Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Ron Paul snags an endorsement
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, October 11, 2007

He gets the "David Duke" vote.

This can't help:
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
I’m not a Ron Paul supporter, but I don’t think it’s fair that that garbage gets passed around. We’re all adults here, I’m sure, and shouldn’t shy away from anything. But that video is essentially political pornography that airbrushes Paul into the money shot. I wouldn’t have blogged it.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
I wouldn’t have blogged it.
Then don’t.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
I think the Paul phenomenon is worth looking at purely from a cultural viewpoint. Not unlike Che, I’m not sure many of Paul’s ardent followers understand what he believes in. The fact that he attracts loons and kooks is worthy of examination. Why do 9/11 truthers like him? Why was this young lady attracted to Paul? Why do they work so hard to skew online polls?

The odd thing to me is that many of the folks who frequent QandO would agree with many or most of Paul’s domestic opinions. (I do, for example.) I’d love to think that his support indicates latent demand for libertarian principles. But it’s hard to tell whether that’s true, because the phalanx of kooks around him, plus his head-in-the-sand isolationism, somewhat obscure his wider message.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
McQ writes:
"I wouldn’t have blogged it."

Then don’t.
There was another comment in that comment:

"But that video is essentially political pornography that airbrushes Paul into the money shot."

That’s why I said that I wouldn’t have blogged it, because it’s not an endorsement of Ron Paul, it’s using his candidacy and some of his issues in racist pornography.

I’m not interested in Paul’s candidacy, but as a longshot and an outsider, he certainly doesn’t deserve to have people of your stature passing that rot along.

Do you have any information whatsoever that Ron Paul is any sort of racist? And if you don’t, does any sort of garbage that floats to the surface on YouTube get passed along as ’news’ here?

Suppose I found a YouTube video made by some obscure racist group that praised Q and O as the first place white supremacists should stop on their blog rounds every morning, and then blogged it with the comment, "Well, this isn’t going to help McQ and the boys!," and left it at that?

What would be my purpose in doing that? Why would I take racist garbage that wants to associate itself with you and help it achieve its goal by passing it along, with the implication that "boy, this isn’t good for Q and O," as if it had any standing at all?
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Billy Hollis writes:
The fact that he attracts loons and kooks is worthy of examination. Why do 9/11 truthers like him?
So examine that, if you think it’s worth your time.

Does Ron Paul do anything that indicates he’s a white supremacist?
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
That’s why I said that I wouldn’t have blogged it,
Ok ... it still doesn’t change my reply.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
head-in-the-sand isolationism
Yeah, Billy... and your idea of foreign policy has worked out soooo well, hasn’t it? You guys are just rolling in credibility.

Puh-leeze.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Lessee,

Head-in-the-sand isolationism. Check!

Kill the Federal Reserve and allow free silver like it’s 1840 again. Check!

Kill the IRS because income taxes are unconstitutional. Check! (see below)

Supports the Constitution and the Bill of rights and no later amendments. Check! (this one means that Blacks are counted as 2/3 (?) of Whites when taking a census).


What do these have in common? See the position statements of the National Alliance, Stormfront or other such "white advocacy" organizations. Paul’s positions are pure copy-and-paste of those planks. Apparently that similarity is no mere co-inky-dink.
 
Written By: D
URL: http://
" We’re all adults here, I’m sure, and shouldn’t shy away from anything. "

Yet you do.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
"(this one means that Blacks are counted as 2/3 (?) of Whites when taking a census)."

Only if they are not free. (I am really getting tired of this nonsense).


"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Fair enough correction, Tim. The other points stand, however.
 
Written By: D
URL: http://
What do these have in common? See the position statements of the National Alliance, Stormfront or other such "white advocacy" organizations. Paul’s positions are pure copy-and-paste of those planks. Apparently that similarity is no mere co-inky-dink.
This is argumentum ad hominem. It’s akin to saying that since communists drink milk, anyone who believes in drinking milk is a communist.

I’m no supporter of Ron Paul, but it’s not at all fair to say that he’s some kind of white supremacist based on these particular views. Unless, of course, you can show how opposition to the Federal Reserve and income taxes somehow show a racial motive.

