Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Ron Paul Smear Campaign
http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=7166 ^ | Doug Kendall

Posted on 05/17/2007 7:08:13 PM PDT by tpaine

The Ron Paul Smear Campaign

Doug Kendall

By now, it is painfully obvious to most people in the freedom movement that Republican presidential hopeful, Ron Paul, has been targeted for elimination—by his own Party. The politically-connected elite within the Republican Party, along with allied organizations and operatives, are working overtime to make sure that Ron Paul is burned at the stake for daring to speak the truth and defy the Good Ol' Boy system.

In all honesty, Dr. Paul should have known that he would be set up in the second debate—after he scored so high in poll after poll, following the first debate—and after he made it clear that he would not tow the neo-con, police-state, Giuliani-style "war" on terror line. Everyone from Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, so-called "conservative" news websites and columnists, and even local talk radio shows have done everything in their power to define Ron Paul as a "nut-job," "dope," and "moron," calling for his removal from the debates because his views are supposedly "dangerous" for the country.

Glenn Beck even went so far as to repeatedly label Ron Paul a "libertarian"—because there is always some kind of negativity associated with it, when Beck uses it—and then used that as a vehicle to beat up on Libertarians, in general, masterfully trying to kill two birds with one stone.

It's very telling, and very sad, watching these elitists attempt to exterminate those who favor increasing freedom by reducing the size and scope of government. The latest and most sickeningly obvious attempt to discredit Ron Paul, called "Big Outrage," is coming from Fox News.

Fox News anchor, John Gibson, recently stated that the second presidential debate got a little "spicy" after "Paul suggested that the US actually had a hand in the terrorist attacks." He even went so far as to attempt to link Paul to the 911 Truth crowd and Rosie O'Donnell—whose picture they flashed, twice, during the five-minute segment, along with the tagline, "ROSIE O'DONNELL STRONGLY BELIEVES IN 9/11 CONSPIRACY THEORIES." Gibson said that the 911 Truth movement has "infected people like Rosie O'Donnell, and one in three Democrats, and many other Americans—evidently, including Congressman Ron Paul." To make matters worse, he brought columnist and Fox News contributor, Michele Malkin, into the segment and said he would have expected to hear something like this from the Democrat debates. In perfect neo-con newsperson style, Malkin stated, "Ron Paul really has no business being on stage as a representative of Republicans," apparently because of the 911 Truth "virus." She then went on to further drive the point about 911 Truthers being mainly democrats, and mentioning something about a mental illness that typically affects people on the Left, called "Bush Derangement Syndrome."

I have lost no love on Democrats, either, but anyone who is even remotely familiar with Ron Paul knows that Malkin's attempt to link Paul to Democrats is laughable. If you look closely, you will see that Ron Paul's statements had nothing to do with the 911 Truth movement, but Fox News is spinning it in that fashion.

In so many words, Paul stated the obvious and basically repeated the findings of the 911 Commission's report:

Meddling in the affairs of others often fosters animosity and a desire for retaliation, and we would never allow other countries to do to us some of the same things that the US is doing to them—and it amazes me to see the scores of people who cannot seem to grasp those facts. The 911 Truth movement seeks to discover whether or not the Bush Administration had foreknowledge about, or actually had a hand in, the September 11th attacks—and that has nothing to do with Ron Paul's statements. 911 Truth deals with conspiracy, but Ron Paul spoke of consequences from our brand of foreign policy—two very different things.

Being an anarcho-capitalist, I do not care for government—small or otherwise—but Ron Paul is a step in the right direction, and he is certainly the most freedom-oriented and fiscally responsible candidate in the Republican stable—and it says a lot about the Republican elites who are using character assassination techniques to discredit and silence him, instead of debating the issue.

Karl Marx would be proud.

During a radio interview, Congressman Joe Wilson (R-SC) once said, "The hallmark of the Republican Party has always been freedom," but everything I've seen lately further confirms that his statement couldn't be further from the truth. I've always known, but this is just icing on the cake.

