Posted on 12/18/2007 7:41:42 AM PST by mnehring
YouTube video via Drudge- Ron Paul quote this morning on Fox and Friends- "When fascism comes it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. "
I endorse similar warnings when it comes to medicine - fascism could well manifest itself through the subversion of the medical establishment, which a great deal of public trust is also invested in. There are other avenues susceptible to subversion as well. Fascism is inherently more insidious than its cousin, communism - historically it appears under veil of legitimacy.
However, I don't think the comment was appropriate in the context used, and Ron Paul should get a lot of flack for making a pretty low attack. I will not bestow my sympathy to Ron Paul for taking additional flack from those who misunderstand the original quote.
**************************
And yet you are the one who pinged Jim Robinson. Ironic, isn't it?
The federal government is meant to operate under the direct authority of the sovereign citizens of the United States, who, of course, if they're wise and want to continue in liberty, are to operate under the laws of their Sovereign Creator.
That's what the founding paragraph of our free republic says, after all:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."
How can anyone take this dude serious?
I think I read that his degree was in communications and that he had a year or so of theology at a seminary, but not a degree. So I don't think he even has a degree in religion. That's if my source was correct, and clearly even Huckabee as the source is not a sure thing on this one, so...That mistake is something Huckabee should explain.
Regardless, it doesn't make him worse than many of the other candidates. If everyone wants to get behind Duncan Hunter, great. But voters are liking Huckabee and his positions are more acceptable to me than Romney, Guiliani, Ron Paul, McCain, or Thompson. Huckabee is not as fiscally conservative as I would like. My experience is that even those who talk about being fiscally conservative generally end up less than I would like. Huckabee isn't a lot worse than anyone else. I don't like his position on immigration. But what about Bush's? We all voted for him. Huckabee isn't perfect, but I will support him if he is the guy other people want.
Blame those who wanted to force social conservatives to vote for Rudy T. McRomney. They are the reason Huckabee is on the rise. It doesn't mean a solid fiscal AND social conservative wouldn't be better. But when forced to choose, some of us will choose social conservatism over fiscal conservatism.
The man that could bring it all together is Duncan Hunter.
I think that's a stretch, but even if he think's he's God's candidate of choice, how does that make him a fascist? Huckabee has lot's of faults, but I don't see him as a potential tyrant.
Oh my gosh, the video in my profile told of this nuttiness ;-).
It won't be wrapped in anything. It will be plain for all to see on it's face. Stop using the vocabulary of the left.
NFP
In fact he denies the existance of any ideological motivation in Islamism. Yet relates fascism, in a loose sense alive today in numerous Muslim nations, to Christianity.
Did you mean to say "putz"?
“At least he’s a patriotic Christian fascist.”
A cross in one hand and a flag in the other, but no understanding of the concept of individual liberty between them.
That’s not patriotism - it’s the symbols of it.
He is not sleazy, or "looney", and he is sincere.
Having said that, sincere or not, I disagree with him abjectly on the Iraq war, and war on terror (which in fact is a war with radical Islam). We have taken the fight to the enemy and have created fly traps where we are destroying them and doing it in such a way that their attention is and must be riveted on where our soldiers are...and thus they are not able to attack here as they otherwise would like. In the process, we are also making allies and liberating people from tyranny.
Radical Islam hates our way of life and liberty. They are unwilling to let people freely choose to be good, moral, people (with the unfortunate chance that some will choose otherwise). That liberty is a threat to them and their established dogma...and they will fight us tooth and nail, wherever we are, in any case, whether we are involved in their countries or not. They see liberty's spread as a threat to their way of life...and it is.
That is a major disagreement I have with Paul and at this point in history is one I cannot overlook in my vote in the primaries (though I would vote for Paul over Hillary)...but outside of that major issue, in most other areas, Paul very strong in his love for and defense of the constitution and the proper role of government under it.
Thanks for bringing up Ayn Rand.
I am disappointed that Ron Paul quoted Sinclair Lewis, probably thinking of his best known novel, “Babbit,” about a hypocritical preacher. Not many politicians could recall an obscure quotation in response to an unanticipated question. But, those who would be President, should be very careful not to offend the sensibilities of those whose support he would need.
I knew Ayn Rand, and Sinclair Lewis was no Ayn Rand. He was an anti-fascist only because he and his ilk lined up with the Republicans (i.e., the communists) during the Spanish Civil War. He was not in favor of freedom, democratic government, the free enterprise system, or traditional family values. He was a cynic who disdained everything American, an avante garde psuedo-intellectual with a poisoned mind.
Ayn Rand, on the other hand, featured heroic characters in her novels. And, as for other libetarian writers, I would mention Rose Wilder Lane of “The Little House on the Prairie” series, and Robert Heinlein (e.g., “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress”). These writers were anti-communists as well as anti-fascists. They were pro-American and pro-freedom.
We should draw our analogies from wholesome sources, not from morally bankrupt ones.
“I wonder how the Paulistinians will see their messiah now, since it seems he thinks loving America or Christ is to be considered “fascism?””
Read message #7 and think for a moment if you might need to restate your assumptions...
Yes, he could have expanded his comment to include blacks and Jews.
I believe it operates under the direct authority of the States. Are you willing to let each man determine the wisdom of his own actions according to his own perceptions of his Creator, and His laws?
Stupid politically to attack the flag in a time of war and the cross at Christmas by stating that they will be the roots of fascism in the United States. He does so by quoting Sinclair Lewis, an athiest and a socialist, who wrote works attacking small town American values and people, capitalism, and religion.
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.