If you read this blog or my original Something Happening Here site, you know that I have usually supported Ron Paul for president based on his support for the Constitution and denunciation of US Imperialism. The other thing is that everyone else running for the Republican Party nomination is a neocon. I cannot and will not support a neocon. Neocons are Trotskyites in conservative clothing, or they are Israel-firsters, or they are Dominionists.
Ron Paul appears to favor liberty. Well, good. But "favoring liberty" can be a double edged sword: liberty also means the liberty of business owners to exploit their workers; it also means liberty to let everyone fend for themselves...sure, many could do this but not the very young or the very old. Randians like Andrew Wilkow think liberty means the liberty of the poor to die off and just go away. Could it be that Ron Paul also favors this Social Darwinism? Maybe.
There is the issue of "racist newsletters." Very possibly, Ron Paul was once a racist. Clearly, if he allowed someone to write racist stuff in his newsletters many years ago, it could mean he once was a racist (so what? he repented, right? After all, I once hated the rich, regardless of how they made their money...to me, all of the rich were exploiters and greedy psychopaths who deserved to die, but I no longer believe that...). More likely, since he is a libertarian who believes in Freedom of Speech, Paul allowed racists to write stuff into his newsletters and since he is for free speech, he has never apologized for letting racists write stuff into the newsletters. I do know for a fact that many white supremists, white separatists and neo-nazis DO support Ron Paul and have been doing so since the 90s.
But that is not why right wing talk radio and FOX News and the rest of the lamestream media hate Mr. Paul. The "he's a racist" BS is just a smokescreen.
Here is why they hate Ron Paul...
1. He is "outside the mainstream." Guys like Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Levin, and the rest of what Mike Church calls the "decepticons" MUST, and I mean MUST, stand with the mainstream, and by that I mean their corporate owners and sponsors. A stand-in for Andrew Wilkow today, December 29, 2011, named Tom Rose--who worked at the Jerusalem Post, which tells you where his main allegiance lies--laid it out in decent-sounding terms without all the Levin-inspired hate for the Republican from Texas: Rose, who went to Columbia Journalism School, told a listener that in the media it is all about "groupthink." The man is absolutely right. THAT is why right-wing talk show hosts (with the exception of Mike Church, the exception that proves the rule) not only hate Ron Paul, but hate him for the same reasons, day by day. This is despite the fact that they cannot really justify, even to themselves, going with Romney or Gingrich. That is why they generally mention Santorum or Bachmann as alternatives when listeners question Gingrich or Romney. (Funny--they don't mention Huntsman, who seems to be fairly decent a choice despite his BS on "taking out Iran."). In other words: Paul cannot win because if he does, then how can they justify their existence? So, though they might agree with Paul on some things, they cannot and must not support him...the neocons being who they are, if they aren't going to support Paul, then they have to issue the most ridiculous ad hominem attacks on him. Levin's utter hatred of Paul on his radio show is just one of the most insane examples.
2. Ron Paul puts America first, not Israel. In the world of the present-day Republican Party which is run by the neocons, this is a no-no. I really don't care about all the platitudes guys like Glen Beck or Rusty Humphries or any of the others have for "our troops." The fact is, Beck and the rest are on the radio or TV to ensure the superiority of Israel and to hell with the USA. I honestly believe that. Beck and the rest do not give a crap if the US goes bankrupt as long as Israel keeps getting taxpayer funds so that they can get American weapon technology and then turn around and sell it to China, or just give it to China. Has anyone reading this actually heard Beck or Hannity or Levin or anyone else even bring this up? Of course not, because Israel selling US weapons or technology to China is just fine with them. Yesterday Sean Hannity on America Right (aka SiriusXM Patriot) had some woman stand in for him, and she was dissing Obama because NYC or DC is not going to have a parade for returning Iraq War vets. Well, Boo-Hoo! Did returning Vietnam War vets get parades? I don't think so! It was former Trotskyite-turned-neocons like this woman, and Hannity and the rest, who probably applauded those who threw tomatoes and lemons and stuff at returning Vietnam War vets, or insulted our vets at airports, themselves. So, why should Obama or anyone give folks who couldn't even win a war against a fourth-rate power a parade? Parades are given when you WIN wars, idiot! But the reality is--and I really think this is the truth, until I have proof otherwise--that these neocon radio and TV hosts HATE THE UNITED STATES under the guise of loving Israel! If they are not Mossad agents or Sayanim otherwise, they sure sound and act like it. But because Ron Paul thinks Israel can take care of itself and does not need additional billions of US taxpayer funding, Ron Paul is anti-Israel, "anti-Semitic" and worthy of their hatred.
3. Ron Paul is NOT an entertainer. Entertainers, like Romney or Gingrich or Bachmann or Perry or Santorum, who either constantly flip-flop or say stupid things just to convince folks they really are "just like" the average American (after all, the average American can't find Iraq on a map, so it is perfectly fine to call Africa a country, or say they can see Russia from their house). Entertainers like Gingrich can divorce his first wife on her deathbed, then divorce his second wife because she's not good looking enough for "a future president," and get away with it because as we all know this is the way politicians are, but some second-rate stand-in for Levin, Mark Simon, can refuse to forgive Ron Paul for "doing racist newsletters for ten years" twenty-odd years ago, showing as much utter hatred for Paul as Levin has! So that because Paul has been fairly consistent in his positions for over 40 years and has never flip-flopped, has never said stupid things to appear "folksy", and has never CONFORMED to their group-think, he cannot be forgiven for allowing racists to write in his newsletters, he cannot be forgiven for not putting Israel ahead of the United States, and he just cannot be forgiven for anything--because of Ron Paul becomes our next president, their lying lives are over and they have to join the rest of us and get REAL JOBS!
Finally, though I defend Ron Paul I probably will not vote for him.
1. It is entirely possible that he still is (if he ever was) a racist, and, further, accusations that he is a Dominionist and that he will cause the old, the poor, and the sick to fend for themselves--he is somewhat of a Randian, after all (or else he would not have named his son Rand, right?)--just might be right on the mark. Meaning, Ron Paul will end "entitlements" such as Social Security and Medicare and (despite millions of us baby boomers who have put into these funds all of our lives) and not give us who have put in our money back. We all know Paul wants to end Social Security and Medicare--but what does he replace them with? Does the money we have put in our entire lives just POOF! Disappear?
2. It is entirely possible that Ron Paul is the greatest controlled opposition operative in American history. That is, Ron Paul just might be the most clandestine agent of the Rothschilds that could ever be created. It might hard to believe that someone so damned consistently Constitutional over the years could be a deep-cover Rothschild agent, but more and more bloggers are seeing him that way. What if they are correct?
3. Forget the "what-ifs" above, and here is a real "what-if": what if Ron Paul gets the Republican nomination despite every and all efforts to keep that from happening by the Republican insiders (already in Iowa there are plans to "count the ballots in a double-secret location"), and then what if Ron Paul becomes President?
A. Ron Paul gets assassinated right after the Electoral College confirms his presidency, or right after he takes over and starts on his Constitution-Restoration project. If Paul truly is "a man of the people" there is almost no doubt in my mind that he will be taken out...the power elites cannot afford to let him do what he says he will do. Paul at this point seems twice or thrice the leader JFK was before they took him out!
B. Ron Paul does confirm that he was a deep-cover controlled opposition person after all and he does what one would expect Romney or Gingrich or Obama to do--invade iran or completely sell the country into slavery to the bankers with no recourse.
C. Ron Paul must do what he would never before think of doing--issue one Executive Order after another to restore the rule of law, the US Constitution, because without Executive Orders, he can accomplish nothing through a Congress that has long ago sold out the American people to the bankers, the oligarchs, and Israel, and a Supreme Court that has long ago abandoned the Rule of Law, and nailed that coffin shut when they voted to make corporations "persons" under color of the 14th amendment. That is, Ron Paul WILL BE UNABLE TO DO ANYTHING TO RESTORE LIBERTY IN THE US unless he acts like a dictator! Further, he will have to arrest every last neocon and every last neolib to do anything that might even smack of being Constitutional. He will have to become what he hates.
And I cannot vote for him and watch him get assassinated, or co-opted, or turn into his own worst enemy.
Thus, we Americas will have to get what we deserve for it to get before things can change.
Because we love not the truth, we will continue to be under strong delusion, and thus we will vote for Romney or Gingrich, or Obama. We do not deserve a true statesman, which is what Ron Paul has shown himself to be.