I've heard Republicans invite Libertarians to join the Republican Party, to work within a bigger, established Party, but this situation should serve as a warning to Libertarians, and any other freedom-loving types, that you should resist the temptation. Freedom has no place within the Republican Party (or the Democrat Party).

Doug Kendall is the host, scheduler & Webmaster of The Dangerous Doug Kendall Show. Listen to live streaming of the show at www.DangerousDoug.net.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: paulbearers; ronpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261 next last
To: tpaine

http://www.chrispeden.org


21 posted on 05/17/2007 7:19:53 PM PDT by isthisnickcool (I believe that's my stapler....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hsalaw

Isolationism didnt work in Jeffersons day and he responded to the Muslim barbary pirates by saying “We do not negotiate with terrorists” and then promptly formed the marines if my memory serves me


22 posted on 05/17/2007 7:20:40 PM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Who gives a rats ass why the stupid goatf****s want to kill us. We just need to kill them first.

I've been saying that since 9/11.
Actually, well before 9/11 I was calling for personal 'hits' on terrorist leaders. If we would have been killing the individual fanatics for the last 20 years or so, Iraq would have been unnecessary.

23 posted on 05/17/2007 7:22:26 PM PDT by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

I think the John Paul Smear campaign has done him in. Too many Americans found it offensive to see him carrying out his blame America for 911 smear


24 posted on 05/17/2007 7:22:32 PM PDT by tsowellfan (http://www.cafenetamerica.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal
Why does Ron Paul invoke the name of Reagan then? Reagan was the polar opposite of Ron Paul with regards to international affairs.

Reagan was no big fan of big gov't intervention in the affairs of others.

25 posted on 05/17/2007 7:25:52 PM PDT by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

The pirates of North Africa, operating variously with or without the approval of the nominal rulers of Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli, had long been a thorn in the side of the European powers. Even Britain, the rarely disputed ruler of the seas, paid tribute to these pirates. Due to Britain’s payments, colonial American merchants were rarely accosted, but after the peace of 1783 ships flying the Stars and Stripes were seen as easy prey. Fortunately for our young, cash-strapped nation, unable either to pay tribute or protect shipping, Portugal declared war on Algiers in 1785, sending a fleet to patrol the Strait of Gibraltar and prevent the Corsairs from passing into the Atlantic. In 1793, the war ended and in the last three months of that year eleven American ships were seized. Unable to raise funds to pay the ransom for the crews, the American negotiator was compelled to borrow from a Jewish moneylender living in Algiers to pay the nearly million-dollar ransom.

During President Washington’s administration, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson disagreed sharply over policy toward the Corsairs. Adams strongly favored paying off the pirates, arguing that a long and protracted war would financially ruin the young nation. Jefferson vehemently disagreed, appealing not only to an American sense of honor, but also to the notion that a single, decisive war might be more cost-effective than annual bribes for perpetuity. Not surprisingly, their subsequent administration policies reflected these beliefs. Adams was anxious to prevent conflict, and ensured payment of all demanded tribute. In addition, Adams even agreed to build and deliver two warships for the Algerian Corsairs. Since the Corsairs were considered more a force of nature than a foreign nation, the fact that this was contrary to the popular, “millions for defense, not one cent for tribute,” attitude toward French demands for bribes, was rarely noted. Yet, frustrated during tribute negotiations with Tunis, negotiator William Eaton wrote home that, “there is but one language which can be held to these people, and this is terror.”

