Trutheriness and Ron Paul (Michelle Malkin) [Ron Paul Says The Darnedest Things!]

Michelle Malkin ^ | May 19, 2007 | Michelle Malkin

[Xenalyte]

Ron Paul is Lyndon LaRouche reincarnated

A neat trick, since LaRouche is still alive.

[TexasAg1996]

To try to make it into some trutherism is either stupid or dishonest. Take your pick.

Ron Paul goes on a radio talk show known for its 9/11 conspiracy theories. He takes a call from someone who wants an independent investigation into 9/11 since the caller is "tired of this bogus garbage about terrorism." You can spin that how you want to, but the caller clearly doesn't think 9/11 was caused by terrorists. The caller also mentions Michael Meacher, a guy who believes the US used 9/11 as an excuse to secure world domination by force.

Ron Paul answers and says it's better with the Dems in charge. Ron Paul also says that "we" (including himself and the caller) see the investigations into 9/11 as cover-ups.

Oh, and Ron Paul attended the event hosted by the "Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth". So clearly, he is not a truther and doesn't have truther leanings. I believe him when, after all of this is pointed out, he claims he's not a truther. (Yeah, right).

Beyond the silliness of beliving that the Dems would uncover the truth about 9/11, this is what really bothers me. If someone called and asked me how I feel about George W. Bush going to war in Iraq so he could murder little children, I'm going to say that the question is biased and it's ridiculous to accuse GWB of wanting to murder little children. Ron Paul gets this call and doesn't contest the idea that terrorism is bogus. Paul answers the question in a way that shows he agrees with the underlying assumptions of the question.

[CenTexConfederate]

If Ron does well in the Iowa straw poll, the GOP establishment will hit the panic button.

Go Ron!

[Dead Corpse]

and the establishment "big-government" Republicans want us all to know what awful monsters the Democrats are.

A game of two card Monty. Each distracting their "side" with the boogey-man of the other.

[CenTexConfederate]

Jamie Gorelick and Richard Ben Veniste were on the 9/11 commission. It is only natural to think there is a coverup. Ben Veniste is the sleaziest lawyer in DC. Gorelick is the creator of the WALL.

Ron is running a Guerrilla campaign. Basically a one man show. He will go wherever he can get his message out.

Go Ron!!

[Xenalyte]

As such, as older he gets as further he drifts from reality.

If you think this is a clear sentence, you might not want to be throwing stones about detachment from reality.

[DreamsofPolycarp]

What I hear you saying is that you object to him being on the show in the first place, since if he does anything other than just get up and walk out on some of the moonbat followers, then he has sullied himself.

There is something to be said for that, but I do disagree. I think it is more like a friend who sent me a "truther" video. I watched it, and then called him. Instead of arguing with him about it, I asked him "so why aren't you going with me to the gun show this weekend?" He is a lefty and was confused about my reply. I said "if the goverment is that big and evil don't you think it would be better for all involved if you ARMED yourself? I have." I told him I did not buy the scenario, not because I thought government morally incapable of such an act -- If you are going to go into hysterics, now is the time to do so -- but because I think they are so damn inept and disorganized they could never in a billion years pull something like that off and then keep it quiet.

I think that is the difference between me and the faithful elect here on FR. You guys really believe in the moral rectitude of our leaders ......, IF they have an (R) in front of their names. In that sense, you are mirror images of the moonbats on DU. They are convinced that the key is to get the right people into power, and that the republicans are satanically empowered. For a few (a VERY VERY VERY few), I believe this confidence in a politico may be justified. You don't think they would do something like that (although the dems might!), and I don't think they COULD do something like that....., but there is almost always skullduggery of a minor sort around that you could dig up if given investigative license. That is why the two groups need to be balanced in power.

You guys just keep romantically dreaming that the good guys will keep their white hats.

[Xenalyte]

Just a friendly hint . . . centering text reduces its readability.

[Xenalyte]

Truthers are below child rapists.

Since Dr. Paul has repeatedly disavowed them, your point is interesting but irrelevant.

[Xenalyte]

Do we really want a President that needs an English interpreter to tell the public what the President really meant to say everytime he opens his mouth?

Which would really be a change for us.

[TexasAg1996]

Jamie Gorelick and Richard Ben Veniste were on the 9/11 commission. It is only natural to think there is a coverup. Ben Veniste is the sleaziest lawyer in DC. Gorelick is the creator of the WALL.

As has been pointed out, that relates only to a cover-up of the Clinton administration's failures, not a MIHOP or LIHOP cover-up.

The caller specifically mentioned "this bogus garbage about terrorism." That's not someone who thinks that the complete story of 9/11 is not known. That's someone who thinks Middle Eastern terrorists didn't blow up the trade towers. You're entering MIHOP or LIHOP land at this point. And Ron Paul answered the question without any kind of challenge to that statement or any other.

[Xenalyte]

Two appearances does not a regular guest make.

[dirtboy]

Yes, I am the real big scary nightmare that FreeRepublic doesn’t seem to want around.

No, you're a nutcase who is stinking up the joint. Time for some ozone-based air freshener.

[CenTexConfederate]

I don’t think the complete story is known. That’s why all the heavy weights like Kissenger didn’t want the job. What do people in DC do best? Cover their rear ends.

[Xenalyte]

Loserdopians? Oh, my goodness, that is the funniest thing I have ever read. It’s like you took “libertarian” and “loser” and “dopian” (whatever that is) and made one word out of them. Did you think that up yourself? Because that is just too funny. I am cracking up and can hardly breathe from laughing so hard. Loserdopians. Wow, that’s funny. And original. No one’s ever called us that before. Hilarious!

[TexasAg1996]

You guys really believe in the moral rectitude of our leaders

Nice try, but that's a pretty poor attempt to mischaracterize our position.

Do I believe we know everything about 9/11, no.

Do I believe that Middle Eastern terrorists of Al Qeuda hijacked 4 planes and killed 3000 Americans, yes.

Does Ron Paul give credence and support to "truther" ideas when he answers a question about bogus terrorism and 9/11 and he talks about a cover-up, yes.

Anyone who responds to a question about terrorism being "bogus garbage" without challenging that assumption shouldn't be anywhere near to Commander-in-Chief position in the U.S.

Does Ron Paul give credence and support to "truther" ideas when he attends a "Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth" event, yes.

Your statement that he "just get up and walk out on some of the moonbat followers" glosses over the fact that this was a "truther" event. It wasn't some RNC or Republican event where he got ambushed by truthers. It was an event sponsored by truthers, and Paul went to it voluntarily!

[Bogtrotter52]

“Ron Paul is an idiot.”

A bit off subject. At the moment I am watching C-Span> A spokesman from Taxpayers for Common Sense is on and was just talking about the millions and millions of $$$ that Ron Paul requests in earmarks.

[George W. Bush]

Again, let’s put Malkin aside for a moment and respond to what Paul said please.

Translation:

"My own attack dog, Michelle Malkin, turns out to be the real certifiable Truther nut instead of Ron Paul but rather than acknowledge it like an honest person and apologize and retract my libelous thread and remarks about Ron Paul, I'd rather just change the subject to continue to libel Ron Paul because that would only be the only fair thing to do in my view."

[George W. Bush]

Lovebloggers, 8/6/2007

"Slap some sense into him [Ron Paul] is far different than beating him up."

Are you aware it's against the law to slap elderly people and children in this country? Do you personally strike elderly people or are you just defending those who like to play tough guy by talking about slapping senior citizens?

One would think this forum wouldn't allow posters to defend striking senior citizens.

[SJackson]

Thanks for the ping, I not terribly surprised.