional chess while everyone else is playing checkers. Has he fired the neo nazi who edited his newsletter yet or is he still courting that vote (from the above comments, I would venture a guess that he is).
Ed| 12.2.11 @ 4:04PM
What is unique or particularly sophisticated about blaming America first? Heck, Obama does it.
Red Phillips | 12.2.11 @ 4:07PM
No need to be confused Mr. Lawler. Jeffrey Lord simply isn't rational when it comes to Ron Paul.
Dai Alanye | 12.3.11 @ 9:38AM
Are these cultists implying that Ron Paul is rational? Seems quite a stretch to me. When does he, for instance, renounce his blame of America for luring the Islamists to attack us? When does he integrate his directly opposing views on the border fence?
Will Malven | 12.8.11 @ 10:07AM
It's impressive, is it not, the level to which Ron Paul's supporter will wallow in self-deception to avoid seeing the truth?
Whenever any dares to raise the question of his seeming enthusiasm for a nuclear armed Iran, his canned response is two-fold--First the straw man of them attacking us directly, and Second, the absolutely insane comment that Israel has 300-400 nukes, let them defend themselves.
Anyone insane enough to believe that a nuclear exchange/war between Iran and Israel would be anything but catastrophic for the rest of the world--including the US--has no business being within a mile of the Oval Office.
faithkills| 12.14.11 @ 5:19PM
It is telling when you have to fabricate criticism.
I take it you are 'against America' or 'blaming America' because you oppose Obama's foreign policy, which, in it's weakness I presume you think will invite attack?
You know you are lying when you say Dr Paul is desirous of a nuclear Iran. So I assume you have no substantive critique or you would have leveled it.
He simply doesn't think it's possible to prevent it without war. Eventually every nation will have nukes. Do we commit to perpetual war?
Nuclear Iran is just like Global Warming. It's the boogeyman they use to justify expanding government power and taking our freedom.
You may disagree, but the issue is valid. What would you say is TOO much government power when in the interest of denying Iran nukes?
After all, we could certainly reduce murders if we just gave up our second amendment rights. We sure have stopped some terrorists by giving up our 4th and 5th amendments rights in the PATRIOT act.
What line is too far?
What is it about progressives, left wing or right wing, that they can't debate the actual issues? I'm pretty sure it's because they don't understand the actual issue.
Will Malven | 12.8.11 @ 10:00AM
Ron Paul is as hypocritical as anyone in Congress. Is he not the number one advocate of moving to a gold standard? Is he also not heavily invested in the gold mining industry?
Has he not called for term limits four times over his TWENTY-FOUR years in Congress?
Is he not running in the Republican presidential primary--and did he not very publicly resign his membership of the Republican Party back during Reagan's second term?
Ron Paul is a serial hypocrite, it's just that his cult of followers can't be honest enough with themselves to see it.
Yep, there's nothing like a hypocrite calling someone else a hypocrite for being an exemplar of the very sin of which he accuses others.
yielee| 12.18.11 @ 3:23PM
Ron Paul served as Republican party member for the +20 years he's been a representative. He was a Libertarian when he raised the consciousness of the People to bring the Constitution back into American politics, almost a quarter century ago - during that time he did not hold public office. Yet you want to hold it against him? Get real.
Compare his history to Newt Gingrich who supported turncoat Democrats to run as Republicans and surreptitiously infiltrate the GOP, or to Perry who was a registered Democrat himself. No one asks Newt whether he's vote for Obama if he's not given the nomination, and they don't ask whether Perry will switch parties and run as a Democrat. Yet hey hold the Libertarian Presidential run against Ron Paul. It's ridiculous.
Ron Paul is a Republican because historically the US Constitution is preserved through the GOP and destroyed by the Democrats. But nowadays it's the GOP that's destroying the Constitution. So something is wrong. The GOP has been infiltrated and changed by globalists calling themselves New Conservatives. We need to restore honor to the Republican Party. Support Ron Paul's nomination. It's the only chance we got to take our country back.