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

Michelle Malkin ^ | May 19, 2007 | Michelle Malkin

[Lovebloggers]

CALLER: I want a complete, impartial, and totally independent investigation of the events of September 11, 2001 . I’m tired of this bogus garbage about terrorism. Ask Michael Meacher about how he feels about this bogus war on terrorism. Can you comment on that please?

HON. DR. RON PAUL: Well, that would be nice to have. Unfortunately, we don’t have that in place. IT WILL BE A LITTLE BIT BETTER NOW WITH THE DEMOCRATS NOW IN CHARGE OF OVERSIGHT. But you know, for top level policy there’s not a whole lot of difference between the two policies so a real investigation isn’t going to happen. But I think we have to keep pushing for it. And like you and others, we see the investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on.

[thecabal]

Where does this "two appearances" meme come from? On this website, there are at least three interviews listed with Alex Jones himself (April 10, May 31, July 12):
http://www.ronpaulaudio.com/

Believe it or not, I used to listen to Alex Jones before 9/11. If I remember correctly, Paul used to be a guest on his show at that time as well, but I can't verify that. I guess you could say I'm an anti-truther, because I stopped listening to that Alex Jones crap after 9/11.

This thread is also a real eye-opener:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=7094
Where some Paul supporters want to distance him from the truther movement, there are also a large contingent who see him as a champion of the movement. A few also insightfully state that the truther movement is one of his largest blocs of support.

Why are you guys trying to spin the fact that Ron Paul has chosen to align himself with the truther movement (whether he "officially" supports the conspiracy theories or not)? If he really though the 9/11 conspiracy movement was so disgusting, he would not give his time to known truthers such as Alex Jones and George Noory. These guys have not made their views any secret, so he can't claim ignorance on this one.

[Xenalyte]

Three appearances instead of two. Okay, I guess that makes him a Truthinesser, all right.

>>Why are you guys trying to spin the fact that Ron Paul has chosen to align himself with the truther movement (whether he “officially” supports the conspiracy theories or not)?<<

Because Dr. Paul has disavowed them.

[thecabal]

Three appearances instead of two. Okay, I guess that makes him a Truthinesser, all right.

Be snarky all you want, but it doesn't look good when you can't even get the basic facts right when trying to shoot down the truther connection.

Because Dr. Paul has disavowed them.

By going on Alex Jones' show multiple times? By speaking at a 9/11 truther conference? He has a funny way of disavowing them.

[Xenalyte]

That’s a helluva standard, that a candidate has to agree 100% with the views of every group he speaks in front of.

Which candidate would you say meets that standard?

[CenTexConfederate]

Alex Jones is an Austin radio institution. KLBJ AM carries his show, the same station that runs Rush Limbaugh. The station advertises for his show during the Limbaugh program. Alex is nuts and that’s why people listen. He is very entertaining. Trying to smear Ron with the truther label is a sign of desperation. Ted Nugent has been on the show several times. Is he a truther??

[OneHun]

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

Thank you for your criticism regarding my grammar. Well, English is my third language. I thought this post was about Ron Paul, and in connection with it, people can agree or respectfully disagree with each other.

[soccermom]

LOL! You dodged the point entirely! Whether or not she appears on BOR is irrelevant. She is a guest who often vehemently disagrees with BOR. (Incidentally, that is a far cry from the way Paul panders to the likes of Alex Jones). Take No Prisoners accused her of lying, based on the fact that he couldn't access the video. All I did was supply the video which proves she wasn't lying. The "taken out of context" excuse is wearing thin. How many times is Paul going to pander to the Truthers before you guys get honest about what he is doing?

[TexasAg1996]

That’s a helluva standard, that a candidate has to agree 100% with the views of every group he speaks in front of.

The "Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth" is a "truther" organization. It's not like Ron Paul was asked to speak to the local Rotary Club or Chamber of Commerce, where you'd expect people to have wide views on various topics. He voluntarily went to a program put on by 9/11 truthers.

Your argument is kinda like saying "David Duke went to a KKK meeting, but he doesn't agree with 100% of what they stand for." When you voluntarily attend an event planned by 9/11 truthers about 9/11, I think it's safe to say that you might agree with the overall concept or topic of the event.

[Oberon]

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

I like to think of it as playing "good cop/bad cop" with the electorate.

[soccermom]

Of good grief, you know what I meant. Your response to 185. That is pretty apparent when the reply is to post 191. So stop being deliberately obtuse and answer the question.

[SJackson]

I find jveritas to be a knowledgeable poster.

This isn't the first time you've stated there's a conspiracy of posters here at FR who's purpose is to undermine Ron Paul.

You've implied I'm a part of it, but you slither off every time you're asked for details.

You appear to be another conspiracy moonbat. That's not helpful in defending your candidate from the charge of either being a conspiracy moonbat or looking for support amongst them.

AM, I think the characterization of jveritas is BS, if not, perhaps it's time for you to weigh in on various posters like jveritas and myself who may be running a conspiracy here on FR. Doesn't make FR look particularly well.

[thecabal]

That’s a helluva standard, that a candidate has to agree 100% with the views of every group he speaks in front of.

That's a very dishonest debating tactic. You are putting words in my mouth. Of course no such standard exists. But where does one draw the line? Does that mean that Ron Paul will pimp himself to any media, no matter how disgusting their content might be? Either way, it doesn't paint him in a good light.

[thecabal]

You already said this. Besides, as I mentioned before, I listened to Alex Jones on SW and the internet before he was really even a blip on the national radar. I know exactly who Alex Jones is. As far as Ted Nugent, you tell me? I don’t know the guys stand on the truther movement. Am I supposed to recoil because he is some supposedly some “uber-conservative” that also went on the Alex Jones show? Besides, that’s a non-argument. Ted Nugent is not running for POTUS, Dr. Paul is.

[jveritas]

SJackson

Thank you very much for the support. Anyway, the mods took care of this guy.

[soccermom]

Ron Paul, like me, and like historical conservatives IS NOT slave to the idea that "republicans are good and democrats are bad." LOL! I don't know how you can speak for historical conservatives, but I have no doubt that you and Paul agree that democrats aren't bad. When it comes to things like surrendering to the enemy, getting high, getting abortions, getting hookers, etc., you guys think democrats are pretty darn KEWL! It wasn't necessary for you to explain that to me, but thanks for sharing!

[I see my hands]

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

I don't know why you're posting to me. I disavowed the posting in forums a long time ago and have never done it since. It's interesting.

[Xenalyte]

Check your post 166 for a refresher.

[SJackson]

I’ve been on the receiving end of the same conspiracy nonsense.

[Xenalyte]

Boy, you sure are assuming a lot about DreamsofPolycarp.

For the record, it’s tacky tacky tacky to put words in people’s mouths.