(Clock image by simpologist.)
One of the more interesting phenomena of the past few months has been watching the unheralded rise of Ron Paul among those Republicans and libertarians who are OK with most of the current de facto GOP platform (especially that bit of catering to bigotry known as “the Southern Strategy“) but want out of Iraq. These people, who used to be comfy with the racist and anti-Semitic isolationist Pat Buchanan, have now latched onto Ron Paul and are trying to get him elected president.
Ron Paul is touted as being very “pro-Constitution” and “pro-states’ rights”. Except that he isn’t — at least, not where religion, family planning and marriage are concerned (emphases mine):
According to Ron Paul himself (via Brent Rasmussen)
Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few.
It should be noted right at the beginning that Ron Paul consistently decries “secularism” and “secularists,” though he more often uses the label “secular Left.” This, perhaps more than many of his arguments, makes it clear where stands: squarely and unambiguously against a secular government, secular laws, and a secular America. This helps put him in the same camp as the extremist Christian Right.
The second thing to note is that there isn’t a single word in the above that’s true. Ron Paul is employing a falsehood which has been very popular with theocrats of the Christian Right who seek to deceive voters about what secularism is and what the separation of church & state is all about. Ron Paul has either been duped by those deceivers, or he knows better yet is actively participating in the deception.
No one has launched any court cases seeking to drive religion “from public view.” There have been no organized efforts to prevent people from promoting religion in public, from having religious images on their front lawns, or engaging in religious evangelism in the community. What’s actually been happening is that people have tried to stop the “public,” which is to say public funds and institutions, from promoting, supporting, or endorsing the religion of just some of the citizens. Usually those offering dishonest claims about this rely upon ambiguity in the word “public” (in public view vs. publicly funded), but Ron Paul doesn’t even do this — his is an unambiguously false claim.






Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Uno?
Where do I sign?
Hi PW
Phoenix Woman!!!
Singles?
Bravo, PW!
And he raised $4M in one day? I think I heard that.
Somebody is really pushing for him hard, he raised what, 4 million bucks in one day?
I love the smell of desperate Republicans in the evening.
Saw this little gem on Ron Paul today too:
Hi, PW! Always good to see you.
Don’t you think most folks supporting him are hanging that support on his anti-Iraq stand?
of course, that supports the point of your post, that most people don’t know about the rest of his views.
Editor of The Village Voice is ripping Ghouliani apart on KO!!
Evening, PW!
I am glad you posted this. I have been seeing way to many positive comments about Ron Paul on Lefty Blogs. I have to assume it is a result of lack of curiosity and laziness. The info about this man is easily obtainable.
He is your man if you believe in Social Darwinism, that public education should be abolished, and you are nativist, racist and anti-Semitic. That just for starters.
Ron Paul with his antiwar stand is the most dangerous Presidential Candidate to the Left. I see his signs all over Seattle and he has more signs than any possibly all the GOP and Dem candidates together.
He could pull away many of our 70%ers. Only Bush’s pride is stopping him from getting actual 30%er votes.
His third party candidacy could hurt us too!
Nanny-boo-boo, I threw a snowball… 8-)
Bustednuckles @ 8
The only stand I think any of us agree with Paul on is the war. He serves only one other good purpose, to make the other Rethuglicans crap their pants. To make chaos out of the Rethuglican primary because the Daddy party can’t stand chaos. Hopefully he’ll help along the implosion of the Rethuglican party. I hope everyone else figures that out.
Ron Pauls idea of individual liberty is Gunsmoke.
TexBetsy @ 9
Keep harping on this topic Seattle voter ignorance of his postions might be nationwide. Ignorance of the Presidential Candidates take on the issues is our biggest enemy.
PW – Are folks like Scaife supporting Paul financially?
Eureka Springs @ 16
Ole West Justice…
I like Ron Paul’s views on Iraq. But there are no Republicans, including Paul, I would vote for. In 39 years of voting I have voted the straight Demo ticket everytime. And God help me, if HRC is the nominee, I’ll vote for her. But the Senator is a huge disappontment.
Things Come Undone @ 13
His candidacy just adds more to the theory that most people don’t look at positions all that much. Just look at how many people believe Hillary is the most liberal candidate in the race.
The point about how he uses secularism is well noted. But your assertion about Roe and states rights could use some clarity. The issue of RvW’s constitutionality seems to me to be a separate issue of whether or not it’s good to defend such a right. I’m not suggesting that we just trust the guy either. But as a liberal and libertarian I’m not yet convinced that this guy would be worse than the dem front runners. I’m willing to be convinced too… but not without sufficient reason that dems will protect the constitution.
