Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul People (Southern Avenger)
American Conservative ^ | 2010-02-22 | Jack Hunter aka Southern Avenger

Posted on 02/22/2010 11:33:11 PM PST by rabscuttle385

When Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina was censured by various GOP county committees in his own state recently, Graham dismissively blamed it on “Ron Paul people.” When Florida governor and U.S. Senate candidate Charlie Crist was defeated in a Republican straw poll by challenger Marco Rubio in December, Crist complained it was nothing more than “Ron Paul people”

At this year’s 2010 Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C/, there were plenty of “Ron Paul people,” enough to deliver the congressman a first-place victory in the annual CPAC straw poll, long considered a decent gauge of conservatives’ mindset. But when Paul’s victory was announced much of the CPAC crowd booed, showing disdain for the congressman not unlike that expressed by Graham and Crist. Those pesky “Ron Paul people” had struck again, it seemed, and many Republican establishment types quickly dismissed the poll. But one glaring question remains: Who is it that Paul’s critics prefer to him? What kind of “people” are they?

What, for example, are Mitt Romney people, who placed second this year and won CPAC’s straw poll the last three years? Romney was introduced at CPAC by newly elected senator Scott Brown, and the Massachusetts politicians stood side by side before a cheering conservative audience that seemed oblivious to the fact both men implemented government-mandated healthcare in their state, similar to the Democrats’ current national plan. President Obama and his party have even often cited the Massachusetts plan, known as “Romneycare,” as the model for “Obamacare.” In his speech, Romney also had much praise for George W. Bush. The crowd went wild.

What are “Dick Cheney people,” who received a standing ovation at CPAC? Said Cheney, “A welcome like that almost makes me want to run for office,” which elicited chants of “run, Dick run!” from the audience. Cheney promised that Obama would be a “one-term president” and said that conservatives could look forward to victory in 2010. Considering his big government track record, Cheney giving conservatives’ prospects is sort of like Tiger Woods giving marital advice. Yet loudly and with zero irony, CPAC cheered Cheney.

We could go down the list — what are Newt Gingrich, John Boehner, or Tim Pawlenty “people?” What solid, tangible conservative platform or agenda are any of these people suggesting, other than defeating Obama and the Democrats? Is a return to Bush Republicanism really a desirable goal, as Romney and Cheney’s warm welcomes seemed to suggest? Rush Limbaugh claims Paul’s straw poll victory means CPAC wasn’t conservative this year, which raises the question, “well, who was ‘conservative’ this year, Rush?” Since CPAC’s inception in 1973, what has actually been done to shrink the size of government? What in the last Republican administration, something Romney praises and Cheney represents, gives anyone who isn’t completely brain dead hope for a better, more conservative future?

When you boil it all down and though they won’t admit it, here’s what those who complain about “Ron Paul people” really care about — GOP victory. They don’t really care why, how, or to what ideological end — only that Democrats lose elections and Republicans win them. The tolerance of the big-government George W. Bush years proved as much, and the current nostalgia for Cheney only underscores this point. Those at CPAC who cheered Romney, Cheney, and the conventional rest have no intention of ever challenging the status quo precisely because they are the status quo.

Then there are the “Ron Paul people.” Paul’s CPAC speech was not simply partisan Democrat bashing, but a lesson on how any GOP worthy of challenging the status quo must finally deliver on the conservatism it has always promised. Paul said Republicans must finally show true fidelity to the Constitution. Considering the conservative movement’s abysmal failure in stopping government growth, Paul asked the crowd to reexamine first principles, casting a critical eye upon the Right’s enthusiasm for wars that don’t make much sense and cost too much money, incurring massive debt. In short, Paul called for an end to big government — all of it. Asks Pat Buchanan, “Who in the Republican Party today is calling for a Barry Goldwater-like rollback of federal power and federal programs? Except Ron Paul.” Answer: no one. Paul’s CPAC speech proved as much.

Derided as “kids,” or irrelevant “college students,” the many young people who support Paul are the heart and soul of what has been dubbed the “Ron Paul Revolution,” and they are a force to be reckoned with. Writes National Review Online’s Robert Costa, “Paul supporters were the most visible and vocal throughout CPAC.”

Expect Paul supporters to become even more visible and more vocal in the future, because it will be impossible to silence a genuine movement driven by actual conservative passion, and not just the two-party horse race the Republican establishment continues to mistake for principle. In their ignorance, conservatives who boo Paul, at CPAC or anywhere else, are essentially dismissing the only force in contemporary American politics serious about smaller government. And despite the constant media spin and gnashing of teeth, Ron Paul and his “people’s” onward march does not represent some sort of confusion within the conservative movement-but the only conservative movement.


TOPICS: Issues
KEYWORDS: braindeadzombiecult; cpac; cpac2010; larouchies; liberterians; lronpaul; paulestinians; paulkucinich08; paulkucinich12; ronpaul; southernavenger; southernwanker; youknowhesnuts
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

1 posted on 02/22/2010 11:33:11 PM PST by rabscuttle385
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bamahead; djsherin; Bokababe; dcwusmc; Captain Kirk; sickoflibs; Favor Center

fyi


2 posted on 02/22/2010 11:34:01 PM PST by rabscuttle385 (Live Free or Die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

“In 1988 Ron Paul was nominated by the Libertarian Party for president and ran against the Reagan agenda, at one point telling the Dallas Morning News, Reagan was a “dramatic failure” as President. Paul also said, “I want to totally disassociate myself from the Reagan Administration”, Reagan was “a failure, yes, in, in many ways”. Transcript of Paul’s remarks on Meet the Press. Also, see Youtube video of Paul on MTP”.


3 posted on 02/22/2010 11:37:16 PM PST by rbmillerjr (I'm praying for Palin....if not I'll vote 4 conservatives...Mitt won't get my vote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
Expect Paul supporters to become even more visible and more vocal in the future...

Groan...don't we have enough problems without having to contend with that?

4 posted on 02/23/2010 12:01:34 AM PST by Allegra (It doesn't matter what this tagline says...the liberals are going to call it "racist.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
When you boil it all down and though they won’t admit it, here’s what those who complain about “Ron Paul people” really care about — GOP victory.

I'll admit it. GOP victory stands on three legs: economic, social, national defense.

Ron Paul has one full leg and one partial leg. One leg is missing.

But wait! There is more! If Ron Paul were strong on defense, much of his support would evaporate overnight. Why? Because he would not be useful to the left. The media would drop him. We would not see threads on leftist forums saying "Please Mother Earth, Let Ron Paul Win the GOP Nomination"

5 posted on 02/23/2010 12:07:06 AM PST by Brugmansian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

I watched a video yesterday of Rue Paul saying that 9/11 was the result of our “occupation” of arab countries. I wouldn’t pee on him if he was on fire.


6 posted on 02/23/2010 1:01:28 AM PST by HospiceNurse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HospiceNurse

Ron Paul on Glenn Beck show for the full hour.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pme20JHPkwk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y4j4m90-XM


7 posted on 02/23/2010 1:09:14 AM PST by Irenic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: HospiceNurse
I wouldn’t pee on him if he was on fire.

There's always Number 2. Wear Nomex.

8 posted on 02/23/2010 1:12:57 AM PST by Stentor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Irenic

Beck has lost his mind.


9 posted on 02/23/2010 1:17:47 AM PST by HospiceNurse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Irenic

I guess there are several to make the hour (links to the side)

I’m watching them now, so not sure how many there are.


10 posted on 02/23/2010 1:17:50 AM PST by Irenic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Ron Paul is not conservative, he is more like a libertarian.


11 posted on 02/23/2010 1:29:56 AM PST by greeneyes (Moderation in defense of your country is NO virtue. Let Freedom Ring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Irenic

I didn’t know we gave 3 times more foreign aid to the Arabs than we give Israel...


12 posted on 02/23/2010 1:35:27 AM PST by Irenic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: All

Ron Paul on Glenn Beck for an hour 12/18/07
________________________________________________________

1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pme20JHPkwk
Opener, Free Market, personal liberty, constitution

2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y4j4m90-XM
Globalism, NAFTA

3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNjnvp5z6kM
North American Union, Economy

4) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGrlZTlD-Sc
Currency, IRS, Taxes

5) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lF_92PpCyUs
Foreign Policy

6) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnm1nPHdATQ
Military, Troops etc

7) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD1qMXMOjfo
9/11, Tea Parties, Paul supporters

8) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kze69_lmGmA
Summary by Paul, Taxes, Responsibility
__________________________________________________
Listed a ROUGH idea of what segment has what.


13 posted on 02/23/2010 2:06:54 AM PST by Irenic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Allegra
Groan...don't we have enough problems without having to contend with that?

So you like the GOP's continued slide into big governemnt & internationalism? Why does having a pro-Constitution & America First President bother you so much?

14 posted on 02/23/2010 2:07:16 AM PST by ChrisInAR (You gotta let it out, Captain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man; Allegra; death2tyrants; freedumb2003; Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus; AdvisorB; ...

ping


15 posted on 02/23/2010 2:11:38 AM PST by ChrisInAR (You gotta let it out, Captain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr

I have no problem w/ what Paul said about Reagan. I am kinda curious as to whether or not Reagan started to lose his conservative bona fides after having to deal w/ a Dim Copngress & being in the Oval Office for 8 years.

IIRC, Reagan & Paul were good friends early on in the 70’s, & I have heard that Reagan either supported &/or helped campaign for Paul when he originally ran for the House back then. Feel free to read what Reagan said about Paul on my profile page. :-)


16 posted on 02/23/2010 2:18:49 AM PST by ChrisInAR (You gotta let it out, Captain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Conservatives are becoming more vocal. The anger has been pent up for yrs now.
Has nothing to do with Ron Paul and his screwball followers.


17 posted on 02/23/2010 2:25:51 AM PST by rrrod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greeneyes
So I guess you disagree w/ what Reagan said about conservatism in his July 1975 interview w/ Reason magazine?

Here is Reagan's 1st comment in the interview:

REAGAN: If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

18 posted on 02/23/2010 2:26:55 AM PST by ChrisInAR (You gotta let it out, Captain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
I'm sure the "Southern Avenger" has his cape on and is hanging out with his sidekick Handiman as we speak.


19 posted on 02/23/2010 2:33:25 AM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Libertarians are anti-war and small government supporters. Most are not interested in moral conservatism, although some support it. That is why Paul sees nothing wrong with abortion, and supports it. I would wonder what kind of supreme court justices a libertarian would promote.


20 posted on 02/23/2010 2:54:05 AM PST by Shery (in APO Land)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson