Ron Paul on Iranian nuke site: I’m tired of all this military-industrial fearmongering

posted at 9:01 pm on September 26, 2009 by Allahpundit

As contemptible as this is, I’ve got two good reasons to spare you a harangue about it. One: I’ve already written that harangue, and after the summer coup in Tehran and another year of cheat-and-retreat on their nuclear program, it’s truer now than it was then. And two: Thankfully, this old crank’s isolationist denialism is so fringe on the right that not even mainstreamers who are sympathetic to his broader agenda, like Glenn Beck, will go near it. It’s almost not worth bothering about. But suffice it to say, in the unlikely event that the three-percent rEVOLution ever commands the foreign-policy agenda of the GOP, I’ll run — not walk — into the Blue Dogs’ arms.

As Paul spoke passionately about ending all military operations and keeping government out of people’s “lifestyles,” a lone heckler began to shout, “Tell her!” Bachmann remained serene, hands folded in her lap, facing Paul. Bringing up Obama’s announcement that Iran had secret underground nuclear facilities, Paul announced that he had had enough of “fear-mongering” for the sake of the “military-industrial complex.” Bachmann, who once advocated nuking Iran, kept her eyes trained on Paul as her heckler repeated, “Tell her! Tell Michele! Tell her!”

A few more choice quotes from Think Progress:

We should never go to war if they’re telling us a lie about what’s happening. … We took the position, over my strong objection, we took the position that we had to have regime change in Iraq.

What they’re getting ready to do is put very, very strong sanctions on Iran. … But sanctions, and blockades, and prevention like this is an act of war.

I’m not sure what “lie” it is we’re being told about Iran, but then this is a guy so eager to see American “lies” at work vis-a-vis enemy powers that he’s been known to accuse the feds preemptively of telling them. Anyway, the point to take away about his Iran shtick is that it’s not an argument about strategy, i.e. “They’re a threat but non-intervention is the best way to stop them.” It’s an argument about facts, i.e. “There is no threat,” which it has to be because once he admits that Iran is dangerous his isolationist “solution” becomes impossible to sell. In that sense he reminds me of opponents of waterboarding, forced to insist that coercive interrogation never ever works because once they admit that it does, their absolutist opposition is politically dead on arrival. Conservatives complain frequently about Paul’s penchant for blaming America — and here, too, in the blockquote above, he’s already laying the groundwork to say “we started it” if and when Iran tries something — but his foreign policy, such as it is, leaves him with no other choice. The only way isolationism works is if literally any form of intervention against an enemy is morally wrong and just cause for disproportionate reprisal. Which is another way of saying it doesn’t work. Happy viewing.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 9

Ron Paul the Ron Jeremey of the GOP. He cant keep from swallowing the big lie

William Amos on September 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM

There will be other joining you with the Blue Dogs if the GOP ever decides this tool’s ideas are worthy of being part of the party platform. I think he does more damage to the Right with his schtick than anyone else does.

changer1701 on September 26, 2009 at 9:06 PM

Trust me, the Ronulans are already out in full force and confident he will run again in 2012.

We gotta nip this in the bud.

NickTx on September 26, 2009 at 9:09 PM

I’ll run — not walk — into the Blue Dogs’ arms

What makes you think that the blue dog dems think any different than Ron Paul on this? They suck up to the majority, they are spineless wimps only interested in their own re-election. You should know that by now Allahpundit.

Dollayo on September 26, 2009 at 9:10 PM

If you go far enough right — you’ve turned left!

unclesmrgol on September 26, 2009 at 9:11 PM

In Ron Paul’s world the only government that can’t be trusted is our own.

Sure, question our own – that’s fine. In fact, it’s good.

But for goodness sake, at least be sceptical of others.

Paul and his supporters are so wedded to the view that the US government is so corrupt (since the Civil War!), so evil, that they have to fit the rest of the world into that perspective.

And that means the enemy of my enemy must be defended. Or apologized for.

SteveMG on September 26, 2009 at 9:11 PM

William Amos on September 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM

I see him more as the Dennis Kuicinich

FontanaConservative on September 26, 2009 at 9:12 PM

The only way isolationism works is if literally any form of intervention against an enemy is morally wrong and just cause for disproportionate reprisal.

Yep.

And 7, or 15, or 22 sternly worded letters later, we, and our allies, will need to do something.

Isolationism only works in a world without threats.
We’re not there, yet.

massrighty on September 26, 2009 at 9:12 PM

Blue Dogs are a fraud. My guess is more than half of them will end up voting for the public option.