In May of 1801, the Corsairs of Tripoli became restless and declared war on the United States, figuring they could increase their annual tribute. Their disorganized fleet passed into the Atlantic but was chased back by a recently dispatched American squadron. The Americans cruised the Mediterranean, evacuating American merchantmen and winning several engagements with the Corsairs. Later that year Sweden declared war on the Tripolitans and lent considerable support to the American blockade of Tripoli. The combined fleet of Swedish and American, and infrequently Danish, ships was unwilling to bombard the city until early 1802 when President Jefferson ordered that the war be pursued with greater vigor. Despite occasional bombardment, as the blockade continued, it became impossible for the large American ships to prevent some of the smaller, faster Corsair gunboats from slipping through. The Americans wanted to draw the pirates into a large decisive battle, but their attempts proved fruitless. When Sweden made peace that year, the blockade collapsed.

Following the abandonment of the blockade, a series of unfortunate incidents made the American position increasingly difficult. An American captain killed the personal secretary of the British governor of Malta in a duel, straining relations with that important source of respite and supply. In early 1803, an accidental explosion aboard an American ship killed nineteen men. In May of that year, a large squadron of American warships was assembled and proceeded to Tripoli to destroy the Corsairs’ fleet entirely. Large guns protected the anchored fleet, but marines landed close to the walls of the city to set fire to many of the docked ships as they were pelted with stones from the town’s inhabitants. However, a heroic group of Tripolitans endured bombardment from the squadron and small-arms fire from the marines and extinguished the fires.

In October of that year, a large U.S. man-of-war, Philadelphia, gave chase to a Corsair ship trying to break the blockade, but was lured into an uncharted reef. The ship was paralyzed and overtaken and put into the service of the pirates. The following February, eight marines sailed a small merchant vessel alongside the anchored Philadelphia, killed twenty Corsairs, and destroyed the warship without any loss of life of their own side. Upon hearing of the attack Admiral Horatio Nelson called it, “the most bold and daring act of the age.” Yet the blockade remained largely ineffective.

Early in 1804, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies declared war on Tripoli, lending a number of small, maneuverable gunboats that were thought to be helpful in subduing the pirates. On August 3, the American-led force began an all-out attack, sailing into the harbor and bombarding the city at direct range. The Americans aboard the smaller gunboats decided to counter the pirates’ standard technique and approached the enemy ships fast, boarding them and engaging in hand to hand combat. After destroying much of the town’s fortifications, several gunboats, and a large mosque, the squadron withdrew.

Bombardment of the town achieving little besides massive civilian casualties, a change in strategy was in order. A small force of marines was sent to Alexandria, Egypt, to locate the original hereditary ruler of Tripoli, with the intent of restoring him to the throne. Upon finding him, they raised a mercenary army of Arabs and Greeks and began a several hundred-mile march towards Tripoli from the land. After a difficult march across the Libyan Desert and a bloody victory in the outlying town of Derne, the marines were informed by messenger that the war was over. The treaty that was signed guaranteed the return of American prisoners but changed little. The difficulties with the Barbary States, including a series of confrontations with Algiers in 1814-17, would continue until France brought the era to an end by invading and colonizing most of North-West Africa. Notably, Algiers in 1954 proved to be the forerunner to the type of war being waged against the United States today.


26 posted on 05/17/2007 7:27:32 PM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Why would the Republicans want to eliminate Ron Paul from the debates. Let him say what he has to say. On domestic issues he is WAY more conservative than conservatives.

And we have so many RHINOs these days, at least paul says what he means. He makes some excellant points.

Just because we don’t agree with an isolationist policy does not mean we can not re-assess our foregin policy to make it most advantageous for us.


27 posted on 05/17/2007 7:27:36 PM PDT by Recovering Ex-hippie (We need a troop surge in New Orleans and Philly!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Reagan was no big fan of big gov't intervention in the affairs of others.

Whatever. Afghanistan, Grenada, Central America happened in a parallel universe.

28 posted on 05/17/2007 7:28:08 PM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mission9
I have no objection to killing Osama; -- nor does Ron Paul.
29 posted on 05/17/2007 7:29:16 PM PDT by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
It is increasingly obvious that the only thing that the pseudo-Conservatives attacking Dr. Paul have to offer is aspersions and insult. In the past two days, there has been a virtual absence of any intellectual content in the attacks. Generally, they misrepresent what he says, then oversimplify the issues involved, and hurl sloganized rant in response to the straw man created.