Greenwald, otoh, says:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…..index.html
which is why the accomplishments of his candidacy are so exciting. Ron Paul and Kuchinich should team up and run on an independent ticket – so for once there would be a real choice for voters, rather than just a (D) neo-con vs. an (R) neo-con.
The absolutely hysterical part of this is my Dads name is Ron Paul.
CTuttle @ 19
He doesn’t look anything like James Arness. ;-)
Eureka Springs @ 18
Actually, it’s the conservative netroots, not astroturf, either…!
Oklahoma kiddo @ 20
I slipped and voted Green a couple of times…
(((((((PW!)))))))
Goopers don’t hold well thought-out beliefs – they identify with symbols. They treat themselves like NASCAR vehicles and plaster themselves with ‘badges’ of identity.
They can’t really explain anything sensibly, but they’ll fight if they think someone is making fun of them for being stupid.
They want so badly to ‘belong’ that they’ll sign-up for Torture Jokes, Racist Code Words, Chortle at Rush and O’Reilly, cheer for Coulter’s Arrogance, and put W stickers on their cars.
Just don’t ask them why. They don’t know.
“Just look at how many people believe Hillary is the most liberal candidate in the race.”
Pretty sad.
I think there is a good chance that Ron Paul represents the future of the Republican Party. When the economy goes into the shitter, and the “restraining “influence of the Plutocrats is removed; what is left is a Ron Paul Republican. If that message is covered with a shell of economic populism; watch out.
CTuttle @ 27
We (lahoma and me) won’t hold it against you ;0)
I hope the mods are ready..A less than positive Ron Paul thread attracts the wackos like flies on shit.
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 21
The MSM is responsible for Hilary’s false Lefty cred just as they are responsible for Ron Paul getting a pass on racism.
Perhaps Hillary will make a good president.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 31
I left a question in EPU land…
sporkovat @ 23
Excuse me.. Kucinich is not a racist for starters.. One doesn’t need to be a fan of Kucinich to point out the your statement is egregious in its implied insinuations about Kucinich. Please read up on him and reconsider you positions.
Hey, everyone! Sorry I’m late — the refresh wasn’t refreshing for me.
How is everyone this fine Wednesday evening?
Eureka Springs @ 36
The one thing I’m enjoying this cycle is the mass exodus from the center to the fringes…! 8-)
I think that this is an election where people will pay more attention to the big issues end the war, healthcare etc which will hurt Hilary. Ron Paul is on the right side of that issue but the media is giving him a pass on racism.
Which means he could steal our 70%ers! We need to harp on this! Why doesn’t the media ask him those embarrassing questions about racism?
Are they on the payroll?
if i had made not voting for a bigot an absolute requirement… i wonder how many votes i’d have to take back.
no excuses for for anything ron paul has actually done or said (and quite frankly i’m confused as to what he’s actually said and done vs. what some of his supporters have said and done)… but it looks to me like a different standard is being applied to paul. i don’t get it.
What are the specific, I said specific, qualities we are looking for in a president?
Which is, of course, why so many conservatives are flocking to him.
buncha flockin’ lemmings
If handled right, Ron Paul could be useful in two ways: a) to throw the Repug contest into chaos,and b) to maybe give the Dems some cover for being anti-war. However, the Democrats never play things right, so it will likely turn out bad for them. As usual.
Phoenix Woman, Thanks for the post. Because Paul wants out of Iraq immediately some are blinded by his intolorant positions.
Radiofreewill is on a tear this evening!
Sheesh Lou ‘The Beaners are Comin’ Dobbs and now Ron ‘Shoot the IRS’ Paul on the site!
Yer gonna need a pressure washer to blow off all the slime!
CTuttle @ 35
Except for bridge, kiddo is the only one I play games with. ;0)
lahoma
Oklahoma kiddo @ 41
Honesty and integrity, would be nice… Parsing the definition of ‘is’ is not high on my list…
CTuttle @ 47
Ability to speak in complete sentences.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 47
Spades? ;-)
selise @ 40
selise..David Neiwert has a post today at Orcinus
that talks about Ron Paul. David has been looking at Paul for quite awhile and at the end of the current thread he has links. Read David and the decide. I think David has a good track record of exposing “hate” and I don’t think he attacks people for no reason.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 34
She cares about America and Americans deeply.