Mark1971 on September 26, 2009 at 9:13 PM

About the only way Obama can appear tough on foreign policy is to make sure a Ron Paul speech follows every single one of his utterances on world affairs. Maybe Barack should just dump Biden and make Ron his VP.

jon1979 on September 26, 2009 at 9:13 PM

This is where I draw the line in contemporary libertarianism.

The foreign policy is a completely out to lunch.

WisCon on September 26, 2009 at 9:15 PM

Ron Paul the Ron Jeremey of the GOP. He cant keep from swallowing the big lie

William Amos on September 26, 2009 at 9:04 PM

You may have meant Jeff Stryker.
Ron Jeremey is straight.

massrighty on September 26, 2009 at 9:17 PM

Wow, I think I just had an offensive reference blocked.

I didn’t think it was offensive.

massrighty on September 26, 2009 at 9:18 PM

To Paul supporters: Ron is NEVER getting close to the U.S. presidency. Thank God!

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:21 PM

Trust me, the Ronulans are already out in full force and confident he will run again in 2012.

We gotta nip this in the bud.

NickTx on September 26, 2009 at 9:09 PM

They are probably dead right about Paul’s intent. As for nipping in the bud, good luck!

In my neighborhood, one can ask: What’s the difference between a car driven by a far left winger and one driven by a Ron Paul supporter? A: The Ronulan has more bumper stickers papering the front and back in addition to the gun rack.

unclesmrgol on September 26, 2009 at 9:22 PM

Its amazing to behold all these closeted Marxists, anti semites, and neo isolationists, coming out of the woodwork now that Chavez lite is president.

elduende on September 26, 2009 at 9:25 PM

Every day I walk into work through a parking lot of cars festooned with (now half-torn-off) Obama-Biden bumper stickers. Invariably, there’s this one old Honda Civic with a Ron Paul sticker on it parked in their midst..

..and every day I think, “Thanks to idiots like that, we have idiots like our current President Training Pants.”

VoyskaPVO on September 26, 2009 at 9:25 PM

CNN…Michael Moore ripping Chris Dodd on his sweeheart CountryWide mortgage deal.

SouthernGent on September 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM

What makes you think that the blue dog dems think any different than Ron Paul on this? They suck up to the majority, they are spineless wimps only interested in their own re-election. You should know that by now Allahpundit.

Dollayo on September 26, 2009 at 9:10 PM

Evan Bayh thinks differently than this.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM

I’ve never seen Ron Paul speak but I’m watching this video. He lies so much.

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM

Ron Paul is the very definition of crazy. Clinically insane, in fact.

Talk about someone who just needs to go away!

19th century thinking for a 21st century world.

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM

Evan Bayh thinks differently than this.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM

Also Joe Lieberman thinks differently than Ron Paul.

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:27 PM

Also Joe Lieberman thinks differently than Ron Paul.

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:27 PM

Oops! I forgot he’s not a Dem anymore. My bad!

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:28 PM

I just do not understand this conspiracy thinking that Paul and his ilk are so fond of. The only people they really seem to distrust are either Israelis, or other Americans. Everyone else gets a pass.

And I am not so sure that Beck is really that far off on the isolationist thing either. Not so long ago, he said he was rethinking Paul’s ideas about foreign engagement and maybe he was not so wrong after all. But then he backed off that right away like he was not serious about it, so who knows?

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:30 PM

It is a pity about Ron paul. So right about the internal, so wrong about the external.

OldEnglish on September 26, 2009 at 9:32 PM

Ron Paul is the very definition of crazy. Clinically insane, in fact.

Talk about someone who just needs to go away!

19th century thinking for a 21st century world.

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM

except for one thing, its not 19th or 18th century thinking. It is ONLY early 20th century thinking after WW1, when the myth of virtuous Isolationism set in and FDR did nothing to refute it during WW2 unfortunately.

The founding fathers were far, far, far, far from “non-interventionist”, i.e. Military Isolationist nutballs.

We let Ron Paul and his fringe clique get away with lying about history and completely distorting it. He is a very dishonest politician. I read him as either a completely gullible idiot or a Machivellian figure for the left, who knows what he is doing.

jp on September 26, 2009 at 9:33 PM

19th century thinking for a 21st century world.

gary4205 on September 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM

“There are no compacts between lions and men, and wolves and lambs have no concord” -Homer.

BTW, I liked your work earlier, on the Palin thread.

massrighty on September 26, 2009 at 9:33 PM

What no mention of Sarah Palin must be a first.

Clyde5445 on September 26, 2009 at 9:34 PM

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:28 PM

I’d love to see Joe Lieberman move all the way over to the Republican party.

I have a dream he’ll block health care, then find his way to our side.

massrighty on September 26, 2009 at 9:35 PM

I’ve never seen Ron Paul speak but I’m watching this video. He lies so much.

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM

I’m not so sure its lies as much as willful ignorance. Either he believes this stuff, or thinks he’s supposed to believe this stuff. Either way, it’s at variance with reality.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:35 PM

http://www.veteranoutrage.com

Now this is EXACTLY why i didnt vote for ron paul
Dont get me wrong ..
On FINANCIAL issues I love what he says.

But on everything ELSE he advocates the isolationist ideals

If it were possible for the USA to isolate itself
from world affairs – totally
I would actually agree with him.

But But But..
the islamic terrorists dont really give a rats ass
about your isolationist ideals..

its either your with Islam – or your the enemy.

Same with communism either your a communist
or your NOT and therefore a legitimate target..

So when ron paul spouts this laughable dream of
ohh lets all just go home and live and let live
he just like liberals forget one important thing

OUR ENEMIES DIDNT AGREE to your self imposed truce.

They dont CARE if you want to just take your marbles and go home..

they want to UTTERLY DESTROY ALL who arent muslims
and they will NOT stop comming just because
you decided to play nice in your own yard and leave everyone else in their yards..

sorry to burst your bubble ron paul
but they will just climb over the fence
and then start killing your family again..

this is the lesson we should have learned from 9/11

The terrorists had all of pakistan and afghanistan
and iran and well the whole saudi aribian area
but that WASNT ENOUGH TO SATISFY THE ISLAMIC NAZIS
desire for Genoicide against the Jews..

No if you ever even had a dealing with a jew you are to be considered as having thrown in your lot with them..

Islam has shown me that Islam is from the pitts of HELL
spawned by satan himself.

For only Islam could so pervert the entire worlds view
that now over 1/3 of the entire world (meaning 1 billion muslims and 1 billion of their liberal supporters worldwide)
now thirst for the blood of the Jews..

so to mr ron paul and all of the dumb ass liberals out there
if you want to surrender to the Islamic Nazis go ahead
I will be home preparing my family to survive the comming liberal betray of the United States of America.

veteranoutrage on September 26, 2009 at 9:36 PM

massrighty on September 26, 2009 at 9:35 PM

he’s got to be worried about being a R and getting re-elected with that brand in Conn.

jp on September 26, 2009 at 9:36 PM

I’d love to see Joe Lieberman move all the way over to the Republican party.

I have a dream he’ll block health care, then find his way to our side.

massrighty on September 26, 2009 at 9:35 PM

I thought Joe was a solid socialist.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:36 PM

I’m not so sure its lies as much as willful ignorance. Either he believes this stuff, or thinks he’s supposed to believe this stuff. Either way, it’s at variance with reality.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:35 PM

He said were gearing for a war in Iran. It is not true. It is a lie.

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:37 PM

This is where I draw the line in contemporary libertarianism.

The foreign policy is a completely out to lunch.

WisCon on September 26, 2009 at 9:15 PM

Some isolationism in libertarianism I can deal with, even if I don’t go that way. This distrust the government stops at the border nonsense I have no use for.

My libertarianism goes more toward sic semper tyrannis. I feel as a free man I have the right to go after any dictator anywhere. Like varmints with no closed season or limits. But I’m kind of cranky.

exception on September 26, 2009 at 9:37 PM

Bayh, Lieberman and Kyl:

The joint statement from Senators Bayh, Lieberman, and Kyl follows:

“The discovery that Iran has been hiding a secret uranium enrichment facility adds fierce new urgency to the collective, comprehensive effort to stop Iran’s nuclear breakout.

“For years, Iran has cheated and lied to the world about its nuclear activities and its nuclear ambitions. Just last week, a secret IAEA report was leaked, describing Iran’s covert nuclear weapons work. Now it has been caught red-handed once again. After today, the evidence all points to one inescapable conclusion: Iran is
determined to acquire nuclear weapons.

“Given Iran’s consistent pattern of deceit, concealment, and bad faith, the only way to force Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions is to make absolutely clear to the regime in Tehran that its current course will carry catastrophic consequences. We must leave no doubt that we are prepared to do whatever it takes to stop Iran’s
nuclear breakout.