 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com/
I think the point here is this is an endorsement Ron Paul should quickly repudiate. Agreed?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
You say he should quickly repudiate the endorsement. I was curious as to how often candidates do that. I can’t off the top of my head think of any candidates who have done that, but maybe I just haven’t been paying enough attention. I don’t think the endorsement is a good thing, but it won’t alter my opinion of Paul unless someone shows me he has actively courted this group. If his response is to ignore it until someone brings it up to him in public and then immediately repudiate it, that’s good enough for me.
 
Written By: Jim
URL: http://
McQ writes:
I think the point here is this is an endorsement Ron Paul should quickly repudiate. Agreed?
No. I don’t think that anyone should be put in the position where he is obligated to repudiate that sort of rot.

Did he seek their endorsement? Has he even heard of that group?

 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
it’s not at all fair to say that he’s some kind of white supremacist based on these particular views. Unless, of course, you can show how opposition to the Federal Reserve and income taxes somehow show a racial motive.
Agreed. It is not my intention to label him as racist. However, I believe that Rep. Paul has shown a history of seeking easy, superficial and usually false answers to complex problems. Opposition to the Federal Reserve certainly qualifies as there is not enough non-base metal in existence to back all the currency in a $13 trillion economy; Ma-Fed is a necessary institution like it or not. Likewise the assertion that income taxes are unconstitutional as they are supported by amendment which is, if I am not mistaken, as much a part of the Constitution as any other. The National Front Storm-Alliance-whatever shows similar resorting to false superficiality by blaming the skewed public debate on the "Jew-media", declining to take a long look in the mirror.

That comparison is substantive, germane and cannot be called argumentum ad hominem.
 
Written By: D
URL: http://
It is not my intention to label him as racist. However,... The National Front Storm-Alliance-whatever shows similar resorting to false superficiality
There’s enough "false superficiality" going around in national politics to choke a herd of elephants. Comparing Ron Paul to these racists is puerile claptrap.

Does Ron Paul subscribe to white supremacy? No? Then get off it, because that is the singular point of this racist group, whatever window-dressing they hang around it.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Ron Paul sure draws out the freak squad. Not sure what that says about Ron, but he’s sure getting his 15 minutes.

More importantly, I need to see the stormfront chick before I know what I want to shove down her throat.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
timactual writes:
"We’re all adults here, I’m sure, and shouldn’t shy away from anything."

Yet you do.
What I’m saying is that discretion is also a useful concept. There’s no reason to refuse to confront something that needs confronting, but if this "endorsement" isn’t something that Ron Paul sought or even knows about, what exactly is the point of trying to saddle him with it?
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
What I’m saying is that discretion is also a useful concept. There’s no reason to refuse to confront something that needs confronting, but if this "endorsement" isn’t something that Ron Paul sought or even knows about, what exactly is the point of trying to saddle him with it?
Good lord.

He’s already "saddled" with it, whether he wanted it or not or whether he sought it or not.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
McQ writes:
He’s already "saddled" with it, whether he wanted it or not or whether he sought it or not.
He’s not "already ’saddled’" with anything. Even in the Usenet sewers hardly anyone paid attention to these people when they came around. So they put out a YouTube and grabbed hold of Ron Paul to advance their racist claptrap. That and $2.50 will get them a coffee at Starbucks.

Ron Paul owes exactly nothing to that. He owes it no more than he owes a lunatic running down the street declaring him the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama. Do you think he should race to the microphone to deny "absolutely, unequivocally" that he is not the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama? (With apologies to the current Dalai Lama who is still very much alive.)
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
He’s not "already ’saddled’" with anything.

[...]

Ron Paul owes exactly nothing to that.
I see. So if Planned Parenthood endorsed Rudy Giulaini and claimed he best represented their stand on abortion, he owes exactly nothing to that and isn’t saddled with anything, correct?

I mean, since he didn’t "seek" their endorsement and all.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
The obvious difference is that Guiliani endorses Planned Parenthood. Ron Paul doesn’t endorse Stormfront or anything like them.
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
McQ writes:
I see. So if Planned Parenthood endorsed Rudy Giulaini and claimed he best represented their stand on abortion, he owes exactly nothing to that and isn’t saddled with anything, correct?
You’re using as a comparative example a major and regretably mainstream American institution, a major player in the national political discussion, with all the bona fides that the leader in the abortion industry brings to the table.