The fact is that neither Paul's Republican foes, nor his likely Democratic foes in the future, have any adequate response to his basic position on the Constitution, economics, or traditional American values. All they have is invective and abuse. Paul is completely correct in pointing out that the Constitution does not authorize most of the grandiose schemes that others have endorsed.

Will Paul fare well in the Primaries? Well, who expected Bill Clinton to get his Party's nomination in May of 1991? The fact that Paul does so well in the straw polls after the so-called "Debates," where he is limited to 30 and 60 second sound bites, where his natural advantage over the sloganeers does not even come into play, strongly suggests that he has a real chance, if he can get the funding for some serious media time. The best chance that he has to get that is a continuation of the ridiculous posturing of the Giulianis and Sean Hannitys, which are provoking the real outrage of true Conservatives and Libertarians.

Time will tell.

William Flax

30 posted on 05/17/2007 7:31:25 PM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering Ex-hippie

No one has eliminated him. He has time to get his message out


31 posted on 05/17/2007 7:33:15 PM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

We used to have something called “The Monroe Doctrine” that promised war to anyone meddling in the Americas.

Paul’s critics won’t admit that other countries, religions, whatever, could have a similar anger at our meddling in what they consider their own back yards. If they do admit it privately they are still eager to play a demagogue’s game in vilifying Ron Paul.

I’m not a Paul supporter, but he’s a thoughtful man who deserves not to be mau maued.


32 posted on 05/17/2007 7:33:32 PM PDT by Pelham (Treason, not just for Democrats anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
Should we base our foreign policy around the wishes of Osama bin Laden?

No. -- Who do you know that says we should?

Because that?s what a Ron Paul presidency would entail.

Get a grip. Paul will never be president.

Paul likes to lecture us about history but he seems to not understand that appeasement has never worked.

You're simply imagining that he is for "appeasement".

33 posted on 05/17/2007 7:33:44 PM PDT by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Personal hits are pipe dreams when the targets are gang leaders like bin Laden or national dictator like Saddam. It’s wishful thinking. They don’t make it that easy.
34 posted on 05/17/2007 7:34:46 PM PDT by elhombrelibre (Al Qaeda knows Iraq's strategic value, yet the Democrats work day and night for our defeat there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan

Ron Pauls’ position is quite simple. If it aggrieves bin Laden, it is verboten for the United States. That is the position of a cowardly nut.


35 posted on 05/17/2007 7:34:46 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal
Why does Ron Paul invoke the name of Reagan then? Reagan was the polar opposite of Ron Paul with regards to international affairs.

He ought to be invoking George Washington's Farewell Address which does fit his views.

36 posted on 05/17/2007 7:35:28 PM PDT by Pelham (Treason, not just for Democrats anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

Oh, while you are examining the distortions in the time space continuum warp that happened under the Gipper, don’t forget supporting Solidarity in Poland and verbally discrediting the ultimate leadership of the Union of Soviets by calling them the evil empire.

Ron Paul hates that kind of intervention. Just let history play itself out, we’re passive, us chickens.


37 posted on 05/17/2007 7:35:34 PM PDT by sgtyork (Liberalism worthy of the name emphasizes freedom of the individual, democracy and the rule of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Reagan was no big fan of big gov't intervention in the affairs of others.

When he said, "...tear down this wall," which wall was he talking about? Walmart?

38 posted on 05/17/2007 7:36:32 PM PDT by Rocko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Here here.....


39 posted on 05/17/2007 7:37:00 PM PDT by svcw (There is no plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pelham
He ought to be invoking George Washington's Farewell Address which does fit his views.

Rosie O'Donnell and Michael Moore would be more fitting.

40 posted on 05/17/2007 7:37:11 PM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson