Thursday, December 22, 2011

Why I don't give a flying you-know-what about Ron Paul's economic ideas

Liberty! Constitution! I win the debate!
For the past year, every time anyone criticizes Ron Paul's ridiculous foreign policy, his minions supporters leap to his defense, demanding that you admit how obviously brilliant his domestic economic policies are.

My response to this has always been that a great economic policy won't help much if we embrace a suicidal foreign policy. Arguing that the United States should exercise prudence before intervening in the affairs of other nations is one thing, saying that it's "understandable" that Iran wants a nuclear weapon and blaming America 9/11 is something else altogether.

I'm now beyond the point of just disliking Paul's foreign policy. The ugly bigotry that this man has openly encouraged among his supporters is absolutely inexcusable, and he deserves nothing but scorn from respectable conservatives.

Now, if a Republican candidate advocates responsible fiscal policies and someone who is racist supports that candidate, it doesn't necessarily mean that the candidate is racist.

Still crazy, now with a free side of bigotry!
However, if the candidate advocates responsible fiscal policies and also encourages nutty conspiracy theories, hateful racist rhetoric, and anti-Semitic propaganda among his followers, or openly reaches out to racists and bigots and solicits their specific support, then I do think it is legitimate to view the candidate as adopting those views as well.

Let's be clear about a few things: we're not talking about a few silly little comments here and there taken out of context. We're talking about deliberate and detailed discussions in videotaped interviews and newsletters that he either wrote or allowed to be published under his name, extending over decades, in which Paul has spewed this garbage.

And on the note of Paul's attempts to exculpate himself by claiming that he didn't write the newsletters: if someone sent out a newsletter like that under my name, there would be absolute hell to pay.

RedState's Erick Erickson wonders if Paul is just losing his darn mind:
Let me get this straight.
Twenty years ago someone put some crazy, racist stuff in newsletters bearing Ron Paul’s name and written in the first person as if they were from Ron Paul.
Ron Paul never read them.
...Fast forward to the present and Ron Paul never wrote them, does not know who wrote them, cannot recall the names of anyone who worked for him who might have written them, is shocked to learn he made big money off them, and people think this guy has the qualifications to be President of the United States?
Letting someone write bat crap crazy stuff under your name, not knowing who they are or what they are doing, profiting from them, then taking responsibility before denying responsibility is credible?!
If we’re to take Ron Paul at his word, maybe we need to get him an Alzheimer’s test. He is old. Hell, if pigs did fly and he did get elected President, he’d be 81 at the end of his first term.
Read the rest here.

Hat tip: @petecummings1
Back to my response to Pauls' supporters, I know I'm risking Godwin's Law consequences here, but I'd like to point out that no sane person would ever respond to a discussion of Adolf Hitler by pointing out what a great highway system the Autobahn is.

Accordingly, I have absolutely zero interest in hearing one more word about Ron Paul's economic policies. He has proven to be a candidate completely and totally unworthy of my support, and all of the most brilliantly principled fiscal conservative ideas in the history of human civilization will not save him.

Erickson puts it very well in another post today: "If you know all these things about Ron Paul...and you still intend to vote for him, I don’t really see that the Republican tent needs to be big enough to accommodate you."


Don't miss James Kirchick's original 2008 expose on Ron Paul's newsletters at The New Republic, or his follow up articles this month at TNR and The Weekly Standard.

Further reading:

Conservatives Network | Who Wrote The Ron Paul Newsletters? Ron Paul Wrote Them – Clear Proof

RedState | Erick Erickson |  The Ron Paul Newsletter and His Jeremiah Wright Moment

RedState | Leon H. Wolf | About Those Racist Ron Paul Newsletters that He Didn’t Read and Completely Disavowed

Legal Insurrection | Biggest question – what took people so long on Ron Paul?

Ace of Spades HQ | Ron Paul In 1995: Hey, I've Got These Awesome Newsletters That Explain My Philosophy!

Ace of Spades HQ | Ron Paul Walks Out of CNN Interview When Asked About Newsletters

Et tu, Mr. Destructo | Game Over: Scans of Over 50 Ron Paul Newsletters

POLITICO | Ron Paul 2012: Six Comments He Needs to Explain

Daily Caller | Ron Paul and the Nazi Century


  1. YES!!! thank you, I'm going to keep this link and send it to all those crazy Paultards who troll around twitter.

  2. Emailing this post to my annoying cousin now. What the hell is wrong with Iowa that they are voting for him?

  3. I think his point on Iran was that we don't attack countries that have nukes, so it's "understandable" from their perspective to want one.

