Audio: Why Ron Paul is a crank, episode 314
posted at 12:18 pm on September 13, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | regular view
I hope I’m not telling tales out of school or anything (and Greta Van Susteren’s Gretawire blog, which is an entertaining behind-the-scenes read, btw, suggests that I’m not) to note that on Monday, after Michelle and I interviewed Sen. James Inhofe, we went over to Fox so she could appear on O’Reilly. She goes off to the makeup room and in walks a gangly congressman and his press guy. It was Rep. Ron Paul.
As I sat across from him while he fiddled with his Blackberry, I was tempted to say all kinds of things, believe me, but I held my tongue. “Why do you give Truthers the time of day?” “Do you really think that we had 9-11 coming?” Etc. The truth is, if it weren’t for his orneriness on the war, I’d put more stock in Paul’s staunch libertarian/small government ethic. I’m very sympathetic to all of that. But when it comes to the war and related security issues, Paul is just unreasonable, and if enacted his ideas would get more people killed, which would lead to even more of a security-heavy environment, not greater libertarian freedom. Why can’t he see that? Because he’s a crank who evidently thinks that mall security guards are better at their jobs than the US Marines. That’s pretty much what he said on John Ziegler’s show the other night. Click to play.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
I’m seriously questioning either his sanity or his paradigm. If the former is a problem, enough said. However, the latter appears to be a real conundrum. Does he realize that if a majority of Americans were to listen to this crap, they would recoil? Really, how out of touch is he?
MadisonConservative on September 13, 2007 at 12:29 PM
He keeps saying he is a Libertarian, so why doesn’t he drop the front of being a Republican. At least the Republicans or whoever sponsors the debates need to leave him off the invited list and quit giving him free publicity.
LakeRuins on September 13, 2007 at 12:29 PM
I’ve said for a while that I’d be happy if there was some government post that only dealt with domestic issues that Ron Paul could be in charge of. Maybe the IRS.
He’s been named the taxpayers best friend repeatedly, and as far as I know he’s never voted for a pay raise for himself. The Fair Tax site has a short clip of him saying he’d vote yes if it came before the house.
He has absolutely no business dealing with anything beyond our shores, but at least he hasn’t gone to Syria yet.
BadgerHawk on September 13, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Ok Paulites…..your man has won. Congress has converted. The official government position to world affairs is ‘Stay home, don’t look at the bully, and the bully won’t look at you’.
Two airliners slam into the Empire State building on Sep 12th. What happens on Sep 13th?
Limerick on September 13, 2007 at 12:31 PM
Just not too much authority in government. Let’s remember that he wants to do away with the CIA and other information-collecting agencies.
amerpundit on September 13, 2007 at 12:32 PM
I sometimes scratch my head and wonder how in the world this guy got through medical school.
Catie96706 on September 13, 2007 at 12:33 PM
Obviously the Paulites are good at spamming polls but not so good at answering questions.
Limerick on September 13, 2007 at 12:34 PM
His voice just leaves me with the “You kids get off my lawn!” feeling.
bbz123 on September 13, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Its the “WOT” is just a bumpersticker mentality. That and you can arrest and try terrorists.
I dont get the thought process either. To prevent terrorism we are fighting them overseas. The alternative is to turn the US into a police state and monitor everyone to make sure they arent ready to commit terrorism
Paul is saying here we will neither fight them overseas nor pass laws to prevent terrorism here.
I just feel like he is wearing the “Attack us because we are stupid” sign a little too much.
William Amos on September 13, 2007 at 12:39 PM
I had my first enounter with a Paul supporter yesterday.
He lived down to all the stereotypes.
JammieWearingFool on September 13, 2007 at 12:43 PM
And he wants to disband the CIA and FBI because they failed to prevent 9-11. So, basically, Paul wants us entirely disarmed and unable to prevent even the most elementary attack, preferring to rely on mall security guards instead.
The only ways to make sense of that are that a) he’s on the enemy’s side (and I don’t believe that’s the case); b) he’s insane; or c) he’s a crank.
Bryan on September 13, 2007 at 12:43 PM
The old “better red than dead” argument. Im sure Paul would look great in a turban and a beard.
Sometime I feel we have been too sucessful in the WOT. IF terrorists can kill our military in Iraq why do so many assume that they wold have great trouble doing worse over here in the US ?
Its honestly like 9/11 never happen. Oh right the GOVERNMENT did 9/11 so the terrorists cant take credit for that
William Amos on September 13, 2007 at 12:47 PM
I heard this interview live and realized Ron Paul is even more of a lunatic than had I imagined. His “repudiation” of the Troofers is a sham: he IS one, but won’t publically admit it.