“In the absence of immediate compliance by Iran with the IAEA and multiple UN Security Council resolutions, we must act swiftly and decisively to impose crippling new sanctions against Iran. In the Senate, an unprecedented bipartisan majority now supports the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act — S. 908 — which has attracted 76 cosponsors, including both some of the most conservative and most liberal members of this chamber. It is now urgent that our coalition move forward on this bill.

“As our former colleagues Senators Chuck Robb and Dan Coats recently urged in an important bipartisan report, President Obama must also reaffirm that — should diplomacy fail — all options remain on the table.

“Iran says that it has a right to peaceful civilian energy under the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). But the rights accorded by the NPT come with responsibilities, which Iran has systematically and repeatedly flouted. By their own actions, Iran’s leaders have proven why the world cannot trust them to possess the nuclear fuel
cycle.

“As the Senate unanimously affirmed in an amendment we offered to the National Defense Authorization Act this summer, there is now a narrow timetable by which Iran must fully comply with the IAEA and the UN Security Council. Unless it does so and comes completely clean about all its nuclear activities, there must be a presumption of bad faith against Iran — including in its meeting with the P5+1 on October 1. “Until Iran proves otherwise, we must assume the worst about its nuclear intentions and activities — and act accordingly.”

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:37 PM

It is a pity about Ron paul. So right about the internal, so wrong about the external.

But can you really separate the two?

His hostility to Washington on domestic matters leads straight to his hostility to Washington on foreign ones.

My opposition to the expansive state is not because I think the people running it are all evil. I think the danger is the dependency and bureaucracy that it engenders. Along with the waste, politicizing of the economy, et cetera.

E.g., Tocqueville’s “bland despotism” and a dependent populace serving a “tutelary power”.

SteveMG on September 26, 2009 at 9:37 PM

Clyde5445 on September 26, 2009 at 9:34 PM

And no mention that I’ve seen of Mass-a-two-sh!ts having two senators again, thanks to Deval Patrick and a judge probably bought-and-paid-for by the state’s Democrat Machine.

There are plenty of things out there more dangerous than Ron Paul….

MrScribbler on September 26, 2009 at 9:37 PM

Flaming nutcase.

mcassill on September 26, 2009 at 9:38 PM

jp on September 26, 2009 at 9:36 PM

CT has been R before.
After 2010, it may be a lot easier to be a R in Connecticut.

massrighty on September 26, 2009 at 9:38 PM

veteranoutrage on September 26, 2009 at 9:36 PM

Being a Communist/Muslim never removes you from the respective target list.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:39 PM

I thought Joe was a solid socialist.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:36 PM

Lieberman is not exactly a conservative on all those issues, but even he said Obama was spending too much money too fast.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:39 PM

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:37 PM

You think Osama Obama would go for that? Not bl**dy likely!

He wants to talk to his terrorist pals, not make them uncomfortable or put them in a position where they might have to acknowledge our power before he fritters it away.

MrScribbler on September 26, 2009 at 9:40 PM

I’m not so sure its lies as much as willful ignorance. Either he believes this stuff, or thinks he’s supposed to believe this stuff. Either way, it’s at variance with reality.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:35 PM

Its an interesting thought experiment, on trying to read what Paul really believes.

He is a Rothbardian/Bircher ideologue, and their beef with Conservatism and the GOP goes way back. Murray Rothbard, his idol, claimed the USA, not the Soviet Union was the real Evil Empire. He wrote this article in 1983 calling for REagan’ impeachment and repeating every far-left lie under the sun to indict Reagan with.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard54.html

Ronald Reagan, Warmonger by Murray N. Rothbard

jp on September 26, 2009 at 9:40 PM

This is where I draw the line in contemporary libertarianism.

The foreign policy is a completely out to lunch.

WisCon on September 26, 2009 at 9:15 PM

Exactly, I love the Mises site, but I hate their anti-war shlick. It doesn’t work.

Tim Burton on September 26, 2009 at 9:41 PM

I thought Joe was a solid socialist.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:36 PM

He’s with us on foreign policy, and certainly on Mid-East policy.

He’s against the public option.

Not perfect, but I’ll take him as a poke in the eye to the Democratic party.

massrighty on September 26, 2009 at 9:42 PM

It is not just the foreign policy stuff that bothers me about Ron Paul, he has some associations with neo nazis that should bother just about everyone.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:42 PM

Paul is rubber room material

Clyde5445 on September 26, 2009 at 9:42 PM

I’m not so sure its lies as much as willful ignorance. Either he believes this stuff, or thinks he’s supposed to believe this stuff. Either way, it’s at variance with reality.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:35 PM

He believes it. His record as resulting in his voting has been consistent for many years. I respect the consistency of his views, even though I think he is a crank, and is completely out of touch with reality in the realm of foreign policy.

ICBM on September 26, 2009 at 9:43 PM

Did this guy ever sell his blimp?

Hummer53 on September 26, 2009 at 9:44 PM

I think his idea of abolishing the Fed is idiotic in the real world, not the textbook world though.

The more power Congress(Pelosi and company) have over the Fed, the worse for MOnetary Policy. Which was the entire point of it to begin with, which the Founders themselves had this debate and agreed in the end with Hamilton on.

jp on September 26, 2009 at 9:45 PM

He said were gearing for a war in Iran. It is not true. It is a lie.

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:37 PM

The falsity of a statement does not make it lie — to be a lie, the maker of the statement has to believe it to be false. I suspect Paul is nuts enough to believe.

Likewise, I’m not entirely certain that Joe Wilson’s little outburst was completely accurate, because, a untruthful Obama’s health care speech was, I’m not sure the man didn’t believe the words he was saying.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:45 PM

You think Osama Obama would go for that? Not bl**dy likely!

He wants to talk to his terrorist pals, not make them uncomfortable or put them in a position where they might have to acknowledge our power before he fritters it away.

MrScribbler on September 26, 2009 at 9:40 PM

I don’t think Obama knows what the hell he is doing.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:45 PM

If I am not mistaken Paul is a congressional porker as well.

Clyde5445 on September 26, 2009 at 9:45 PM

Seems to me most conservatives and libertarians could agree that we have an internal ‘enemy’ – the statist collectivist mindset that has unfortunately seduced so many Americans and external threats.

We have external threats also and the Iranian issue is undeniable. It will be destabilizing to the entire middle eastern and central asian region.

But while one set of conservatives focuses its laser sights on the external threat, it has ignored the internal decay for decades. On the other extreme are the Paulians, who feel that their liberty is more threatened on a day to day basis by the encroachments of our federal government and consequently give short shrift to the external threats our country faces.

Some very insightful comments by Barry Goldwater so many years ago:

“We can be conquered by bombs or by subversion; but we can also be conquered by neglect — by ignoring the Cosntitution and disregarding the principles of limited government. Our defenses against the accumulation of unilimited power in Washington are in poorer shape, I fear, than out defenses against the aggresive designs of Moscow. Like so many other nations before us, we may succomb through internal weakness rather than fall before a foreign foe.
. . .
“The turn will come when we entrust the conduct of our affairs to men who understand that their first duty as public officials is to divest themselves of the power they have been given, It will come when Americans, in hundreds of cimmunities throughout the nation, decide to put the man in office who is pledged to enforce the Constitution abd restore the Republic. Who will proclaim in a campaign speech” ‘I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden . . . And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ ‘interests’ I shall reply that I was informed ttheir main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.”

Who will espouse these principles and thwart both the internal and external threats faithfully? Not RP, OK, but the last few ‘conservative’ presidents most definitely HAVE NOT.

Firefly_76 on September 26, 2009 at 9:46 PM

unfortunately he has enough good ideas to pull people from voting for conservative candidates that are likely to win

whig33 on September 26, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Michelle Bachmann has a look like on her face like she’s irritated. She is not liking what she’s hearing.

terryannonline on September 26, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Guys like Ron Paul are still pissed that Teddy Roosevelt went after Spain. They are probably pissed Polk went after Mexico. That was Polk right?

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:47 PM

I still think Paul is a Patriot.
Out there, but no worse and a little better than the sots now lying in wait to “fundamentally change the Country”.

The lesser of two evils me thinks.

seesalrun on September 26, 2009 at 9:47 PM

He believes it. His record as resulting in his voting has been consistent for many years. I respect the consistency of his views, even though I think he is a crank, and is completely out of touch with reality in the realm of foreign policy.

ICBM on September 26, 2009 at 9:43 PM

He did however, vote FOR the 2001 AUMF that Afghanistan War is fought under. Apparently this resolution wasn’t “Unconstitutional” like the 2002 AUMF is according to him.

He went on to claim the Afghanistan war was in fact for “Oil Pipelines” and that we needed to withdrawal(as he claimed during the campaign. Now, he recently stated on a Youtube video that he beleives withdrawing from our “Murder” of Afghanistan is more important than stopping Obamacare!

jp on September 26, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Thankfully, this old crank’s isolationist denialism is so fringe on the right that not even mainstreamers who are sympathetic to his broader agenda, like Glenn Beck, will go near it.

George W. Bush said he would not tolerate a nuclear Iran and yet kicked the can down the road to Obama who, like Bush, will do nothing to prevent it. So the end result is the same as if Ron Paul had been the Republican President.

aengus on September 26, 2009 at 9:48 PM

If you go far enough right — you’ve turned left!

unclesmrgol on September 26, 2009 at 9:11 PM

Exactly. I think some people would be very surprized to see who supports Paul. They aren’t GOP’ers.

Vashta.Nerada on September 26, 2009 at 9:48 PM

whig33:

I just do not get that. It took me about 2 minutes to come to the conclusion that Paul was a nut case.

But then it took me less time than that to decide that Obama was snake oil salesman..and millions of people disagreed with me. So there you go.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:49 PM

If you go far enough right — you’ve turned left!

unclesmrgol on September 26, 2009 at 9:11 PM

I agree.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:49 PM

They are probably pissed Polk went after Mexico. That was Polk right?

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Correct.

Vashta.Nerada on September 26, 2009 at 9:50 PM

Guys like Ron Paul are still pissed that Teddy Roosevelt went after Spain. They are probably pissed Polk went after Mexico. That was Polk right?

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Teddy was a participant in the armed force that went after Spain, but that was a long time before he became president.

Yeah, I’m pretty sure it was Polk. I seem to remember hearing something about him chewing out the general that accepted Mexico’s conditional surrender instead of taking over the whole place.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:52 PM

Terrye,
Alot of people (not me) like the fair tax.
Alot of people like auditing the FED.
Alot of people like some of the things that he proposes and when you only look for what you want instead of looking harder some people will like what they see in him. It is unfortunate because just like you I see the guy as a nutball also but you and I just by being here and giving enough of a dang about things to discuss them are not the norm.

whig33 on September 26, 2009 at 9:52 PM

Exactly. I think some people would be very surprized to see who supports Paul. They aren’t GOP’ers.

Vashta.Nerada on September 26, 2009 at 9:48 PM

Most of the Paulnuts that I’ve encountered are more Anarchist that members of either political party.

thomasaur on September 26, 2009 at 9:52 PM

They are probably pissed Polk went after Mexico. That was Polk right?

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:47 PM

strangely though, you never hear them saying a bad thing about Jefferson…..La. Purchase, Barbary Wars, Killing Indians in Ga and Tenn. Jefferson wanted to seize Canada and Cuba with our military, or atleast talked about doing it.

jp on September 26, 2009 at 9:52 PM

SteveMG on September 26, 2009 at 9:37 PM

No argument, there. I just find it sad that a high profile person can have such a split personality on political issues. I applaud his distaste for Washington, or any political centre, for that matter, but he ruins it with his lack of reality vis-a-vis the rest of the world.

The days of shutting the gates have long gone.

OldEnglish on September 26, 2009 at 9:52 PM

George W. Bush said he would not tolerate a nuclear Iran and yet kicked the can down the road to Obama who, like Bush, will do nothing to prevent it. So the end result is the same as if Ron Paul had been the Republican President.

aengus on September 26, 2009 at 9:48 PM

When he left office, there was not a nuclear Iran. And you know what? Bush had a lot on his plate, and people simply did not support going after Iran, especially after the 2007 NIE report. This was one reason I would get frustrated with some conservatives for going after Bush so hard on so many things, he had a Democratic opposition that would not ever support Bush going after Iran..so he needed all the help he could get. A lot of people on the right just sort of baled too.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:53 PM

Guys like Ron Paul are still pissed that Teddy Roosevelt went after Spain.

It goes further back than that.

They hate Lincoln for “centralizing” power. The war was both unnecessary and unjustified.

Read some Murray Rothbard for example.

