Critiquing Ron Paul

The Libertarian Republican. Author Jeffrey Lord makes some seroius charges about Paul and some of his supporters.

 Because the Paul campaign is not just a campaign for president. This is a campaign -- a serious campaign -- to re-educate the American people to an alternate universe of reality. A campaign that goes far beyond whatever will happen at the polls in 2012.

 

 

Comments

[Richard Cowden Guido]

Caro TF:

A little cruelty here, since in linking to this ASpectator silliness, you've ruined your freedom ever to criticize the NYT again - although even there, crude & obvious as the NYT, et. al. is, only at their best - worst if you like - are they as crude as this piece was.

Its MTV analysis was that anything older than five minutes must be flashmobbed away, & that accordingly, in defiance of history, not to say etymology, no one may call themselves a conservative unless they define it as the opposite of its historical & obvious meaning.

Actually the argument was: let's forget history & meaning, & instead say that unless you support endless war of manifest injury to the American public but most congenial to the AmSpec's paymasters, you're a poo-poo head; & not allowed to call yourself a conservative; & just in case you have any impertinent impulse towards, say, thinking for a half second, then you're also personally responsible for the death of Anne Frank.

In 2003, the devoted fecalist & abortion enthusiast David Frum made the identical argument (in a once interesting magazine called National Review that for decades now has alas been read only by folk aspiring to be trained ponies) in a piece titled 'Unpatriotic Conservatives.' As that was so very long ago, the AmSpec bird didn't realize that, unlike today - where we have always been at war with Oceania, & there never been a real conservative who didn't slaver for endless war & Empire (likely George Washington & John Quincy - "we are the friend of liberty everywhere, but the defenders only of our own" Adams would have been exposed as commies had the Specbird ever read them) - Frum still knew the conservative tradition was antiwar, in need of neocon excommunication.

Shortly after the piece appeared Frum hooked up with Richard Pearle to write a book with the scintillatingly restrained & conservative title 'An End to Evil,' about the need to send millions of Americans across the globe to be killed so that Debbie Does Dallas could be found on every corner in the world (I paraphrase; albeit accurately).

Neither the book nor the article has held up too well. Nor has Frum, who now has a site that principally rails at the Tea Party, & is only read by Andrew Sullivan. That AmSpec thinks a re-tread piece like this might still have traction indicates not just how pathetic the neocon contretemps is & always was - in thought, mind you, I'll grant the power - but bespeaks also no minor contempt for the intelligence of its audience. With affection, dear TF, I doubt the utility of such dutiful burps, & am dismayed to see you attracted by the contempt.

Pedagogically yours, - RCG

[tomfaranda]

Rich

We have discussed this in the past.

I am not an isolationist, do not believe in sticking my head in the ground, and find some (not all) of Ron Paul's economic ideas silly.

The Spectator article was put out there to show a particular viewpoint that's as least as valid as much of what Ron Paul has said - it doesn't follow that I agree with all of Lord's oints at all.

[Richard Cowden Guido]

Dear Tomaso:

Accepting the rumor that Doc Paul has been known to burp on occasion after meals, I grant that the AmSpec was at least as valid as those, albeit not remotely as valid as anything Paul has actually said.

By the bye, Hurricane Irene shut the abortion mills in NYC today, so let's hope she saves more lives than she takes.

Pax et B TF - RCG