.
What a buffoon.
Spiny Norman on September 13, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Or he is an insane crank who thinks the enemy is right to hate and want to kill us…
doriangrey on September 13, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Paul is one of the “Blame America we are the root of all evil” crowd.
Self hatrid is not a solution to this countries problems
William Amos on September 13, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Paul was on some show the other day I saw, and he kept talking about how great Ghandi was and we need to be more like Ghandi, etc.
I got a chuckle, because on this site in the past that is what I’ve said Paul is basically, the Ghandi Candidate.
He claims to be Pro-Life, but the reality is he’s Pro-Choice and has a 75% NARAL rating. Anyway, he claims to be pro-life for the same reason he is anti-death penalty and Anti-War….on all those things he is against the “Use of Force”, which is how he justifies each position when he talks about them.
he’s an idiot, doesn’t take a genius to see that the world is governed by the use of force.
jp on September 13, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Bryan, can you explain the “John Birch”/Birch-esq crank reference? I never could wrap my head around that one……
either way, my answer is “b”; he’s insane…
liquidflorian on September 13, 2007 at 12:53 PM
Here is your bumper sticker.
“I’ll arrest terrorists when they try to arrest me”
/instead of trying to killing me
LakeRuins on September 13, 2007 at 12:55 PM
I never get the Ghandi and MLK references either. Both took on Democracies where the threat was much less
And both eventually were shot and killed
Id say ultimately they were failures. Their messages were good but they never really proved that non violent protests end violence.
William Amos on September 13, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Ron Paul is a Chasers plant, I just know it.
- The Cat
P.S. Or he’s working for Mr. Demi Moore
MirCat on September 13, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Now here’s a scary thought.
Universal Health Care comes to be and Ron Paul is assigned as you doctor!
Ah time for a nooner beer to wash that thought away.
CommentGuy on September 13, 2007 at 1:00 PM
Good greif what is up with the MSM trying to make John edward appear angelic ?
Angel John
William Amos on September 13, 2007 at 1:00 PM
One thing I don’t get, is if you agree with the notion that Jihadists hate us because of our interventions, not because we are Great Satan, then what good will pulling out do? Wouldn’t they just stay angry?
Sure if you believe that it’s a nice gesture, but would they say, “You know they killed hundreds of thousands of our people and forced us to live in poverty. But by Allah they recognized Iran and let them develop nuclear weapons. Let’s start Free Trade!”
Keljeck on September 13, 2007 at 1:02 PM
But Ron Paul!!!! is RIGHT. Every time I go to the mall and see that Jeep driving around with that little green flashing light, I drop every terrorist intent with which I had come to the mall. Those mall guys are awesome scary!
eeyore on September 13, 2007 at 1:03 PM
I don’t quite get it either. It’s a reference to the john birch society – but it still doesn’t make sense to me.
lorien1973 on September 13, 2007 at 1:04 PM
failures yes, but my point is that is how Ron Paul is justifying his anti-war, anti-death penalty and pro-life positions……..he’s using very similar Logic that Ghandi used in the “use of Force”, especially by the govt., as ALWAYS being a bad thing. Its what leads Libertarians to free-market capitalism also, which aren’t the same reasons Conservatives are free market types.
Ghandi told his people that if the Nazi’s came to Germany they shouldn’t fight them and just convert to whatever they want.
jp on September 13, 2007 at 1:04 PM
It’s a reference to the John Birch Society, an early group in the Conservative movement that believed Eisenhower was a red, and believed in many other conspiracy theories. Obviously they were later kicked out for being cranks.
Keljeck on September 13, 2007 at 1:08 PM
I have known that this guys is nuts for a long time, and the more I hear from him, the more validated I feel. Besides, the ostrich defense only works if you don’t mind the lion that is chewing on your erm.. posterior.
RINO_Hunter on September 13, 2007 at 1:10 PM
There, fixed it.
jihadwatcher on September 13, 2007 at 1:17 PM
I hate it when someone beats me to the punch.
Where I live, those guards were successful at getting rid of another terrorist group – people dressed in gothic attire.
What we need is a sign on all buildings that reads, “Mall Property”. We could protect our schools effectively with such a sign.
On-my-soap-box on September 13, 2007 at 1:20 PM
What surprises me more is not that this guy is running for President, but the fact that he actually has supporters who see him as the political messiah!