SteveMG on September 26, 2009 at 9:53 PM

jp:

I know, I agree. In fact think how much better off we would be if they had made Cuba protectorate and took Mexico when they took the rest of the southwest.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:54 PM

i was there….people started walking out when others in the crowd kept shouting
“INSIDE JOB”

alexraye on September 26, 2009 at 9:54 PM

SteveMG:

I think you are right, it is as if the Confederacy lives on.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Most of the Paulnuts that I’ve encountered are more Anarchist that members of either political party.

thomasaur on September 26, 2009 at 9:52 PM

others are College kids and 20 somethings, who grew up in GOP households but had College, Jon Stewart and AMerican Pop Culture make them well aware of how evil and non-cool the GOP is. From there they here Paul tell them how he is real conservatism and everyone else is the “Neo-Con” boogeyman.

From that they read Ron Paul’s book to discover(falsely) that he is a modern day “Founding father” and on top of that the far-left lies(RObert Pape) on Terrorism.

jp on September 26, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Most of the Paulnuts that I’ve encountered are more Anarchist that members of either political party.

thomasaur on September 26, 2009 at 9:52 PM

Anarchists are either closet Communists or bandits. Either way, what’s yours is theirs, and what’s theirs is theirs.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Too many republicans are addicted to the maintenance of this overseas empire.They cannot understand that the welfare state and warfare state are the same incorrigible creature. National defense threats are over magnified and embellished to keep them in line. Does anyone in their right mind think that Iran poses a serious national security threat to the U.S? Seriously. Iran isn’t even the most powerful nation in the region.

Pitchforker on September 26, 2009 at 9:57 PM

When he left office, there was not a nuclear Iran.

Oh c’mon that’s not what he meant. I don’t have the exact quote but he said he would stop their nuclear prpogram from coming to fruition.

Bush had a lot on his plate, and people simply did not support going after Iran, especially after the 2007 NIE report.

I’m not saying he didn’t have reasons for not bombing Iran but you have to admit the issue is dialectical – either Iran gets nuclear weapons or it doesn’t – and Bush as President did no more to thwart Iran’s nuclear program than Ron Paul would have. Sad but true.

aengus on September 26, 2009 at 9:57 PM

whig:

I know a lot of people support the fair tax, but you do not have to be a nut case to support the fair tax.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:58 PM

others are College kids and 20 somethings, who grew up in GOP households but had College, Jon Stewart and AMerican Pop Culture make them well aware of how evil and non-cool the GOP is. From there they here Paul tell them how he is real conservatism and everyone else is the “Neo-Con” boogeyman.

jp on September 26, 2009 at 9:55 PM

Yes, I call them Apathists, for lack of a better term, but they would hate that. Each of them believes they are unique, not part of a fan club.

Vashta.Nerada on September 26, 2009 at 9:58 PM

I found myself in an argument with a Paul nut last night. It got a little heated. I really never found myself in that detailed a discussion with one before. What I just don’t get is how anyone that could see every conspiracy that could possibly involve the USA or Israel could be so trusting of every middle eastern nation. If you’re a cynic, then why not be a cynic about everyone?

stldave on September 26, 2009 at 9:59 PM

I know, I agree. In fact think how much better off we would be if they had made Cuba protectorate and took Mexico when they took the rest of the southwest.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 9:54 PM

Well, I’m not sure how much better we would be off for it, but I’m sure the occupants of Mexico would have been a lot better off for it.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:59 PM

We have no overseas empire.

We cannot get Germany to send 1,000 troops to help us in Afghanistan. When they do send troops they’re instructed not to use their weapons.

Heck, we can’t even get Pakistan to do what we want.

Some Empire.

SteveMG on September 26, 2009 at 9:59 PM

What they’re getting ready to do is put very, very strong sanctions on Iran. … But sanctions, and blockades, and prevention like this is an act of war.

I really doubt that Bojangles Obama’s Keboki Dance will even have any of those steps in it. Must be a slow news day.

MB4 on September 26, 2009 at 9:59 PM

thomasaur on September 26, 2009 at 9:52 PM

Most of the Anarchists that I have encountered over the years are not real Anarchists. They tend to be more of the “a pox on both houses” type.

OldEnglish on September 26, 2009 at 10:00 PM

aengus:

When he left office, there was not a nuclear Iran.

Oh c’mon that’s not what he meant. I don’t have the exact quote but he said he would stop their nuclear prpogram from coming to fruition.

I disagree. Bush also said that he thought there were ways short of a military assault to deal with Iran’s weapon program. I think he might have been thinking not only of sanctions and blockades, but of regime change from within.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 10:01 PM

I know a lot of people support the fair tax, but you do not have to be a nut case to support the fair tax.

