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.
No but thats what is flourishing there today.
Not socialist, not comunist, but democratic republics.
Witness Poland and Estonia and Latvia and CZ.
The Reagan legacy
Well put. Thanks.
I thought their home ground was Saudi, Egypt, Pakistan, etc. When will be building a democracy (which will elect islamists) in those nations?
I hear you but this kind of thing will lose the common voter.
They have handed sovereignty over to the Gov, and it has been that way all my life
That is the surface appearance yes.
He is doing a poor job making his case in public
Do you think invasion and nation building would have produced better results in these nations?
How did Nicaragua and Afghanistan work out?
I too support those who support our Constitution.
What is the current military objective?
Ron Paul would have been suited to the era of Calhoun and Webster when some politicians actually argued ideas.
To protect the democratic government. However, the primary objective of ‘Operation: Iraqi Freedom” was to overthrow the Saddam regime.
From what statements?! Dr. Paul would understand that the United States of America are not a single moral force. We are a Federation of States, some embracing--more or less, for none of our States are monolithic--various moral principles and cultures. Red China is a totalitarian monolith, which because economic reality has set in, is allowing some semblances of increasing freedom in areas where it is seen as safe or convenient. Only an imbecile would seek to equate the two. The tragedy is, and Dr. Paul is certainly aware of this, is that there are those who are trying to consolidate power and ideology in these United States--i.e., moving in precisely the wrong direction.
William Flax
You misunderstand me. Invasion always results in ugly blowback.
However, we must always stay engaged.
Sadly at the point in time it seems only the US is willing to engage the threat, and that makes us the only target for the sniping in this world.
We are not being unresonable. and the truth is that Iran has had a bellyfull of the Mullahs and if we can stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan the Iranian people are likely to come aboard.
This would divide the entire ME ideolgically. Its a good plan but risky.
We are very close to sucsess, I say press on
When he said, "...tear down this wall," which wall was he talking about? Walmart?
Cute. -- He was urging the Germans to tear down a Russian wall. -- Do you think he would have sent in US troops if they didn't?
Is the purpose of the US military to protect other people's governments from their own citizenry?
What part of that do you think isn't salable to the rest of the world?
Looking at the 231-year old history of the US, that is one of the purposes of the US military. Iraq is not unique.
Republicans targeted Ron paul for elimination long before last night. He’s the most consistently limited-gvoernemnt candidate in teh field, and Ed Gillespie declared when he was GOP chari a few years back that there is no longer any place for limited-government people in the GOP.
Paul’s commitment to stopping all unconstitutional Federal activity is simply unacceptable to either of the Establishment parties. Note his answer when asked about what programs to eliminate. He named three large Federal departments. That kind of talk will get you in trouble every time.
Well if Ed Gillespie said it it must be true. L0L
Seriously Duncun Hunter made me look twice when he suggested more Gov for the borders and the people cheered!
I was like what the hell? I dont want MORE Gov! Im uneasy with Homeland security too.
Once we form a dept it is hard to put the genie back in the bottle.
Exactly, which is why Ron Paul can never, ever be CIC.
Get a grip, - he never will be.
And remember, -- regardless of who is elected, we will not pull out of Iraq. - Bet on it, - this whole 'controversy' is all political posturing/electioneering.
We are there,and committed what is the alternative to seeing Iraq through?
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.