Most of the people I talked to on Saturday were from Pennsylvania, many from the less renowned, more conservative corners of the state. More than a few were Constitution Party activists, and that's nothing to scoff at in this state where the Constitution Party can draw hundreds of thousands of votes when the Republicans nominate pro-choice candidates. Just as many were big "L" Libertarians, some of them activists with a few decades of election disappointments etched on their faces between their prescription specs and their trimmed beards. Members of Delaware County for Liberty, the Libertarian group in the (ever-less) conservative area south of Philly, handed out flyers for a post-rally fundraiser at a rollicking bar in Old City. The charge was $20 a head; nearly 200 Paul fans showed up.The rest is here.
New at Reason (and Reason.tv)
I've put up three videos from Saturday's Ron Paul rally at Reason.tv, and I've got a long report from the rally up here. An excerpt:
Comments to "New at Reason (and Reason.tv)":
Now Edward, you diseased, maggot ridden, syphilitic, two-bit whore's cunt, THIS is the thread that you post your inane comments about Ron Paul.
I'm not here often enough to know who Edward is or if he deserve such vitriol, but FWIW, that made me laugh out loud.
So, can anyone tell me if the RP campaign has returned the nazi money? And what about that essay? Sure, it's from 1992, but it's pretty damn ugly.
Brandybuck | November 12, 2007, 7:34pm | #
How do you return the racists' money? Not only is it expensive going through all the $50 and $100 donations and matching up names to the membership rolls of racist organizations, it's a violation of privacy. Do your really think that's a good use of the campaign's time? Do you really think the campaign should vet all contributions? Besides, if push came to shove, we could find similar reprobates contributing to Rudy's campaign.Luke Johnson | November 12, 2007, 7:36pm | #
Besides, if you give back the money they'll just spend it on an actual nazi.True enough, but releasing a statement distancing the campaign from nazi crackpots who somehow see themselves as fellow travelers wouldn't take much time or money. And there's still that essay. What the hell is that about?
J sub D | November 12, 2007, 7:42pm | #
So, can anyone tell me if the RP campaign has returned the nazi money?After Saint Benedict's parish received a large donation from the Grambino crime family patriarch, Father Anthony was asked "Don't you know that's the devil's money?" The good Father replied, "The devil's had it long enough. Let us see what the Lord can do with it."
And that ends todays sermon.
Kwix | November 12, 2007, 7:44pm | #
dcpotts,No, the Paul campaign has not and will not return the donations. To paraphrase the campaign manager, "If people donate money to our candidate without knowing where our candidate stands, well they just lost money."
As for the essay, as RP has stated several times and has been thoroughly covered. The essay was written by a staffer and was printed without Paul checking it first. He has admitted that but has also said that while he doesn't believe what was written in the essay he can't fully distance himself from it either. Personally I think he should have disavowed the whole thing to begin with but since he hasn't, it may bite him in the ass.
Give me a few minutes to locate the "nazi money" quote.
Craig | November 12, 2007, 7:45pm | #
The essay from 1992 has been dredged up by liberals worried about losing anti-war, pro-civil liberties voters to Ron Paul (for good reason.) It was apparently written by someone working on the newsletter, without approval from Ron Paul.It came up in his Congressional campaign a few years back, and Ron Paul took responsibility for it. It was mentioned in an early New York Times article this year, and dismissed as differing in character and style from anything Ron Paul has ever said or written.
Ron Paul also addressed the issue in an online interview with the Muckraker Report. (You can Google it.)
Kwix | November 12, 2007, 7:53pm | #
dcpotts,Here is the quote:
"I asked Bydlak about attention the campaign is getting from creepy white supremacists, and whether if they discovered donations from specious people they'd give them back. 'If people who hold views that the candidate doesn't agree with, and they give to us, that's their loss,' he said."
Funny Stomrfront Nazis would support Ron Paul since his two biggest heroes were Jews.
