Looks as though Ron Paul and Jeremiah Wright share something. Two somethings, actually. One is a blame America first mindset. The second is nasty, unbridled racism.

Where they differ is that Wright hates Jews and whites.  Paul hates Jews and blacks.   Oh, right.  Paul only hates Israel, and gives Iran and other jihadis who wish to exterminate the Jews a pass.  This alone should mark Paul as too extreme to be running as a Republican.  But, I’m sure that, as the formulation goes,  “some of his best friends are Jews…”

Paul’s racism against blacks comes out very clearly in some newsletters from the 1990s.  Ed Morrisey at Hot Air lists some very tasty excerpts.

As for Paul’s views on America’s role in the world,  Rich Lowry examines Paul’s blame America first world view.  Well, Paul is an isolationist in the best Patrick Buchanan mold:  we’re in the Middle East because world Jewry’s vast conspiracy has dictated it.  What Pitchfork Pat used to call the Israel “Amen Corner” in Congress.

What’s really sad about the Paultards is that they simply don’t seem to care that their man is nuttier than a Christmas fruitcake.  For every good idea, and he’s got quite a few, there are “I can’t believe that any sane man can believe that crap” ideas.

That Paul might actually win the un-representative Iowa caucuses says nothing about the Republican Party, and a lot about caucus-goers in Iowa.  As Rich Lowry concludes,

Iowa caucus-goers are protective of their pre-eminent place in the nominating process. If they deliver victory to a history-making Ron Paul, no one should take them as seriously again.

Ron Paul may “win” Iowa. But that means little for nominating an actual Republican. Let’s hope that Dr. Paul retains enough sanity to not mount a third-party run, unless of course he and his Paultards actually believe that another four years of Obama would be better for the nation than a President Romney (or fill in the name of any other Republican candidate except Ron Paul).


3 thoughts on “Paultards

  1. John, I follow your blog, and for the most part, I agree with your POV. But today, I have to totally disagree.
    RP is a whole lot less of a racist than Obama and the majority of his cabinet. How many times has O or one of his cronies disparaged white people and touted “his people”?
    Ron Paul is not of the establishment, and that his most attractive factor. Newt and Mitt will continue the tradition of shitting on the Constitution just the same as Obama, Bush, and Clinton have before. Paul won’t, and that should be the most important thing to consider.

    • Paul may, indeed be less racist than Obama & Co. However, that’s a pretty low bar.

      It’s not Paul’s racism that bothers me; many of his writings have more than a grain of truth.

      It is Paul’s isolationism, as though this were the 1930s and we could sit safe and secure in Fortress America.

      Didn’t work in the 1930s, certainly won’t work in the 21st century.

      • True enough on the low bar thing.

        I think isolationism may be a bit of an overstatement. I non-interventionist is really a more correct description. He is right that we stick our noses in too many places, and the negative blowback outweighs any positive gains we get. He may be a little out there on some stuff, but the real meat of what he could do as far as ending the war on drugs and this phoney war on terror would reap huge benefits for folks who appreciate liberty.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s