Frank Rich editorial
-
For those who haven't heard of him, Frank Rich is an editorial writer for the NY Times. He is a conservative; he's also intelligent, which leaves him on the outside looking in these days. From Sunday's Times[^] - A co-sponsor of CPAC was the John Birch Society, another far-right organization that has re-emerged after years of hibernation. Its views, which William F. Buckley Jr. decried in the 1960s as an “idiotic” and “irrational” threat to true conservatism, remain unchanged. At the conference’s conclusion, a presidential straw poll was won by Congressman Paul, ending a three-year Romney winning streak. No less an establishment conservative observer than the Wall Street Journal editorialist Dorothy Rabinowitz describes Paul’s followers as “conspiracy theorists, anti-government zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged.” And no, I don't want to debate it. I just thought I'd throw this out there; the viewpoint of a traditional conservative, representative of those of Buckley's ilk, who actually had some intellectual substance behind their rhetoric.
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
-
For those who haven't heard of him, Frank Rich is an editorial writer for the NY Times. He is a conservative; he's also intelligent, which leaves him on the outside looking in these days. From Sunday's Times[^] - A co-sponsor of CPAC was the John Birch Society, another far-right organization that has re-emerged after years of hibernation. Its views, which William F. Buckley Jr. decried in the 1960s as an “idiotic” and “irrational” threat to true conservatism, remain unchanged. At the conference’s conclusion, a presidential straw poll was won by Congressman Paul, ending a three-year Romney winning streak. No less an establishment conservative observer than the Wall Street Journal editorialist Dorothy Rabinowitz describes Paul’s followers as “conspiracy theorists, anti-government zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged.” And no, I don't want to debate it. I just thought I'd throw this out there; the viewpoint of a traditional conservative, representative of those of Buckley's ilk, who actually had some intellectual substance behind their rhetoric.
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
So what are you saying? Ron Paul is bad? It doesn't surprise me the slightest bit that they are throwing their propagandist might against Ron Paul and his supporters to knock them down. Fortunately, as the government becomes more corrupt and self-serving, we are going to see the likes of Ron Paul become more and more mainstream. The revolution has been set in motion. Will it be peaceful or will it be violent? With this type of demonization of the true grassroots who are already angry, it just might be a violent revolution (unfortunately).
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
-
So what are you saying? Ron Paul is bad? It doesn't surprise me the slightest bit that they are throwing their propagandist might against Ron Paul and his supporters to knock them down. Fortunately, as the government becomes more corrupt and self-serving, we are going to see the likes of Ron Paul become more and more mainstream. The revolution has been set in motion. Will it be peaceful or will it be violent? With this type of demonization of the true grassroots who are already angry, it just might be a violent revolution (unfortunately).
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
It doesn't surprise me the slightest bit that they are throwing their propagandist might against Ron Paul and his supporters to knock them down.
All they need to do to knock people like you down, is put you on a platform and wait for you to shoot yourself in the foot. You are an advertisement against the 9/11 truth movement, the patriot movement, and any other movement that is made to look populated entirely by crackpots, through your participation.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
So what are you saying? Ron Paul is bad? It doesn't surprise me the slightest bit that they are throwing their propagandist might against Ron Paul and his supporters to knock them down. Fortunately, as the government becomes more corrupt and self-serving, we are going to see the likes of Ron Paul become more and more mainstream. The revolution has been set in motion. Will it be peaceful or will it be violent? With this type of demonization of the true grassroots who are already angry, it just might be a violent revolution (unfortunately).
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
What kind of propaganda? Black propaganda? Wait, you still don't know what that is, do you?
-
For those who haven't heard of him, Frank Rich is an editorial writer for the NY Times. He is a conservative; he's also intelligent, which leaves him on the outside looking in these days. From Sunday's Times[^] - A co-sponsor of CPAC was the John Birch Society, another far-right organization that has re-emerged after years of hibernation. Its views, which William F. Buckley Jr. decried in the 1960s as an “idiotic” and “irrational” threat to true conservatism, remain unchanged. At the conference’s conclusion, a presidential straw poll was won by Congressman Paul, ending a three-year Romney winning streak. No less an establishment conservative observer than the Wall Street Journal editorialist Dorothy Rabinowitz describes Paul’s followers as “conspiracy theorists, anti-government zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged.” And no, I don't want to debate it. I just thought I'd throw this out there; the viewpoint of a traditional conservative, representative of those of Buckley's ilk, who actually had some intellectual substance behind their rhetoric.
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
LunaticFringe wrote:
No less an establishment conservative observer than the Wall Street Journal editorialist Dorothy Rabinowitz describes Paul’s followers as “conspiracy theorists, anti-government zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged.”
Notice the wording. "An establishment conservative." I think that says it all. You see what you want to see, out of bias. As do we all. But Ron Paul is just one that accepts everyone, no matter who you are; that's why he's popular. He's also about common sense conservatism. So don't believe everything you read; though everything does have a hint of truth to it. Put the whole picture together.
-
For those who haven't heard of him, Frank Rich is an editorial writer for the NY Times. He is a conservative; he's also intelligent, which leaves him on the outside looking in these days. From Sunday's Times[^] - A co-sponsor of CPAC was the John Birch Society, another far-right organization that has re-emerged after years of hibernation. Its views, which William F. Buckley Jr. decried in the 1960s as an “idiotic” and “irrational” threat to true conservatism, remain unchanged. At the conference’s conclusion, a presidential straw poll was won by Congressman Paul, ending a three-year Romney winning streak. No less an establishment conservative observer than the Wall Street Journal editorialist Dorothy Rabinowitz describes Paul’s followers as “conspiracy theorists, anti-government zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged.” And no, I don't want to debate it. I just thought I'd throw this out there; the viewpoint of a traditional conservative, representative of those of Buckley's ilk, who actually had some intellectual substance behind their rhetoric.
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
LunaticFringe wrote:
“conspiracy theorists, anti-government zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged.”
Two funny things to note here, I've never seen one successfully argue that this isn't true and nothing about this necessarily makes them wrong. Of course being disliked by the establishment doesn't make them right either.