Whooie. Keith gets to break the news about Rosie O’Donnell and MSNBC! After the commercial.
Eureka Springs @ 36
your misunderstandings are significant. The two would make a great independent ticket because they are opposed to imperialist militarism … which none of the other candidates, except Mike Gravel are.
If Ron Paul teams up on a ticket with George Ringo, he may be unbeatable. That’s how dumb people are…
Ron Paul has this statement on his official RP2008 website on the issues page:
Dang, KO was feeding us a teaser about Rosie! Replace F*cker? Puh-lease… ;-)
Loo Hoo. @ 52
Perhaps you are right. ;0)
Ed*ard Teller @ 55
He also has a very loud dog whistle.
CTuttle @ 35
I left something for y’all downstairs, too.
Bob in HI
mroom @ 55
How’s he feel about birth control pills? If Bush nominated Ron Paul for Health and human services, we’d all be calling our Senators to block the nomination.
Hi Loo Hoo!
The abomination of Torture never goes away. Each new ‘break-out’ in Civilizations just adds to the lore of Man’s Evil Actions Towards His Fellow Man.
People don’t forget about it. Torture defines those who sponsor it. The votes of the Goopers and their surrogates will be cast for all to see for all time.
We should make it a Goal to oust anyone who votes for it by 2012 – whether we can get them to Court, or not – supporting Torture is not how We want the World to know US.
Let the Goopers and our Dem Goopers go down with Bush.
I guarantee that any opponent running against a Gooper will have a Silver Election Bullet if that Gooper votes for Torture.
Loo Hoo. @ 52
Loo Hoo have you been reading eriposte at the Left Coaster?
TvNewser rumored yesterday that the axe could fall on Fucker Tarlson at any moment.
Paul won’t be the candidate- most goopers support the war.
I have much to learn but I understand.. They are polar opposites on what government should do..
Kucinich is for:
Government support of unions and strong labor
Education through collage for all
Universal/single payer type health care
Womans rights
Civil rights regardless of race or sexual orientation.
Ron Paul is not for any of the above..
Perhaps they could work together on defense issues but I suspect much of their compatibility ends there.
No Rosie on MSNBC. I’ve never heard her or seen her on TV, so no opinion here.
bobschacht @ 60
Bob, I couldn’t find it…
radiofreewill @ 62…Should I re-post the US Law dealing with torture? The irony is, as good Thugs, they included a death penalty.
smapdi @ 64
The sooner, the better…
No, Steve, I will. I see The Left Coaster is on Jane’s blogroll.
A.Citizen @ 46
Think of it as the Flypaper Theory. (Remember when the PNAC Platoon pitched that thing? It was a GOOD thing, they said, that so many folks from outside Iraq were going to Iraq to fight our troops — as if there were a finite number of terrorists and that our actions hadn’t been the biggest terrorist-incubator imaginable.)
Steve-AR @ 69
That they did! Divine retribution…?
Prince the Bronze for suing his fan sites for posting his likeness without paying.
Rust Limpballs the Silver for admitting his producers told him not to mock and criticize the young person who testified on Global Warming.
Brit Hume WPITW for spinning how the flights from Syria to Iraq are fuller so that means things are better in Iraq, not that the refugees have been sent back to Iraq.
sporkovat @ 54
They might agree on the war (though likely for different reasons) but they would agree on nothing, and I do mean nothing, else. They would want to kill each other if left alone in the same room for more than 15 minutes.
For Bob in HI (once more i think). Aloha.
lahoma
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hU_hwOD61_w
by harry owens. 1934.
Steve-AR @ 50
well, i wasn’t claiming that paul isn’t a racist.. only that i think a different standard is being used to judge him here.
but if you want to change the subject to what has been posted at ornicus… i haven’t read today’s post yet, but i think i’ve read everything else david has written on paul, and i don’t think the paul’s been shown to be any more of a bigot than most politicians. it mostly seems to me to be a condemnation by association… (which you will see if you read the comments at orcinus – since my comments are there for the world to see). maybe today’s post is different.
and p.s. i don’t condemn anyone because a trusted writer attacks them. i look at the evidence they present and evaluate it for myself.
smapdi @ 64
That is Great News! The MSM is lossing the abilty to carry Wingers with no ratings.
30% is not a big enough audience for advertisers.
Loo Hoo. @ 71
link
linklink
link
Here are a few links to get you started.
Okay, just for the sake of arguement.
The popular perception of Ron Paul from the MSM is that he is pro-constitution and anti-Iraq war. While the rest may be true, it is pushed back, so many Paul supporters likely support him for just those two reasons. And these supporters are probably members of the GOP.