I blogged about how some moron sold his grandkids inheritance to support “Mr. Clueless.”
For all the Ron Paul groupies out there, we are fighting against an emerging global theocracy, one that has not surfaced since the times of the inquisition.
If you can’t fathom that, you may truly be from another planet.
Darnell Clayton on September 13, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Here’s a mall cop pwn31ng some terrorists:
http://www.security-guard-service.com/images/guard-officers.jpg
lorien1973 on September 13, 2007 at 1:30 PM
sigh he’s saying the same stuff that Goldwater and Reagan used to say, not to mention the Old Right. Maybe ya’ll are the ones that are confused as to what a conservative foreign policy really is. All the leaders of the neo-conservatives are just former liberals who saw the balance of power in Washington shift.
libertytexan on September 13, 2007 at 1:40 PM
On small government, yes, and I noted that. On disarming the country in the face of a threat, no, he’s not saying what Goldwater and Reagan said. Not by a looooooong shot.
Bryan on September 13, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Bingo! That’s a winner. Question though, has Ron Paul ever publically agreed/disagreed with the Truthers? He doesn’t seem to mention them as much as they mention him…
JetBoy on September 13, 2007 at 1:48 PM
“Mr. Paul, when did you stop beating your wife?”
C’mon. He probably would have said that if he thought it. He doesn’t really hold back on his opinions.
Why is it more prudent to divest yourself of liberty up front, especially since “get more people killed” and “lead to even more of a security-heavy environment” are merely hypothetical outcomes?
Mark Jaquith on September 13, 2007 at 1:55 PM
Do you ever listen to what he actually says, Mark?
Name a single civil liberty that you’ve had to give up since 9-11 and you might have a point. Name one. But you can’t. You’re free to go wherever, whenever, and do whatever, and say whatever, just as you were before 9-11. Oh, if you call up Osama’s cave you might get a visit from the men in black. But if you have a problem with that, well, you’re a crank too.
Bryan on September 13, 2007 at 2:02 PM
Come on… isn’t Ron Paul the only man who can save America? The only question is for whom is he try to save it for? I’d hate for us to be so rude as to not balance the budget before we hand over our country to the Jihadis?
BadBrad on September 13, 2007 at 2:06 PM
And the outcomes are hardly hypothetical. Did you miss the anniversary that we just noted two days ago? Tell the victims’ families that it’s a hypothetical threat, and then pick your teeth up off the street.
We have layered defenses starting overseas and ending in your brain. If you remove the outer layers as Paul would systematically do (again, go listen to what the man actually says once in a while) by pulling out of Iraq, dismantling our intel agencies, dismantling all domestic anti-terror initiatives etc, then you’re left defenseless. And in your case, evidently, the lack of defense goes all the way inside.
Bryan on September 13, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Is paul saying that leaving Iraq and getting rid of the Patriot act a first step to peace also a hypothetical outcome ? There are no garauntees either way
William Amos on September 13, 2007 at 2:11 PM
I think you have that backwards – the only liberties that we are allegedly “divesting” ourselves of are hypothetical ones (unless you decide to go research bomb making at a public libary or start telling people that you’d like to blow-up a building). Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness – there’s a reason Life comes before Liberty. If there is a threat to life, we must evaluate those liberties that possibly enable that threat (and not necessarily abolish the liberty, but keep tabs on it and possibly restrict it).
Rick on September 13, 2007 at 2:26 PM
Right before they go watch the hotdog on a stick girls whip up some Lemonaid.
Thanks for the definition, I’ll read up on the J/B society for a better frame of reference.
liquidflorian on September 13, 2007 at 2:47 PM
He’s not a Libertarian – He’s a Liberal.
Kini on September 13, 2007 at 2:48 PM
Why is Ron Paul not wearing a strait jacket?
Hilts on September 13, 2007 at 2:54 PM
Now, is anyone going to take me to task for using the word “stupid”?
Because it isn’t nice and all.
Christoph on September 13, 2007 at 2:59 PM
How else are we to interpret his calls that we understand why they attacked us and that they wouldn’t have done so had we not done ______.
Honestly, the way he explains it, it should make perfect sense why we were attacked, that being attacked was the logical conclusion of our actions overseas, which literally means that we deserved it.
Esthier on September 13, 2007 at 3:04 PM
O’Reilly spanked St. Paul pretty hard that night when he appeared on The Factor, too. Bill isn’t always the best debater (except in his own mind), but he didn’t have any trouble making Cranky McBircher look like a complete loon.
ReubenJCogburn on September 13, 2007 at 3:07 PM
You seem hurt.
Esthier on September 13, 2007 at 3:19 PM
Why would we take you to task for using a perfectly appropriate word?
Bryan on September 13, 2007 at 3:20 PM
Ron Paul has allota Barney Fife in him.
TheSitRep on September 13, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Ron Paul needs to change his party to Democrat and stop trying to fool people that he knows how to protect the USA and her citizens.
desertdweller on September 13, 2007 at 3:30 PM
Because he can’t get elected in his congressional district as a Libertarian, it’s dominated by Republican voters. But now that he has exposed himself for the kook he is, he won’t be going unchallenged next election for his House seat. His GOP challenger has already announced.
Selfishly, I want the GOP to keep him on hte stage because the more he talks the bigger the hole he digs in his district.. ;)
Texas Gal on September 13, 2007 at 3:34 PM
His district must have some wackos if they vote him into office.
I’d hate to see who his opponents were.
Kini on September 13, 2007 at 3:38 PM
Ron Paul is not a civil libertarian, national security is the most important and first Civil Liberty and he is effectivily against it. He has to deny the facts of the world and is basically a mental midget with no common sense or analytical ability.
jp on September 13, 2007 at 3:59 PM
Unfortunately he’s worse than useless when it comes to nipping it in the bud.
ReubenJCogburn on September 13, 2007 at 4:02 PM
Right. He’s so poor in front of a microphone, it’s disconcerting to imagine him needing to think quickly about anything. He just flippantly agreed with Zielger’s hyperbole about mall security and the marines.
When I listen to the small government conservatives who support him, I am embarrassed to think that these guys have probably been voting for Republicans, reluctantly. So apparently the Democrats don’t have the only delusional voters.
Jaquith, you’re not stupid or crazy; how — exactly — have you deluded yourself into thinking that such an obvious nut could safely lead the country?
Jaibones on September 13, 2007 at 4:12 PM
He’s talking about a discussion he had with me not long ago that he misunderstood, which is evident because when another poster made my point using a different analogy, he agreed that it was a valid point instead of calling it vile and disgusting.
He believed the discussion was about him being “mean” which is just incorrect.
Esthier on September 13, 2007 at 4:17 PM
LOL.. well before he got to this presidential election this is all they really knew about him and as a House Rep. “politics is local”:
Ronald Ernest Paul (born August 20, 1935) is a 10th-term United States congressman from Lake Jackson, Texas, a member of the Republican Party, a physician, and a candidate for the Republican nomination in the 2008 presidential election. He has represented Texas’s 14th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1997 and represented Texas’s 22nd district in 1976 and from 1979 to 1985. Paul also ran for president in the 1988 presidential election as the nominee for the Libertarian Party, while remaining a registered Republican. After graduation from the Duke University School of Medicine in 1961 and his residency in obstetrics/gynecology, he was drafted and served in America as a flight surgeon during the Vietnam War.[2]
Ron Paul has been referred to as a conservative,[3] a constitutionalist,[4] and a libertarian.[5] He is pro-life and supports states’ rights, free trade, sharply lower taxes, smaller government, and a non-interventionist foreign policy,[6] advocating a withdrawal from NATO and the United Nations.
Texas Gal on September 13, 2007 at 5:49 PM
After watching the last Republican debate, I mentioned to a friend that it would be great if Pat Paulsen was still alive and running for president. At the conclusion of the debate, I realized that Pat Paulsen is indeed still alive and has changed his name to Ron Paul.
MrFreeman07 on September 13, 2007 at 6:28 PM
The RP loons think that kind of crazy talk comes from on high and that everyone else is nuts for not agreeing with it.
csdeven on September 14, 2007 at 10:01 AM
I’ve never heard him say that we had 9/11 coming. That implies that we deserved it — going beyond simple causation or motivation.
Me personally? The Fourth Amendment, for my phone call records and Internet communications. Others have lost habeas corpus.
Only have a problem if they lacked a warrant.
They are, going forward. You can’t say for certain that withdrawing from Iraq and abolishing the Patriot Act will make us less safe.
Correct you are — but at least we wouldn’t be paying a daily toll in American lives (in Iraq) and putting up with habeas corpus suspension, “sneak and peek” searches, warrantless wiretapping, lack of library record privacy, etc here in America.
That’s talking about their motivations. That’s different than saying we deserved it or we had it coming. The only times I’ve seen Dr. Paul talk about this, he has only mentioned motivations.
Mark Jaquith on September 14, 2007 at 6:16 PM
Comment pages: