Skip to comments.NYT: Ron Paul for President... of the 'Wackos'? [Birchers, Israel-Haters, etc.]
Posted on 07/20/2007 4:27:18 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
NEW YORK A feature piece in this coming Sunday's New York Times Magazine on Republican candidate for president, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, portrays his followers as including a wild mix of "wackos" on both ends of the political spectrum. Paul, a libertarian, has been gaining media and public attention of late.
The cover line reads: "A Genuine Radical for President." The headline inside: "The Antiwar, Anti-Abortion, Anti-Drug-Enforcement-Administration, Anti-medicare Candidacy of Dr. Ron Paul."
The article closes with the author, Christopher Caldwell, attending a Ron Paul Meetup in Pasadena. The co-host, Connie Ruffley of United Republicans of California, admits she once was a member of the radical right John Birch Society and when she asks for a show of hands "quite a few" attendees reveal that they were or are members, too. She refers to Sen. Dianne Feinstein as "Fine-Swine" and attacks Israel, pleasing some while others "walked out."
Caldwell notes that the head of the Pasadena Meetup Group, Bill Dumas, sent a desperate letter to Paul headquarters: "We're in a difficult position of working on a campaign that draws supporters from laterally opposing points of view, and we have the added bonus of attracting every wacko fringe group in the country....We absolutely must focus on Ron's message only and put aside all other agendas, which anyone can save for the next 'Star Trek' convention or whatever."
Asked about the John Birch Society Society by the author, Paul responds, "Is that BAD? I have a lot of friends in the John Birch Society. They're generally well-educated and they understand the Constitution. I don't know how many positions they would have that I don't agree with."
The writer concludes that the "antigovernment activists of the right and the antiwar activists of the left" may have "irreconciable" differences. But "their numbers -- and anger -- are of considerable magnitude. Ron Paul will not be the next president of the United States. But his candidacy gives us a good hint about the country the next president is going to have to knit back together."
Among many other things, we learn from the article that Paul had never heard of "The Daily Show" until he was a guest and referred to the magazine GQ as "GTU." It also notes that he was the only congress member to vote against the Financial Antiterrorism Act and a medal to honor Rosa Parks, among many others tallies, based on principle, not politics. He also is praised by liberal Rep. Barney Frank as "one of the easiest" members to work with because "he bases his positions on the merits of issues."
Except, of course, use the internet address of YOUR picture of choice. If it shows up in preview, you've got it.
Officially, the JBS is anti-Hitler and anti-facist, but the membership of that org. tend to have those sympathies. I have known several Birchers in my day, and they were to a person anti-Semite and racist. What idealogy does that sound like?
A person can’t be Conservative and support the WOT and be a Bircher at the same time.
Nice try at diversion, but that sophmoric trick works only on forums for idiots.
You can't ignore the gigantic elephant in the room.
Ignoring the fact that Ron Paul is a tool for 911 conspiracy kooks, and himself aligning with Rosie O'Donald and Cindy Sheehan should be highly suspect of any member of Freerepublic.
Here’s your ping!
I’ll go to their site and check them out when I can find the time. Just by clicking on their link and bookmarking the site, I didn’t see anything nefarious in their article titles.
LOL name calling? That's just pitiful....
Question answered, then.
Careful there sunshine. About this time next year your lot is going to be running around in a circle as the rest of the Presidential candidates adopt Rep. Paul's current position on the police action.
But I do thank you for name calling....gee who's being 'rude' and 'snotty' here? I wonder if I should ping the person who claimed all Paul supporters were such and point out the name calling from those that would slur the one candidate who stands by the Constitution...
OMG! Someone else who understands Ron Paul! Can I stand the strain.
Like the "Compassionate Conservative," now serving as President.
LOL - indded! One of the signs of the end times, I think (along with dogs and cats living in sin).
Alex Jones: Congressman, just out of the gates. Cindy Sheehan yesterday on my show went further than anybody has ever gone. She said, a distinct chance of a staged terror attack or the government allowing that to happen it to happen. Bush is saying he doesnt care what the people want the war will continue. Theyve set up the military commissions act; theyve set up the John Warner defense authorization act. He signed PDD 51, making himself literally dictator he gave himself that power. How much danger are we in now, with the Homeland Security head feeling in his gut we are about to be hit. Republican memos saying they need terror attacks, they need Al Qaeda hit us to be able to continue the war, top military strategists saying it. How much danger are we in of some new Gulf of Tonkin provocation?
Ron Paul: Well, I think we are in great danger of it. We are danger in many ways - the attack on our civil liberties here at home, the foreign policy that is in shambles and our obligations overseas and commitment, which endangers our troops and our national defense. So everyday, we are in worse shape. And right now there is an orchestrated effort to blame the Iranians for everything that has gone wrong in Iraq. And were quite concerned, many of us, that the attack will be on Iran and that will confuse things and jeopardize so many more of our troops, so I would say that we are in much greater danger than we have been even 4 or 5 years ago. Whether it is overseas or even by terrorists here at home, because I just think the policies are seriously flawed.
Ron Paul 2008 threads should belong on DU, not Freerepublic.
It is no longer about Dr. Paul's stance on the Constitution.
He is a certifiable nut-case.
You won’t see in most part outright comments, etc.
I have seen their stuff for over 30 yrs.
Their Absolutist mentality as the Ron Paul type are no different than the Islam O Fascists
I prefer Paulistinians, since libertarianism is the cousin of anarchy.