Posted on 07/20/2007 4:27:18 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
NEW YORK A feature piece in this coming Sunday's New York Times Magazine on Republican candidate for president, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, portrays his followers as including a wild mix of "wackos" on both ends of the political spectrum. Paul, a libertarian, has been gaining media and public attention of late.
The cover line reads: "A Genuine Radical for President." The headline inside: "The Antiwar, Anti-Abortion, Anti-Drug-Enforcement-Administration, Anti-medicare Candidacy of Dr. Ron Paul."
The article closes with the author, Christopher Caldwell, attending a Ron Paul Meetup in Pasadena. The co-host, Connie Ruffley of United Republicans of California, admits she once was a member of the radical right John Birch Society and when she asks for a show of hands "quite a few" attendees reveal that they were or are members, too. She refers to Sen. Dianne Feinstein as "Fine-Swine" and attacks Israel, pleasing some while others "walked out."
Caldwell notes that the head of the Pasadena Meetup Group, Bill Dumas, sent a desperate letter to Paul headquarters: "We're in a difficult position of working on a campaign that draws supporters from laterally opposing points of view, and we have the added bonus of attracting every wacko fringe group in the country....We absolutely must focus on Ron's message only and put aside all other agendas, which anyone can save for the next 'Star Trek' convention or whatever."
Asked about the John Birch Society Society by the author, Paul responds, "Is that BAD? I have a lot of friends in the John Birch Society. They're generally well-educated and they understand the Constitution. I don't know how many positions they would have that I don't agree with."
The writer concludes that the "antigovernment activists of the right and the antiwar activists of the left" may have "irreconciable" differences. But "their numbers -- and anger -- are of considerable magnitude. Ron Paul will not be the next president of the United States. But his candidacy gives us a good hint about the country the next president is going to have to knit back together."
Among many other things, we learn from the article that Paul had never heard of "The Daily Show" until he was a guest and referred to the magazine GQ as "GTU." It also notes that he was the only congress member to vote against the Financial Antiterrorism Act and a medal to honor Rosa Parks, among many others tallies, based on principle, not politics. He also is praised by liberal Rep. Barney Frank as "one of the easiest" members to work with because "he bases his positions on the merits of issues."
Again: quite the fascinating little gaggle of supporters, there.
Heh.
“They forgot Anti-American”
Gosh. I haven’t spent much time on FR for a couple years. I never would have dreamed that a politician who is opposed to big government, and wishes to follow the Constitution and intent of the founding fathers would be called “anti-American,” on Free Republic. Not to mention, calling the John Birch Soc., probably the strongest anti-communist organization still existing, a bunch of kooks and fascists, while admitting they know very little about it is rather bizarre, to me. I have to wonder if it’s worth coming back for a while.
Maybe the forum name should be changed to “A Little Less Free Republic”?-Glenn
<img src=http://home.artbyec.com/misc1.htm
Relax, there are others... /grin
I followed the link. There are some odd theories and views on the site that I don’t share. But RP’s column was pretty rational. What do you think of it?
Nice take-down :)
It's gonna leave a nasty mark.
You couldn't possibly have read the entire one hundred and fifty page thread in the two or three minutes time between our respective postings; nor even a significant portion of same. Come back and see me when you've done so, please, and we'll continue from there.
"[...] odd theories and views..." Oh, gee. Ya really think...?
A quick search turned up a half dozen or so links for a "by Ron Paul", below in case someone wants to check other search engines, but the archives don't seem to be working, so I can't see if they're in fact by Paul. The weekly column I just don't know about other than references on Wiki and a few other places.
Puddleglum, you seem to be skeptical, as you should be. I am, and thus far the association may be only tangental. Though from a political perspective even if only 6 columns were printed, an elected official who allows that is a moron.
Do I take it from your tone that you're not convinced of the connection, it's not definitive to me. But if he is regularly printed there, which requires his participation, do you agree that it's a despicable thing to do, and a virtual disqualifier to most people to public office?
AM, apologies for the links, but they seem appropriate.
Saw your post 80, so it’s not necessary to answer my question. Jewhaters, racists, the scum of the earth, they’re welcome in the Paul camp and it’s fine to pursue them.
The anti-RP spleen is dangerous when it spills over into a criticism of some fairly traditional and well-founded conservative ideals (limitng governemnt, reducing spending, protecting civil liberties, only getting into wars for compelling reasons of national security). These are all debatable but defensible conservative positions.
Sorry it is not easy being a retard- so here is the picture I want to post- it is located here.
http://www.artbyec.com/misc1.htm
How do I do it- if you post it for me than I will take it from there.
Thanking you in Advance
Ed
You have not been following this blame America first, white flag waver very close have you?
Remember a couple of months ago, a poster informed us that there’s no need to have quotes before and after the URL? I still haven’t been able to break that habit!
Puddleglum, if you really don't know about AFP or the Barnes Review or Spotlight or the Institute for Historical Review or the National Alliance or Willis Carto or William Pierce or the former National Youth Alliance or the recent version of the Populist Party, you should learn before you embarass yourself by defending these people by dismissing them as simply having "odd theories".
That works for you and I. For a Presidential candidate, the fleas become cabinet members, a far more serious issue.
A tad more concerning than the JBS or his regular guesting on conspiracy shows, another freeper pointed out to me that he apparently writes a column for the American Free Press. For those not familiar with it that's Willis Cartos lightweight companion to the Barnes Review, a full fledged Holocaust denial publication. AFP founded by Willis Carto after the Spotlight and Liberty Lobby went belly up. Carto also known for morphing youth for Wallace into the National Alliance over the years, a group he lost control of to William Pierce.Gee, "another freeper" did that, eh? I don't suppose you could tell us who?
I haven't had time to look for what I'm told is a weekly commentary, I don't have easy access to the print version and saw only one Ron Paul article on their website (one too many), but if he's writing for Willis Carto, for distribution to the Barnes/National Alliance/IHR cadre of racists and Jew haters, obviously to gain their support, imo he's disqualified for public office and should be admonished by the Republican Party.Well, I typed into Google: American Free Press "Ron Paul" (forcing a match on "Ron Paul"). The very first link in the Google results appears to be the article you described, the only one on the American Free Press website. The page is marked: "(Issue #12, March 20, 2006)".
 |
  Ron's weekly message [5 minutes audio, every Monday] • Podcast • Weekly archive • Toll-free 888-322-1414 • |
       |
| Free Republic Ron Paul Ping List: Join/Leave |
your subsequent post: "Note my post 61. If true, and I'd like to find out if it is, Stormfront would be more appropriate.Yes, it's clear to me just how hard you were trying to find out if it was really true that Ron Paul is a vicious Nazi or not. You really worked yourself to exhaustion trying to find out, didn't you?
I will say that discretion is the better part of valor, and RP and his staff should be aware of the consequences of the company he keeps, even in print. I would be keen to hear his side, since he is generally lucid. And again, his columns themselves seem true-blue conservatism. I bet few one on this thread would disagree with their content. And so, it seems, we have aconundrum waiting for an answer. Dig away! I am not afraid of real facts.
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.