I know that, heck a large number of whigs support it. But when that is all someone is looking for it is easy to skip to that read his position and then exit the browser without worrying about the rest. It is the lazy informed of the uninformed that disappoint me more than the true beliving nutballs.

whig33 on September 26, 2009 at 10:01 PM

What I just don’t get is how anyone that could see every conspiracy that could possibly involve the USA or Israel could be so trusting of every middle eastern nation. If you’re a cynic, then why not be a cynic about everyone?

The Saudi lobby is powerful enough that most people don’t get to hear about it.

aengus on September 26, 2009 at 10:01 PM

Does anyone in their right mind think that Iran poses a serious national security threat to the U.S? Seriously. Iran isn’t even the most powerful nation in the region.

Pitchforker on September 26, 2009 at 9:57 PM

Let’s discuss this after Iran launches their missles into the Saudi port facilities, and oil breaks the $500/barrel mark. Think not only of your automobile, but also of our tanks, planes, and most surface ships which are not nuclear.

Vashta.Nerada on September 26, 2009 at 10:01 PM

the religious side of Paul’s faction, do beleive the US became evil with Lincoln, some go back well before that though.

They view the messiah worship of Obama, no different than the Patriotism of Conservatives(i.e. Conservatives are just worshiping the State through a different means). SO both worshiping the same false idol. With Lincoln taking the US from its Purtian roots to Americanism as a religion.

There is debate within those camps on that, but that is the short version of what it is they believe.

jp on September 26, 2009 at 10:01 PM

Is our government controlled by foreign interests? Apparently so.

http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/nov/01/00006/

Pitchforker on September 26, 2009 at 10:01 PM

Ron Paul is a kook. But this part caught my attention:

What they’re getting ready to do is put very, very strong sanctions on Iran. … But sanctions, and blockades, and prevention like this is an act of war.

And when they have their nukes, this is exactly what the Iranians will claim. So back to The One. What’s he going to do when the Iranians demand he remove the sanctions?

pearson on September 26, 2009 at 10:02 PM

If you go far enough right — you’ve turned left!

unclesmrgol on September 26, 2009 at 9:11 PM

Heh! Doc Hudson proverbs.

Alden Pyle on September 26, 2009 at 10:03 PM

Ron Paul is a fraud.

In 20+ years, he’s done nothing but lap up hundreds of millions of dollars of pork and give the MSM soundbites to embarrass the GOP.

And lets drive a stake through the heart of him being a “libertarian”. He is a anarcho-populist, which is the polar opposite of libertarianism.

Rebar on September 26, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Let’s discuss this after Iran launches their missles into the Saudi port facilities, and oil breaks the $500/barrel mark. Think not only of your automobile, but also of our tanks, planes, and most surface ships which are not nuclear.

Vashta.Nerada on September 26, 2009 at 10:01 PM

and the cost of the food you eat, and what that does to the World Econonmy(your Economic Liberties).

Someone has to take the time to engage, on the intellectual side, on how a Strong Muscular Foreign Policy and Military is a component of Liberty, and a must for Capitalism and Global Trade.

Shouldn’t be hard with our history and our cousin Britain’s history. These fools will point to Hong Kong as a model for the ‘free market’ but deny it was the British who took it to them and taught it to them, and that its the American Military that made their rise possible.

jp on September 26, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Well, I’m not sure how much better we would be off for it, but I’m sure the occupants of Mexico would have been a lot better off for it.

Count to 10 on September 26, 2009 at 9:59 PM

I have wondered about this in alternative history sort of way…after all, most of the Southwest was actually part of Mexico a long long time ago. The Mexican war was in 1848 I think. There were not nearly so many people there then.

But then again, it might have been a huge mistake too.

Terrye on September 26, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Pitchforker on September 26, 2009 at 9:57 PM

Is that you, Ron?

OldEnglish on September 26, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Let’s discuss this after Iran launches their missles into the Saudi port facilities, and oil breaks the $500/barrel mark. Think not only of your automobile, but also of our tanks, planes, and most surface ships which are not nuclear.

Why would a nation intentionally commit what would assuredly be described as ‘national suicide’?

Pitchforker on September 26, 2009 at 10:04 PM

A nuclear arms race in the Middle East – which will surely follow if Iran acquires them – is simply a disaster waiting to happen for our interests and security.

This isn’t exclusively or even solely about Israel.

This is about a world that gets smaller every day. I know, that’s trite (very); but it’s also true.

SteveMG on September 26, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 9