Ron Paul Quotes Jesus, Conservatives Outraged

[jmdrake]

This is lousy article full of a bunch of strawmen arguments. So because I think the tweet was in poor taste that makes me a supporter of war? How ignorant.

That's not what Lew said. This is the closest quote to what you're trying to say.

The tradition of laissez faire is a tradition against standing armies, and wars, and deference to military "heroics."

You can support standing armies and not support war, or at least not the wars going on now. You could have deference to military "heroics" and not support war. I see this every year at church around memorial day where a pastor that I'm pretty sure doesn't support the current wars has all current and past members of the military stand up and say "Thank you for protecting our freedoms." Yeah I know. It's a nice thing to do. If I was a pastor I'd be tempted to do it too, and to leave out what I'd want to say which is "While I thank you for your service, I pray that our ignorant politicians will quit sending you off to fight in wars that are none of our business". Then again, you may not support wars or standing armies or military heroics, but just be overly concerned about losing the support of republicans who do support those things. In that case cheer up! Rand Paul is making sure he doesn't lose their support.

 

[Occam's Banana]

That's not what Lew said. This is the closest quote to what you're trying to say.

The tradition of laissez faire is a tradition against standing armies, and wars, and deference to military "heroics."

Actually, that's not what Lew said either (although I'm sure he would agree).

The LRC blog entry being referred to is by Ryan McMaken - not Lew Rockwell.

 

[dbill27]

There's no way in hell that ron paul had anything to do with that tweet. Doesn't sound like anything he would ever say in a million years. So ya'll can stop trying to justify it. The most insulting part of the tweet was actually the second part about it not having been a good idea to go to a gun range. When has Ron Paul ever said something that snarky and arrogant in his entire life?

 

[Butchie]

That's not what Lew said. This is the closest quote to what you're trying to say.

The tradition of laissez faire is a tradition against standing armies, and wars, and deference to military "heroics."

You can support standing armies and not support war, or at least not the wars going on now. You could have deference to military "heroics" and not support war. I see this every year at church around memorial day where a pastor that I'm pretty sure doesn't support the current wars has all current and past members of the military stand up and say "Thank you for protecting our freedoms." Yeah I know. It's a nice thing to do. If I was a pastor I'd be tempted to do it too, and to leave out what I'd want to say which is "While I thank you for your service, I pray that our ignorant politicians will quit sending you off to fight in wars that are none of our business". Then again, you may not support wars or standing armies or military heroics, but just be overly concerned about losing the support of republicans who do support those things. In that case cheer up! Rand Paul is making sure he doesn't lose their support.

From the article:

The most transparent were the conservatives who claimed to be former supporters of Paul who must now go support some more "patriotic" politician: One who doesn't actually question anything the military does.

One member at RonPaulForums.com said "'Live by the sword, die by the sword' is what the dumbest, stupidest, most delusional people around here would say. There's no way that Ron actually said this. Ugh. How said [sic] and pathetic."

That seems to be the general reaction one gets from conservatives about the Golden Rule also.

This is what it comes down to for most conservatives, of course. All that stuff about laissez faire and freedom and free markets has never been more than an act and an affectation which goes right out the window if someone ever criticizes the US Government in a truly trenchant or penetrating manner.

Most of these sunshine patriots who now whine that Ron Paul has lost their support, wouldn't ever have supported Ron Paul in the first place if Obama weren't in office.

So yeah, anyone who lost respect for Ron or thought this tweet was a terrible idea is a "sunshine patriot" who never supported Ron in the first place and has to go support a "partiotic" politician who doesn't question the military. The guy who wrote this is just as bad as any demogauge out there.

 

[qh4dotcom]

One member at RonPaulForums.com said "'Live by the sword, die by the sword' is what the dumbest, stupidest, most delusional people around here would say. There's no way that Ron actually said this. Ugh. How said [sic] and pathetic."

Found it

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...tter-Account&p=4856987&viewfull=1#post4856987

 

[K466]

Thanks to Ryan's post at LRC for helping me understand what Ron Paul's Tweet meant. I guess I do agree with it after all but I might also agree with Liberty Eagle that it was in poor taste at this time and it certainly was poorly worded.

Exactly. I can't stand Lew - he's nothing but an apologist for the worst that libertarianism has to offer. If Ron Paul needs Lew to write an 11 paragraph blasting America for not understanding Ron's message, then something is wrong with the message....not America.

Yeah, it was poorly worded, but note the author was Ryan McMaken not Lew. Also Ron reads Lew everyday so how can you stand him either? I don't see how Lew is not awesome, at least most of the time.

In my opinion, there is really no defense for the initial tweet sent out. It was in extremely poor taste given that the guy isn't even in the ground yet and has a family in mourning.

The second tweet made the same point, but was phrased in a way that someone besides true believers might actually hear what was being said.

 

[Confederate]

Found it

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...tter-Account&p=4856987&viewfull=1#post4856987

Hahaha Danke quoted by Lew?

 

[pcosmar]

2 Thessalonians 2

3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.


people should read the book. They might understand then what Ron understands.

 

[A Son of Liberty]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to pcosmar again.

Thanks Pete.

 

[acptulsa]

Hahaha Danke quoted by Lew?

No, Lew's site quoted by Danke.

Here's the original:

"Live by the sword, die by the sword" is what the dumbest, stupidest, most delusional people around here would say. There's no way that Ron actually said this. Ugh. How said and pathetic.

 

[fisharmor]

Exactly. I can't stand Lew - he's nothing but an apologist for the worst that libertarianism has to offer. If Ron Paul needs Lew to write an 11 paragraph blasting America for not understanding Ron's message, then something is wrong with the message....not America.

If Lew Rockwell needs to put the actual author of his blog posts in bold 42 point type, then there' something wrong with America, not Lew.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Ron Paul Quotes Jesus, Conservatives Outraged
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/131829.html

Abashed the Devil stood,
And felt how awful goodness is, and saw
Virtue in her shape how lovely; saw, and pined
His loss; but chiefly to find here observed
His lustre visibly impaired; yet seemed
Undaunted.
-- John Milton, Paradise Lost

 

[KingNothing]

In my opinion, there is really no defense for the initial tweet sent out. It was in extremely poor taste given that the guy isn't even in the ground yet and has a family in mourning.

The second tweet made the same point, but was phrased in a way that someone besides true believers might actually hear what was being said.

This is exactly how I feel. Well said.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Cos' like, it needed to be said again...

In the end of course, Ron Paul has never been about rallying people to himself. He has been about the message, and the message is about freedom. It is a logical impossibility to be simultaneously pro-freedom and pro-military. Patrick Henry, who called government soldiers "engines of despotism" knew this. Thomas Jefferson knew this. Every true friend of liberty from William Graham Sumner to Murray Rothbard knew this. And Ron Paul knows it. Some of his supporters, still stuck in the mindset of a form of Geezer Conservatism in which "freedom-lovers" bow and scrape before the US Government, denied that Ron Paul could have even agreed with the Twitter post. No such luck for them. The tradition of laissez faire is a tradition against standing armies, and wars, and deference to military "heroics." Conservatives who are troubled by this should probably be honest with themselves and find a candidate more suitable to their views. I hear Newt Gingrich is still taking donations.

I was one of those geezers who was originally slapped out of my comfort zone by that first tweet. I had myself convinced that it didn't sound like something Ron would say. I originally saw it as "gloating" over Chris Kyle's death. I saw it as correct, but "insensitive in its timing".

But upon further review..... the more I revisited the words of the bastard Chris Kyle, re-read his quotes about how much he enjoyed killing and war, I am now firmly in support of the first tweet...without regard to who really sent it. I hope Ron did. Ron's cut-to-the-chase honesty has always been one of the qualities I love about him.

God bless Ron Paul.

 

[KingNothing]

I wonder if Ryan McMaken authored the tweet.

 

[LibertyEagle]

T"While I thank you for your service, I pray that our ignorant politicians will quit sending you off to fight in wars that are none of our business".

I don't think anyone here would have had a problem with the above. Nor do I think it is necessary to call everyone who signs up for the military a hero. That designation is tossed around as much as the word neocon, such that neither one of them has much meaning anymore. It used to really mean something.

 

[LibertyEagle]

But upon further review..... the more I revisited the words of the bastard Chris Kyle, re-read his quotes about how much he enjoyed killing and war, I am now firmly in support of the first tweet...without regard to who really sent it. I hope Ron did. Ron's cut-to-the-chase honesty has always been one of the qualities I love about him.

God bless Ron Paul.

The problem is that the general public DOES NOT KNOW that Chris Rye talked about loving to kill people.

So, yeah, the Ron Paul fan club may love it, but the majority of other people will misunderstand and it will drive them further from anything people in the liberty movement have to say.

Congratulations. I hope it was worth it.

 

[pcosmar]

The problem is that the general public DOES NOT KNOW

You could have stopped there.

The "public" will gladly cheer and support Lucifer when he s put on the throne in Jerusalem.

And there are many working to make that happen.

 

[A Son of Liberty]

You could have stopped there.

The "public" will gladly cheer and support Lucifer when he s put on the throne in Jerusalem.

And there are many working to make that happen.

Too right.

I'm beginning to feel more and more like, for me personally, my approach needs to be considerably less hands-on. Sometimes, when you roll in the slop with the pigs, all you end up is covered in pig shit.

 

[fisharmor]

So, yeah, the Ron Paul fan club may love it, but the majority of other people will misunderstand and it will drive them further from anything people in the liberty movement have to say.

Here's the main question:
Why does anyone still care what Ron Paul says or thinks?

Your group certainly doesn't care, since you've all jumped on the Rand bandwagon and decided that honesty and principle don't mean as much as they did in the beginning.

Fox News should certainly not care, since they won. Rupert Murdoch got his candidate elected, the neocon elite are happy because they successfully ran another rich great-hair candidate, and the rank-and-file is still champing at the bit to get behind the next plastic great-hair rich boy who doesn't stand for a damned thing they believe in.

So what is it about Ron Paul that people still give a damn what a failed, disgraced, retired presidential candidate thinks?

Could it be because you need us?

Guess what? What we did to Romney, we're going to do to Rand.

Perhaps you should all think real hard about that the next time you decide that being condescending is the way to convince us.