The racist group that produced that video isn’t even a minor group it’s so marginal. It has no credibility, isn’t a participant in the political process. It isn’t backing a candidate, or even forming a symbiotic relationship with a candidate. It is acting as a parasite, using a candidate to get attention for itself and its white supremacist message.

If Ron Paul isn’t a white supremacist, and I’ve never heard anyone say that he is, then these people are just trying to suck his campaign’s blood. Paul doesn’t have any responsibility to respond to that, and no one has any reason to facilitate it. The people who made that video don’t rate it.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Nice dodge Billy.

Let’s say John McCain then.

 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
You’re using as a comparative example a major and regretably mainstream American institution, a major player in the national political discussion, with all the bona fides that the leader in the abortion industry brings to the table.
And you’re trying to avoid the point.

Let me ask you, would Rudy Giuliani or John McCain or even Hillary Clinton, let an unsought endorsement from the KKK just lay there?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Let me ask you, would Rudy Giuliani or John McCain or even Hillary Clinton, let an unsought endorsement from the KKK just lay there?
Well, Hillery didn’t really distance herself from the MoveOn "betray us" add.

In the case of Paul, I’m not sure pushing away voters, even the stormfront types, makes sense. Currently he relies upon the kook vote. So for him, attacking the kooks probably doesn’t make sense.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
McQ,

Are you unaware of the LBJ "farm animals" principle?

According to an old tale circulating about him, he once contrived to have a political opponent accused of unpleasant activities with the same. When an agast aid objected on the grounds that it was totally unfounded, LBJ replied, "I know, but I want to make the son of a gun deny it."

Martin’s point is that the denial itself would be an endorsement of a perverted sort for these losers
 
Written By: E. Brown
URL: http://saturninretrograde.blogspot.com
A repudiation isn’t a denial.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
The notion that Paul must repudiate endorsements from anyone and everyone is just lunacy. Candidates shouldn’t be asked to take the time chasing every comment from any misguided morons to denounce them. I’m sure that there are many racists pigs that endorse [gasp] Fred Thompson, is he expected to chase them down and denounce them???
I also find it ironic that the music at the end of this ridiculous video is from the film Lord of the Rings. I wonder how Stormfront feels about humans interacting and helping elves and hobbits.

More disturbing however, is the obvious ignorance from some of you,
The fact that he attracts loons and kooks is worthy of examination.
Written By: Billy Hollis
Ron Paul sure draws out the freak squad.

Currently he relies upon the kook vote.
Written By: Don
I live a stones throw away from Paul’s district. It is safe to say that they are my neighbors. And you would be wasting your time trying to convince me that the people who have re-elected Paul time and time again are nothing but “loons and kooks”.

After all, Ron Paul should be a conservative/libertarian dream boat.
He,
Supports free trade,
Opposes the Patriot Act,
Opposes Gun control,
Opposes the Federal War on Drugs,
Supports the abolition of the federal income tax,
Supports a balanced budget,
Opposes illegal immigration and amnesty,
Favors the withdrawal from the UN and NATO

Hell, he’s even pro-life.

But noooo. He’s been ridiculed and mocked from so-called neolibertarians. Even to the point of wishing him banned from the debates. Yeah, just how open-minded are you?

So what justifies these condemnations? Why it’s his opposition to the Iraq war of course.
Neolibertarians and their single issue litmus test.

Speaks volumes.

Cheers.

 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Mahone writes:
So what justifies these condemnations? Why it’s his opposition to the Iraq war of course.
That’s nonsense. Presenting this video is at worst a case of YouTube’itis. I was the one who challenged it because it seemed out of character at this blog. Paul’s views on Iraq wouldn’t require any of the principals here to float the white supremacist "endorsement" to discredit Paul. They’re all more than capable of dealing with Paul’s position directly.

 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
I was the one who challenged it because it seemed out of character at this blog.
That’s nonsense. It’s completely in character for this blog.
You’re forgiven though, Martin. As you obviously haven’t been around here long enough to be a good judge of the character of this blog.
Truth is, McQ blogs about lots of things, including what amuses him. And for some odd reason, this “endorsement” seemed to amuse him, and I doubt that he is suggesting that this particular endorsement carries much weight. He is suggesting, however, that a repudiation is demanded from Ron Paul backed by the immense weight of himself and the neolibertarian empire.
Of course, you would realize this if you were around during the mocking George Clooney days.

Good times. Good times.
Paul’s views on Iraq wouldn’t require any of the principals here to float the white supremacist "endorsement" to discredit Paul.
Wouldn’t it? Of course it wouldn’t. This is just an amusing side show. Right?
They’re all more than capable of dealing with Paul’s position directly.
And that would be my question. Other than this amusing little side show, how would the principals of this blog deal with Paul’s position? And how would they deal with his positions on other things other than the Iraq war? And if their positions differ little, then why is this single issue being held as their litmus test?

Nevermind.

I’m just going to watch that video again.

Looney, cookey, freaky Paul supporters… Hey!! I think I see some of my Ron Paul supporting neighbors walking their dog now…
Excuse me, I’ll be right back…

HEY!!! GO BACK TO YOUR BUNKER, YOU FREAKY RON PAUL SUPPORTING RACISTS PIGS

Well that was strange… You should’ve seen the look they shot me.
Weirdos.

Cheers.

 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
"Nice dodge Billy."
It was nothing of the sort, Bruce. It was a factual difference between the two cases that refutes any insinuation that there is any sort of interest for Ron Paul in all this.

Pogue: McPhillips was reading Bruce long before you were.
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
Well my mistake then. Apologies.
Perhaps, then, McPhillips is just a poor judge of character.

 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
I live a stones throw away from Paul’s district. It is safe to say that they are my neighbors. And you would be wasting your time trying to convince me that the people who have re-elected Paul time and time again are nothing but “loons and kooks”.
It isn’t the people in his constitutional district I’m talking about.

It’s the internet nutcases who spam polls and rant, and the kooks who show up the the demonstrations. And all the Truthers who support him.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
In fact, I know him to be an extraordinarily good judge of character.
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
The idea that Ron Paul attracts only "kooks and loons" is not only ridiculous, but totally unfounded. He raised a significant and surprising amount of money during his campaign...a number that can not just be written off. Clearly, all this money isn’t coming from racists or people who stand on the side of the road talking to watermelons. It is from regular Americans, many of whom, believe it or not, are rather intelligent and are simply fed up with politics as usual.

As far as Paul wanting to get rid of the income tax, when did people become so pro-tax in the first place? I don’t believe Paul ever said he believed taxes are unconstitutional, I think the more accurate statement would be that he believes the programs funded with our tax dollars are unconstitutional. Welfare programs, subsidies, all benefit one small group at the expense of another. They are simply wealth redistribution programs with fancy names. Read some of Thomas Jefferson’s writings if you want to learn about the problems with this. In the case of subsidies, our taxes go to pay the subsidies, and then we pay higher prices for the goods. Any time the government attempts to be a provider rather than a protector it fails, and ends up harming the interests of the majority of the population.

As for the gold standard, which has been attacked for being too archaic, on this point I am not really qualified to comment extensively. Economics is not really my subject, but I do believe that the current system gives the government too much power. The power to print currency that is not backed by a hard base leads to inflation, where again, the middle class loses out.

As for whether Ron Paul should repudiate the endorsement, I don’t think he really needs to. He has never been accused of being a white supremacist, and, in contrast, I believe he received 100% on his voting record from the Association for a Color Blind America (I think that is the name). Not to mention, I doubt most voters are aware of Stormfront or their endorsement of him.

A Ron Paul "loon"
 
Written By: The Honorable Flamingo
URL: http://www.thehonorableflamingo.blogspot.com
Agreed. It is not my intention to label him as racist.
Horse hockey. You deliberately mentioned he holds the same views as racist organizations. Now you’re backing away from your statement.
However, I believe that Rep. Paul has shown a history of seeking easy, superficial and usually false answers to complex problems. Opposition to the Federal Reserve certainly qualifies as there is not enough non-base metal in existence to back all the currency in a $13 trillion economy; Ma-Fed is a necessary institution like it or not. Likewise the assertion that income taxes are unconstitutional as they are supported by amendment which is, if I am not mistaken, as much a part of the Constitution as any other. The National Front Storm-Alliance-whatever shows similar resorting to false superficiality by blaming the skewed public debate on the "Jew-media", declining to take a long look in the mirror.

That comparison is substantive, germane and cannot be called argumentum ad hominem.
Had you made these points in your initial post, I might have agreed with you that it wasn’t ad hominem. But you didn’t, you just said Paul holds views in common with radical fringe elements. That most certainly is ad hominem, no matter how much back-pedaling you do now.
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com/
"A repudiation isn’t a denial."

This is pettifogging, which is unworthy of you. You were most certainly calling for him to deny a connection with the Stormfronters, and said "repudiation" would give them the attention that they don’t deserve.
 
Written By: E. Brown
URL: http://
Pettifogging?

Sorry but when I look up the two words they do not mean the same thing.

We’re talking about presidential politics here.

Repudiating them requires nothing more than a press release by Ron Paul’s staff. That would take care of the situation.

Then if anyone tries to use it against him (as a throw away line in a debate for instance), Paul simply points to the press release and whoever uses it looks like a fool.

If, however he ignores it and someone uses it against him, he’s stuck with denying it ... what you and others claim he shouldn’t have to do.

But there he’ll be, on national TV, doing exactly that.

This isn’t running for city council and, if you’re paying attention at all, you know if someone sees an advantage in bringing this up, they will.

Which do you think is smarter politics?

Repudiate now, or deny it later when it is forced on you in front of a national audience?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Why should he? There’s nothing to it and you’re trying to gin up something that isn’t there, McQ. Would he have to "repudiate" endorsements from the Chr$stadelphians, Ti-Grace Atkinson, Judge Crater or the Flat Earth Society as well?
 
Written By: E. Brown
URL: http://
Why should he?
I just explained why, Earnest.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
I remember a Bruce McQain from years ago with the integrity to "man up" to screwing up; as Martin has most thoroughly pointed out, and Billy and Earnest have backed up.

Makes me wonder if he’s less certain about his advocacy of this American war against a 3rd world country than he lets on, among other corners he’s stuck in — but admittedly that’s just speculation. It’s just that I have in the last couple of years gained an intense interest in the utter terror people seem to experience at the prospect of being wrong. I happen to engage in a business activity (derivatives trading) where I’m actually wrong most of the time, and have to admit it and manage losses, or I lose big.

It’s done wonders for my perspective. Others might want to try it (uh, getting psychologically used to fessing up about being wrong; not trading derivatives). It’s quite liberating. Moreover, you really get to enjoy and bask in being right.
 
Written By: Richard Nikoley
URL: http://www.honestylog.com
I remember a Bruce McQain from years ago with the integrity to "man up" to screwing up; as Martin has most thoroughly pointed out, and Billy and Earnest have backed up.
F*ck you, Rich.

Clear enough?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Yea, and now even Dale Franks had to publicly call you out.

You were wrong, Bruce. Way wrong, which isn’t a big deal. That you no longer possess the integrity to fess up is a big deal.

Do you really that that eff u’s have any impact on me, as long as I’ve been around the net.

Least you can’t honestly call into question my honesty and integrity, and that’s exactly what I’m doing to you.
 
Written By: Richard Nikoley
URL: http://www.honestylog.com
Least you can’t honestly call into question my honesty and integrity, and that’s exactly what I’m doing to you.
Oh I could call all sorts of things about you into question. The difference is, I’d have the courtesy to do it by a means other than on a public board.

So my comment to you stands.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Like what, Bruce? You might be right. I’ve done a ton of stupid things over the last few years, and many documented on my blog if people add up the numbers. I’m hardly going to hide from a good lesson in how not to be so stupid next time.

And BTW, I was explicit and limited in my assessment, here. I think you’re a good man, and I wouldn’t bother hitting you up like this if I didn’t think that.

I just can’t see why you’re so resistant to admit to effing up.
 
Written By: Richard Nikoley
URL: http://www.honestylog.com

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider