-
Peter Wehner Responds
June 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Cummings Accused of Subverting IRS Investigation
June 19, 2013 | 4 comments
-
Gerson, Wehner, and the Losing Old Ways Crowd
June 18, 2013 | 17 comments
-
Hannity: Secure the Border First
June 17, 2013 | 6 comments
-
Charles Krauthammer and The Limbaugh Theorem
June 14, 2013 | 27 comments
The Spectacle Blog
The problem with Reid Smith’s assessment, I would suggest, is that we have been here before and done that.
Literally, forever.
I confess that as I listen to all these young people going on about Ron Paul I hear exactly the same sentiments I heard… dare I say I myself occasionally voiced… when I myself was in college. All my peers running around college campuses or Washington or somewhere bemoaning exactly what Mr. Smith captures so exactly below:
However, I’m also bloody well exhausted of a Cold War paradigm that continues to shape presumptions about U.S. policy, and the seemingly insatiable need to rattle sabers from the comfort of our keyboards……
It would seem that Mr. Lord is either unwilling or unable to admit that I’m not alone. Many of my generation are similarly tired of this status quo. Although he dismissed the “non-cons” as a conservative aberration, Mr. Lord cannot ignore the fact that the vast majority of young caucus-goers support Ron Paul. Before dismissing Paul’s utter domination of the youth vote as anomalous, I would remind you that this is the same generation of young conservatives who have watched their friends, family and classmates blown to smithereens in the distant backwaters of the global stage — their sacrifice financed by untold treasure spent to reshape and refine the political infrastructure of foreign failures. They’re sick and tired of “business as usual” and their ardent support of Ron Paul is indicative of a genuine commitment to change.
The villains in those days were President Richard Nixon and Vice President Spiro Agnew. (No computers, unfortunately. Posters and typewriters sufficed.) I dallied with this for a bit, finally recovering and being one of approximately five Nixon supporters on a campus of Franklin and Marshall College’s 2,000 or so member student body.
The Ron Paul of the day was, as I mentioned in passing in my earlier post, South Dakota Senator George McGovern. Senator McGovern had electrified the young with his defeat of two pillars of the Democratic Party’s Establishment — Maine Senator Edmund Muskie and former Vice President and then-Senator Hubert Humphrey. He was your basic leftist’s leftist, as a young man a delegate to Henry Wallace’s Progressive Party Convention in 1948.
All the buzz words Mr. Smith uses were in play then: the “status quo,” “business as usual,” and, well, as a much later Jerry Seinfeld might say, yada yada yada.
As I eventually later in life figured out, I was going through the standard and necessary youthful rebellion that always comes against the “status quo.” But most assuredly neither I then nor Mr. Smith now are the first at this and in fact this is not about the “status quo” at all. Much less is it about a “Cold War paradigm” and rattling keyboards.
Long before either Reid Smith or Jeff Lord were even twinkles of thought, long before the Cold War or the “Cold War paradigm” there was the “King and Country” debate between the young students of Britain’s Oxford Union in February of 1933. The formal title of the resolution was:
“That this House will in no circumstances fight for its King and Country”.
It passed 275 votes to 153, with the Ron Paul devotees of 1933 winning the day. Over in Germany, the new Chancellor, Herr Hitler, took note of the sentiment as he spent the rest of the 1930s dealing with two like-minded British prime ministers (Baldwin and Chamberlain) — both conservatives.
In other words, the real complaint here is not about the status quo but human nature itself. As Russell Kirk noted — and he certainly wasn’t the first — human beings are imperfect. They are now, they were when I was in college and back in 1933 and for that matter back in 1861 or 1066 or… well… forever. Human beings can be many positive things… they can be loving, charming, responsible, caring. They can also be extremely violent, psychotic, mentally unbalanced and a whole host of other things. They may be Communists, Nazis, Islamic Fundamentalists, the Ku Klux Klan or the guy next door. Whether Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Osama, Al Capone, Lee Harvey Oswald or the husband in your town who beats his wife to a pulp… this is the reality of being a human being. If it weren’t, there would be no need for the local police much less the U.S. Marines. You would not need the lock on your door much less worry today about computer hacking.
So — respectfully — I take Reid Smith’s point. But it’s an old one that pre-dates not only us but our ancestors. And in an imperfect world, as some but not all learn, the most dangerous people of all are people like Ron Paul or McGovern or those Oxford Union students and one of their heroes — Neville Chamberlain. Why? Because however unintentional… they send a signal to deranged minds inviting violence, mass murder and mayhem.
It would be lovely to think we can perfect human nature. But this is not only not a conservative belief — it’s a dangerous belief. It is flatly untrue. Today, tomorrow or thousands of years ago. It is, one might say, the eternal status quo. And on occasion — OK, more than occasion — it stinks. And Ron Paul or no Ron Paul, the newest “younger generation” or the last few thousands of “younger generations” — Non-Cons or No-Cons, that human nature will not be changing.
View all comments (83) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Jeffrey Lord
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/04/reid-smith-ron-paul-and-the-no
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Drink Earlier, Drink Less
- Once Upon a Time in the West
- Sweet Home, Alabama
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
aloysius| 1.4.12 @ 3:58PM
Jeff Lord is so cute when he pretends to be a Conservative.
You could be writing foreign policy papers for the Barack Obama administration, Jeff, and all you would have to do is change the letterhead.
Con Chef (NB) | 1.4.12 @ 4:19PM
Yeah. Ron "Bradley Manning is a Hero" Paul is a TRUE conservative.
Have you hugged YOUR mullah today, Mr. Willing Dhimmi?
aloysius| 1.4.12 @ 4:23PM
Bradley Manning broke the law, and I never said he was a hero.
Do you make a habit of pretending that people say things, and then yelling at them about the made-up things?
aware| 1.4.12 @ 4:30PM
Yep, and then he calls you an idiot.
Tom| 1.4.12 @ 4:55PM
"Bradley Manning broke the law, and I never said he was a hero."
Der Kult Huhrer did.
Tom| 1.4.12 @ 4:58PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pbSCT2SE6U
Clint| 1.4.12 @ 5:44PM
Mitt Romney Responds to Question about Bradley Manning / War Crimes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EtmGted3D0
Tom| 1.4.12 @ 6:11PM
Just a big blast of hot, empty air; like the inside of Herr KKKlint's head.
Clint| 1.4.12 @ 7:04PM
Just Romney Saying Go After The War Crimes ,Not The Whistle Blowers, Israel Firster Smear Bund Ass Clown, Little Thomasina.
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Smear Bund Ass Clown, Little Thomasina.
Tom| 1.4.12 @ 9:02PM
No, Dummkopf, Romney said, "I don't want to comment on that specific case." As if Romney's worthless answer has ANYTHING to do with the fact that your Kult Fuhrer called a criminal and traitor who betrayed each and every person in the military and people outside the military, a "hero."
Once again, neo-Nzai Paultard scumbag Herr KKKlint proves to the world that he is a liar, a traitor, and dumber than the Grand Canyon full of dog shit.
Clint| 1.5.12 @ 3:03AM
No Israel Firster Smesr Bund Ass Clown,Thomasina, Mittens Romney Didn't Wanna Comment For The Mirror Reason Dr.Ron Paul Did.
Romney Was An Uninformed Asswipe Chickenhawk,Who Didn't Know About The Case,Where The Veteran American Military Officer Dr.Ron Paul Did Know About The Case.
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Smear Bund Girl, Thomasina.
Tom| 1.5.12 @ 6:07AM
Herr KKKlint, your rant is just another demonstration of your Paultard stupidity. The FACT is that your Kult Fuhrer called a traitor and crminal a "hero."
And I don't give a rat's rear about Romeny. Your Paultard rant is nothing but a strawman, and is as irrelevant as you are.
Now go kiss your golden swastika.
fuzzywzhe| 1.5.12 @ 8:03AM
> The FACT is that your Kult Fuhrer called
> a traitor and crminal a "hero."
Which traitor and criminal, and what exactly did the Kult Fuhrer say?
I can't really imagine a person that wants to reduce the scope of federal government back to it's Constitutionally mandated powers as a Fuhrer either. I can see somebody that wants to extend it as one. I'll place both Bush II and his darker skinned clone Obama in that category.
Tom| 1.5.12 @ 4:51PM
"Which traitor and criminal, and what exactly did the Kult Fuhrer say"
If you are too lazy to follow the exchange between Herr KKKlint and myself and to click on the youtube videos, don't expect any help from me.
Quartermaster| 1.5.12 @ 8:51PM
Tom is part of the Kutursmog here. Good sense is wasted on dishonest morons like Lord and Tom. Both have plenty of company on both sides of this divide. Godwin's law does not exist here.
Tom| 1.5.12 @ 9:59PM
Quarterbrain is one of the ignorant, anti-American, Jew-hating, neo-Nazi scumbag Paultards here. He is a completely worthless individual, and is without a single redeeming quality.
Seek| 1.4.12 @ 7:11PM
Jeffrey Lord's piece is the essence of realist conservatism. There is nothing "Leftist" about it.
James Phillips| 1.4.12 @ 7:23PM
Mr. Lord also attempts to smear Dr. Robert Sungenis in this article. Sungenis, a brilliant Catholic apologist knows full well that The American Spectator is nothing more than a neo-con Zionist mouthpiece. His stunning response to this particular article is found at http://www.catholicintl.com/in.....-santorum.
Tom| 1.4.12 @ 9:38PM
Well, not all Catholics view geocentrist Sungenis as a "brilliant Catholic apologist." Here is a legnthy exchange the forum for an organization called Catholic Answers which discuss some of Sungenis' opinions. One poster called him, "a strange man."
http://forums.catholic.com/sho.....t=Sungenis
And here is a legnthy discussion of Sungenis' opinions and behavior by another Catholic apologist named Dave.
https://sites.google.com/site/sungenisandthejews/defense-of-bishop-rhoades-from-false-accusations
I'm not Catholic, but do have an interest in the differences betwen Catholicism and the Reformation. So this is basically an intramural debate between Sungenis and many other Catholic apologists. The main point being that he is a contraversial figure within those circles and many do NOT think highly of him.
Tom| 1.4.12 @ 9:50PM
Alo, a book recently came out by Christopher A. Ferrara, who is the President and CEO of the American Catholic Lawyers Association, called "The Church and the Libertarian: A Defense of the Catholic Church's teaching on Man, Evonomy, and State." It is a critique of Austrian economics according to Catholic social teaching. I've just read a few pages of it, but Ferrara concludes, "The Austro-libertarian way can never be the Catholic way." (p. 5).
fuzzywzhe| 1.5.12 @ 7:09AM
He's right to call the American Spectator as a neocon Zionist mouthpiece. Try to post anything that doesn't agree with the Zionist narrative and you're banned.
I've been banned. The American Spectator isn't American at all, it's an Israeli first publication, and nothing more. If you talk about Scott Ritter, bring up the IAEA reports on Iran, talk about Israel's own internal racism between Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews, or dare to bring up the kill ratio of children in the conflict, you'll be silenced immediately.
I've been silenced several times and had my posts deleted. After a point, I simply gave up. They won't allow free discussion on their boards especially when you can back it up with facts and verifiable data, like I can.
Todd S| 1.5.12 @ 11:12AM
We get it, you hate Israel and wished Hitler finished the job. Plenty of other websites around to go hate on the Jews and Israel but we do not care for your hateful bigotry here.
Tom| 1.5.12 @ 4:54PM
"I've been silenced several times and had my posts deleted. After a point, I simply gave up. They won't allow free discussion on their boards especially when you CAN'T back it up with facts and verifiable data, like I CAN'T."
There, fixed it for you.
Mark| 1.11.12 @ 2:07PM
Tom wrote:
"I'm not Catholic, but do have an interest in the differences betwen Catholicism and the Reformation. So this is basically an intramural debate between Sungenis and many other Catholic apologists. The main point being that he is a contraversial figure within those circles and many do NOT think highly of him."
I don't think that's quite right. From what I can see, it's much more than an intramural debate about RC doctrine. The doctrine part is a side-show. Sungenis seems to want it to look as though it's all just about RC doctrine, but the real issues revolve around anti-Semitism. He was cited at the top of a report called "Hate Watch" because of anti-Semitic writings. That's why his RC bishop forced him to stop calling his group "Catholic" and told him to stop writing about Jews.
You can read this and scan down to his statements:
http://www.sungenisandthejews.com/Section2.html
And this "Hate Watch" article:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-i.....irty-dozen
C Bowen | 1.4.12 @ 3:58PM
Yeah, look at you know. You helped lie your own country into invading Iraq, with an illegal propaganda campaign linking Saddam to 9/11, wasting over a trillion dollars, thousands of lives and making Iran stronger in the region--while destroying the native Iraqi Christian people.
That's growing up, Ruling Class style.
aware| 1.4.12 @ 4:25PM
He was assimilated into the Borg.
Ed| 1.4.12 @ 3:59PM
Pat Buchanan and the Paultards would tell you that the Oxford Union, by its assertions, was trying to lull poor old misunderstood Adolf into complacency and his pushback against that forced Germany into its maniacal state.
Ed's Dead Baby| 1.4.12 @ 4:05PM
Just jump right to the Godwin, Ed. LOL
You're supposed to warm up to calling us Nazi's, not just leap into it without preamble.
aware| 1.4.12 @ 4:32PM
Hey Ed, convince me we would be worse off with Buchanan in the 90s than with Clinton or Bush the Greater.
Ed| 1.4.12 @ 5:31PM
Pretty simple-if you write a book lauding Hitler, you're a bad guy. You can get a couple of laughs on the TV shows but, in your heart of hearts, something is very twisted.
Sea Cucumber| 1.4.12 @ 5:48PM
When did Pat Buchanan write a book 'lauding' Hitler?
Clint| 1.4.12 @ 5:51PM
That Kind Of Logic Presents This Problem.
" 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With the Nazis
By Lenni Brenner, ed. Barricade Books, 2002, 342 pp. List: $22; AET: $15.
Reviewed by Sara Powell
It’s no secret that Zionism embraced political expediency to advance the cause of carving Eretz-Israel from the land of its native inhabitants. In his 1983 book, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, Lenni Brenner shows that 20th century Zionists observed shockingly few limits to that expediency. Not surprisingly, the book received little coverage in the American media. Now, in 51 Documents, Brenner has compiled a wide variety of letters, statements, articles, and judgements—some of which appeared in his earlier book—by a broad array of activists and authors, that documents Zionist cooperation with the Nazis. On the face of it, the notion seems absurd. However, Brenner presents the case—made in many Zionists’ own words—that the Nazi agenda of expelling the Jews from Germany fit nicely with the Zionist plan for enticing those Jews into settling in Palestine and creating a new Jewish nation. "
Clint| 1.4.12 @ 5:53PM
And This Problem.
" USS Liberty' veterans demand investigation
Jun. 3, 2007 12:00 AM
Conclusions submitted in October 2003 to the Office of the U.S. Secretary of Defense by the USS Liberty Veterans Association, Inc., in demanding a congressional investigation into the aborted rescue during the attack of the USS Liberty and subsequent alleged cover-up.
The group also calls for a new Naval Court of Inquiry and that June 8 be officially recognized as USS Liberty Remembrance Day.
1. That on June 8, 1967, after eight hours of aerial surveillance, Israel launched a two-hour air and naval attack against USS Liberty, the world's most sophisticated intelligence ship, inflicting 34 dead and 173 wounded American servicemen (a casualty rate of 70 percent, in a crew of 294);
2. That the Israeli air attack lasted approximately 25 minutes, during which time unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on USS Liberty's bridge and fired 30mm cannons and rockets into our ship, causing 821 holes, more than 100 of which were rocket-size; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes which were jamming all five American emergency radio channels;
3. That the torpedo boat attack involved not only the firing of torpedoes, but the machine-gunning of Liberty's firefighters and stretcher-bearers as they struggled to save their ship and crew; the Israeli torpedo boats later returned to machine-gun at close range three of the Liberty's life rafts that had been lowered into the water by survivors to rescue the most seriously wounded;
4. That there is compelling evidence that Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew; evidence of such intent is supported by statements from Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Undersecretary of State George Ball, former CIA Director Richard Helms, former NSA Directors Lt. Gen. William Odom, USA (Ret.), Adm. Bobby Ray Inman, USN (Ret.), and Marshal Carter; former NSA deputy directors Oliver Kirby and Maj. Gen. John Morrison, USAF (Ret.); and former Ambassador Dwight Porter, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon in 1967;
5. That in attacking USS Liberty, Israel committed acts of murder against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States;
6. That fearing conflict with Israel, the White House deliberately prevented the U.S. Navy from coming to the defense of USS Liberty by recalling Sixth Fleet military rescue support while the ship was under attack; evidence of the recall of rescue aircraft is supported by statements of Capt. Joe Tully, Commanding Officer of the aircraft carrier USS Saratoga, and Rear Admiral Lawrence Geis, the Sixth Fleet carrier division commander, at the time of the attack; never before in American naval history has a rescue mission been cancelled when an American ship was under attack;
7. That although Liberty was saved from almost certain destruction through the heroic efforts of the ship's captain, William L. McGonagle (MOH), and his brave crew, surviving crewmembers were later threatened with "court-martial, imprisonment or worse" if they exposed the truth; and were abandoned by their own government;
8. That due to the influence of Israel's powerful supporters in the United States, the White House deliberately covered up the facts of this attack from the American people;
9. That due to continuing pressure by the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, this attack remains the only serious naval incident that has never been thoroughly investigated by Congress; to this day, no surviving crewmember has been permitted to officially and publicly testify about the attack;
10. That there has been an official cover-up without precedent in American naval history; the existence of such a cover-up is now supported by statements of Rear Adm. Merlin Staring, USN (Ret.), former Judge Advocate General of the Navy; and Capt. Ward Boston, USN, (Ret.), the chief counsel to the Navy's 1967 Court of Inquiry of Liberty attack;
11. That the truth about Israel's attack and subsequent White House cover-up continues to be officially concealed from the American people to the present day and is a national disgrace;
12. That a danger to our national security exists whenever our elected officials are willing to subordinate American interests to those of any foreign nation, and specifically are unwilling to challenge Israel's interests when they conflict with American interests; this policy, evidenced by the failure to defend USS Liberty and the subsequent official cover-up of the Israeli attack, endangers the safety of Americans and the security of the United States."
aware| 1.4.12 @ 6:31PM
No I meant with actual evidence, Ed.
Ivan| 1.4.12 @ 4:41PM
Read Herbert Hoover's "Freedom Betrayed" and you will see Buchanan and all other "revisionists" completely vindicated. The list of left wing McGovernites is growing by the day. :)
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....ert-hoover
http://original.antiwar.com/bu.....rl-harbor/
aloysius| 1.4.12 @ 4:45PM
Thanks for the links, Ivan
Billlionairechronicles | 1.4.12 @ 4:06PM
George Soros Supports Ron Paul. Expects to Be His Running Mate
http://www.billionairechronicles.net/soros-paul
W| 1.4.12 @ 4:07PM
Mr. Lord,
I agree, saw Eugene McCarthy speak in 1968 and the students all thought he was great. Hate to say this, though, I saw Teddy Kennedy speak at a dinner in 1972 and the crowd loved him. He could talk.
9thID| 1.4.12 @ 5:06PM
Liber-als and Liberal-tarians (Libertines) are all especially prone to the cult of personality. It may be a genetic defect...
Clint| 1.4.12 @ 7:14PM
The Bibi Cultists Are Crybabyin' About Libertarians Again.
Ronald Reagan,
" If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are traveling the same path.
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The 9th IDiot.
Ivan| 1.4.12 @ 4:11PM
Jeffrey Lord, blessedly clueless as ever, repeats the same moronic meme took over from such luminaries as Hanity and Levin, tha any anti-interventionist foreign policy is somehow "left-wing". This is so, only if one is "educated", as Mr Lord seems to be, by listening to Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Hanity and similar giants of "conservative" thought.
It never appeared to the poor Mr Lord that the real intelelctual and political predecessor of Ron Paul is not George McGovern, but Robert Taft, and the Old Right in general. Those were the guys whose politics was motivated by the wish to abolish the New Deal and progressive era "big leaps forward", as well as foreign military adventurism, and whose followers are Ron Paul and his supporters these days.
What kind of pathetic know nothings pass for the "right" these days is best seen in Jeffrey Lord's elevation of the likes of Sean Hanity to the status of exemplar conservatives and arbiters of ideological "right-wing" purity - the same Sean Hanity who had never heard that Roosevelt's New Deal may have not got us out of depression and who was greatly surprised and interested in that novel theory when he was introduced to it, few years ago, by Tom Woods,.:) a Ron Paul supporter and an excellent Old Right thinker and historian.
And now the people like Hanity, Levin, Limbaugh, Lord, who grew up and intellectually socialized in an environment in which the span of allowed opinion went from Artur Schlesinger Jr on the left, to Irving-three cheers-for-the-neoconservative-welfare-state Kristol, on the "right", are purporting to arbitrate in ideological disputes and give the "left wing" labels to the intellectual heirs of the Old Right. :)
One can go even further - what about Robert Nisbet, Rusell Kirk or Richard Weaver, all of whom were the staunch opponents of foreign wars and interventionism. Were they also the “left-wing” followers of McGovern, Mr Lord?
jweaks | 1.4.12 @ 4:25PM
Hear, hear!
ronpaulpredictedmassivedebt| 1.4.12 @ 4:50PM
So basically what you are saying is that its the United States Job to protect every nation from some form of dictator. Ok then why not go to Zimbabwe? or what about the mass Genocide in Darfur why are we not PROTECTING THEM? BECAUSE ITS ALL FOR OIL IN THE MIDDLE EAST! People like you are dangerous. Because it is people like you that allowed French Imperialism, Dutch Imperialism and British imperialism. They said things like what you are saying now OH THEY ARE LESSER THAN US THEY NEED OUR HELP! that is what Britain said about its colonies.They were "helping" bull shit Imperialism is what ultimately gave the problems that we have today in middle east, Africa, India, Pakistan, Vietnam, South America. The only reason these countries have so many problems is because of people like you who think Imperialism is ok when you want to help the world. Bull you are not helping a country when you are killing thousands of innocent civilians. We are allowing our country to start wars for the betterment of other countries? THIS IS PARADOXICAL and completely idiotic..
fuzzywzhe| 1.5.12 @ 7:25AM
People like him aren't dangerous.