So if this stuff is polling so well within the ranks of the GOP, then it means these issues are winning issues. Not primary issues. But General Election issues. Maybe Nancy and Harry should take note.
selise @ 77
fair enough..I respect your opinion
…and all this time I thought we were talking about RuPaul
Phoenix Woman @ 72
Very well said, as per usual. Thanks for the post.
Steve-AR – You posted our own US War Crimes law in the earlier thread, which may play a part in BushCo being brought to Justice, but I really think we’ll see a multi-Country pleading before the World Court in the Hague, where Bush and Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld will be held accountable to Global Standards like the Geneva Conventions.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 76
Leilani is a popular name…
Here’s why I hurled a snowball… A Truckload appeared and we all had some fun… 8-)
http://www.hawaiitribune-heral…..ocal01.txt
punaise @ 82
Wiping coffee off the monitor.
Eriposte (Left Coaster):
Let’s recap. Sen. Clinton, contrary to portrayals that she wrote a completely unconditional “blank check”, actually voted to limit the Congressional war authorization to one year, supported tax increases to pay for war, and supported the creation of a report on possible manipulation of intelligence in the lead-up to the war – back in the 2002-2003 timeframe. Sen. Edwards voted against each of these measures. Now, this does not in any way justify Sen. Clinton’s other votes in favor of the Iraq resolution, but I usually see this context missing in the portrayals of Evil Republican DLC Hitlery Inc. Sen. Clinton – so I thought this should be mentioned.
Sen. Edwards subsequently admitted publicly that his vote on the 2002 Iraq resolution was wrong and took responsibility for the mistake:
Thanks again, Steve. I’ll keep up with this blog!
Fern @ 74
my bold.
oh for crying out loud. please watch this video.
i started the day being too argumentative, and i’m afraid that i’m going to end the day that way too.
but would it be too much to ask that we not state as fact something for which we have no confirming evidence and disconfirming evidence can be found in 30 sec. of googling?
Oklahoma kiddo @ 41
1. Genuine lover and defender of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Rule of Law
2. Demonstrated record of fiscal responsibility (e.g., doesn’t bill grandchildren for grandiose schemes, knows how to set fiscal priorities: to each, according to his/her needs; from each, according to his/her ability to pay)
3. Effective peacemaker
4. Knows value of investing in people (e.g., education, wellness)
5. savvy environmentalist (e.g., understands global warming and how to deal with it)
6. promotes civic involvement in public affairs by ordinary citizens; free, fair and clean elections; and understands how to regulate lobbyists appropriately.
7. understands how to defend our country appropriately, without sacrificing civil rights, and due process.
And, with a bow to Molly Ivins, I shall refrain from further items, in order to keep the list as short and clear as possible.
Bob in HI
“For social and religious conservatives, the nomination and election of someone with Rudy Giuliani’s track record would represent a repudiation of their place in the party, regardless of how he shades his positions these days. It would also give a green light to “pro-choice,” pro-gun-control Republicans, as well as to those who might support domestic partnerships or civil unions for gays. Social conservatives would lose their grip on the party. To them, losing the 2008 presidential election to the Democrats might arguably be better than losing control of the GOP.
Several months ago, the chief executive officer of a major investment company explained his support for Giuliani by saying that he didn’t know whether the former mayor could win the nomination, but that Republicans needed to move their party in Giuliani’s direction. In some ways, Giuliani’s candidacy could become something of a proxy fight between secular Republicans, who see the GOP as needing to emphasize economic and foreign-policy issues, and religious Republicans, who see social and cultural issues as being of paramount importance.
In some ways, this fight has been inevitable ever since working-class and lower-middle-class conservative white voters abandoned the Democratic Party and migrated to the GOP. Their shift was partly a reaction to the Democratic Party’s stands on civil rights and the Vietnam War, but it also was in response “
Charlie Cook
We Dems may be too weak, at the moment, to mount effective opposition against Bush, but it’s better than going along sucking our thumbs like the the Goopers – they’re the ones that are truly weak – no moral compass whatsoever, eyes closed, just praying the teat keeps giving.
Ron Paul complains that: “religion must be driven from public view” – and blames this on the secular left.
I hate to break it to Ron Paul, but Jesus, born a Jew, is responsible for this: Jesus told people, “when you want to pray, go and pray in secret.”