    We didn't invade North Korea, we did invade Iraq. We treat Pakistan with kid gloves because of their nuclear capabilities. This particular comment of his isn't reflective of any view on Iran itself.

    and he doesn't blame America for 9/11, he simply restates the obvious: the muslims want us out of their countries. They mujahadeen didn't want to take over russias in the 80's, they just wanted them out of Afghanistan.

  4. It's very possible that Ron Paul never read the his news letters, after all Obama never heard Jeremiah Wright's sermons.

  5. Sorry Sarah, but you and other Republicans can't distance yourself from racist accusations by criticizing Paul's overt racist while embracing coded racism that Republicans have embraced for decades. Ron Paul's racist newsletter is not the problem, it's a symptom of a problem that conservatism is racist; a problem that your side embraces whether it's overt or coded. So nice try, Paul is your problem especially if he somehow wins the nomination.

  6. such weak propaganda.... you should be ashamed of your self. What ever your view is surely in the 21st century you can produce higher quality propaganda. You'd have to be a real fluoride head to be swayed by this non sense.


  7. Albert - as usual, you're too wrapped up in your own liberal worldview to see reality. I'm racist for criticizing Ron Paul for being racist? Oh, you just mean that all conservatives are racist by definition.

    Thanks for the laugh.

    And to Anonymous - "Fluoride head" ???

    That has to be one of the weirdest things I've ever been called. So, same message to you - Thanks for the laugh!

  8. Laugh all you want, it's true. All conservatives are racist to a degree and just because they are less racist doesn't make them not racist. Even if they don't go yelling the n-word around and wear white robes, conservative policies are still bad for minorities. Lee Atwater understood this and that racism is sometimes coded in other conservative messages.

    Criticize Ron Paul all you want for his racist newsletters, it will be empty criticism.

  9. No, Albert, the guy who went around wearing the white robes was Robert Byrd, a Democrat.

    As for policies that are bad for minorities, take a peek at the unemployment rates under your Democrat president. Who's hit hardest? The black community - they have the highest unemployment rate.

    Got any more jokes for me? I am enjoying your comments so very, very much.

  10. You are so predictable. Yes the Democratic Party used to be more racist, but they redeemed themselves and all the racists fled to the Republican Party. As for Byrd, yes he was in the KKK, but he had since changed. The senator at the end of his life enjoyed a 100% rating from the NAACP. Any reference to Byrd being racist is irrelevant and should be disregarded. The Klan is a right-wing organization, Republicans and conservatives are more in line with their policies, not Democrats and liberals.

    The bad economy is the fault of Bush and the Republicans, Obama just happened to have been given a big mess to clean up and Republicans continue to impede his efforts.

    I do make jokes about other things, but I'm serious about this stuff. You should get serious too.

  11. Sure, Albert, keep blaming Bush. Obama's policies for the last 3 years are completely blameless. OK!

    And again, I'm dying laughing at how me criticizing Paul for what seems to be racism is proof all conservatives are racist. If I don't support racist policies and criticize others who say racist things, how does that make me a racist?

  12. You, Sarah, should understand that when Ron Paul speaks about economics you should listen to every word and memorize the theory. You should understand why the United States is threatened just like the USSR was threatened in 1983 by wars, spending, and incompetent leadership more concerned with wealth and privileged than the country. In other words there will be no empire to defend in 10 years, only a memory of when the United States was a super power.

    This is not the same United States that went through the Great Depression, 90% white, 10% black, united behind the dictator FDR. We are more like Yugoslavia today. The same Yugoslavia that suffered years of civil war and broke up into seven countries.

    When the bankruptcy comes Ron Paul will not seem like such a nut, by then it will be too late, the empire status will be gone.

    Ignorance is not cool, it only make you look the fool.

    In other words if you want your precious American superpower to remain vital the economy will have to be dealt with FIRST. No economy, no superpower status.

    Romney is a economic illiterate, Newt the fool. Romney does not have the economic education to understand should money and Austrian economic theory. He will pursue more Keynesian crap like Obama and Bush. He will be the equivalent of the USSRs Gorbachev.

    2018 is the time line to the end. 2012 is the meltdown year.


Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License
Permissions beyond the scope of this license are available here.