Skip to comments.The Paleocon Dilemma... Ron Paul campaign illustrates the choices facing the antiwar Right
Posted on 01/07/2008 3:30:07 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Ron Paul isnt just running for president. The antiwar 10-term congressman from Texas hopes that as titular head of the Republican Party, he can nudge the Right in a less interventionist direction, both at home and abroad. In fact, reviving an older, less reflexively hawkish conservatism may even be a more important motivation for Pauls long-shot campaign than actually capturing the GOP nomination.
Theres just one problem: the movement Paul is trying to lead, or at least influence, is filled with people who think he is some kind of crazed left-wing radical. The popular conservative website RedState.com has effectively banned Paul supporters from signing up as commenters and promoting their candidate, partly on the grounds that such people are liberal Democrats merely pretending to be Republicans. FreeRepublic.com founder Jim Robinson, whose website was once more open to constitutionalists than Republican boosters, asserted that Paul equals Hillary on the War. National Review senior editor Richard Brookhiser has opined that Paul backers are wicked idiots.
Syndicated columnist Mona Charen dubbed Paul a kook, saying that although he shouldnt be president, [h]e might make a dandy new leader for the Branch Davidians. Dean Barnett of The Weekly Standard devoted a similar piece to taunts along these lines, calling Paul the crank-in-chief and undisputed owner of the Dont tase me bro vote. Averring that Crazy people love to have a cause, Barnett observes that Americas lunatics have taken such a shine to the formerly obscure Ron Paulsince all Paul really wants is to wear a powdered wig without being ridiculed in public.
The feeling is mutual.
(Excerpt) Read more at amconmag.com:80 ...
As a Texan, I'm embarrassed to associate Ron Paul with Texas.
I always thought Ron Paul’s unusually high poll numbers were because of leftist crossover. But for some reason, none of the MSM (to include Fox News) ever seemed to figure it out, instead choosing to dismiss the numbers without any explanation as to why. Well now we know why...Ron Paul is attracting the anti-war left, the vast majority of whom will switch back over when it comes time to vote.
Now that's an image that amuses me. Anyone have Photoshop ability to do it justice?
Because most of his polls are skewed by his imbecilic following, spamming website polls in much the same manner as we do for 2nd amendment, etc polls.
And dittos, lormand.
He is not anti-war, RP is anti-defense of America.
And probably some crossdressers, too.
There is already a party for the anti-war crowd to join - when I hear the term “paleoconservative”, I think more of a Duncan Hunter than that libertarian.
It's a mistake to assume that all "dangerous kooks" are racists or anti-Semites. Some are, maybe the most dangerous ones. But someone can be a nut -- and dangerous -- without having those kinds of prejudices. I'd say Ron Paul is just that: a nut whose nuttiness could have disastrous consequences. Painting him as a bigot as well is overkill that will backfire.
LOL...Ron Paul’s base is a bunch of crossdressing crossover voters who will cross back over still crossly dressed :o)
Pat Buchanan would make a very good fit for the Paul ticket. I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see a Paul/Buchanan 2008 ticket. I wouldn’t be surprise not to see it either, but these men do seem to have quite a bit in common.
Paul will not get the RP nomination. It would be interesting to know what is bouncing around inside his head though. Does he see visions of sugar plum fairies and third party queries? I wouldn’t count it out.
Ron and those who consider themselves to be staunch conservatives, based on the non-interventionist doctrine, sure don’t see the world in the same light that I do. It’s fair for them to think that I have ventured off the conservative reservation. It’s fair for me to think they’ve ventured into a separate solar system too.
And I do.
Well said, and with only two "T's" to cross.
But you do come across as a little cross about all this crass crossover stuff.
Oh no, even Paddy Buchanan can’t bring himself to endorse Ron Paul so far.
Dog, meet your fleas?
I wonder why not. They both have the aversion to our efforts in Iraq. Perhaps Paul’s border policy doesn’t gel with Pat.
Possibly; but other than his stand on the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc., he does offer an attractive "right-wing" message regarding the desirable size and powers of the federal government. For many that are violently opposed to the present state of our federal govt., this could sway opinions regardless of his stance on such issues as the war.
If I seem crass about the crossdressing crossovers it’s because Ron Paul has allowed himself to become a crass crossing guard for the crisscrossing left.
LOL, yeah perfect.
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.