Fluffy | November 12, 2007, 7:57pm | #
Paul's story about the newsletter is: While out of the Congress and semi-retired, he was approached by some people who wanted to put his name on a libertarian newsletter to increase its circulation. Paul agreed, and discovered later that some of the people who wrote for the newsletter held racist views. I believe his story, for three pretty basic reasons: his claim about being approached has a certain plausibility if you have been involved in minor party politics; Paul has put out a pretty substantial body of writing, and the style and content of the newsletter material is just so alien to that writing that his defense makes "textual" sense; and, finally, the Houston Chronicle reporter who dug out the copies of the newsletter and broke this story to begin with also concluded that Paul probably didn't write the material in question.With regard to Don Black's donation - if it's that important to you that Black get back his $500 to spend on promoting his usual causes, just send him a check yourself. If you think it's a good idea.
Thanks guys, I hadn't read much about the essay. As far as the donations are concerned, I get the campaign's stance on the cash, I would just think that distancing themselves from kooks as much as possible would be in their best interest, even if it's a little unfair, and they had to go out of their way to do so. A somewhat glib statement might not do the trick.
J sub D | November 12, 2007, 8:02pm | #
I would like to apologize for the language I used in my 7:16pm post above. One reason is that there are ladies of breeding who occasionaly visit this site to expand their political knowledge. That should not have to tolerate the uncouth, waterfront language I used.Another reason is I inadvertantly omitted "puss filled, chancre infected" from my tasteless but otherwise accurate characterization of Edward.. I humbly beg your forgiveness for both affronts.
J sub D
iih | November 12, 2007, 8:10pm | #
Good article here:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ken-bank/ronstock-rally-rocks-ph_b_72110.html
Look at the comments too. Some on the left are seriously considering Paul.
I highlight a portion of the last paragraph:
In many ways it is remeniscient of the kind of support for another antiwar paleoconservative populist who ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 1996, Pat Buchanan. And most of us remember who won the New Hampshire primary that year.
iih | November 12, 2007, 8:17pm | #
I would like to apologize for the language I used in my 7:16pm post above. One reason is that there are ladies of breeding who occasionaly visit this site to expand their political knowledge. That should not have to tolerate the uncouth, waterfront language I used.Another reason is I inadvertantly omitted "puss filled, chancre infected" from my tasteless but otherwise accurate characterization of Edward.. I humbly beg your forgiveness for both affronts.
That is the funniest thing I read today. I almost fell off my chair. This whole cussing thing turns out to be quite entertaining.
Reason and Ron Paul websites go down at the same time. Hmmm...
shove, upon being pushed | November 12, 2007, 11:25pm | #
if push came to shove, we could find similar reprobates contributing to Rudy's campaign.REPROBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATE!
John-David | November 12, 2007, 11:25pm | #
I figured I'd put this in this thread, which I found hereAt first, I assumed, and had even written, that Ron Paul’s financial support was coming from the Libertarian wing of the Republican Party. Then I was corrected by former Ron Paul aide and founder of the Libertarian Republican Caucus, Eric Dondero, who also founded MainstreamLibertarian.com and hosts blogtalk radio show Libertarian Politics Live.Dondero forgot to mention that since 9/11 he's become a bedwetting, racist, authoritarian-loving rightwing freedom-hating nutball.
In an interview with Dondero, he emphatically complained; “Please refrain in the future from using the label "Libertarian Republican" in describing Ron Paul. Call him what he is: Some sort of populist leftwinger.”
Dondero continued, “Since 9/11 Paul has become a complete nutcase conspiratorialist quasi-Anti-Semitic leftwing American-hating nutball.”
These were strong words from a former aide to Mr. Paul (from 1997 – 2003) and words worthy of investigation in my mind. So I decided to investigate, which in politics always means, follow the money.
Warren | November 12, 2007, 11:25pm | #
Reason and Ron Paul websites go down at the same time. Hmmm...CATO too. All are back now, but it does make you wonder
smartass sob | November 12, 2007, 11:30pm | #
Reason and Ron Paul websites go down at the same time. Hmmm...I noticed that, too, this evening. I still couldn't get to Reason's site without going through a link from someone else's blog page. Anyone got an idea what happened?
Eric Dondero's Mustache | November 12, 2007, 11:35pm | #
PAUL HATES JOOSPig Mannix | November 12, 2007, 11:41pm | #
Reason and Ron Paul websites go down at the same time. Hmmm...Yep, I noticed that, too.....
@dcpotts
So, can anyone tell me if the RP campaign has returned the nazi money?
There's an old saying, "If they throw it in your lap, put it in your pocket."
John-David | November 12, 2007, 11:41pm | #
IEatPoop@PoopIsGood.com is the bestest fake email address EVAH!smartass sob | November 12, 2007, 11:43pm | #
According to a note at the Ron Paul site the company that hosts their page had power problems. But I still have to go through a link at feralgenius.blogspot.com to reach H&R. etter than nothing, I guess.John-David | November 12, 2007, 11:44pm | #
But I still have to go through a link at feralgenius.blogspot.com to reach H&R.I feel your pain.
Just kidding, Jennifer.
smartass sob | November 12, 2007, 11:44pm | #
Better than nothing.Edward | November 12, 2007, 11:48pm | #
Support Ron Paul and help make this country the robust Christian nation the pious and religious Founding Fathers envisioned!Dondereprobate | November 12, 2007, 11:50pm | #
According to a note at the Ron Paul site the company that hosts their page had power problems.Yeah, you bet they do! How many divisions does the Pope of Texas have, huh? Huh?
Edwardondereprobate | November 12, 2007, 11:50pm | #
Huh?Patrick | November 12, 2007, 11:58pm | #
Thanks for covering the event David...I feel like I'm part of history!
Do we Americans still deserve to be free? I don't know. But I'm willing to give freedom a chance.
ronpaulncr.com, cheers, Patrick
Edward | November 13, 2007, 12:04am | #
Now we are enslaved, but by the Grace of God, Ron Paul will win, and we will be set free! Let freedom ring in our blessed land! Ron Paul will lead us out of the collectivist wilderness into the clear, bright light of Liberty! Before Ron Paul, we lived in darkness, but now we can see the light!Two, four, six, eight--Ron Paul in Zero 8!
smartass sob | November 13, 2007, 12:13am | #
but now we can see the light!Eddy, there's no need for you to wait and no need for you to remain in darkness. If you would really, really see the light, just kneel there by the wall where your modem is plugged in and give the outlet a big, sloppy, wet kiss. Use a little tongue!
Kolohe | November 13, 2007, 12:19am | #
But do they all hate him? And what about this?iih-
You know, for a minute I was worried the your links would be something like this site.
iih | November 13, 2007, 12:33am | #
Kolohe,I just dislike it when people accuse RP of being racist. As Cesar mentions above:
Funny Stomrfront Nazis would support Ron Paul since his two biggest heroes were Jews.
(Those being von Mises and Rothbard.)
larry | November 13, 2007, 12:52am | #
This racist thing is picking up attention. One of my fellow students in class today told me he was considering Paul until he read the essay. Had to remind him that this was written by a staffer but he could believe what he wanted. But before he made his mind up consider a few things.1) How many racists would deliver babies pro bono to poor black mothers?
2) How many racists would bother to show up a the Tavis Smiley debate? The front-runners didn't.
3) How many racists would do interviews with Arab American radio and how many Republicans bothered to show up at the Arab American National Leadership Conference. Ron Paul did.
4) How many racists would consider a black economics professor as their running mate? Ron Paul has suggested Walter Williams.
Words on a page or real life action? Pick one. I'll take the latter.
