Liberty MavenRon Paul: Still Crazy After All These Years
July 21st, 2009 8:30 am | by Marc Gallagher | Published in Big Government, Blowback, Commentary, congress, Constitution, Economics, Federal Reserve, Foreign Policy, gold standard, government spending, Harry Browne, inflation, Liberty, Maven Commentary, Ron Paul, Sarah Palin | 5 Responses
Ron Paul chose to enter politics in 1971, the year I was born. The reason he entered politics was due to then President Nixon driving the last nail into the gold standard coffin. Nixon severed all ties of gold to the U.S. dollar. This event implicitly granted the Federal Reserve to print money without bound. For Ron Paul being anti-Fed is not just another political position, it is the political position. It is in his blood.
In those early years and up until the economic crisis of last year Ron Paul was brushed off as crazy whenever he brought up the unchecked powers of the Federal Reserve. Once the bailouts began and continued it became politically expedient to be more like Ron Paul. That is, as long as you are talking about economics. On foreign policy Ron Paul is still apparently crazy for firmly believing in non-intervention.
I am not alone among the Ron Paul faithful when I say that I’m very tired of reading articles with any of the following labels attributed to Ron Paul:
- Radical
- Quixotic
- Fringe
- Extreme
- Crazy
In a recent article he had a few labels of his own for Sarah Palin supporters. He called them “establishment” and “country club” Republicans. Palin-ites reacted with fervor in dismissing Paul as just being envious.
Also recently he is heard implicitly accepting the notion that 9/11 was an inside job. Not too long ago he categorically denied it.
I must admit that for the main stream mind these comments do not help in lifting the “crazy” tag from Paul. As for the Palin supporters comment I think Paul is exactly right. He uses the term “country club” as a metaphor for Republicans who toe the party line rather than standing up for what they actually believe. Palin may have been an independent-minded Republican prior to accepting the nomination for VP, but once McCain’s decidedly “establishment” campaign got a hold of her, she became one of them. The jury is still out if she can reclaim her independent tag.
On the recent 9/11 comments, Paul was obviously caught off gaurd by the question. Taking into consideration what he has said before on the topic his answer was odd. One could argue that he agrees that 9/11 was an inside job, but it isn’t politically advantageous to talk about it.
On the other hand one could also argue that what he means is that discussing it now is counterproductive and not something he wishes to focus his time on when there are many more important areas that need attention.
In fact, perhaps he should prepare himself by utilizing Harry Browne’s wonderful argument (in 2004) given after a “truther” caller takes him to task on the topic. Note that Browne somehow “predicts” Ron Paul’s candidacy in 2008 when he dreams of having a major party candidate bring up the role our own foreign policy had in bringing about the 9/11 attacks.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
(For more on this audio see: Harry Browne on “9/11 Truth” and Predicting Ron Paul)
Ron Paul’s political career began in 1971 when he saw the writing on the wall when Nixon closed the Gold window. With every single Republican (and many Democrats too) in the House cosponsoring HR1207 to “Audit The Fed”, it’s taken his colleagues 38 years to learn he was right all along on the economy. Hopefully it doesn’t take them another 38 years to realize Paul is right on foreign policy as well.
If believing in a strict interpretation of the Constitution is crazy, then Ron Paul will never be considered sane. For America’s sake I hope we all go insane in exactly the same way.
Loading ...
July 21st, 2009 at 4:12 pm (#)
You have to be reaaaaaally creative (or paranoid, insane etc) to claim that Ron Paul "implicitly" accepted the notion that 9/11 was an inside job. He didn't even comment the question, and not even the woman asking the question talked about an inside job.
Incomprehensible claim.
July 21st, 2009 at 4:36 pm (#)
His response implied he accepted it but that he was too busy to "come out regarding the truth about 9/11".
I'm obviously a huge Ron Paul supporter, but the fact is, his answer can EASILY be taken to mean he accepts the premise of the woman's question.
As I stated in the article, it is most likely what he meant to say is more along the lines of what Harry Browne said in the audio I included.
-Marc
July 21st, 2009 at 4:41 pm (#)
I tend to agree with vindician. I didn't see ANYTHING in his response that indicated that he accepted the "inside job" theory whatsoever. I just saw a man flustered by a question he wasn't prepared for (and, indeed, a question which clearly often annoys him). What I heard was basically, "I don't have time for this nonsense" but he tried to walk a thin line in his response so as not to alienate anyone on either side of the debate.
July 25th, 2009 at 1:02 am (#)
[...] posing as a Republican Ron Paul jumped on the attack Sarah Palin wagon in an interview with Politico this week saying Palin [...]
October 9th, 2009 at 4:12 pm (#)
But that's just it. There is no "debate". There is absolutely zero weight or validity to the truther argument. And treating it as if the two positions are on equal footing implicitly supports the truther position far more than the evidence supporting it should permit.