The Rabinowitzes and Gersons of this world are angry that people are
beginning to question the previously unquestionable: they’re paranoid
that their positions as opinion "leaders" and official arbiters of
what’s kosher and what’s not are being overturned – and they’re chock
full of hate for anyone who, like Rep. Paul, challenges their power.
----
know the enemy

On Feb 22, 12:37 pm, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ron Paul!That's all I have to say…byJustin Raimondo, February 22, 2010
> The annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), which has been 
> going on formany years, is a bellwether of where the action is on the right 
> side of the political spectrum – and the news from the latest gathering has 
> both the traditionalBuckley-style rightand theObama-ite liberal-leftin shock. 
> The CPAC presidential polls are a conference tradition, and the winner is 
> often hailed as not only the up-and-coming champion of the Republican "hard" 
> right but also a serious presidential contender. The winner of the previous 
> three CPAC polls,Mitt Romney, was accorded such status early on in part 
> because of his CPAC victories, but this time he wasleft in the dustby 
> congressmanRon Paul.
> Headlines reported Paul’s win as a "surprise," but early indications of the 
> Paulian domination of CPAC this year included the ubiquitous presence ofYoung 
> Americans for Liberty(YAL) activists and therock star receptiongiven to Rep. 
> Paul himself.
> Theformer– and perhaps future – Republicanpresidential candidategave 
> ahalf-hour perorationthat boldly stressedanti-interventionist foreign 
> policyas the key to reining in big government on the home front. Invoking the 
> shade ofRobert A. Taft, and wondering aloud how we’re going to pay for our 
> empire, Paul traced the roots of our dilemma back toWoodrow Wilson, the 
> quintessential "progressive" of Glenn Beck’s worst nightmares. Unlike Beck, 
> however, whose anti-progressive polemics only mention World War I in passing, 
> Paul realizes that the whole kit-n-kaboodle of progressivism –the income 
> tax,the Federal Reserve, and the philosophy of government as an instrument of 
> moral uplift –all culminated in US involvement inthe Great War.
> AsMurray Rothbard pointed out, the war – portrayed by its advocates atThe New 
> Republicand among the nation’s intelligentsia as a crusade for moral and 
> spiritual uplift on a global scale – was the apotheosis of the progressive 
> project. The term "Wilsonian," in foreign policy lingo, refers to the view 
> that democracy and human rights can and should be advanced abroad at gunpoint.
> We didn’t hear Beck, at this conference, where he was the featured speaker, 
> or during one of his televised tirades, own up to theessentially 
> Wilsonianforeign policy of the Bush administration, which he fulsomely 
> supported. Beck is the perfect right-wing populist archetype, who, armed with 
> a little knowledge, manages to miss the essential lesson of the Bush years – 
> that an interventionist foreign policy with globalist pretensions 
> isincompatiblewith the desire for limited government.
> Nor does Beck, in hismany disquisitionson the evils of progressivism, 
> mentionthe worst depredationsof the "progressive" Wilson administration, 
> which Ron Paul surely did: it warmed the cockles of my libertarian heart to 
> hear, at a CPAC conference, the name ofEugene Victor Debsraised as a martyr 
> to the cause of individual rights, on account of his being jailed forspeaking 
> outagainst World War I. Yes, and it was aRepublican, Paul reminded his 
> audience – Warren G. Harding – who finally freed Debs. Ron truly is the 
> anti-Cheney.
> Too many conservatives, averred Paul, take a piecemeal approach to liberty: 
> they don’t understand that freedom is indivisible, and that you can’t have 
> constitutional and strictly limited government while engaging in endless wars.
> Beck, inhis CPAC speech, likened the Republican party to a substance-abuser: 
> the first thing you’re supposed to do, he said, is recognize that you have a 
> problem. Beck would do well to follow his own advice: he should go on 
> television and admit thatheand his fellow "movement" conservatives are 
> addicted to war, and warmongering.
> Paul’s CPAC victory is a stunning repudiation of the War Party’s 
> long-standing dominance of the GOP, and is bound to ramp up the already quite 
> active campaign to smear and destroy him. Neocon Dorothy Rabinowitz, in the 
> midst ofa jeremiadostensibly aimed at Sarah Palin, points out that the 
> liberals may hate Sarah for all the wrong reasons, but there are perfectly 
> good neoconservative reasons for joining in the media pile-on, beginning 
> with:"The unsavory echoes of her regular references to ‘the real America’ as 
> opposed to those shadowy “elites,” now charged with threats to the life, 
> liberty and the pursuit of happiness of all real Americans. Neither does she 
> seem to have any idea of how that low soapbox oratory – embracing one kind of 
> American as the real kind, those builders in the towns and cities across 
> America – rings in the ear today. It is not new."Neocons hate people who talk 
> about the elites in less than reverent tones, because they think you’re 
> talking aboutthem– which is often the case. They hate any sort of populism, 
> whether of the right or the left, because they see in it the seeds of 
> revolution, and, of course, anti-Semitism. Most of all they hate Ron Paul, 
> because he and his followers embody the Jeffersonian values and culture of 
> the American heartland, the old America of Bob Taft, America First, and a 
> Republican party that was skeptical of overseas adventurism. They are the 
> "real Americans" Rabinowitz hates and fears, and, this year, they came to 
> CPAC in droves.
> A rebellion among conservativeshas long been brewing, and the CPAC convention 
> represents the first skirmish in a civil war on the right, a war that is 
> essentially over foreign policy. The Paul movement is well-organized, 
> activist-oriented, and well-funded: more importantly, it has 
> awell-groundedideology, one that offers an alternative to the brain-dead 
> neoconservatism of Republican party hacks and third-rate politicians likeRudy 
> Giuliani– whose single delegate to the 2008 Republican convention fairly 
> represents the strength of the Rabinowitz wing of the conservative movement.
> As numerically tiny and largely discredited as the neoconservatives are on 
> the right, the whole tone of Rabinowitz’s disquisition is that of an arbiter, 
> one whose blessings – or curses – are the final word on the subject of Palin, 
> Paul, and, as it turns out, Rand Paul, Ron’s son, who is running for the US 
> Senate in Kentucky:"Though it hasn’t attracted wide attention, nothing Mrs. 
> Palin has done recently has been worthier of notice than her endorsement of 
> Rand Paul, now running in Kentucky’s GOP senate primary. Dr. Paul, an 
> ophthalmologist and radical libertarian, holds views on national security and 
> defense that have much in common with those of the far left. Not to mention 
> those of the considerable body of conspiracy theorists, antigovernment 
> zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and 
> deranged who flocked to the presidential candidacy of his father Ron Paul, 
> the congressman from Texas."Whatever sort of libertarian Rand Paul is, 
> "radical" is hardly a fair description: here, after all, is someone 
> whodisdainsthe Obama administration’sdeterminationto try Khalid Sheikh 
> Mohammed and the Christmas Day bomber in civilian courts, and opposes the 
> dismantling of Guantanamo. Sure, hequestionsUS policy in Afghanistan, Iraq, 
> and elsewhere, pointing out that we don’t need to be "nation-building" 
> overseas when our own nation is falling to pieces, but such complaints are 
> hardly the exclusive prerogative of libertarians, radical or otherwise.
> Rabinowitz & Co. have their work cut out for them if they’re going to try and 
> convince conservatives that the Paul movement is "leftist." Good luck with 
> that one. The neocon method, however, is simple repetition: if you tell a lie 
> long enough, and persistently enough, maybe, just maybe people will come to 
> accept it.
> "Conspiracy theorist," "zealot," "deranged," "truther" – rinse, and repeat. 
> There is something oddly childish about the taunting polemical style of the 
> neocons: what it boils down to is simple name-calling. Rather than engage 
> Paul’s actual views, the idea is to drive him out of the public square by 
> means of pure epithets. Former Bush speechwriter Michael Gersonjoins the 
> chorus:"The left has a political interest in defining the broad backlash 
> against expanded government as identical to the worst elements of the Tea 
> Party movement –birthersand Birchers, militias and nativists, racists and 
> conspiracy theorists, acolytes of Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo and Lyndon 
> LaRouche."Ron Paul, avers Gerson, is preying on those "new to political 
> engagement" who find "anger and paranoia intoxicating." (After all, there’s 
> nothing to be angry about: only the "paranoid" get angry.) They "listen to 
> Ron Paul attacking the Federal Reserve cabal, and suddenly their resentments 
> become ordered into a theory. Such theories, in politics, can act like a 
> drug, causing addiction, euphoria and psychedelic departures from reality."
> Yes those drug addict-truther-paranoid-extremist-birther-militia types – how 
> dare they so much as open their mouths!
> The whole neocon pack of attack dogs is bound to be out in full force by 
> Monday morning, on that you can depend. Angry, paranoid, and full of hate – 
> that describes Ron’s critics to a tee. They are merely projecting these 
> attributes which they possess in full measure onto Ron Paul and his 
> supporters.
> The Rabinowitzes and Gersons of this world are angry that people are 
> beginning to question the previously unquestionable: they’re paranoid that 
> their positions as opinion "leaders" and official arbiters of what’s kosher 
> and what’s not are being overturned – and they’re chock full of hate for 
> anyone who, like Rep. Paul, challenges their power. As well they should be. 
> Because if Ron and themovementhe leads is successful, their day is over and 
> done.http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/02/21/ron-paul/

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
  • Ron Paul! M. Johnson
    • Re: Ron Paul! plainolamerican

Reply via email to