Steve-AR @ 80 -
thanks.
btw, i share your fear of a right-wing populist movement – especially under conditions of stress (economic collapse, another terrorist attack,…). i just don’t think it’s limited to the R party (although that seems to me, by far, the most likely source).
Sorry OT
peanut butter if you’re around … ?
I found some links that might be helpful, they’re on the 1st NSA/ATT thread. Maybe it’s info you’re already aware of, but … who knows
Here
It’s really long (sorry) but important info if anyone cares to check it out
Off to a meeting
L8r
Dems are hatching a dream- of long term domination. They would like to shed the “soft of defense” label that has hurt them in the past- get the guns issue off the table- and create a dynamic that lets them press their built in advantage on domestic issues.
They’re getting a little stronger- but most of these dreams of domination turn to dust. We’ll see.
CTuttle @ 85
It’s a wonderful tune. Lahoma and I absolutely love it. We adore the Islands and her people.
radiofreewill @ 84
The US law uses the International Standards, here is the definition:
c) Definition.— As used in this section the term “war crime” means any conduct—
(1) defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;
(2) prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907;
(3) which constitutes a violation of common Article 3 of the international conventions signed at Geneva, 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party and which deals with non-international armed conflict; or
(4) of a person who, in relation to an armed conflict and contrary to the provisions of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended at Geneva on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II as amended on 3 May 1996), when the United States is a party to such Protocol, willfully kills or causes serious injury to civilians.
With all due respect, The Hague is wishful thinking plus look at what a screwed up mess they made with the Serbian war Criminals..The US is very clear and Life in Prison without parole is a just sentence for these people.
Fern @ 75
Importantly, Kucinich and Paul also agree on an isolationist style domestic policy. Each, in his way, endeavors to drastically curtail imports and increase domestic manufacturing, ergo, jobs in the USA. This populist style methodology (or rhetoric – its just talk at this point) is very appealing to both blue collar Rethugs and Democrats.
Kucinich is the best candidate of any and all.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 95
The natives here are pretty cool, too…! 8-)
bobschacht @ 88
Good list. And I do like language economy. ;0)
“…to keep the list as short and clear as possible.”
OT -I will be heading up to Seattle on Friday
Seattle Firepup meetup on Saturday, November 10, 2007
11:00am – 1:00pm
Uptown Espresso
2504 4th Ave. (4th & Wall)
Seattle, WA
http://www.facebook.com/event……amp;ref=mf
If you are in the area please join us, if you know anyone from Seattle who would like to attend please spread the word…
Steve-AR @ 95 –
do you think there is any potential legal liability for senators voting to confirm mukasey – if he should decide, for example, that waterboarding is acceptable if ordered by the president? and then more people are tortured by waterboarding?
OT..
WASHINGTON (AP) — Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte told Congress on Wednesday that Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf is an “indispensable” ally in the U.S.-led war on terrorism and that “partnership with Pakistan and its people is the only option.”
CNN
My question is: what is plan B when the indispensable is dispensed.
By staying with the principles of Freedom, Justice and the Rule of Law, we encourage the rank and file Goopers to realize that they are Lost.
When we engage them in debates like hair-splitting over Water-boarding vs Simulated Drowning, they miss the point that Bush’s Life History is one of Never Being Accountable for His Mistakes – He always leaves his supporters holding the bag.
We have to let the Goopers realize how easily mis-guided and stupid they’ve been by showing them what principled leadership actually looks like – leaving them to deduce who’s holding the bag this time for themselves.
But, we’ll have to be very patient…teh dumb doesn’t come around quickly.
GOPers run against Hilary as if she were the nominee. What if a few of our guys run against Ron Paul to highlight his racist views and awaken our 70%ers.
Plus we could marginalise the GOP leaders for the nomination by ignoring them. They crowned Hilary as our leader, we ignore their leaders and crown Ron Paul turnabout is fair play.
Plus he has raised alot of money we have to start drawing out our knives.
Steve-AR @ 103
Kind of up there with “Heck of a job Brownie” comment.
Haven’t read thread.
In case this hasn’t been said…That picture is, I think, the Glockenspiel (-sp). The commisioner of the piece, an old Czech or Slovakian king, appreciated the beauty of the clock so much that he had the clock builder’s eyes gouged out so that he could not build another clock as beautiful as the Glockenspiel.
Now to wiki to confirm…
Ron Paul is a disgusting cryptofascist. What strikes me is that I’ve seen some *liberals* saying that he’s viable.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 41
1. Will leave Iraq
Dr Zen @ 108
Just remind people that he is from Texas.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 76
Yes! I got it before, too, and sent it on to family and friends. I bookmarked it.
As we say here, mahalo nui (thank you very much)!
And as the Lakota say, Mitakuye Oyasin.
Bob in HI
katymine @ 101
How do you confirm for the event? Cause I’m going!
we’re not all bad.
Hopefully I will live to see the day when George W. Bush is finally held accountable for his naughtiness.
selise @ 102
I would think they are protected by the “speech and debate’ clause (Art. 1, sec 6). The question is do the attempts at granting retro-active immunity have any validity.
Nevermind I hit the add to my events button.
Steve-AR @ 103
Bushco gives 200 million a year allowance to Military Dictator General Pervy Musharraf and 100 million a month to run his army (that Pervy can spend on hookers and beer if he wants to). DO you think Uncle Pervy will bite the hand that feeds him? He is a King funded and legitimized by the US gubmint.
hackworth @ 115
I know some teens who would find that even that is not enough!
hackworth @ 117
My question was based on the possibility that he might receive trans-cranial lead therapy.
Steve-AR – I like what you say! I’d take either outcome, US or Hague.
Bush has already said that Rummy issued a DoD Directive that authorized Torture in Iraq. But, there is much speculation that Bush actually signed a Secret Executive Order authorizing Torture, that Rummy, in turn, used for his authorization.
With where the story is at right now, Rumsfeld is on the hook for Torture in Iraq. I hardly think he would go down for Bush, if Bush actually authorized the Torture.
In any case, here’s hoping an All Dem WH, Senate and Congress = Serving BushCo up for Justice to restore Our name.
New post!
http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..o-go-away/
FYI, new post
I did not know that Paul said those racist, dumbass things. Nor did I knoe that his postion on abortion was so utterly steadfast and neanderthal. I only know waht I heard on NPR.
That being said, I was not compelled to research him as he is a member of the party that s*cks d*nkey d*cks.
CTuttle @ 68
It was for OK Kiddo & Lahoma.
Bob in HI
well, wiki called bullshit on the gouging bit, but our local guide found that story so compelling that my wife and I heard it on our honeymoon 400 years after the
factfiction.I did see that the clock is called the Orloj and the glockenspiel refers to instruments that play bells so I guess the Orloj is technically one of those.
Now back to your regularly scheduled programming…
So if your ever on Jeopardy and you win with trivia on the Orloj, just look for me in the threads.
Eureka Springs:
well, the idea of a joint ticket was kind of a speculative joke on my part, true. they are worlds apart on many issues.
Greenwald pointed many shortcomings as well, but highlighted sincerely held political beliefs, clearly stated, as something very refreshing about Paul.
Same goes for Kuchinich.
sporkovat @ 126
I would love to see them stand up together and demand change in defense policy… I just don’t think they could run on the same ticket.
Thank you for this post pw! I was actually considering finding more about him to see if I would vote for him.
Steve-AR is definitely on a roll tonight. :o)
Negroponte comes perilously close to being honest, and just flat-out saying:
“WTF! Who needs a Supreme Court and a constitution when they’ve got all those F-16’s we gave him. As long as he keeps shutting down the Madrassas and promising to let us sniff Bin Laden’s bicycle seat (the one that’s been sitting on an Islamabad side street for a month…) Mush is our guy!”
i will not vote for hillary. if she is the democratic nominee i will vote for ron paul. period end of story. until we have instant runnoff elections, we have to send a message somehow.
how DARE the democrats take my vote for granted and continue to let the bushies run rampant?
screw that. hillary is neocon lite.
what do you want, then?
the continuing murder of iraqis? the invasion of iran? the preservation of the lies concerning the events of 11/09/01? the perpetuation of the dual passporters and their control of the usa[chertoff et alia]?
other than ron paul, all the other candidates want to continue being george walker bush.
i listen to what so many say about ron paul. it reminds me of what i heard about gene mccarthy and george mcgovern. decades ago.
let’s talk about abortion for a moment. the killing of a potential human being. some of the candidates oppose that, but are more than comfortable with killing a living child. figure that one out.
to the best of my knowledge,ron paul is the only candidate that opposes killing. from the womb to the middle east.
and he is the only candidate that wants us to extricate us forces from iraq/afghanistan asap.
what do you want? for us forces to occupy those countries indefinitely?
geoplitically, i can understand that. but are you prepared for conducting that perpetual war, implementing a draft, and imposing major sacrifices on the public? all for a fraud?
here is the way it really is…the reptillians/demtillians have bankrupted the usa.
