Grandfatherly libertarian cult leader to be grilled about race war at tomorrow night’s debate
posted at 10:20 pm on January 9, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I don’t know that for a fact, but Chris Wallace isn’t one to shy from tough questions and he’d never live it down if he gave the Bircher King a pass on the recent “troubles,” so expect something in this vein. What we do know is that, contra last weekend’s debate, the Confederacy’s Greatest Patriot will be participating. I like to think they were leaning towards excluding him until the TNR story broke, at which point sure, Ron, see you there. If they’re going to prop his wretched ass up for another 90 minutes of free TV time, they might as well make him tapdance to earn it.
Any predictions on whether we’ll see contrition beyond the halfhearted “I take moral responsibility” soundbite loop he resorts to when asked about this? If he genuinely regretted it, he’d have come clean and made a show about retracting long ago. What we’re in store for, I suspect, is another digging-in along the lines of what he said in this clip, implying that Nazis really aren’t any worse than military contractors when push comes to shove so shouldn’t the other boys on stage be apologizing too? The Paulnuts will love that but it’ll send the less “afflicted” Paul supporters off on an even more manic bout of squirming than we’ve observed the past two days. A tapdancing chorus line, if you will.
David Frum plucked a few choice quotes from the Hit & Run comment section challenging the prevailing rEVOLutionary wisdom. Don’t miss it.
Update: Shame, or post-NH discouragement? It can’t be shame.
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: « Previous 1 2 3
It will be wonderful if Iraq recovers like Germany and Japan.
But dude, Iraq was not like Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, and Saddam was not like Hitler and Hirohito, and the Iraqis are not like Germans and Japanese. Everything is not equivalent.
Drum on January 10, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Neocon ≠ Jew
People who think ALL Neocons are Jewish ≈ MORONS
But the comments all you Paulbots have left here increasingly seem to suggest that:
Paulnuts + Ron Paul himself
= FACISTS (at worst) + NAZIS (at best)
Paul’s continuing vitriole about facism has me totally convinced that if elected, he’d rapidly turn into one himself.
Some eastern sage once said “Whatever you meditate faithfully upon, you become”. In Ron Paul’s case, this proverb appears to have proven itself true.
A huge bunch of you Paulnuts practically LYNCHED Hannity not long ago. Are you TRYING to earn the nickname “Brownshirts” ???????
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Yes.
Jim Treacher on January 10, 2008 at 3:11 PM
Gotta agree with you, Drum. Both Germany and Japan had long traditions of working very hard and taking pride in the quality of that work making a statement about oneself, one’s family, one’s company, one’s country. Both of these countries had the cultural backdrop to recover and become economic powerhouses. Which makes sense because they had to be sufficient economic powerhouses in the first place BEFORE they went up against our military in the 1940’s.
Question: Does IRAQ have similar cultural backdrop and econonic history?
I’ll let others answer this for me.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Another Eastern chap said the following:
Sun Tzu said “There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare.”
And: “When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men’s weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength.”
And: “If the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain.”
And: “Contributing to maintain an army at a distance causes the people to be impoverished.”
And: “In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy’s country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them.”
And: “It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of carrying it on.”
And: “In war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.”
Fed Up on January 10, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Fed Up, those were precious pearls of wisdom from Sun Tzu.
But what the he** was the point you were trying to make?
After reading each one, maybe I’m just stoopid or something but I have NO EARTHLY what relevance they had to the points I was trying to make.
Care to ’splain it to me in plainer English?
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 3:29 PM
You were quoting an “Eastern Sage,” so was I…
…not directing it towards you but towards the wisdom that has come from the East’s experience in fighting wars. Our “young” country can learn a thing or two from it.
Fed Up on January 10, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Your excerpt wasn’t racist or bigoted. Distrustful of the government and of socialism, yes — but not racist or bigoted. Read AP’s new post. If there is hay to be made here, it isn’t over the allegation that Ron Paul is a racist or a bigot. There’s no evidence of that, and plenty to the contrary. What it’s about is his lack of oversight of a publication that used his name. But you don’t see it that way, and I’m not going to waste time convincing you, especially since you’ve already pledged support to the pro-illegal immigrant pro-abortion anti-gun liberal war mongering 9/11 pimp.
Mark Jaquith on January 10, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Drum on January 10, 2008 at 3:02 PM
No, they are not the same, but that does not change our obligation. What is the same must be our commitment to complete a job that we started. Failure to do so after the first Gulf War led to the Iraq war. What do you think will happen if we get it wrong again?
One of the aspects that marks the whole Paulian episode as one occupied by the cranks is this misguided notion that if the US simply pulls up stakes in the rest of the world, that the problems our involvement causes us will simply vanish. It won’t, and in fact it has the very real potential to make the world a worse place. Every president (except Carter) has used war as a foreign policy instrument of the US, and the results have expanded freedom and liberty in the world.
Defense Guy on January 10, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Uhhh….Ok.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 3:58 PM
This web site could use a larger font.
mlnicosia on January 10, 2008 at 4:19 PM
the problem is Ron Paul does not know what the Constitution says, much less Constitutional Originalism.
Here is a real Originalist on this subject, Michael Ramsey. former Scalia law clerk and Harvard Law prof.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No1_Ramseyonline.pdf
jp on January 10, 2008 at 4:54 PM
Don’t Hate-Ray me, bro!
John from WuzzaDem on January 10, 2008 at 5:14 PM
I have to laugh at your first comment about Ron Paul not knowing the Constitution….after 30 years of dedication to it……but since you are throwing out so called experts on the Constitution, I’ll do the same with a gentleman who has 4 degrees from Harvard, is a PhD and a JD:
THE CONSTITUTION LIMITS THE PRESIDENT EVEN AS “COMMANDER IN CHIEF”
http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin32.htm
Excerpt:
“In sum, the arguments that all too many “conservative” media personalities typically put forward these days to infuse the Presidency with Fuhrer-like powers are the products of constitutional illiteracy. They are, however, not just nonsense, but extremely dangerous nonsense–because they will surely be trotted out in the future in support of a comprehensive police state that these same “conservatives” themselves will find most uncongenial, but as the result of their own efforts too deeply entrenched to oppose. Proving, once again, that “situation constitutionalism”–the notion that the Constitution may be creatively interpreted to fit some immediate political agenda, rather than all political agendas being required to square with the original intent of the Constitution–is a Sirens’ song that will surely lure America’s ship of state onto the rocks of destruction. And far sooner than most Americans imagine.”
Fed Up on January 10, 2008 at 6:05 PM
Ron Paul just claimed that Libertarians cannot be racist. Wolf Blitzer v Ron Paul on CNN.
If that doesn’t sh*tcan this guy nothing will.
The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 6:20 PM
Ron Paul defends himself on Wolf Blitzer’s show (since MM, Bryan and Allah won’t update it):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6rxts0-f9w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82CYNV0U_kg
Fed Up on January 10, 2008 at 7:15 PM
oh…i guess they started a new thread…
Fed Up on January 10, 2008 at 7:16 PM
So much for Allah’s prediction.
fossten on January 11, 2008 at 9:37 AM
You’re right, fossten, AP should have followed normal MSM protocol and added a question mark at the end.
Jim Treacher on January 13, 2008 at 3:58 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3