Posted on 11/21/2007 9:31:52 PM PST by West Coast Conservative
Apparently, America's greatest patriot was on Loonwaffle/Trooferville's favorite radio show today with the King Nutbar himself, although I'm not sure if anyone grabbed audio.
If you want to listen to the rebroadcast stream, go here. I don't feel like it. Have fun.
“Why has he refused to go on with Glen Beck?”
Because Beck refers to him as “the mayor of crazy-town?”
If somebody was calling me that, I wouldn’t go on with him unless I had a switch to turn his mike off.
Re-read? What thread are you talking about and why should I know about it?
(A) Jones is a nationally syndicated radio show host, he's not some bug-eyed guy in his basement transmitting on a shortwave AM radio
Because Alex Jones is nationally syndicated means that he is not feeding off of paranoid delusions for fame and riches? What's next on Ron Paul's agenda? Faith healers and spoon-benders?
(B) Paul goes on his show because he can discuss the issues freely without preening hosts interrupting him
If he isolates himself from those who might interrupt or disagree in the press, will he also isolate himself from representatives of other, possibly contentious nations while president? How about U.S. citizens who may disagree?
(C) Paul doesn't agree with Jones' wacko conspiracy theories
Even if he has said so, and I don't know if he has, his actions contradict such statements.
Visiting Alex Jones' show strongly implies an interest in courting or gaining the ear of those folks that Alex Jones appeals to: i.e., 911 truthers and conspiracy nuts.
Honestly, who does Alex Jones appeal to and, unless Ron Paul is trying to relieve them of their bizarre conspiracy theories, why is he spending time with them? Why is he providing "credibility" to Jerry Fletcher types?
(D) Some of Paul's issues are attractive to the populist Left and independents
And dictators, terrorists, democrats, truthers, conspiracy nuts, etc.?
Do you believe there is any corruption in government?
The entire contribution was returned? As I recall, the campaign only refunded the part of the donation that was an overpayment.
Yet another smoking gun.
Alex Jones and co are nothing more than closet anti semites and racists.
His audience is made up aside from the far left ‘truthers’, neo nazis and other racists.
It is sickening that ANY gop voter would cast their vote in favour of a man that wants to appeal to that sort of audience.
Let there be no doubt about it, Paul is doing this for a reason - he KNOWS who his core support, and while publicly the Paulbots spam away every site known to man, about how we can’t judge him for this, appealing so blatantly to such an audience is the smoking gun.
Be gone with this moron, he doesn’t value the party, he is in fact ready to stand against it as he has in the past.
Shame on any American that casts a vote in his favour.
Only the photograph of the KKK picketing the Goldwater Dept. Store and documentation in the Arizona State Historical Archives which may or may not be on the web.
Did the University of Arizona photoshop (right click the photo for properties before making accusations like that) the photo, I haven't seen the original so I can't say, but I suspect they didn't, it's just more Ron Paul nuttiness.
Might be a parade, those kluckers were big on parades, a joyful bunch they are.
$1,300 of the $2,300 max. Alex must have been upset about something, and got a partial refund.
Wonder if the RNC has a similar policy?
It would explain his failure to recognize the jihadist threat. Were there no such thing as "collective classes", it's odd he runs as a Republican, clearly a "collective classe".
An those meetup groups and internet spamming sites, what are they?
A bunch of individuals over whom Paul has no control, nor responsibility.
Though absurd, he might believe than when it's convenient.
Once you get into word parsing, nothing has any meaning.
Terrorists, what terrorists.
You know perfectly well Paul denies the existance of ideologically motivated terror, it just the occupation ot those evil American colonialists.
America sucks per Paul, and I presume per most of his supporters.
Good riddance, a-hole.
That being said, the greater concern that should exist about the Ron Paul campaign is its leftist connection. The so-called paleolibertarian school, exemplified by LewRockwell.com and antiwar.com, to which Paul is aligned, has bought into an essentially leftist critique of American foreign policy, i.e., so-called American imperialism and not totalitarian ideologies like Japanese militarism, Nazism, Communism, and Islamic militancy, is the main cause of international turmoil. This view is as distorted as those that blame the world's problems on "da Joos" or the Queen of England as the head of the world drug cartel. Historically, the United States and its Western allies have reacted to the aggression of the totalitarians, unless you choose to subscribe to elaborate and unprovable conspiracy theories. Granted, the paleolibertarians are not conspiracists of the Alex Jones school, but they have accepted the leftist foreign policy package. What is scary is watching leftists like Naomi Wolf (a one time Friend of Bill, former adviser to Al Gore and feminist author) and Glenn Greenwald (Salon magazine) favoring or at least speaking well of the Paul campaign.
As flawed as our political system is and as corrupt as many of our politicians are, it is far better than what the alternative. FDR vs. Hitler and Tojo; LBJ vs. Brezhnev and Mao; and Bush vs. Ahmenijad and Putin are clear contrast between flawed leaders on our side and tyrants and would-be world conquerors on the other. It is a shame that the paleolibertarians, who are right on so much else, are wrong on this crucial matter.
Nineteen Middle Eastern terrorists murdered nearly three thousand American on 9/11/2001. It’s that simple.
It is disgusting that the 9/11 truthers, more appropriately called the 9/11 liars, would even suggest that President Bush was part of a plan to murder Americans that day. If I was a surving family member of someone killed on that day, I would be very angry with the 9/11 truthers.
“The only rule of engagement I’m going to have in a Tancredo administration is this,” Tancredo said: “We win, you lose!”
http://tancredo4prez.blogspot.com/
Other than France, during the early years of our country, we had no “western allies.” We didn’t participate in any of the European wars in the 1800’s, except to protect our citizens in certain situations. We didn’t do anything when the western European countries were colonizing Africa and parts of the far east in the 1800-1900’s. We were almost completely neutral in WW I until the sinking of the L. While we were not completely neutral in WW II, prior to the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the mood of the country was to stay out of war. FDR ran on an anti-war platform in 1940.
So tell me more about what we and our Western Allies have done, historically.
It is only after WW II that we have decided to be “cops of the World.” Prior to that we confined almost all our actions to the western hemisphere.
Those interviews were usually post-debate interviews. They weren't in-depth interviews that gave him free reign to speak.
He’s also been on The View, David Letterman, Jay Leno, etc.
Paul has never been on Letterman or the View, get your facts straight.
I heard that he was scheduled to be on the View, but I’m not sure if it has happened or not yet. (I don’t watch a lot of hellevision)
Uh, this thread here, duh
Because Alex Jones is nationally syndicated means that he is not feeding off of paranoid delusions for fame and riches? What's next on Ron Paul's agenda? Faith healers and spoon-benders?
Complain to his corporate sponsors then. If he's a syndicated radio host, that obviously means he has a legitimate job and audience. Jones is no different than Michael Savage & Howard Stern.
If he isolates himself from those who might interrupt or disagree in the press, will he also isolate himself from representatives of other, possibly contentious nations while president? How about U.S. citizens who may disagree?
I don't know what the Hell you're talking about here.
Even if he has said so, and I don't know if he has, his actions contradict such statements.
Name these actions, please.
Visiting Alex Jones' show strongly implies an interest in courting or gaining the ear of those folks that Alex Jones appeals to: i.e., 911 truthers and conspiracy nuts.
Not all of Jones' audience are truthers or wackjobs, otherwise he'd have a lesser audience than if he'd broadcasted over an elementary school's PA system. You got your traditional leftists, libertarians, and pro-American populists, the drecks of society kicked on by the two-party duopoly. Ahhh...you smell that son? That's the smell of raw Americanism!
They're less dangerous than the rabid opposition who submits that because they are wrong about that, they are wrong about everything else, too.
However, you must consider what would have happened had the United States stayed out of World War II. Japan would have dominated South and East Asia, and Germany would have been hegemonic over Europe and the Middle East. Their imperial designs would have led them into the Western Hemisphere, where dictators like Juan Peron, the Hugo Chavez of his day, were pro-Nazi and more than willing to tweak the hated Yankee. Ditto for the post-World War II era. The United States Army was the one barrier that prevented Stalin's hordes from reaching the Atlantic Ocean, fulfilling the dreams of Lenin and Trotsky of a Eurasian Communist superstate.
As far back as the 1890s, America became imperial, effectively developing our own dependent states, such as Hawaii, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines. Ironically, some of the Republicans who were strong American Firsters before Pearl Harbor supported American intervention in the so-called banana republics of Central America. Perhaps we should not have become involved in the nations to our south, but our absence may well have invited the European powers to establish a presence in this hemisphere.
A policy of strict neutrality may work for Switzerland or another small nation. In our case, our size and economic impact preclude our ability to be neutral. American failure to assert its power overseas invites nations that are more malevolent than ours to fill the power vacuum. The Atlantic and Pacific Oceans do not provide us with the protection they once did. The world would be a far worse place today had the United States not confronted first Germany and Japan, and then the Soviet Union and its satellites.
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.