all of the world knows it. we can become more bankrupted, or we can staunch the financial hemorrhaging. to the best of my knowledge, only ron paul discusses this issue.
his proposition is that we return to the gold standard. in other words, repudiate nixon and conally who told the world to go f*ck themselves and deal with a completely debased reserve currency.
why is this proposition a non-starter? we ain’t got no gold to bulwark the paper. where did the gold go? into the accounts of those who have been running the usa since the outfit finessed the election of ronnie raygun.
so, i must say that if ron paul thinks that a return to the gold standard is possible, he hasn’t a clue. the us vaults are empty.
the gold has all been stolen by the pols. the bankers. and the usarmy general staff. long ago.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 34
Droll humor. Good one.
I wonder if the “secular left” includes everybody on the left–including Christians–or just Jewish leftists.
The article on Pat Buchanan, whose author I did not find, was basically incoherent. It threw a hodge-podge of issues together to try to discredit Buchanan on one thing.
“But even as Moran was committing his political gaffe, the March 24 issue of “The American Conservative” was carrying a little noticed Buchanan diatribe entitled “Whose War?” The article charged that American foreign policy has been hijacked by a “cabal” of “neoconservatives,” clearly Buchanan’s code word for high-ranking Jews in the Bush Administration. These neocons, he says, are “deliberately damaging U.S. relations with every state in the Arab world that defies Israel or supports the Palestinian peoples’ right to a homeland of their own.” They “harbor a ‘passionate attachment’ to a nation not our own that causes them to subordinate the interests of their own country and to act on the assumption that, somehow, what’s good for Israel is good for America.” In other words, it’s “their war,” not ours.”
Maybe Buchanan is an “anti-semite” and maybe he is not. But that has nothing to do with the argument he presents. A charge such as “anti-semitism” is a diversionary tactic used to avoid discussion of a particular subject.
Almost everyone, including Jimmy Carter, has been called an “anti-semite”. The word means nothing nowadays because of wide overuse and abuse.
Here is the Shah of Iran back in 1976.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQgZ3oLp_WY
Was the Shah an “anti-semite”?
Saying “neocons started the Iraq war” is anti-semitic? Because “neocons” is code for “Jews”?
There are lots of things to dislike about Pat Buchanan, but that’s not one of them. Did you read the article you linked to?
If Paul would end the war (good), restore a Constitutional conception of the Presidency and law enforcement (good), but also rail against abortion (bad) and abolish the department of education (not sure it would matter), I would take that.
It’s a moot point, obviously, since he will never get there, but still, his straighforward rhetoric about the Constitution is striking a nerve because none of the frontrunners are bothering. There is a line from a movie (the sequel to Chinatown, maybe?) about being “the leper with the most fingers,” and that disgusting metaphor is pretty apt right now with regard to our presidential candidates. Hillary is 100% on the abortion issue, I believe, and that’s super, but if she continues the imperial executive, and the Empire, period (i.e., stays in Iraq and bombs Iran), what kind of trade is that?
I sent money to Dodd when he got solid on FISA issues and telecom immunity. I sent money to Paul because he is making noise about the Constitution and it fucks with the Republican primaries to have him remain in the race. I don’t expect either man to get within sniffing distance of the White House, but they are both carrying important messages, imperfect messengers though they may be. I would not assume people who support Paul are racists, or ignorant of his loonier views. They may just be terribly desperate for signs of life for a Constitutional government, like many of us are. Paul is crazy? Dodd doesn’t have a prayer? So what?
Guilt by association is the oldest and cheapest trick in the neocon’s bag. It’s what got us stuck in Iraq to begin with.
You’re indulging in the same tactic when you equate the Paul candidacy with cranks like Stormfront.
That selective quote from an old speech by Paul noting the statistical disparity between crimes committed by blacks and their % of the population is a grim fact. It makes Dr. Paul a realist, not a “racist” – except in the mind of a politically correct, liberal ideologue.
For the record, Ron Paul’s 36,672 supporters raised $4.2 million overnight, the average contribution was $103. We take no corporate money or accept Government matching funds. We get more contributions from the troops in Iraq than any other candidate from either party.
The response to this event by at least one Democrat candidate, Edwards, has been encouraging… He used the n-word, neocon at least eight times in an anti-war speech. Thanks to men like Buchanan and Paul, the left is growing a spine and beginning to ID the real enemy – the Israel Lobby and their “Christian Zionist” enablers.
The issue of War vs. Peace should trump all other parochial considerations. Wrongfully attacking a true antiwar candidate serves on other purpose than supporting the War Party.
Shame on you.
Guilt by association is the oldest and cheapest trick in the neocon’s bag. It’s what got us stuck in Iraq to begin with.
You’re indulging in the same tactic when you equate the Paul candidacy with cranks like Stormfront.
That selective quote from an old speech by Paul noting the statistical disparity between crimes committed by blacks and their % of the population is a grim fact. It makes Dr. Paul a realist, not a “racist” – except in the mind of the politically correct, liberal ideologue.
For the record, Ron Paul’s 36,672 supporters raised $4.2 million overnight, the average contribution was $103. We take no corporate money or accept Government matching funds. We get more contributions from the troops in Iraq than any other candidate from either party.
The response to this event by at least one Democrat candidate, Edwards, has been encouraging… He used the n-word, neocon at least eight times in an anti-war speech. Thanks to men like Buchanan and Paul, the left is growing a spine and beginning to ID the real enemy – the Israel Lobby and their “Christian Zionist” enablers.
The issue of War vs. Peace should trump all other parochial considerations. By wrongfully attacking a true antiwar candidate serves on other purpose than supporting the War Party.
Shame on you.
Sorry about the double post. I’m new to this
So now we know that Ron Paul doesn’t think that states should be allowed to marry gays, or that women have any sort of right to choose (he not only would repeal Roe v. Wade, he would try to forbid states from making abortion legal), or forbid using tax dollars to promote a particular religion. That’s not pro-Constitution. That’s authoritarian.
(sigh)…….you know, PW, I generally dig your posts…but this one isn’t particularly well thought out. You’ve left out a very important aspect of Paul’s life-long governmental philosophy, that being the fact that he has *always* regarded the Executive Branch to be subservient to the Legislative Branch! If he were somehow elected President (not too likely, right?) he’d have a *very* difficult time attempting to push through his agenda, particularly in light of the likely big Democratic gains in the coming election. Truth be told, if we could get enough left-leaning Dems elected to Congress, we’d probably have a better chance of actually passing liberal reforms under Paul than we would under a Clinton presidency (given the pressure she’d be under from the corporate press).
As it so happens, I’m actually going to register as a Republican so that I can vote for him in my state’s primary (anyone whose state has an “open” primary can simply vote for him without this trouble). Why would I vote for a libertarian conservative Republican when I’m a far-Lefty? Because he’s the best of the GOP pack, because he’s anti-war and pro-Constitution, and most of all, because he would radically change the timbre of the Democratic challenger’s rhetoric!
I am SICK TO DEATH of hearing Hillary pushing for war with Iran and am shattered by her unwillingness to get our troops out of Iraq. If Paul was her opponent, she’d be forced (ironically, by his antiwar stance) to actually become antiwar, which would be a nice change, I think we can both agree.
In addition to what he would do to the Democrats, he would also splinter the GOP. Think about it: What would happen to all of these Republicans that insist that we need a lifetime of war? There is no third party for them to go to and it takes years to form the organization to field a candidate, so…..they’d be up the proverbial shit creek! The ones who vote GOP no matter what would be forced to adopt and defend Paul’s antiwar, pro-Constitution stance (ah, what a beautiful sight it would be to behold!). The GOP would be in bits and pieces for years, with myriad squabbling groups unable to find a center.
No matter how you look at it, Dems voting for Paul is a GOOD thing that *you should encourage* rather than trying to bash him. Look, I understand that some “Democrats” see him as some weird savior (the same ones who were stupidly charmed by McCain, the last time around), but that’s a *very* small group that you don’t need to worry about. Your real concern should be derailing anti-Constitution fascists like Rudy- which doesn’t just mean voting for the Democratic candidate, it means gaming the Republican voting process.
The GOP (at least, at the moment) controls our voting machines and they use that control on Election Day. Do they do the same thing during the primaries? Well, look what happened to Lieberman. He lost the primary and then somehow (through the magic of vote hacking?) ends up winning the general election! If this shit were to go on again, I’d rather that Ron Paul was the default rather than Rudy or any of the other Thugs.
Think of this as a chess game that will require some bizarre, completely out-of-left-field move that will throw off the opponent’s strategy to the extent that it destroys their game. Paul’s two main political attributes (anti-war, pro-Constitution) completely overshadows his negatives and that in combination with his “weak Executive” philosophy would make him the VERY BEST person for our candidate to run against, or in the case of GOP vote tampering, to lose against.