They are just simply liars. Germany had it's Goebbels, well the US has several of them. We might as well call them what they are. What is passed off as US media today is basically just Pravda designed by capitalism.
I think it's best just to simply accept that the United States has a lot of propaganda, a lot of collaborators in corruption, and to move on from there. This is the system you are stuck in, and if you ignore what it is, you can't really work in it.
Hobbes| 1.4.12 @ 5:35PM
How deluded is this guy? Comparing Paul with McGovern?
Tom| 1.4.12 @ 6:12PM
Birds of a feather.
john dubose| 1.4.12 @ 5:44PM
Ron Paul and Libertarians in general are perfectly ready to have a powefull military and go to war when the US is REALLY threatned. But
1. They have a much less expansive theory of when that is necessary.
2. They want to make sure that it is done right with a proper declaration of war and a proper definition of when to quit.
Lord and many of the other neo-cons refuse to acknowledge the difference between that and the pacifism of the left.
Ryan| 1.5.12 @ 9:35AM
What act would Ron Paul consider an act of war?
William R| 1.4.12 @ 6:33PM
Good gawd Lord, "the Ron Paul of my day was George McGovern. "
First Lord, I'm older than you and Nixon won in 1968 because he promised to end LBJs war in Vietnam. In 1960 JFK was the HAWK and portrayed Nixon as weak against the commie menace. In 1964 after LBJ ran the Daisy ad against Goldwater, he replied "Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater, Republican senator from Arizona, charges that President Lyndon Johnson lied to the American people and that he is committing the United States to war "recklessly." Having previously called the war "McNamara's War," he now described it as "Johnson's War."
http://www.history.com/this-da.....nam-policy
Lord, conservatives have never been big on internationalism. I'm sorry, but you can't rewrite history. And this classic debate performance between Bob Dole and Walter Mondale in 1976
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G9AePwl1AE
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.4.12 @ 6:44PM
Jeffrey,
These kids are simply afraid of the Draft being re-established.
Ron Paul gives them an "out"...they think... of taking their turn in the barrel to defend liberty and freedom.
George Washington called them "sunshine patriots".
Hey, I was subject to the Draft, so I volunteered to fly med-evac choppers. I'm kinda' proud of that decision.
These little wimps can kiss my butt.
William R| 1.4.12 @ 6:59PM
The comic book author returns. Dreaming of his past military glory.
And here is Russell Kirk the father of modern conservatism speaking at the Heritage Foundation in 1991
"Presidents Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and Lyndon Johnson were enthusiasts for American domination of the world. Now George Bush appears to be emulating those eminent Democrats. When the Republicans, once upon a time, nominated for the presidency a "One World" candidate, Wendell Willkie, they were sadly trounced. In general, Republicans throughout the twentieth century have been advocates of prudence and restraint in the conduct of foreign affairs.
Clint| 1.4.12 @ 7:10PM
You Never Served In The Military, You Lyin' Sack Of Israel Firsster Shit, Kenny The Squirrel.
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On Kenny The Amazin' Lyin' Squirrel
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.4.12 @ 7:24PM
Hi Clinty-poo
No I did not serve in uniform. While I was waiting for my call, I took on the presidency of a company that dug bunkers for the soldiers. Heh, I filled a lot of sand-bags with my guys in the field.
Heh, I could tell you some wild stories about those days...but then I would have to shoot you.
Wimp.
C Bowen | 1.4.12 @ 8:00PM
Ken;
Did you cash checks from BCCI or the Export/Import Bank--I can't quite recall your angle, could you remind me?
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.5.12 @ 7:45AM
C Bowen,
neither. Our cash flow was from primarily oil related engineering firms like Bectel, Fluer, Brown and Root etc.
The DOD paid us for field fortifications.
C Bowen | 1.5.12 @ 6:08PM
No, I was talking about when you were doing business directly with Saddam--that had to be Export/Import Bank, but a BCCI angle would be funnier, as they say.
C Bowen | 1.5.12 @ 7:56PM
It's funny that you are covering your tracks, Ken--remember when you wrote about sitting across the table from Saddam? BCCI or Export/Import, just let me know.
Bob Grant| 1.4.12 @ 8:06PM
Just shoot him already. And while your at it...
Clint| 1.5.12 @ 3:13AM
Now, Kenny The Lyin' Army Wannabe Israel Firster Ass Clown, You Never Served A Day In Your Life,In The United States Military.
Now, Apologize To All The Real American Miltary , Like Dr.Ron Paul Who Did , You Lyin' Sack Of Israel Firster Smear Bund Shit.
Oh Yeah, If You Ever Tey To Shoot Me, I'll Take Your Little Toy Gun And Shove It Up Your Puckered Coward Asshole, Israel Firster, Sack Of Shit Coward.
Got It Sweetie Pie ?
Get It.
Ivan| 1.4.12 @ 8:19PM
Oh, now the military conscription became a "conservative" value. It's getting better and better. What's next - nationalization of railroads and post-office as conservative values? The central bank and going off gold as "conservative" policies (ups, it's been already done by Wilson and Roosevelt and is supported by the "conservatives" today)? Concentration camps for the Japanese (or other "enemy combatants", or non-combatants for that matter)? Is there end in sight of these glorious "conservative" and "right wing" policies?
9thID| 1.4.12 @ 10:28PM
Ken, these neo-Liberal cowards and dopeheads will be heading for Canada if ever the draft is mentioned in Congress again. Most of 'em already have dual passports at the ready. On the bright side, bounty hunting may come back into vogue real soon...
Clint| 1.5.12 @ 3:17AM
You're One More Israel Firster Smear Bund Liar, 9th IDiot.
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To The East Coast.
fuzzywzhe| 1.5.12 @ 9:09AM
They should go to Canada if there is conscription again for a war like Vietnam.
The United States lost Vietnam, and what was the consequences? Well Vietnam went communist, several hundred thousand Vietnamese were killed, 50 thousand US servicemen died, and it was such a drain on the Treasury we were forced off the gold standard.
If the war was never fought, Vietnam would be communist, who knows how many Vietnamese would have been killed but it would probably have been less, no Americans would have died, and we wouldn't be quite as bankrupt. We might even still be on the gold standard today, and a quarter would buy you a gallon of gas.
It was a stupid war.
And don't forget, Nixon ran on ending that war, and he did. Nixon was actually a pretty good president. He was better than either George W Bush or Obama certainly.
Who started that war for the United States? Well, it began in 1950. Harry Johnson got us there to begin with but it was really JFK that ramped up that war. During Eisenhower it was just a continuation of Johnson. The Democrats were historically the party of war, not the Republicans.
Why is it people like you want to re-write history rather than learn from it?
fuzzywzhe| 1.5.12 @ 9:11AM
Why did I say Johnson?
Truman.
Quartermaster| 1.5.12 @ 9:01PM
The progressive left lost Vietnam. Kissinger did not give us a treaty worth signing, and the McGovernites were determined to undermine anything Kissinger did bring back because they wanted the Reds to win. Literally.
OryGun| 1.4.12 @ 8:14PM
Mr. Lord is right on with his analogy. It is about the human condition and our own failure to stop creating mistakes of the past. It matters little if it is 50 years or 5000 years the conversations and grunts go on. It is the timeless battle between good and evil and if you take the time to look in your heart you will know what I am talking about.
William R| 1.4.12 @ 8:17PM
You're as clueless as Jeffrey Lord
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udz5_FdoFGU
JW| 1.4.12 @ 8:38PM
Very disappointing. It took forever for the guy to get to the point and when he did it was a pretty lame point.
If we lived by this principle we wouldn't even have to worry about this election because we would still be under the King of England.
Of course people are imperfect, so that is why you want to limit their power (especially in government) and why leave it up to one man(the president) to pick fights and declare wars. The more neo-con crap I read the more they seem like a bunch of communist to me. Where ever their ideas come from, it's totally un-American.
fuzzywzhe| 1.5.12 @ 7:39AM
These people are NOT communists.
The are fascists. They want to centralize power, that's the one thing that communist and fascism has in common.
However, the economic system of fascism is corporatism. This is when the government decides which corporations live and die. This is done by direct monetary injection into corporations. TARP, QE1 and QE2 was exactly that.
Banks that were run by incompetent and CORRUPT people were saved "for the good of the nation". It wasn't for the benefit of the nation, it was for the benefit of these corporations and the people who run them.
There are plenty of banks that are competently and ethically run. I readily admit that allowing Goldman Sachs to fail, along with Lehman and Bear Sterns would have caused considerable turmoil however they would have been replaced by smaller more competently run banks and we wouldn't be in this economic mess now.
The Federal Reserve is an incompetently run cartel of corrupt banks, that's all it is today. It wasn't always that way, but that's what it is today, and it should be replaced or simply eradicated.
Ward Bond| 1.4.12 @ 8:42PM
Jeff Lord seems pretty sharp to me.
9thID| 1.4.12 @ 10:30PM
Jeffrey nailed this one -- again...
Quartermaster| 1.5.12 @ 9:03PM
But his hammer missed the nail as it usually does. Lord is so blinded by his silly ideology that if he hits the truth it is only in passing, and by sheer luck. Reid is quite a ways ahead in this exchange.
Louis Nardozi | 1.4.12 @ 9:14PM
Santorum was apparently taking bribes from Accuweather to introduce legislation that prevents the NWS from giving out free weather reports - now that information is given to AccuWeather to sell to us. But it gets better - he sold us out for a lousy $2000.
Hm. He also sold us out on a $10 billion bailout of tobacco farmers - for $9,000. Nice work if you're a tobacco farmer I guess.
He took $6,000 to reduce the federal tax on a keg of beer by 1/2. Nice work if you can get it.
http://www.citizensforethics.o.....df?nocdn=1
Then there's Romney. His SuperPac changed reporting requirements so it can hide who the money came from until after the Florida primary.
His Democrat opponent for governor had a better NRA rating than he did. Of course there's Romneycare, the model for Obamacare. Plus, he was excused military service because he had to go convert more Mormons. Good enough reason not to serve, huh?
Then there's Paul. Unimpeachable integrity. Military service. 12 Term Congressman that NEVER ONCE voted to increase taxes. Responsible for bringing the problems with the FED to the attention of the 75% of people who now want an audit. Delivered over 4000 babies, many of which to poor families - but did not accept Medicare or any other government payments. 30 years of consistency and 30 years fighting for YOUR individual liberty.
Despised by the media for speaking the truth about the bailouts, the FED and the erosion of civil liberties. Will end the wars - the ONLY candidate to unequivocally state so. Only candidate to predict the housing bust. Only candidate able to explain why we our economy is so bad and how to fix it. ONLY candidate with a plan to ACTUALLY cut spending, instead of just proposed increases. I could go on for pages, but you get the point. Will you vote in your own self interest?
Josh Brueggen| 1.4.12 @ 10:13PM
Jeffery Lord makes a classic straw man argument here. He places the Oxford Union "we will not fight for king and country under any circumstances" position as an equivalent to the "I will defend this nation if under immediate threat, but would otherwise require a debate in congress and a declaration of war before starting a war" position that Paul takes. Even a cursory comparison of the two shows them to be completely dissimilar. He then proceeds to build his whole article on a faulty premise. This is known as a strawman argument, and is a classical logical fallacy. Lucky for me I had a high school literature teacher who still believed in teaching the fallacies, or I might have really been agreeing with Mr. Lord.
Ben Doverhereitcomes| 1.4.12 @ 10:46PM
One comment for you guys to the north of us. Mind you're own business eh! You have no idea what you're talking about.
garvan| 1.5.12 @ 12:02AM
Good job on suggesting that NAZI GERMANY came to power because people wanted peace in Britain.
Ignoring all the OTHER MAJOR FACTORS which played much more of a part in dismantling the Weimar Republic.
Right, and if it wasn't for Jesus we'd never have the crusades! Darn Jesus and his message of peace.
Clinton| 1.5.12 @ 2:59AM
"...the vast majority of young caucus-goers support Ron Paul..." they were Obama voters in 2008 and will be this year too.
Ron "Soros" Paul is in love with himself and gov't earmarks. Too be bad he isn't more flexible he'd give his youth voters something to really be inspired by -- self fellatio.
Clint| 1.5.12 @ 3:27AM
Ronald Reagan,
"Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country."
Aaand, Dr.Ron Paul Never Voted For An Earmark Nor Any Appropriations Bill.
Do Your Homework.
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Bund Boy Liars.
fuzzywzhe| 1.5.12 @ 7:42AM
Earmarks are pushed through no matter what. If Paul doesn't try to return money to his state, that money ends up going to one of the other 49 states. He's not helping anybody by foregoing them. The money is spent either way.
Jessie Marker| 1.5.12 @ 4:11AM
Fear controls you. Fear controls every person afraid to embrace freedom from government. Government should only be there to protect freedom.
Ron Paul is an advocate of Nuclear Submarines and Tactical Nuclear Weapons and global positioning of such weapons.
Ron Paul is not for sending out children into third world countries to protect the interests of chicken-hawk politicians, banks, and corporations.
You are the most dangerous America has to offer. You are a part of the problem. You are the fear laced nail driving into the minds of people who don't yet understand the freedoms given to them by god.
People are beginning to understand once again that this era of gross waste, commercialism and corporatism is coming to an end. The communications age is bringing an end to this type of society, it is driving away the fear originating from sources such as this, and it is unleashing the ideas of freedom into the minds of the people.
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.5.12 @ 7:52AM
Jessie,
go tell that to the Mullahs...in person.
Thank you.
Jeff Goff | 1.5.12 @ 10:21AM
Great read.