Ron Paul on Sarah Palin.
20 07 2009Ron Paul. You just gotta love him. OK, I know you don’t really. And yeah, there are a ton of things I disagree with him about completely, and a couple I agree with. But there’s something I just like about him. I can’t explain it. I remember watching a couple teenage boys last fall, climbing up a huge snow pile off the side of the Seward Highway. The thing was probably 40 feet high, and they hoofed it all the way up so they could stick a Ron Paul sign on the top, like it was the political Mt. Everest. Then they ran, slid and tumbled to the bottom, high fiving each other, full of exuberant energy. I remember wondering what on earth Ron Paul must have thought of Sarah Palin. Here’s a partial answer.
As for soon-to-be departing Alaska Governor Sarah Paul dismisses her supporters as “more establishment, conventional Country-Club type of Republicans.”
“I wonder whether she’s energizing the 15-20 year olds,” Paul muses. “That would be a question I would have. Because she doesn’t talk about the Federal Reserve and some of these issues. She doesn’t talk too much about personal liberties, civil liberties, getting rid of drug laws, attacking the war on drugs, punishing people who torture.”
Nope. Can’t recal Palin ever addressing these issues very much. Don’t remember any teens risking life or limb, climbing mountains to put Palin signs on the summit. I think if Sarah Palin stood up there in her last week, and gave a rousing speech about the Federal Reserve, or how we have to punish people who torture, half of the state would be peeling their chins off the pavement, and the other half would just keel over. And yes, the running theory by some Palin fans as to why Ron Paul would dis the shiny new Republican Party hood ornament? He’s jealous.
[Off topic posts go on The Open Thread. Thanks!]
July 20th, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Sarah doesn’t energize the young ones, its the old corrupt bastards who get “energized” when her greedy unfair-o-moans waft through the room.
Ron Paul, Mitt, Huck, and Sarah have effectively drawn and quartered the Oliphant.
All we need now is for someone to (figuratively) mount Rush’s head on a backboard so we can all play point guard and throw down some three pointers.
July 20th, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Sarah doesn’t energize the young ones, its the old corrupt bastards who get “energized” when her greedy unfair-o-moans waft through the room.
Ron Paul, Mitt, Huck, and Sarah have effectively drawn and quartered the Oliphant of the GOP.
All we need now is for someone to (figuratively) mount Rush’s head on a backboard so we can all play point guard and throw down some three pointers.
July 20th, 2009 at 3:58 PM
FYI re: Ron Paul – (and Pat Buchanan)
American Nazi Party Chief says Ron Paul is one of us
Bill White, commander of the American National Socialist Worker’s Party, aka The American Nazi Party, wrote the following on the Nazi Vanguard News Network:
Comrades:
I have kept quiet about the Ron Paul campaign for a while, because I didn’t see any need to say anything that would cause any trouble. However, reading the latest release from his campaign spokesman, I am compelled to tell the truth about Ron Paul’s extensive involvement in white nationalism.
Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.
I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy.
For his spokesman to call white racialism a “small ideology” and claim white activists are “wasting their money” trying to influence Paul is ridiculous. Paul is a white nationalist of the Stormfront type who has always kept his racial views and his views about world Judaism quiet because of his political position.
I don’t know that it is necessarily good for Paul to “expose” this. However, he really is someone with extensive ties to white nationalism and for him to deny that in the belief he will be more respectable by denying it is outrageous — and I hate seeing people in the press who denounce racialism merely because they think it is not fashionable.
Bill White, Commander
American National Socialist Workers Party
*********
This was written during the campaign after word began to circulate about RP’s anti-semitism and ties to White Supremecists and Paul, fearing a backlash had his spokesperson issue denials. Take note.
redwoodmuse
July 20th, 2009 at 4:11 PM
and more on RP’s policies etc. from the campaign. It’s good to research any politician – they all say what they need to say to get elected —and yes, I voted for Obama and I’m awfully disappointed….
————-RE: Ron Paul – more info
At the root of the Ron Paul “revolution” is the dismantling of Social Security and the Department of Education as well as other basic social programs, and the elimination of worker and environmental protections. Advances like single payer health care? No way. Ron Paul’s message is that you need to take care of yourself, and that there shouldn’t be such government programs, nor such interference with private profit. While he puts forward reasons for not supporting going to war abroad, his domestic policies would ignite civil war at home.
In addition to pretending he’s against all government, he’s for outlawing abortion and supports the continued ban on same-sex marriage. He was one of the original co-sponsors of the “Marriage Protection Act”.
He’s also a religious extremist who thinks that creationism should be taught in the schools.
On race, Ron Paul was one of 33 Congress members to vote against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, an act that was first passed to give Blacks in the south the right to vote. On a similar note, he says the Civil Rights Act violates the Constitution and impedes on individual liberties. Speaking of Blacks in Washington DC he states in campaign literature, “95 percent of African Americans in are semi-criminal or entirely criminal”.
No wonder the American Nazi Party has close relations with him. (see letter from Nazi Commander Bill White above). In addition, Ron Paul has the support of other white supremacists such as David Duke, and has knowingly taken donations from former KKK Grand Wizard Don Black.
——————————
it is up to us to pay attention to what a candidate is really about and not just fall for a pretty face or a ‘no war’ stance. IMHO.
redwoodmuse- who has gotten entirely too cynical about politics
July 20th, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Word up, redwoodmuse.
Political cynicism is your friend. Helps you keep your perspective in the proper place.
July 20th, 2009 at 6:20 PM
High five redwoodmuse
July 20th, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Phil Munger, your comments are off topic. As a Jew, I do find Ron Paul to be an anti-Semite based on my own readings. And my personal opinion is that he is anti-Semitic. And I also do not appreciate your anti-Israel comments appropriate on this thread. I was going to comment on that earlier but I was trying to be respectful to AKM and it’s off the topic.
Also I am not surprised people call you or accuse you of anti-semitism. I have no clue whether you are or not of course but your comments about Israel are biased and one-sided and fuel anti-semitism in others. Sorry, they do. I have an immediate immediate negative reaction to your comments which is why I don’t read your blog. You should not assume every liberal or progressive person agrees with you but all of this is also off topic. I wasn’t going to say a word but I don’t appreciate your talking against the anti-defamation league and telling me how I should talk about Ron Paul.
July 20th, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Ron Paul repudiated the newsletters a long time ago. As he should have.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/08/ron-paul-responds-to-new-_n_80513.html
Frankly, I think these kinds of smears are right on par with suggesting that President Obama is someone who “pals around with terrorists.”
July 20th, 2009 at 8:13 PM
lysistrata Says:
July 20th, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Ron Paul repudiated the newsletters a long time ago. As he should have.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/08/ron-paul-responds-to-new-_n_80513.html
Frankly, I think these kinds of smears are right on par with suggesting that President Obama is someone who “pals around with terrorists.”
———–
The posts say nothing about ‘decades old newsletters’. Repudiation in politics is often code for ‘oops, I got caught.’ And finally, it isn’t smearing if it is true. I read up on RP when I first heard about him, thinking he might have potential as a viable candidate I could vote for. It has been a long time since I accepted what a candidate says without checking on voting records, prior public statements, and any other background information I can find (such as where/who do campaign contributions from? )
As I checked into him, I began to see things that disturbed me so, I DID MY DUE DILIGENCE AS A CITIZEN and I followed threads to sites and publications I find repugnant and there I found a different RP from the populist poser who was attracting all the attention. These things can all be fairly easily checked by anyone who wants the truth and doesn’t just want to accept what is presented ‘because he said so.’
Campaign contributions from known white supremacists? Check.
Against choice for women while espousing individual rights? Check.
One of the original co-sponsors of the “Marriage Protection Act”? Check.
Thinks creationist should be taught in the schools? Check.
One of 33 Congress members to vote against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, an act that was first passed to give Blacks in the south the right to vote. Check.
Says the Civil Rights Act violates the Constitution and impedes on individual liberties? Check.
Racist quotes in campaign literature? Check.
No smears. Just looking at his record and judging him accordingly.
redwoodmuse
July 20th, 2009 at 9:16 PM
redwood moose: I have learned so much from your posts this evening. Thank you. I have to say, I am disgusted and dismayed by what I have learned about Ron Paul, and I find that you have provided ample evidence to back your posts.
I was NOT a Ron Paul supporter, due to differing philosophy regarding his economic policies – yet I DID consider him thoughtful and bright. Now I see him as another grave danger to separation of Church and State (big issue for me) and a racist/anti-Semite to boot. Your posts left a big pit in my stomach, but you have enlightened me.
July 20th, 2009 at 9:19 PM
ON TOPIC -
I have wondered what Ron Paul has thought about Palin. I was never a fan of his, but he did appear to be more honorable than Bush and Co. It is disappointing to think that Paul may be a racist.
OFF TOPIC, but in response to other comments:
56 LIsabeth Says:
July 20th, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Phil Munger, your comments are off topic… And I also do not appreciate your anti-Israel comments appropriate on this thread…Also I am not surprised people call you or accuse you of anti-semitism. I have no clue whether you are or not of course but your comments about Israel are biased and one-sided and fuel anti-semitism in others.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lisabeth – Phil Munger’s comments are no more off topic than yours. He was speaking in the context of Ron Paul, as are you. Just because you don’t agree with his comment regarding Israel does not mean that the comment is off topic. I also don’t appreciate the passive-aggressive manner in which you have basically called Phil anti-Semitic. He doesn’t like the policies of a GOVERNMENT. So what? It really gave me a sick feeling to read your comment and I don’t think that has any place on this site. A lot of people didn’t like Bush’s policies, but still liked Americans just the same.
Sorry AKM, but I got irked enough after reading the comment on my phone, to get out of bed, go into my office and turn on my PC.
July 21st, 2009 at 3:25 AM
I actually live in Ron Paul’s district, down here in South Texas where rednecks abound. Could be worse, I suppose. We might have someone like Michelle Bachmann.
Dr. Paul has been in the House for years and has been pretty much ignored by his fellow conservatives. I can’t think of one substantive bill that has Paul’s name on it. He routinely votes against projects and programs that would be beneficial to his own district, but for some reason we keep sending the guy back. Who ever said voters know how to recognize their own self-interest?
And maybe I am missing the point, but what does it matter if Sarah Palin doesn’t excite 15 year olds? Last time I checked, the voting age was 18. And of course Sarah can’t talk about the Federal Reserve, since she obviously hasn’t got the first clue about monetary policy.
July 21st, 2009 at 4:50 AM
Ron Paul is more libertarian and I like much of what he says, NOT all though.
I could be more fiscally conservative IF the GOP got rid of the fundie nuts and went libertarian on social issues: legalize pot and other drugs, let gays marry, let Roe stand, and I could maybe vote GOP occassionally.
Sad that we have just two parties that both have some good ideas but as a voter you almost have to choose based on your one most important issue. Like Christians voting GOP, which is NOT very Christ-like in taking care of our brothers, because of Roe and gays. I might not like teachers unions and too much litigation, but I can’t vote GOP because of social issues. sigh
We do need a third party, just not the Liars for Jesus party Palin wants,
.
July 21st, 2009 at 5:03 AM
As an early adopter of Mudflats back last September, I LOVE MUDFLATS, during the election it was my island of sanity, as my husband freely told friends (I think he was very thankful for Mudflats also as AKM and fellow Mudflatters kept me sane and easier to be around!!).
HOWEVER, I am feelilng a little uncomfortable that we not cross a very fine line and become a Palinesque feeding frenzy, and in the process, lose some credibility for the long list of legitimate criticisms she truly deserves. I am starting to feel tinges of a bunch of junior high girls ganging up on a girl they do not like, even if she has done things that are not likeable. There seems like a fine line that, when crossed, our ‘criticisms’ begin to seem, to me, like a bit of a feeding frenzy. Perhaps we could put our brains to work devising ways to communicate our concerns to those who do not agree with us in ways that they could understand, a la Abraham Lincoln, and our Obama.
Thanks all for everything.
July 21st, 2009 at 6:12 AM
I’ve been reading a lot about the political religious extremists lately but never though Ron Paul was involved. Little by little they will all be identified and hopefully frighten some voters against supporting them. They don’t want freedom for the nation, they want control. I think this is what nearly brought us to ruin with the Bush years. This is truly a wake up call.
July 21st, 2009 at 2:26 PM
Ron Paul is the most dangerous political combination possible: a dominionist and a sophomore who never got over his infatuation with Ayn Rand’s banal “philosophy”.
July 21st, 2009 at 3:23 PM
Paul/- Palin 2012?!!!
July 23rd, 2009 at 3:05 PM
You know I had forgottne that Paul wanted to get rid of S.S. and that was one reason I would not vote for him Once I heard that I did not look any further