Brandybuck | November 13, 2007, 12:53am | #
REPROBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATE!Mr. Giuliani, it has come to our attention that Eric Dondero has contributed to your campaign. Will you give back his money, or do you agree with his frequent assertion that paying extra to ride bareback is the hallmark of liberty?
The Wine Commonsewer | November 13, 2007, 1:19am | #
I know, I know, you all is clamoring for the photos from the Kosmik Kid and his contingent to the Philly rally. The is here:http://independencemall.blogspot.com/
The Wine Commonsewer | November 13, 2007, 1:24am | #
Got a snotty email already wondering why TWC couldn't have the decency to post a got dam link that didn't require a cut and paste. Okay, you can see photos of the Kosmik Kid's bus ride to Philly here.The Wine Commonsewer | November 13, 2007, 1:25am | #
Does Donderoo give mustache rides?Edward | November 13, 2007, 1:50am | #
Ron Paul will save from collectivist evils like tax and socialized medicine and public education and food inspections. Vote Ron Paul in '08!smartass sob | November 13, 2007, 1:59am | #
you can see photos of the Kosmik Kid's bus ride to PhillyThanks for the link to the photos, TWC. I've never been to Philly. Looks like a nice place.
smartass sob | November 13, 2007, 2:05am | #
Speaking of Edward: I noticed on another thread he used the term keener. Is that not a Britishism?Putting aside all political affiliations and feelings, I can say with near certainty that this is one of the most poorly written articles I have ever read. I sincerely hope that this writer is not getting paid for this crap.
smartass sob | November 13, 2007, 4:31am | #
I can say with near certainty that this is one of the most poorly written articles I have ever read.Oh! Looky there! A...a literary critic! Wow!
Hey! How do you do, Mr. Literary Critic - it is such an honor to meet one you guys. I can't wait to read one of the many articles you had published last year - especially the ones you got paid for. But y'know? I don't think I'll hold my breath waiting for them.
smartass sob | November 13, 2007, 5:51am | #
I don't know if anyone at Reason knows about it, but here's a treat for supporters of Ron Paul. It's a series of old-fashioned patriotic-type posters that have been....ahem,...updated a bit. ;-) They're at http://www.ronpaulmoneybomb.com/src | November 13, 2007, 7:04am | #
I'm not Edward.But I do have some doubts about Ron Paul -- I'd like to support him, but I can't make myself agree with some of his policies. Seems like there are a lot of Paul people around here, so I'd like to see your take on it.
Ron Paul calls himself a noninterventionist, in terms of foreign policy. First of all, how is that justified morally? Couldn't there be events (genocide, for instance) that obligate us to step in, even with military force? He also opposes foreign aid. I know it's a blunt instrument, but we still have humanitarian responsibilities to people in other countries.
On a practical level, is it smart? The little I've read on international relations (Salvador Waltz and so on) suggests that a country that guarantees not to attack first is at risk from countries or groups that make no such promise. On the foreign aid issue: if we don't have carrots or sticks it's going to be harder to negotiate.
Is there a way to get around all this?
Linda Inveninato | November 13, 2007, 7:14am | #
My husband and I also come from immigrant grandparents. His are Italian, mine Polish. We remember their stories of escape from fascism and the nazi's. we remember their stories of how...ever so slowly...rights and property were taken away. That is why we hear Dr. Paul's message very clearly.Ron Paul is a Constitutionist, an old fashioned conservative Republican. A Ron Paul Presidency would encourage the original Constitution's balance of power, eliminating the seemingly absolute power of the Executive branch.
Ron Paul non-interventionist policy would immediately remove our military from Iraq and other non-essential areas of the world. Please see the following website? http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen/
Then he would begin the process of streamlining the unconstitutional "departments" reducing the federal budget immensely.
These combined savings would be a serious beginning to paying down the enormous federal debt we owe to Japan, China, and several other nations. The benefits of paying down the debt are clear; the dollar value would be increased making it more competitive with the other world currencies and our children and grandchildren will not be strapped with debt.
By streamlining the Federal Government the collected funds will also be used to continue to pay Social Security. Please to remember, the Social Security lockbox is empty?
Having chuckled when imagining the elimination of the IRS, we are hopefull that this can be a reality by substituting a less invasive, indirect tax.
These are clear, sound policies...a return to transparency.
Please refer to Ron Paul's archived writings: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html You will find him well versed on current applications of constitutional law.
Respectfully submitted,
BTS | November 13, 2007, 7:19am | #
"Because Paul supporters know that support coming from non-Republicans is not reflected in the Republican polls, they have started a campaign to promote party-jumping so that their anti-war supporter’s from the left can vote in the Republican primary."From that god-awful American Daily article
People voting for candidates they support regardless of which party they belong to?! We can't have that! Next thing you know, people will be marrying cats and dogs!
Seriously, is it just the pundits, or are all conservatives that retarded?
Wow. This thread started in the gutter and it was all downhill from there (to mix a couple metaphors). This is what passes for political debate in the Hit & Run era. Sad.
Fluffy | November 13, 2007, 9:02am | #
iih -You can probably lump Rand in there, too, so that would make Jews the top 3.
Then I think there are some Quakers that get in there. Wasn't Lysander Spooner a Quaker?
Jews and Quakers - typical Nazi scum.
iih | November 13, 2007, 9:29am | #
What also gets on my nerves is the description of his supporters as "typical" middle class white non-immigrants. Other than (may be) the middle class thing, I do not fit the stereotype at all.robc | November 13, 2007, 9:38am | #
src,Against the spirit of this thread, I will try to answer your questions:
Ron Paul calls himself a noninterventionist, in terms of foreign policy. First of all, how is that justified morally?
Does doing nothing have to be justified? I think its intervention that has to be justified (and usually, but not always, cant be).
Couldn't there be events (genocide, for instance) that obligate us to step in, even with military force?
Can someone be obligated to help someone else? Maybe. Some would say no. Im a christian, so *I* am obligated at times. Can some group be obligated to spend my money for me to help someone else or force me to live up to that obligation? Hell no.
He also opposes foreign aid. I know it's a blunt instrument, but we still have humanitarian responsibilities to people in other countries.
We, as individuals, may have responsibilities to people in other countries. If so, we, as individuals, should fulfill them by doing what needs to be done, or ponying up so dough. Our country has no, zero, zilch obligations to anyone else.
On a practical level, is it smart?
GW thought so. Read Washington's farewell address. I really think the concept of lack on entangling alliances is brilliant. Compare and contrast his ideas with the causes of WW1.
The little I've read on international relations (Salvador Waltz and so on) suggests that a country that guarantees not to attack first is at risk from countries or groups that make no such promise.
How is it working for Costa Rica? They eliminated their military entirely.
How often has Switzerland been invaded recently? They promise a strong defense but they guarantee they wont attack first.
On the foreign aid issue: if we don't have carrots or sticks it's going to be harder to negotiate.
Free trade with all, entangling alliances with none. Free trade is a great carrot. Just because we are non-interventionist wouldnt mean we wouldnt have enough nukes to destroy the world many times over. Hows that for a stick?
Non-expert | November 13, 2007, 11:03am | #
Couldn't there be events (genocide, for instance) that obligate us to step in, even with military force?Dr. Paul would say that it is congress's job to mamke that determination, not the president's.
Ben Rushing | November 13, 2007, 12:04pm | #
Oh my! Rush mentioned Ron Paul and how he would be portrayed by the media if he won the nomination or if he ran as a Libebertarian. Rush hit the nail on the head. The driveby's would do everything to destroy Paul. If he ran as a Libertarian they would praise him so that the Republican candidate would lose similar to how Perot defeated Bush back in 1992. Clinton had no hope except for Perot. Clinton again would have no hope against whoever, unless Ron Paul ran as a Libertarian. Hopefully Paul will come close to winning the nomination so that the Republican party will change for the better.Pig Mannix | November 13, 2007, 12:30pm | #
A surprisingly extensive and fairly positive Ron Paul article in the Chicago Tribune today.He may not be grabbing headlines yet, but his press coverage has definitely taken a step up in the world....
Mike Reason | November 13, 2007, 12:58pm | #
David Weigel is the Ron Paul's Herbert Mathews. The same two hundred, energetic supporters that are at every Ronstock and he claims it's an army of hundreds of millions of grassroots supporters. So he raised a lot of money in two days, that just means he has alot of rich supporters. I don't think his two percent support will do anything unless he plans on backstabbing the republican party and continue running in which case that two percent might cause an authoritarian like Hillary to get into the White House and turn us into the Union of American Socialist Republics.Derrick | November 13, 2007, 2:02pm | #
Reason and Ron Paul websites go down at the same time. Hmmm...Those sites (and CATO's) are hosted at Rackspace, a major provider of dedicated-server hosting. They had a big power outage last night which affected a lot of people, including one of my clients. Aside from that hiccup, I've found them to be one of the most rock-solid providers out there.
Rattlesnake Jake | November 13, 2007, 2:08pm | #
"I don't think his two percent support will do anything unless he plans on backstabbing the republican party and continue running"He is 5% in one recent poll I saw. As far as him running on a 3rd party, he says he has no plans to do so.
Rattlesnake Jake | November 13, 2007, 2:40pm | #
Ron Paul is 7% on an SRBI Research poll for Saint Anselm College. That makes him tied for 4th with Thompson and Huckabee.CharlesWT | November 13, 2007, 3:30pm | #
"So he raised a lot of money in two days, that just means he has alot of rich supporters."His "rich" supporters are being awful stingy then since they are, on average, only giving him about $116 each.
Damn! I've been shamed. Guess I've got to pony up at least another $66 to reach even stingy.
AuH20 | November 13, 2007, 4:08pm | #
From the enemy of my enemy is my friend desk:Wonkette and RedState Join Forces.
ROFLCOPTERDOWN | November 13, 2007, 9:17pm | #
What? RedState and Wonkette?wtfever, what a bunch of deuche bags. Their Alexa ratings aren't shit and neither are their stupid websites.
www.Ronpaulforums.com has a higher Alexa rating right now then both of those sites, so they can eat shit while they diaf.
John-David | November 14, 2007, 7:10pm | #
Re: the previous comment.I didn't believe it, but it's true.
Eric the .5b | November 15, 2007, 12:28pm | #
To be fair, Alexa ratings are complete bullshit.anon | November 17, 2007, 4:54am | #
@Non-Expert:>>Dr. Paul would say that it is congress's job to make that determination, not the president's.
anon | November 17, 2007, 4:56am | #
@Non-Expert:"Dr. Paul would say that it is congress's job to make that determination, not the president's."
Where does it say in the Constitution that Congress may send troops to foreign countries to prevent genocide, civil wars, etc?
Of course, as an individual, you (and millions of others) would be free to make private contributions or form organizations in any way you saw fit.
src | November 18, 2007, 5:29pm | #
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution says that Congress has the power to "declare war," to "raise and support armies," to "provide and maintain a navy," "to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces." Nothing in the language seems to imply directly that sending troops to foreign countries isn't within that scope.In fact, Congress can "define and punish" "offenses against the law of nations," which might suggest (I'm not sure about this) that foreign interventions are constitutional.
ETJB | November 19, 2007, 12:15pm | #
Ron and Dennis are basically in the race to discourage minor party challengers in the primary.Both have ties/sympathy to minor parties and election law reform issues and their role in the primary is basically to keep certain groups of people in each party, without the party having to make any concessions.
Setting that aside, Ron and Dennis are entertaining to listen to, but nothing more.