Monday, September 24, 2007

Personal Aside: A Self-Indulgent Ron Paul Rally—“Legalize Freedom” (We Know What That Means!)…End the War Now…Repeal the Income Tax. In Summary: A Rally that was Appalling and Appealing.

ronpaul



A similar article appears in today’s Chicago Daily Observer.

Appalling.


For one with a long history of conservative Republican political participation…and mine goes back to the 1952 presidential campaing of Robert Taft…the rally Saturday afternoon at the Hyatt-Regency hotel celebrating Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) could not have been a greater shock. Taft, son of the 27th president, was constitutionally (and this word is used advisably) unable to demagogue. His message of hoped-for return to the policies of the past did not contain many personal incentives. In place of entitlements he advocated work, instead of farm subsidies he emphasized the free market. He accepted Social Security and few other accoutrements of the corporate state but not many. He opposed expansion of the size of government, soaking the rich, a multiplicity of federal alphabetical agencies that robbed personal initiative.. He preached the hard lessons of fiscal rectitude. Most particularly in foreign policy in believed in the enlightened self-interest of America First.

His speeches were laced with statistics and legal scholarship which made his audiences apply the hard work of speculative reason. Thus his prescriptions were not simple nor applicable to a stick-on bumper sticker. On foreign policy, for instance, his “magnum opus” was a 127-page book he wrote in 1951 as a prelude to his entering the race for the presidency. It was called “A Foreign Policy for Americans.” In the book he stated in Chapter One that “I believe the ultimate purpose of our foreign policy must be to protect the liberty of the people of the United States…Only second to liberty is the maintenance of peace”. P. 11. He stated that the tradition of “neutrality and non-interference with other nations was based on the principle that this policy was the best way to avoid disputes with other nations and to maintain the liberty of this country without war” p. 12.

But he added, “I have always felt, however, that we should depart from this principle if we could set up an effective international organization because in the long run the success of such an organization should be the most effective assurance of world peace and therefore of American peace. I regretted that we did not join the League of Nations” p. 12-13. But the UN had failed to protect the peace. He added, “I was never satisfied with the United Nations Charter and stated my criticism definitely at the time. The fundamental difficulty is that it is not based primarily on an underlying law and an administration of justice under that law. I believe that in the long run the only way to establish peace is to write a law, agreed to by each of the nations, to govern the relations of such nations with each other and to obtain the covenant of all such nations that they will abide by that law and decisions made there-under” p. 39.

By the time you finished the book you were filled in completely on the complex thought that Taft had given to international affairs. He rejected the manipulation by which FDR maneuvered us into World War II. Whether Pearl Harbor came as result of presidential manipulation or incompetence he did not offer an opinion—but he stated that once involved in the war he supported the winning of it in the shortest possible time.

With respect to the Korean War which was being waged at the time he wrote the book, he insisted that the action of President Truman was unconstitutional. “…[I]n the case of Korea where a war was already under way, we had no right to send troops to a nation with whom we had no treaty, to defend it against attack by another nation, no matter how unprincipled that aggression might be, unless the whole matter was submitted to Congress and a declaration of war or some other direct authority obtained.” But in the case of Korea, he pledged to win the war if feasible or settle it on honorable terms.

Likewise, he recognized the Communist threat and urged that the U.S. concentrate on turning it back—specifying air power rather than massive enlistment of men. P. 75. But, “while defense of this country is our first consideration, I do not agree with those who think we can completely abandon the rest of the world and rely solely upon defense of this continent. In fact, the very thesis of an effective control of sea and air by the free nations requires that we do interest ourselves in Europe and the Near East and North Africa and the Far East so that Communist influence may not extend to areas from which it is still possible to exclude it by many methods other than land armies.” Pp. 77-78.

However, he questioned and voted against the North Atlantic Treaty and NATO. While the president had the right to send troops to Europe, NATO was a different matter, the creation of “an international army, apparently established by twelve nations, with a commander who is appointed by the twelve nations.” He added: “It seems to me perfectly clear that the president’s power as commander-in-chief does not extend to the delegation of that power to a commander who is chosen by any other nation or any other group of nations” (p34).

When Truman appointed General Dwight Eisenhower as supreme commander, “he exceeded his authority” p. 35. “When the president undertook to carry out that recommendation he usurped the powers of Congress. He had no authority to carry out that particular agreement made at Brussels without submitting it to Congress” p.35.

Why do I go into this ancient history? Because the role of Sen. Taft was and is at great variance with that of Rep. Ron Paul whose demagogic phraseology appeals not to conservatives—but, apparently if Saturday’s meeting was any indication—to a sweaty group of boisterous, screaming, jumping up and down in place, obese youth (obviously from hours spent huddled before computers), shaggy, unkempt, hirsute, noisy, obstreperous, rambunctious and raucous. And that’s before we consider the male contingent.

Why the great interest in this element of youth for a 72-year-old man who, were he to be improbably elected, would be easily the oldest president at 73 and 77 when he would complete his first term? A candidate who touts congressional term limits but who has served nine terms already and under unique Texas law will be running for reelection while he runs for president either as a Republican or nominee of the Libertarian party?

The answer is clear. The message that this candidate brings in one of self-indulgence, ideally suited for the mob he addressed. He preaches peace now and the bringing of troops home as soon as possible—which appeals to the special interest of the group which would disdain military service as inconvenient to its proclivities. He favors abolishing the income tax which attracts the group’s interest in self-enrichment. He distributes a palm card that states a curious objective—“legalize freedom.” Legalize freedom? What does that mean? It’s obvious what it means: code for legalizing drugs which the Congressman before some selective groups advocates but which he decorously did not bring up at this meeting. But “legalize freedom” was the catchword. Every one of the pleasure bunnies in the meeting caught on.

It is the promise of self-indulgence and rather than a conservative campaign is a sop to decadence. Intriguingly enough he is on record as favoring an end to abortion—but he didn’t bring up the issue at that meeting where the youths’ hormones were raging. In place of a scholarly talk of foreign relations as was the case with Robert Taft, there was this bit of doggerel nonsense: the clear implication that we invite attacks on us by being involved on any side in the Middle East…code for support of Israel.

Another subject that never was brought up by the candidate was immigration. He has been identified with two contradictory positions on that issue in the past…one which has supported minimum control of the borders consonant with libertarianism…another which supports wholesale crack-down and the building of a fence. Someone looked over the crowd and possibly decided neither approach would be acceptable to factions of the exuberant and viscerally feeling…not thinking…crowd—so no mention was made.

There was the statement that we should withdraw from the United Nations. Fine: I for one see no need for it—but were we not entitled to a reasoned explanation as to the many reasons why? Just a bumper-sticker shout which was returned by a raucous rejoinder.

Then there came the most outrageous so-called “historical” comparison of all. The candidate said that John F. Kennedy was wise to negotiate with Nikita Khrushchev during the Cuban missile crisis and to agree that in exchange for Soviet missiles being withdrawn from Cuba, U. S. missiles would be withdrawn from Turkey. This was greeted by wild applause as the candidate urged this prescription to be used in our dealings with Muslim extremists. Does he or the group believe that Islamic extremists are the same kind of men that ruled the Soviet Union…men who feared nuclear destruction just as did we? Is he serious in equating Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, with our past adversaries in the Cold War? Converts from Islam to Christianity must live in fear—even in the United States. Does he not understand that to a Islamo-Fascist death, often by self-detonation and death to children by detonation is to be rewarded in heaven? Views in American politics have only one equal—the insensate ranting of the Far Left, of The Daily Kos to which the Paul campaign seems uniquely suited.

But even the Daily Kos would refrain from the valedictory Paul gave the crowd: “We have been told that we have to give up our freedoms in order to be safe because terrorism is such a horrible event. A lot fewer lives died on 9/11 than they do in less than a month on our highways—but once again, who owns the highways? Do we own the highways? No, it’s a government institution, you know.” This implies that if the highways were run privately the death toll would be lower. Really? In a Ron Paul world where likely there would be no enforced speed limits?

Appealing.

You can say all you want about Hitler…monomaniac, racist, genocidal tyrant…but he and his people could really run a rally. From the Munich beer hall putsch through to the end of his regime he was unexcelled. Let me say the manipulation of an already excitable, juvenile, impressionable and deliriously passionate youth audience by the Ron Paul people was unexcelled—at least among those I have observed in this country. Hitler’s meetings would involve people packed like sardines in a room that did not allow much area for expansion. That was the case here. The storm troopers would then lead a preparatory with a brief exultation by one not as articulate as the one who was to come later. That happened, too, although the deputy campaign manager and campaign managers were no slouches. Following the warm-up, Hitler’s people ran a documentary by Leni Riefenstahl, the blonde goddess who dramatized Hitler youth…who was in fact probably the greatest film documentarian at that time in the world. When the documentary…showing bronzed athletes swearing allegiance to the Fuhrer and wide-eyed young people marching joyously as far as the eye could see in perfect precision…a groundswell of music would conclude, lights would go up and someone would shout: “Heil Hitler!” and in he would come. The place would go delirious.

Leni Riefenstahl has gone to her reward and was not available—but in her place was an outstandingly produced video that featured Ron Paul saying only one sentence—this taken from the first Republican debate. “My name is Ron Paul and I am here to defend the Constitution of the United States!” Then the film’s half hour is devoted to panning crowds which are exactly like the crowd packed in the Hyatt-Regency auditorium: bearded, shaggy, pony-tailed, inarticulate, frenetic, unconcerned with ideas. The identification of those in the video with the crowd in the auditorium was perfect. The crowd was alternatively transfixed seeing almost identical representatives of themselves and, in effect, cheered themselves in a cacophony of the Imperial Self. Here was a crowd passionately wanting to have…”legalized freedom”…i. e. the freedom to smoke whatever it wished from marijuana to crack cocaine…pay no taxes…have no war…have no hassle…and not be bothered by restrictions. Were Riefenstahl around, she would have enthusiastically approved the video.

And when the video ended, a voice called out: “Ladies and gentlemen! Dr. R-o-n P-a-u-l !” And the orgy of self-indulgence exploded into an orgasm. He moved into the room swiftly and a forest of hands arose in salutes and waves--you can make of that what you will.

Where Bob Taft spoke as a constitutional lawyer and fiscal scholar…one who had been to Versailles as an aide to Herbert Hoover the World War I food czar…spoke in masterly legal sentences…Ron Paul wasted no time with ramifications. Peace now…end the income tax…”legalize freedom” (we all know what that means, huh?)…don’t tax the Internet (there is a bill to apply postage to emails which is unlikely to even get a hearing much less pass—but it’s good red meat)…get out of the UN!...and “restore our Constitution” which to the crowd means only one thing—more freedom, much more freedom and not order, hell no! Not responsibility! Hell no! F-r-e-e-d-o-m which translated to it means license.

I list this under “Appealing” because I contrast it with the Taft rallies I attended and the Gene McCarthy it was brilliantly derived and entirely nutrition-free with no thought whatever beyond the sloganeering.

Finally, I wish to contrast this with the words Gene McCarthy made at a similar rally against the Vietnam War in Chicago which I attended…not as a follower but as one who knew McCarthy quite well. He began telling the crowd of youth in professorial style the difference between Vietnam and Korea. Unlike Vietnam, he said, “the war in Korea allowed us to make a quit e full moral commitment to the achievements of objectives.” Really exciting phrase, right? “I supported the war in Korea because it was a relatively clear case of aggression against a nation willing to defend itself with the support of the U. S. and other members of the United Nations.” Notice that he was far more in support of Korea than was Bob Taft.

This much I can say: if the Republicans lose the next presidential election…and gamblers’ odds are 80 to 20 it will…there will be a revolution of sorts to reestablish old principles to the party which it sadly forgot….principles of thrift…continuation of tax cuts…deregulation…and true libertarians as well as social conservatives will have says in the reformulation. Let us hope that the reformulation if it is to come following a presidential loss…will be in the mode of Robert A. Taft and not Ron Paul.

Else the Republican party, echoing the New Left, will be Left Out and go the way of the Whigs.

107 comments:

  1. I am a Taft Republican and a Ron Paul supporter. I'm glad you included this great quote from Robert Alfonso:

    “I believe the ultimate purpose of our foreign policy must be to protect the liberty of the people of the United States…Only second to liberty is the maintenance of peace”.

    This is Dr. Paul's theme.

    Tom, you seem to be dismayed that Dr. Paul did not touch on your uber alies issue (his congressional record as the premier pro-life federal legislator is undisputed) or the red meat Immigration issue, but instead had a handbill which states "legalize freedom", which is consistent with Taft's protect liberty first. And you know Dr. Paul does not pander--just look at his debate appearances, even at the Values Voters debates.

    Republicans need to face the truth. The 2008 election will be decided on foreign policy issues. Abortion, gay marriage, etc. are important issues, but with a war which results in hundreds of Americans dying overseas each month, ballooning federal spending, an economic tailspin, and the erosion of, yes, American liberty at home, the war will be front and center.

    And Dr. Paul has been right on the Iraq War since 1998. And he's right about the motives of our enemies. Just as the prosecutorial search for motive as an essential element of a crime does not absolve the criminal of responsibility, so recognition of terrorist motive does not exculpate the terrorist from culpability for his crimes.

    Tom, you charges of license ring hollow, and are about as credible as the left's charges of license against free market right-wingers. I've heard many of Dr. Paul's speeches and seen his debate performances (I didn't make it to Chicago on Saturday--Wrigley Field beckoned), and he preaches individual responsibility.

    One last. Be careful about your comments regarding the "sweaty group of boisterous, screaming, jumping up and down in place, obese...shaggy, unkempt, hirsute, noisy, obstreperous, rambunctious and raucous...bearded, shaggy, pony-tailed" crowd. You sound here like a card carrying Combine member of the Country Club Republicans. This is very unlike you. And several of the adjectives like boisterous, noisy, and raucous are used by combine members to describe RALC.

    But if the point of your article is to point out that there are differences between Senator Taft and Dr. Paul, of course. But Tom, after the unfair attacks on you I would think that you of all people would appreciate nuance.

    ReplyDelete
  2. First of all, and I just have to get this out of the way, I'm assuming the picture of the man on the top of this page is you. Please don't be a hypocrite and generalize a group of people as "obese youth (obviously from hours spent huddled before computers). . .", because it just makes you look like a hypocrite. Besides, what in the world does it have to do with your political differences with Ron Paul?

    Ok, so you don't like Ron Paul. Fine. You think we should be involved in nation building, and you probably love the patriot act removing your freedoms, and then there's the 6 zillion government bureau's. I get it, you've been had by the Republican Establishment Media who's told you what this country "really means" and how this country was "really founded". Fine. Go vote for Rudy McRomney-son and be happy. Blog about how you dislike Ron Paul's politics. I wouldn't even bat an eye at it. It's your right, you're free to do so. . . .

    BUT DON"T LIE

    When you say that "legalizing freedom" means no responsibility and the right to smoke whatever you want, you simply are telling lies, and clearly you didn't attend the same rally in Chicago I did. During his speech, Ron Paul got thunderous applause from these "hirsute, noisy, obstreperous, rambunctious and raucous" supporters when he said that freedom also means the freedom to fail, and necessarily means the need for personal responsibility to face the consequences of failure.

    But you see, if you would have mentioned that, your portrayal of this group (including myself, a well groomed conservative Christian husband and father) as a bunch of dope smoking hippies would have fallen apart, would it not?

    What legalizing freedom means is simply that we don't think the patriot act is a good idea. We don't think we need t give up liberty to have security. We don't think that playing fast and loose with the bill of rights is correct behavior for those in Washington. We don't think that government growing beyond it's constitutional boundaries is a good thing. Also, and pay attention here because you seem confused about the Dr.'s stance, we think that giving up our national soverignty through open borders, unbalanced trade, unionization projects like the NAU, and one world currency policies is decidedly UNAMERICAN. So we're voting for Dr. Paul because he's the only one who seems to agree with us.

    One other thing: I too am critical of some of Dr. Paul's supporters. But before I open my mouth too many times to them, I stop and remember that they are Americans too. Americans who for too long have been disinterested or jaded with politics as usual. And may I remind you, as I was once reminded, many of these "great unwashed" are the same people who keep our country going day in and day out. On my way from Wisconsin to the rally, I met business owners, computer technicians, truck drivers, retail clerks, those in professional fields (accountants, lawyers, etc.) and many many others who are simply everyday folks that this country relies on everyday. I think it's time we've listened to what those good folks have to say, and they've spoken loud and clear in favor of Dr. Paul.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am 36 years old, have a body mass index of 22, took a shower and ironed some clean clothes to wear to the Ron Paul rally. I also have a PhD from the University of Chicago and so I look for a candidate based on his intelligent policy, not emotional appeal. I don't touch alcohol, cigarettes or anything in that vein that is illegal. I spent 7 years living in the Middle East and can tell you that the fear Americans have of Arabs and Muslims is unfounded and that Muslims and Arabs and even Muslim converts from Christianity have more to fear from the US than the other way around.

    I just wanted to tell you a little bit about myself, because you seem to have judged all us Ron Paul supporters by the physical appearance of some and our exuberance in cheering for our next president. Maybe, if you had done your job as a journalist and stopped some of us to actually talk to us, you would have actually understood why we support him.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Awesome imagine Ron Paul an antifascist, antiexpansionist, proliberty doctor preaching tolerance and an end to senseless warmongering and genocide in Iraq. I love the part where you try to compare fat self indulgent hippies to the dreaded brownshirts, hilarious.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't even know where to start on this one. HITLER RALLY, holy crap is this guy in love with his pen. There is an online addage that goes as such. "the first person to make the comparison of someone to Hitler, LOOSES THE ARGUMENT." If anyone person understands the reasons that someone like Hitler and his henchmen came to power it's Ron Paul and his followers.

    We are against the plethora of rules and regulation and agencies that all but ensure another Hitler will come to power in this country.

    Hitler was not unique. We are surrounded by potential Hitlers all the time. The reason they don't rise to power here(at least up till now), is that they don't have the legal backing of the government to do what they want to do.

    Well thanks to 30 years of CFR fascist(both Repub and Dem) the stage is set for someone like Hitler to ride in and save us all. UNLESS those legal loopholes are reclosed. And Clinton, Guliani, Obama and Mitt aren't going to do that. They just open them further thereby guaranteeing a US fascist state.

    BTW I'm 40 years old and father of 2. Short hair and bathe everyday as do almost everyone in my Meetup group and everyone I've met in the campaign.

    The get togethers I've seen are populated with articulate people both old and young. SO GET OFF YOUR IDIODIC SOAP BOX..

    Robert

    ReplyDelete
  6. Just had to get that dig in there. Since you seem to have so little regard for the unbathed masses of Ron Paul fans.

    Robert

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mr. Roeser, we met when I spoke in Chicago earlier this year. I am absolutely appalled by this article. I am surprised that a Wanderer columnist merely repeats GOP boilerplate in an attack on Ron Paul.

    You want to talk sloganeering? Try attending a rally by any other candidate -- any other one at all. As for scholarly, read Paul's books, or indeed his speeches to Congress (or his grillings of Ben Bernanke, which only a handful of congressmen can even understand).

    I'm a traditional Latin Mass Catholic, as is my wife. We homeschool our kids. Our conservative credentials are rock solid. And we are 100% for Ron Paul.

    That doesn't seem to fit the caricature here.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Concerned ConstitutionalistSeptember 24, 2007 at 4:43 AM

    Casting Ron Paul supporters as non-intellectuals? You should write for The Onion, my good man.

    Bible-beaters and fear-mongers are SO much more rational than people who use historical precedent and strict constructionism in their arguments. I can't believe I didn't see how much Ron Paul is like Hitler. "Live and let live" just reeks of fascism. And wanting to pull our troops out of every foreign country makes me so terrified he's going to invade Poland.

    Ron Paul supporters want to "legalize freedom" because "freedom" for politicians is being used in such an Orwellian sense nowadays. Just read what Mr. Mayor said on the subject,

    "What we don't see is that freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."

    Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. War is peace.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I would probably vote for John Cox before Ron Paul. Suffice to say I'm not a fan.

    But this latest tirade against a group of young people who are at least getting involved, is outrageous.

    I'm also surprised that someone pictured as he is on his own blog would try to play the obese card.

    But the Hitler and Hitler Youth comparisons take the cake for crassness and over the top attacks.

    Meanwhile, a true goon like Tony Peraica gets an easy forum for spreading his lies and disinformation. What's the deal?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Aside from the obvious fact that our current Republican regime is more comparable to a fascist regime than a Paul regime could ever be, your article is filled with LIES. Was there an element of "hippy" types at this rally. Sure there was. Were there also young men and woman in dress clothes? Young married couples with their children? Normal middle-class middle-aged people? Were there people of color? Retired folk, a few of whom worked to spread the word about this rally even though they are in their 80's? All of these people, and more, were present. To ignore that is to ignore the fact that Dr. Paul's message of FREEDOM resonates with ALL Americans, and not just liberal ex-hippies. If there was any substance to your ridiculous article, I don't think you'd have to rely on half-truths and exaggerations to make your point. You have in fact NOT TOLD THE TRUTH.

    And the freedom Ron Paul talks about has nothing to do with "self-indulgence." It has to do with our CONSTITUTIONAL right to be free from the tyranny of government! If that ideal cannot be understood as the most BASIC right of our people as Americans, then we are doomed, surely.

    I surely am not one to use personal insults as the means of argument, but where do YOU get off calling the Chicago Rally crowd "self-indulgent"???? In all honestly, I didn't see ANYONE in this crowd of Paul supporters who approached your girth and obvious physical self-indulgence. How dare you attack all these fine people for standing up for the ideals this country was founded upon!

    Now, isn't your cheeseburger getting cold?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Look for that video from the state fair in springfield and the RP supporters. Sure they're seedy kids... I was a seedy radical once and understood exactly the enthusiasm I saw there...

    And some seedy kids grow and become successful entrepenaurs because they're creative sorts and RP may still have some appeal to them....

    I suspect this guy will have some impact...around the margins but impact none the less.

    ReplyDelete
  12. ...and self indulgent too. That's really what this kind of politics is all about... in 1968 and now.

    ReplyDelete
  13. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_qQt9IrUc0

    The above youtube video is a speech by John Galt address the kind of morality Tom Roeser celebrates.... Tom Toeser is a collectivist and his own writings are his indictments... We will remember your words when this country goes bankrupt...

    ReplyDelete
  14. With his post, Tom Roeser has finally and fully let his neo-con cat out of the bag! Roeser's venal rant against Ron Paul is pulled from the NEO-CON playbook that is making the rounds these days. Ron Paul dares to point out the failed thinking of the neo-cons who conned us into the Iraq War. They despise him for it.

    His hatefull comparison to Hitler really pushes the neo-con envelope and is downright LAUGHABLE. It also shows that he is willing in leftist neo-con style to label people and then demonize them. Remember that the founders of neo-conservatism have their roots in trotskyism. They are glib intellectual propaganda pros. It also shows the desperation of the Neo-Cons as they discover that the public at large distrusts them in ever growing numbers. Remember that 70% of the American Public is against this war... and that includes MANY conservatives like me!

    There is an old saying that says, if you don't have the facts, you argue the law. If you don't have the law, you argue the facts. If you have neither, you pound the table. And Roeser and the neo-con are pounding the table these days! This rant proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Tom Roeser is NO conservative. He is a neo-con or a FAKE conservative.

    Michael Medved (supporter of the Bush/Kennedy Immigration Bill) and other neo-con pundits are just as acidic against Ron Paul or anyone who questions from the conservative perspective the war in Iraq or any other facet of the heinous and divisive neo-con agenda.

    Tom Roeser's condecending blatant arrogance toward the supporters of Ron Paul is stunning yet predictable! It is worse than his vitriol against me! I am not even a follower of Ron Paul. I am just an old fashioned conservative who is fed up with the neo-con take over of the policies of the Republican Party! Everything conservative from tax cuts to property rights is going up in smoke because of the neo-cons and their middle eastern hobbies which they demand all of us take on, pay for, and fight for.

    Tom Roeser by this rant has shown that he has deviated from the traditional conservative world into the dangerous and deceitful world of the neo-cons.
    Beware of him!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Twist a pig's ear and watch him squeal!

    Don Tomas the Paulists seem as stridently daffy as the Raphaelites.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Since your hero McCain fell down the hill with his support of the Kennedy-esque Immigration-Amnesty Bill, it must be quite depressing for you these days! Just go on, keep huggin' your Tommy for solice!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Shoot Lar, John McCain's hell when he's well and he ain't never been sick!

    You seem a bit peekid. Gotta get out more, Larry.

    ReplyDelete
  18. To all the Ron Paul supporters, don't let this get to you.

    This type of article is good sign for the Ron Paul campaign. If he was a nobody, with no chance, why would anyone spend any amount of time writing this?

    It's the fact that he is getting more and more popular, people like Tom Roeser are now starting to take notice and worrying that he might actually make it all the way and will do anything to smear him.

    Keep coming with more Ron Paul bashing. The more signs that he is becoming a front-runner the better.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I've read 3 descriptions of Saturday and am not sure they describe the same event. Wish I had been there rather than doing the pro-family thing.

    First, let's agree that a campaign rally is not a think tank seminar. There is a time and place for each.

    Second, let's agree .... to agree on at least a few things. The reason conservatives/libertarians in Illinois are so weak is we expect purity and total agreement from our coalition allies. Paul supporters need to lighten up on and welcome those not yet supporting Paul. Roeser needs to light up on and welcome Ron Paul supporters into the two party system.

    Roeser is not perfect, but not the enemy.
    Peraica is not perfect, but not the enemy.
    Ron Paul is not perfect, but not the enemy.

    If we don't hang together, we'll hang separately ... unless we hang each other first.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Wow who is this old fat outdated non-republican looking guy comparing the nicest guy in the world to Hitler? Wow, sour grapes as we've not seen them in a long time! LOL I guess when you can't find anything wrong with someone, pull out all the stops and compare him to the symbol of the worst.

    Oh and by the way, Paul supporters are among the MOST articulate and well-educated of any Americans I've ever worked with on a campaign.

    Sign me, LIFELONG GOPer from NEW HAMPSHIRE

    ReplyDelete
  21. and this word is used advisably

    The word you are looking for is 'advisedly'. Sometimes a spellchecker can't save you from the errors that come when you try to punch above your weight.
    As for the rest, I don't know whether you got the memo, but comparing your opponents to Hitler has been kind of passe on the Internet for at least fifteen years. Next time maybe you could fire up a few more brain cells and try for an analogy with Pol Pot or Mao or something; at least it would be more interesting, even if it were still a lame ad hominem attack.
    Have fun hanging out with Medved, Podhoretz and all the other clowns who actually believe in the Islamofascist bogeyman.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I haven't met Paul-heads, but the ones that have shown up seem to be spending a lot of internet time googling articles about Paul, checking in their opinion, and emailing their friends. They seem pretty internet savvy with all the condescention and sarcasm that comes with too much screen time.

    Paul's following seems more of a Greatful Dead concert than a Hitler Youth Rally. Just that unfocused gaze and "Legaiize It" sloganeering.

    ReplyDelete
  23. So Tom you think that when you talk, everyone will follow you like lemmings over the neo-con cliff.

    Where is the cascade of support for you and what you said? It simply does not exist because many of us have felt uncomfortable about the neo-con path and it's wrong headed views. Ron Paul is just one of a number of people who are exposing just how bad neo-conservatism has been for America and the Republicans.

    Simply put, the neo-con agenda is a LOSER for the Republican party.

    Enjoy your deck chair on the neo-con Titanic! Go call the neo-con main office and tell them that your rant BACKFIRED!

    And stop being so steamy and figety at the keyboard as you read this!

    Tommy, ole boy, you only did it to yourself! Maybe Scooter or the folks at the Weekly Standard will come to your aid!

    ReplyDelete
  24. This is how Ron Paul gets his deadheads to call up radio shows and post ads about Ron Paul's rally.

    http://ronpaul.meetup.com/94/boards/view/viewthread?thread=3532087&pager.offset=0

    Some guy posted an ad on craigslist, which was probably the most effective people getter given Ron's demographic.

    Fire one up.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Wasn't Ron Paul once affiliated with the John birch Society? (The folks who said President Eisenhower was "a knowing agent of Communist influence.")

    From what I've been seeing, it seems like Paul is another ideologue who is offering a panacea.

    Does anybody here really believe that pulling US troops from all foreign postings will guarantee the peace and security of the United States? Does anybody really believe that once the US sits in continental isolation that, that our enemies are going to quietly leave us to our own devices?

    The US can no longer hide behind the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. We can no longer responsibly avoid entangling alliances.

    I wouldn't mind a US less preoccupied and involved with events in far off lands, but when I see who would take our place if we bowed out, I think I much prefer an engaged, if not activist, if not outright imperialistic foreign policy.

    Better to rule events than to be ruled by them...

    ReplyDelete
  26. I notice you didn't include any pictures to support the images you drew with your words. I'm an accountant, a member of the GOP since the mid-80's. I bought a new suit to wear to the $1000 per plate dinner that took place after the event you attended.

    You're not a Taft conservative. You Southern Democrat turned Republican.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The days are long gone when the people have to take the MSM's word for anything.

    Now people can go to YouTube and see if the room was filled with losers or concerned citizens:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMxG37f8ijE

    Really, the establishment is desperate. Comparing Ron paul to Hitler because his supporters are enthusiastic and he wants to *not* fight endless wars? Insulting the women of the rally as being supposedly "obese," "hirsute" and "sweaty"?

    If this is the best they can come up with, no wonder Ron Paul's numbers are climbing.

    And Tom: funny you calling other people "obese." You look like you've had a lifetime of seconds.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Horrors! Not that red baiting John Birch Society! During the early to mid-sixties the John Birch Society was home to many conservatives and supporters of Goldwater who laid the foundation for the victory of Ronald Reagan whom the liberals despised! (thats a historic note for your grandchildren Tom)

    When you talk about overseas neo-con hobby adventures in the Middle-East why not bring up the lousy rules of engagement that our troops have to fight under. Rules of engagement that can have you charged with MURDER if you guess wrong.

    Nation building and police actions are simply NOT conservative uses of the military. But then people like you are looking for Islamofascists under every bush. Well go tell that to President Bush who let the Bin Laden family have a nice plane ride home after 911.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Here's a link to the Chicago Rally on Justin.tv. View it and you'll see that Mr. Rosen has no idea what he's talking about.

    http://www.justin.tv/ronpaul/36710/Ron_Paul_speech_at_Chicago_rally_Septemb

    ReplyDelete
  30. Dear Sir,

    I usually don't write comments on blogs, especially not on political blogs. More so not on foreign political blogs.

    Your fine piece of writing made me change my mind.

    As a German, born in 1969, I underwent some education about the nazi time, it's agenda, it's means and it's outcome.

    I am disgusted beyond belief that you are cheeky enough to compare an election rally with a big style NSDAP propaganda show.

    Here you had a very well educated Gentleman talking about moral values and law, there you had Adolf ranting about who had to be put away for the greater glory of the Aryan race.

    Here people gathered out of their free will to cheer to their favorite candidate, there were party members herded into convention halls and if they knew what was good for them, they better looked cheerful and happy.

    You, Sir, either have no clue or made up a hit piece. A bad one, I may add.

    Bad because you achieved the opposite. I am not allowed to donate to Dr Paul, but I understand I can buy some merchandise the profit of which will go to the campaign.

    Well done, Sir...I am off to order some T-Shirts

    ReplyDelete
  31. comparing a candidate to Hitler simply because he has grassroots support? That's a pretty low hit.
    Funny that you pick the only anti-collectivist, anti-Iraq War, anti-government expansion, pro-constitution, pro-personal liberty candidate to compare to HITLER. I'd say Giuliani fits a Hitler profile better, but even that would be a cheap shot.

    How about "WARNING" Defamatory blog posts will not be tolerated...

    ReplyDelete
  32. Having been distracted today, I missed the Great Run of the Ron Paul Lemmings over the cliff of intelligent discourse. Rave On Crazy Feelings!
    Stay the course Mr. Roeser-

    ReplyDelete
  33. "Legalize freedom?"

    That's right, bub. Haven't heard of some of the recent fascist protocols that have been enacted under Herr Bush, have ya? Military Commissions Act of 2006 is just one of them, someone else drop a few more on this guy!

    "Every one of the pleasure bunnies in the meeting caught on."

    Yes, that is right, us "pleasure bunnies", a term I'm not against by the way, DID "get it" when we spoke those words and had those words spoken to us. We LOVE the idea of keeping things like free speech(which keeps your tirades going...), freedom of religion, freedom of press, and many other things that are INHERENT RIGHTS, we SO in love with the idea of keeping them free from the greasy, oil and blood stained hands of fascist, and also mind you, old-and-in-the-way politicos who are still gripping for dear life to an outdated philosophy of government that should have never taken root in America in the first place!!!

    Interventionism is a GOOD idea? And how so, I'm not even as well versed in the ways of political masturbation as you are, Mr. Roeser, but I KNOW I could win over you in a debate about that ONE issue!

    As for this notion that us Ron Paul supporters are simply following cute bumper sticker slogans with no actual understanding of what they mean, and also that Ron throws these around with no real ideas behind them, I suggest you firstly read everything ever written by the good old Dr. Paul. That will get you to shut the hell up, but don't stop there! Go to a few Ron Paul meetups! I've met so many people who are now, BECAUSE OF RON PAUL, studying such topics as Austrian Economics, the ideas of the gold standard, taxation laws, foreign policy issues, and more. Many more. And I only live in Illinois and have only attended a FEW events!

    What do you have to say to that?

    As for our appearance, well I can speak for myself and many others I worked with the other night that we are beautiful people. Sure some are skinny, fat, male, female, black, white, hirsute, hippy, stoned, sober, christian, agnostic, and any other label you may have the dexterity to hurl at another free individual, but hey, whatever, you see labels, we see PEOPLE!!! I have not met one single bigot in this whole campaign either in real life or on the internet! Actually, we are quite against people who talk out of their "exit-only's" and simply resort to immature misinformation tactics to dissuade others away from a candidate who has more moral and intellectual integrity than any other candidate on either side of the illusory party line!

    What do you say to that, sir?

    In fact, I'll give you my number, we can talk in person! We can talk all about our differing opinions on Ron Paul, and you know what, we can do it in front of a live audience thanks to the new internet technologies available nowadays. Boy, to someone so obviously dated as yourself, it must be scary that all these disruptive, young, long-hairs are learning the ropes of the political game you and other of your ilk thought belonged solely to yourselves!

    I've got news for ya, bub, that realm belongs to ALL American people and no matter what happens with the Ron Paul campaign, he has awoken a sleeping giant that will NOT go away after 2008 and beyond...We're in your playground now, you better share the sandbox or get sand in the eye.

    Peace and Good Will
    Jarett Austin Sanchez
    ezbreez22-at-yahoo.com(should you read this and choose to take me up on my offer...)

    ReplyDelete
  34. Frank you always are the sycophant to Tom. It is you who is the unthinking lemming. Go back to singing your old songs because you are no expert in conservative politics. Maybe someday you will wake up and study what has gone wrong with the Republican Party and you will discover that Tom is wrong in his neo-con leanings which is turning the Republican Party into a loser.

    ReplyDelete
  35. For those readers of this blog who were unable to attend the rally, I forward you to Tom Roeser's endorsed candidate for governor for a more accurate account of the rally. http://www.mchenrycountyblog.com/

    Tom's diatribe is too long and the space to respond to short to list all of the fallacies of the piece. Tom invited me on as a guest on a future show and the one hour time frame (40 minutes of airtime) will allow me time to rebut a few of his distortions about Ron Paul and his positions. People can go to Ron Paul's website for his views on ending illegal immigration / birthright citizenship, his strong pro life views and other conservative viewpoints which Tom’s favorite neocons oppose or give lip service to at best. http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/

    I do ask that Tom’s reader’s pray for Tom so he can perhaps one day return to the teachings of the Catholic Church, specifically the Just War Doctrine. Tom must have confused Bush and Ron Paul with his reference to Hitler. Pope Pius condemned Adolf Hitler and his unjust war and several decades later Pope John Paul II called Bush’s preemptive neocon war (planned in 1997, not 9/12/01) a “threat to humanity”. Pope John Paul II’s conservative successor called the Iraq War a “continual slaughter” and that “nothing positive is happening.” In case Tom Roeser needs clarification, continual slaughter means continual slaughter. http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/continually http://m-w.com/dictionary/slaughter

    Pro life means respecting and defending innocent life both in the womb and after they are born. More Americans died in Iraq which had no weapons of mass destruction and no role in 9/11 then died in 9/11. This does not include the tens of thousands of dead Iraqi “collateral damage” victims nor the tens of thousands of American wounded. I pray that Tom Roeser looks to God and the teachings of the Prince of Peace Christ Jesus, not the prince of preemptive war, Paul Wolfowitz.
    http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

    ReplyDelete
  36. Wait, didn't Hitler have a socialist agenda as Germany's version of the federal reserve destroyed their currency?
    That sounds a lot like a democrat, a FEMALE democratic presidential candidate.
    Not, Ron Paul.

    By this commentator's notion Barry Goldwater was Stalin...

    Read a history book sir.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Enjoy your free traffic neocon, this is the last you will get. Your time in our party is OVER. The sooner we get you and your kind OUT of the GOP the sooner we can get back to work restoring our country.

    Change your ways or be made irrelevant, sir. Freedom is truly and most sincerely on the march.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Mr. Roeser:

    From what I had read of Ron Paul, he seems like a simple enough nut job. So perhaps you were overreacting with a bit of hyperbole. Obviously, you have touched a raw nerve among his several fans in northern Illinois who have reacted with great hysteria.

    I mean, Sir, that he has none of the greatness, say, of a Pat Paulsen, but Mr. Paul at least rates the respect that we would give to his Democratic counterpart, Dennis Kucinich. That is, when Mr. Kucinich returns from his regular trip to the eastern shoulder of the constellation, Orion.

    ReplyDelete
  39. the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?

    CCC 2497 By the very nature of their profession, journalists have an obligation to serve the truth and not offend against charity in disseminating information. They should strive to respect, with equal care, the nature of the facts and the limits of critical judgment concerning individuals. They should not stoop to defamation.

    CCC 2479 Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one's neighbor. Honor is the social witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect. Thus, detraction and calumny offend against the virtues of justice and charity.

    CCC 2508 Lying consists in saying what is false with the intention of deceiving one's neighbor.

    CCC 2509 An offense committed against the truth requires reparation.

    Confessions:
    SUNDAY – before and during all Masses
    SATURDAY – 4:30–5:00 P.M.
    WEDNESDAY – 7:00–7:30 P.M.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Funny that you do not say where Robert Taft and Ron Paul depart in foreign policy because your quotes are pretty close to what Ron Paul says.

    So where is the departure?

    I have to invoke Godin's law here. Absurd that you feel it necessary to compare Paul to Hitler.

    Finally, a person who posts a picture of himself that looks to be obese, shouldn't be calling others obese. It's embarrassing.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Just so you know, this Ron Paul supporter is a quite articulate speaker, whose speeces have been submitted to the middle states accreditting board as good examples of what my Alma Mater's speech dept. produces. We are not inarticulate.
    Further, I'm a mild-mannered, slightly overweight athelete. That is a far cry from the raucous, obese crowd you described.
    Honestly, resorting to ad hominem (yes, some of us even know Latin and Logic) attacks on supporters shows how desperate you are to stop the revolution.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I hope everyone that reads these comments realize the difference between the picture of Ron Paul supporters portrayed by Mr. Roeser and the reality they see here.

    I personally am a recent college graduate, yes, young perhaps, but from a conservative family and very concerned about the welfare of our country and everyone in it. My parents care just as much about Ron Paul as I do.
    The other Ron Paul supporters I know are logical, thoughtful people, professionals, college professors people with families, intelligent. They are sincerely motivated to act for the future and the freedom for their children. The one (huge -- 1500+ people) Ron Paul rally I have attended had a wonderful cross section of supporters. Sure, people with long hair, but many businessmen, plenty of grandparents, young families and college kids. I would say the average age was about 45. It would be sad if somehow the people with long hair felt excluded. But this campaign is open for everyone.

    One thing that I find that is so beautiful about the Ron Paul movement is that it brings together such a wide range of people, who are all concerned with getting the country back to the freedom it used to have, who are VERY concerned about the way things are working out now, with the state of the economy, with the tremendous welfare system, with the engorgement of the federal government.

    Ultimately it's not so much the supporters though, it's the message of freedom, limited government, the message of personal responsibility and integrity that make Ron Paul's campaign so unique and so compelling.

    Thanks for this opportunity to share my opinions and strong convictions about a great candidate for president. Hope for America!

    ReplyDelete
  43. (Sorry, quick aside to the last poster...)

    Bill -- Hey, I know Latin and logic too! I teach it (Latin, that is). We should start a meetup group. Logicians for Ron Paul, or Classicists for Ron Paul. (c:

    Campaigning for the good Dr. is so much fun!

    ReplyDelete
  44. People are excited at Ron Paul rallies because they have finally found a candidate they can believe in -- someone who stands for traditional American values, peace, and liberty, and has a long, proven record of consistently upholding those ideals.

    To compare him to Hitler is worse than disingenuous -- if it's not a deliberate smear, it shows a complete lack of understanding of the issues facing America and Ron Paul's response to them.

    It is the rest of the Republican Party (and many of the Democrats) who are pushing America toward intolerant totalitarianism, militarism, socialism, and an end to two centuries of freedom.

    Ron Paul wants to end the current war, and avoid the next one. Ron Paul wants to restore the Bill of Rights, not spy on you without a warrant or seize your property or register your guns or lock you up without a trial.

    In short, Ron Paul is trying to stop America from sliding in the direction it is heading, where a Hitler-type figure could seize absolute power.

    If you care about America, join Ron Paul. His campaign may be the last chance we get.

    ReplyDelete
  45. You, Sir, have never seen so much traffic on your blog as a result of this story. Congrats on an attempted, though poorly executed, smear.

    I've never heard of you and will certainly never be interested in any other story you write about, as the only thing appealing about you for these 15 seconds of fame is that you wrote about Dr. Paul.

    By the way, speaking of self-indulgence, lay off the donuts. I don't like the medicare removed from my paycheck going to unnecessary heart bypass surgeries.

    Enjoying the last days of sailing on the neocon titanic.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Disgusting article - totally eroneous, poking fun at people!? Talk about looking like a fat pig as he called Dr. Ron Paul's supporters, this man should look at himself in a mirror!
    Also poking fun at highly intelligent people who use computers, the internet, etc.. as geeks and stuff. Man this guy is so typical NEOCON... GO DR. RON PAUL, GOOGLE DR. RON PAUL. BRING FREEDOM, LIBERTY AND JUSTICE BACK TO THE GOOD OLE US OF A AND BRING OUR TROOPS HOME AS WELL...

    ReplyDelete
  47. James B Schlessinger JrSeptember 24, 2007 at 5:11 PM

    I just want to congratulate you on the Hitler comparison. You are the first to use it to my knowledge and you worked it in quite well. I have been reading ad hominem attacks against Dr. Paul for a while now and they all are pretty much the same.

    They linger around the edges and never attack the core of the politician: namely the voting record and Constitutional stance. Instead most of these attacks just pick out some detail that can be manipulated with a slight of hand trick.

    Take for instance your, "Legalize Freedom" vitriol. Instantly your sour mind seizes on the "Legalize" part and envisions all those dirty pot-smokers sitting at home enjoying a good toke and we can't have that. It is much better to have those people on the road driving drunk, at least then they would be considered normal. Never mind the fact that our civil liberties have suffered the same fate as Rodney King, beaten down by those sworn to protect them.

    Next the rant about the video and the metaphor of propaganda beget by Nazi's, all in all, very weak. If you had actually studied the campaign, instead of making an impulse decision based on an afternoon rally, you would know of the impact YouTube has had. It is an Internet Site with Videos; ordinary people can make their own videos and post them here. Indeed a good portion of the footage shown is merely clips of amateur home video, obviously not at home.

    It was not presided over by a sinister producer with most heinous intent. Ah, but the campaign must have selected them and organized. Right. The video was of average composition at best and certainly was no “wag the dog” flick. A Clinton or Romney and surely Giuliani would have had a much sharper showing with real production value; alas Dr. Paul is a real conservative and wouldn’t waste his money on such trifles.

    As far as the crowd and their appearance are concerned, I believe only a fool or a politician would ware a 3 piece suit on a nice summer day if it were not required.

    Are you a politician?

    Really thought this whole rant is just an attempt to get attention on your part. Sad as it is, I have seen it many times as I indicated earlier. Each the same and each motivated by the fact that “your” candidate has little to no grass roots support, the integrity of a wet pretzel and no clue when it comes to the Constitution.

    Good luck to you and yours,

    James B Schlessinger Jr.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I'm not from Chicago or wherever this Tom Roeser guy is from. So is this real? This guy does comedic political blogs or something? It's his "thing", right? It's obviously a joke, because he pretty much compares Robert Taft dead on to Ron Paul and then says they are obviously very far apart. Then he compares the wee little Dr. Paul to a love child between Jim Jones and Adolf Hitler.

    Doesn't anyone see the irony in the title of this blog, "Self-Indulgent"? Obviously this is a poor attempt at sarcastic humor, but someone needs to remind Mr. Roeser that sarcasm does not translate very well over the internet. Maybe he should ask one of those fat sweaty computer nerds he stood next to at the rally.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I just noticed the warning in the sidebar of this blog:

    **WARNING**
    Defamatory comments will not be tolerated and the individuals who post such comments will be turned over to authorities. Our "reader comments" system allows us to track IP addresses and we intend to collect as much information on posters as we possibly can. Thanks!

    Since this article is basically one big defamatory comment, I assume Mr. Roeser will have to turn himself in to "the authorities." No wonder he's worried about someone legalizing freedom.

    ReplyDelete
  50. pity you went to all the trouble trying to decipher the good Dr's hidden code words when one of those raucous followers could have taught you how to use the internet and thus, read and hear the meaning of "liberty" for yourself.

    if i cite "bearing false witness," will you send the aclu in chase?

    good day...

    ReplyDelete
  51. Tom Tom Tom, not even dear Peggy, your favorite caller would support you now! You talk about posts for your grandchildren. Well Tom, THIS post of yours is one for them to remember! It will give them a strong memory of just how wrong their grandfather was!

    Tom where are all your neo-con supporters? Where is the crowd from the Weekly Standard? WHERE ARE THEIR POSTS IN SUPPORT OF YOU?, Tom, in support of your position. I don't even see Eric Zorn coming to your aid.... ha ha ha
    Where is Leahy?

    Tom you have finally spit on the people who put you where you are! You are obviously too arrogant to realize it and too ensnared in the neo-con's intellectual trap!

    You thought you were IN with the "cute" neo-con crowd. AND WHERE ARE THEY NOW?
    They left you politically swinging in the wind! Remember it was you that let the cat out of the bag! Enjoy the rank smell of its litter box! Even Kate Smith would be sticking her toungue out at you now!!!! Poor Tommy.... you really blew it this time!

    ...And may the Saints forgive you for the thoughts you are having while you read my articulate post.... once again!

    OH and John Powers, why don't you go take some Malox!

    ReplyDelete
  52. I commented earlier in this blog on your atrotious smear of Dr. Paul. I was quite upset at the time. But I'm not as upset, because I now realize this is a GOOD thing. For someone to spend so much time and effort attempting to destroy the integrity of Dr. Paul only means that you are AFRAID. Afraid to change the status quo, afraid to step away from the sinking ship the GOP has become, and afraid to admit that the real fascists in this country are George W. Bush and his cronies. Dr. Paul speaks the truth, and those who are afraid of it will do as you have done and try to brush it aside with lies, exaggerations and defamation. In your honor, Mr. Roeser, I have just contributed another $100.00 to the Ron Paul campaign, and I urge my fellow supporters to do the same. Good day, sir.

    ReplyDelete
  53. But I have been reading. And wow, the mob is out to hang you now. Just a bunch of rabble. And it is sad, because I liked Ron Paul until I met his supporters. Seriously, when Nixon talked about hooligans and the like, he was speaking of these people. Just keep giving it right back to them, Tom. They and Dr Paul deserve everything they get.

    ReplyDelete
  54. It is funny to read your review of Ron Paul and your slanderous attacks on his supporters. Two can play that game. What I wish to say in all sincerity is this. Ron Paul is a more principled intellectual, a 1000 times more well read, and a much better author than Taft ever was. Furthermore, his support base is even more well read than any presidental candidates support base OR EVER HAD. You show your ignorance with your aside remarks. Thus to say Ron Paul and his supporters are "unconcerned with ideas" announces your total ignorance. Most have read Ron Pauls numerous essays over the years, his books, and his book on foriegn policy. There is such a deep intellectual connection with his support base, the constant fear is who to keep it simple and understandable for the lay person such as yourself. To suggest again and again as you do that "legalize freedom" is really code asking for a libertine existance, is to say you haven't a clue as to what principles are needed and necessary to stop freedom from becoming anarchy. To quip that that "if the highways were run privately the death toll would be lower. Really?" and add, "In a Ron Paul world where likely there would be no enforced speed limits?" tells us you are very weak, accademically, theoretically, principly on why the free market works, what keeps it in check (not the government) and most of shows you have little imagination. Ok, let me "school you" Mr. Roeser. No, in a free market freeways system, say when I-10 is privatized to "I-10 CoasttoCoast Inc"and you can drive from coast to coast and recieve a bill in the mail for usage much like you get your cell phone bill today,...for these private owners the incentives for safety are amazingly high because their liability is very high. Could you imagine a company, an airline company or train company for instance, staying in business very long if it allowed 55,000 deaths a year on "its" highways? No, you can't and you as a board member who knows you must have lots of insurance covering your liabilities would have EVERY insentive to make safety a top priority. And you would balance that with "thru-put"..the amount of cars & trucks that can go through, the rate. Traffic jams are not your friend because, just like trains are not paid by the time on the track but by thru-put. A private I-10 company would have two mutually troubling incentives, to increase safety and to increase the rate and speed of safe travel. Perhaps that would lead to computerized freeways, one that talks to your cars on board navigation computer. Perhaps it would mean WHOLE NEW highway technologies, something we have not seen since 1933 when Hitler first invented them. The bottom line Mr. Roeser, is that old fat republican farts like yourself who fail to comprehend the principles of the free market capitalist system in its purest form must just fade away like the old stale shirts that you are.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Now go back your sports bar and hoist a few with the other non-thinking lunkheads like yourself. Nothing and I mean nothing you have posted on this site has had any intellectual depth or value. Go back to your sports pages. Really thats where you belong.

    If someday you become fluent in the political issues of the day, then maybe you will be capable of making intellegent comments, comments that back up your neo-con buddy Roeser in a well reasoned manner. None of the usual Roeser sycophants have come up with any plausable arguments in support of Tom's position... How sad you let poor Tom hang out to dry on this one but then Tom, the trusty neo-con, is on the wrong side here just as you are.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Lawrence,

    You are more than welcome to disagree with Tom and the other posters, or agree with them. It adds to the discussion and promotes political scrutiny.

    Just refrain from profanity and threats, which have no place in a polite or impolite conversation.

    JBP

    ReplyDelete
  57. Wow, Tom, you sure smoked 'em out! You and I have had our spats, but what amazes me on this combox is that the St. Pauli Guys and Gals uwittingly (and I use that word advisedly in it's root sense of wit = intelligence) demonstrate by their commentary just how fanatical (again, in the root sense) they are. Out of the mouths of babes your assessment of the Paulites stands confirmed. Congrats on the strategery. I think they misunderestimate you.

    ReplyDelete
  58. After reading Mr. Roeser's account on the Ron Paul rally I have concluded that he and I did not attend the same event on a sunny Saturday afternoon in Chicago. The Ron Paul rally I attended was a group of 1,200+ Ron Paul supporters who energetically cheered for their canidate as he energized them with his message of hope and freedom.

    As far as Roeser's account as to the physical attributes of the rallies attendees...well, let the pictures and YouTube videos speak for themselves...the rally was attended by the young, middle-aged and old. It was attended by well-dressed business professionals and the dressed down Ron Paul tee-shirt with jeans. There were skinny people, heavy people, and a whole lot of "average-sized" people too.

    Mr. Roeser, if you are going to print an outright lie about the event that you attenedned, I would urge you to do so at an event that does not result in dozens of online videos to prove to doubting readers that they have been duped!

    You don't have to agree with Dr. Paul, you don't even have to like him...but, you should be ashamed of yourself for your blatent misrepresentation of Saturday's Ron Paul rally at the Regency Hyatt in Chicago.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Freedom=Drug use!? Is that what the Declaration of Independence is really about, drug use!? Roeser criticizes the crowd for being young and obese. Is that worse than being old and obese...and senile!?

    ReplyDelete
  60. Lawrence of ----?
    Is it worse to be a sycophant like me, or just a syco like you?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Hey fatty! What's up with this? "Does he or the group believe that Islamic extremists are the same kind of men that ruled the Soviet Union…men who feared nuclear destruction just as did we?"

    Do you know any 'Islamic extremists'? Are you qualified to comment on their state of mind. Why wouldn't a human being be fearful, that's what started this whole mess in the first place, us spreading fear.

    Does he not understand that to a Islamo-Fascist death, often by self-detonation and death to children by detonation is to be rewarded in heaven? Views in American politics have only one equal-the insensate ranting of the Far Left, of The Daily Kos to which the Paul campaign seems uniquely suited.

    What is islamo-fascism? It has nothing to do with a state, it's a religion. If you neocons would look up the words you use half the time, then people might take you for intelligent once in a while. And 'far-left', wtf? just because it's neocon doesn't mean it's left...jesus, his views are as far-right as you can get. Your fat-ass and tiny brain just can't quite get a grip on the multidimensionality of politics.

    “We have been told that we have to give up our freedoms in order to be safe because terrorism is such a horrible event. A lot fewer lives died on 9/11 than they do in less than a month on our highways-but once again, who owns the highways? Do we own the highways? No, it’s a government institution, you know.” This implies that if the highways were run privately the death toll would be lower. Really? In a Ron Paul world where likely there would be no enforced speed limits?

    Yes, of course it would be lower, because a private highway would be held responsible for deaths. They would set a speed limit and actually enforce it. Why do we have 55mph signs all over the place? I haven't gone 55 in my life. I've only gotten one ticket. I should get a ticket every five minutes if the speed limit is actually 55.

    It's completely obvious that you're a paid-off shill just spouting out halftruth. Good luck with that. Maybe ask your handlers for a weight watchers membership.

    How many GOP votes for Rudy McRomney did you get today? I spent my morning convincing 89 people to vote for Ron Paul, and it's only 10:26AM..multiply that by the 40,000 meetup members who are as motivated as I am, that's what? 890,000 voters signed and sealed per hour? ... you're going to lose, sir!

    ReplyDelete
  62. Dan,

    There are advantages to owning the blog, and one of them is to reserve the right to be the name-caller.

    You are more than welcome to disagree with Tom and other posters, however, you will be blocked if you continue name calling. You are also more than welcome to be the name-caller-in-chief on your own blog, just not here.

    JBP

    ReplyDelete
  63. John Powers, you said "There are advantages to owning the blog, and one of them is to reserve the right to be the name-caller."

    Though I do not agree with useless name-calling (the blogs author included) as it discredits the writer, I do think that people respond in a simiar manner in which they are spoken to. If Mr. Roeser did not write in such a rude and disrepectful way, he would not have readers replying in a similar tone.

    So, it is okay for Mr. Roeser to be a name-caller, but anyone who uses the very same language in their response receives a written warning of being blocked...unreal!

    Repect is a two-way street, it is not given freely, it is earned...if you want people to respect the rules of this blog, maybe the author should be a little more cautious when he degrades other peoples' characters!

    ReplyDelete
  64. The decorum rules are more strict for comments than they are for the blog owner.

    That is the point to Thomas Jefferson's statement "Freedom of the Press belongs to those that own the Press".

    As Tom Roeser was the only person to have the nerve to write about the Ron Paul rally, despite the blackout by the Tribune, Sun-Times, Chicago Reader etc, perhaps showing a tiny bit of deference to the hardest working man in Chicago Journalism would be advised.

    JBP

    ReplyDelete
  65. "...the individuals who post such comments will be turned over to authorities."

    -you must be referring to those dastardly followers of goldstein, right big-brother?

    ReplyDelete
  66. "As Tom Roeser was the only person to have the nerve to write about the Ron Paul rally, despite the blackout by the Tribune, Sun-Times, Chicago Reader etc, perhaps showing a tiny bit of deference to the hardest working man in Chicago Journalism would be advised."

    Deference? For what? What respect does Roeser earn in maligning approximately 1500 individual people who he has never met or talked to? What respect should any writer get who uses exaggerations, assumptions, half-truths, and outright lies in order to push their agenda?

    The fact of the matter is that people from every walk of life, of every age, race, background, etc., attended this event. Might there be a few questionable types, as there are with any public campaign? Sure. But overwhelmingly RP supporters are average everyday American people who work, go to school, take care of their children, etc.

    If Roeser desires respect and deference, then he might have written something worthy of such. Even a NON-RP supporter, if they are honest, would take issue with this blatant smear campaign against Dr. Paul, and with the negative characterization of 1500 individuals!

    You guys can laugh, and take pot shots, and call us "nothing but rabble", etc. I'm just a housewife, trying to raise my kids. I'm worried about the future of my country, and about the future of my children. I've never before been involved in politics, but Paul's words and ideals have resonated with me, as they apparently have done with thousands of others who are also worried about our future. I am NOTHING that Mr. Roeser has described, and if you expect me or anyone else to give him "deference" as he maligns our character or our sincerest beliefs, please don't hold your breath.

    ReplyDelete
  67. When one is a guest at someone else's house, you host is not obligated to tolerate a guests screechy rants, anymore than this blog is.

    If you disagree with Tom, post it. But, for the third time, name calling and profanity is not allowed in the comments sections. I would prefer less screeching, but as blogs are thundering with the sounds of the gnashing of teeth, I suppose it would be as harder to stop the screech than it would be to get people to occasionally talk about issues in between their teeth gnashing.

    And by the way, where were the Tribune, Sun-Times, Reader, Channels 2,5,7,11,32 on Saturday? Sleeping late again?

    JBP

    ReplyDelete
  68. The only congressman who doesn't take his tax-funded pension or tax-paid junkets, and his message is self-indulgence? He does have that vice of chocolate chip cookies. that must be what you are referring to. Otherwise you don't qualify as a respectable journalist and should get an honest job.

    ReplyDelete
  69. and that is, that Ron Paul has been blacklisted by the media, not just in Chicago, but nation-wide. It is becuase if this media blackout of a GOP canidate that Ron Paul supporters use the internet, Meetup groups, and facebook to spread the word about him to the millions of people who are unaware of Paul and his campaign.

    The Chicago Meetup group is the second largest Ron Paul meetup in the nation. Thank you very much for all your hard work in organizing the event in 2 weeks, and I suppose we can thank Mr. Roeser too as his blog has allowed us to see that on this issue (based on the comments posted to his blog) there are only a few who agree with his wildly sensational comments!

    ReplyDelete
  70. If you Ron Paul people want to know why he is not taken seriously read these posts! You guys use the word Neo-Con as a sword that somehow describes anyone who disagrees with you. You sound like the Daily Kos instead of conservatives. The term neo-con now means Jew/moderate Republican, I know that's not the original meaning but in the context of the last 5 years (starting @the Daily KOS) it is now.

    BTW Lawrence here I am and I will ask you the same 3 questions I always ask Rep Paul supporters

    1. Do you believe that 9/11 was an inside job, or that the US Government had anything to do with it either before hand and let it happen?

    2 Do you believe that Okalahoma city was done by the US Government?

    3. Do you believe that there is a US government plan to give up our sovereignty for the North American Union?

    If you answered no to any of these questions you do not reflect the views of any of the Ron Paul supporters I have met.

    I will wait for your answer

    ReplyDelete
  71. What exactly is the issue you have against Ron Paul? Why should anyone be for war, the income tax and non economic freedom? Did you know if we cut government spending to 2001 levels, the government still collects the same amount of taxes by other means so that the IRS isn't needed? The IRS is only one way taxes are collected. There's phone taxes, gas taxes, sales tax, state tax....and on and on. There are something like 200 different taxes everyone pays, which are mostly hidden. Things like inflated prices by merchants to cover their own taxes which are passed onto consumers. The government can get by if only it were not so big and bloated.

    So logically speaking your arguments don't make any sense. I could go on about the others but most people are smart enough to know that they are false.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Those who attack Ron Paul's stances are generally spoon fed their criticism by the media and system lackeys who protects the corruptions of the US government in the modern age.
    The system has one way of dealing with that which it wants to destroy, in this case, The freedoms of all Americans, race, creed and religion set aside..
    Kill the messenger and ignore the message.

    Look into why he feels the way he does and maybe you'll end up in the peanut gallery.. Next to us crazed(passionate) Ron Paul supporters.

    My question to anyone who does not follow Ron Paul is,
    Do you believe in your candidate, really? Does it inspire you to act alone on their behalf?
    No? I figured as much.

    No one inspires the passion that Ron Paul does.
    Why do you think that is?

    ReplyDelete
  73. Is this guy serious? Non-thinking mob?Hitler? The crowd packed in the Hyatt-Regency auditorium: bearded, shaggy, pony-tailed, inarticulate, frenetic, unconcerned with ideas. No enforced speed limits. This guy has no idea how NOT to over-eat, which, in my book, takes all of his credibility about politics. He's unconcerned about his health, what makes me think he's concerned with the countries health?

    ReplyDelete
  74. I am not a conspiracy theorist. Your trap did not work. The new word neo-con is not
    a pejorative but an actual political movement within the conservative movement and the Republican Party. It has been well documented by numerous books and by even its founders, Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz. I suggest that you read Irving Kristol's book, "Reflections of a Neoconservative: Looking Back, Looking Ahead". Also read the Weekly Standard and Public Interest.

    As a counterpoint, read Chronicles from the Rockford Institute or the American Conservative Magazine.

    I have been a traditional social conservative for years and a staunch Republican. From working in the Republican trenches, I have been studying the neo-conservative movement for at least 20 years. At first these people came into the conservative movement saying many the same things I said but then I began to see a marked deviation in the area of foreign policy, trade, and a diminution of social conservatism as they became prominent in many conservative think tanks including the Heritage Foundation. Suddenly concepts that were not conservative in the traditional sense were being promoted by them and the rest of us who welcomed them in were marginalized by them and called names.

    I have mentioned a number of neo-con policies I take issue with in my posts here. I also saw pundit after pundit like Tom Roeser courted and pulled into their intellectual stance. But then, I also remember it was Tom Roeser who exposed his radio audience to Dr. Thomas Flemming who took radio time to explain neo-conservatism. Tom knows all about this. You see, Leahy, Tom is one of two Honorary Directors of the Rockford Institute. Dr. Flemming once discussed on the air how the neo-conservatives tried to take over the Rockford Institute and failed leaving the Rockford Institute as one of the few traditional Conservative think thanks. I am sure that Tom Roeser knows the story and will be happy to tell it to you.

    The problem is that the neo-con philosopy has come to full bloom and has taken over the Bush Administration and has virtually eclipsed all other conservative issues. The Iraq war was a neo-con prize and goal but it also exposed major flaws in their "piece of cake" foreign policy arrogant attitude. Unfortunately this is rapidly sinking the Republican Party. For example the Bush Tax cuts which we all fought hard to get will sunset/expire and they will not be extended without a Republican Majority now lost because of neo-con failed policies.

    Leahy, it is the traditional conservatism that made the Republican Party a winner. Reagan won huge on it but then in his second term he began sink when he listened neo-cons ideas of "guns for hostages". Remember that the neo-con's main hobby is the Middle East. The problem is that they should not be allowed to pull down the rest of conservatism including social conservative goals which is everything I and others have worked for.. when their ideas fail as they have.

    And believe me, they should NEVER be immune from criticism no matter how hard they scream or how hard they try to smear people with the trite old labels the left has used for years.

    I would have much more respect for the neo-cons if they would admit their mistakes which they will not do. Instead they retreat to the safety of their think tanks and let the President and the Republican party take the heat and the blame.... And thanks to them we will most likely get Democratic President in 2008. The one question I ask all Republicans is: Are they worth it? Is losing all the tax cuts worth it? This is when I get upset and look at them as the Trojan Horse in the Republican Party. Simply put, I never began my political interest in conservative issues by starting as a Troskyite! Think about it Leahy and read up on it!!

    ReplyDelete
  75. Actually, A.J. Liebling said "Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one." This can be seen at http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/27716.html and many other reputable websites.

    For a list of quotes from Thomas Jefferson relating to the Press, please go to http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1600.htm.

    I really enjoy this one, "The man who fears no truths has nothing to fear from lies." --Thomas Jefferson to George Logan, 1816.

    As a Ron Paul supporter, I actually enjoyed Tom's article. It provoked me to learn more about Ron Paul. This research revealed the fallacious arguments of Tom. (One can start with the obvious Straw Man Hitler comparisons http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#straw.)

    Thank you, Tom, for reinforcing my beliefs in Ron Paul.

    ReplyDelete
  76. "And by the way, where were the Tribune, Sun-Times, Reader, Channels 2,5,7,11,32 on Saturday? Sleeping late again?"

    You act as if ignoring the Paul campaign, as the lamestream media has done all along, is somehow worse then lying and exaggerating about it, not to mention defaming the character of every individual involved with it. I'll take the Trib's silence over lies and misrepresentations any day.

    As for your analogy about how to behave as a "guest" in someone else's house: If I invited you to my home and proceeded to lob the gravest insults I could at you, and then provided you the opportunity to respond, I would EXPECT you to reply appropriately. If I implied you were a Nazi, I surely wouldn't expect you to respond with endearments. Mr. Roeser should think next time before dishing it out if he can't also take it.

    I see he's posted something new, and yet not new at all. More of the same lies and innuendo about Ron Paul supporters. It's beyond even attempting to push an agenda. It's just plain silly, and childish. As a Ron Paul supporter who's attended several straw polls, I've met and talked with supporters of Romney, Giuliana, Thompson, etc. We didn't agree on many issues, but I would never in my life speak of the supporters of other candidates in the ways Mr. Roeser has. Because I know that each one is an individual, and should be treated as such, and with respect.

    I have never heard of Mr. Roeser before this. I have no previous beef with the man. I will, however, speak up when I see myself relegated to the trash heap by someone who has never met me and doesn't know me from Adam. His assumptions and exaggerations about me and thousands of others involved with the Paul campaign are wrong. So while the Trib and Times may have ignored us, at least they didn't slander us.

    And what's this new crock about using our real names? As if that somehow proves that we are everything Mr. Roeser has accused us of. Do you think we are afraid?

    My name is Susan Richmeier, and I live in Evergreen Park. I would be happy to provide my complete address and phone numbers upon e-mail request, provided you're willing to share yours with me.

    ReplyDelete
  77. I paid off to write this articles. How else do I keep my girlish figure.

    ReplyDelete
  78. ...about a candidate who does not act on the CFR television network, and who is honest about his positions, which are consistent with his voting record.

    By the way, if the notion that some God-like state can stamp out "impure" vices and behavior isn't Hitlerian, what is?

    To read such a ludicrous comparison between Ron Paul and Hitler (made with no apparent awareness of irony) is actually encouraging. It indicates the progress of the corrupt establishment from nervous laughter to desperate attack.

    ReplyDelete
  79. My name is Kemp Moyer (real name). I am an avid study of Austrian Economics, market history, economic history, market dynamics, and general philosophies and ways of life based on individual liberty, minimal government and personal responsibility.

    I have read most of the posts disagreeing with Mr. Roeser's article and I really do believe there is a lot of well-reasoned response included therein.

    I must say that I was very much put off by the article in question. I am also very put off by those who claim that Ron Paul supporters are ignorant of history, politics, philosophy, etc. I find this to be pretty funny, as grouping an entire body of individuals into one blanket pronouncement strikes me as pretty significantly lacking intellectual skill.

    The problem, friends, is group-think. Group think has led to nearly every mass terror in the history of the world. The "us-against-them" mentality is one that has spawned a lot of unwitting evil.

    My guess is Mr. Roeser considers himself a good person. However, his blanket declarations regarding Ron Paul supporters, his attempt to tie Mr. Paul (dedicated minimal government supporter) to Hitler (the supreme advocate of maximum government control), and his general clear act of hypocrisy regarding overweight individuals (a fact in this case), lead me to believe that somewhere along the line he lost his ability to individually reason, and has instead reverted to some form of group think.

    In sum, both Ron Paul supporters and those who favor some other line of thinking need to avoid the "us-against-them" mentality and truly reflect as individuals on what it is they stand for and why.

    I for one, am a strident believer in the ability of free individuals, powered by individual reason, to overcome the forces of groupthink and generally outperform those who rely on slogans.

    So, in the end Mr. Roeser, thank you for providing me with one more piece of clear evidence of the lack of reasoning ability associated with many status quo "thinkers". You give people like me hope that the choice will be very one-sided come election day 2008.

    The power of liberty and personal responsibility (meaning skill) is in the corner of Ron Paul. I am less doubtful of the future.

    ReplyDelete
  80. not much different than everyone accusing all Ron Paul supporters of being 'conspiracy theorists' just because those people happen to support Paul.

    ReplyDelete
  81. sitting next to a very well-dressed couple in their 80's. Pleasant, articulate, informed folks. I am a registered nurse who voted for Bush (very unhappily now) twice. Next to me was my 13 year old daughter and 24 year old college student daughter. All around us were very nice, excited, mannerly people. My personal experience is that Ron Paul supporters are generally very well informed people... as opposed to those who still soak up the 'official' tv news information about the our government, country and the world.

    I cannot fathom what agenda the writer of this article has against such a decent man of integrity as Ron Paul.

    Oh, and I like the WARNING against defamatory comments on the sidebar of this site. Ha. Coming from the someone that has written an article full of them. You've now received all the attention from me that you ever will. Actually, I don't even remember your name. My name is Diana Nickel, I live in Winneconne, WI.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Lawence

    Your whole response is the reason, I stated in my post "In the context of the last 5 years" I know what and who Neo conservatives are, but as in the posts here the term is used as a derogatory name not a political ideology.

    BTW You did not answer the questions I put out. And the term middle east in your post means Israel doesn't it? Why write in code I don't understand.

    I would argue I am not a Neo Con by any definition and I support the war! I joined the USMC in 1979 to fight this movement and we did nothing. It has nothing to do with Israel it has to do with our National Security. I have met with and talked to Rep Paul in his office in Washington DC I do not think he is a kook I like him but I do not agree with him on American Foreign Policy! I always ask people who quote George Washington about foreign entanglements; "If not us then who? The world abhores a vacumme it will always be filled be filled. So who would you rather be the worlds superpower? Russia? China? France?
    And I think I read enough Thank You

    ReplyDelete
  83. Your article offered a promising historical background, but that unfortunately turned out to be just pretext for a logically and morally bankrupt attack on Congressman Ron Paul.

    Conservative Republican candidates have always received the support of Neo-Nazis, racists, and theocrats. Does that mean those candidates support any of those agendas?

    Liberal Democrat candidates have always received the support of illegal aliens, welfare queens, and philosophical socialists. Does that mean those candidates support any of those agendas?

    Libertarians (such as Congressman Paul) have always received the support of libertines who confust the libertarian message of "freedom AND responsibility" with "freedom FROM responsibility." Does that mean Ron Paul is a libertine?

    Consider -- given the evidence from your photo, your penchant for overeating should obviously have you looking for some libertine champion ... unless, of course, you are more complex than that, and may have other interests and motivations in life.

    Please note that Dr. Paul has been drawing tremendous support from disaffected liberals, disaffected conservatives, unrepresented libertarians, anti-corporate-abuse Greens, unrepresented Constitutionalists, orphaned Reform Party folks ... etc., etc.

    Maybe freedom isn't just about license. Maybe licence is always about control. Can you assimilate the difference between those? And can you formulate principles whereby control can uniformly be justified without infringing on freedoms (non-licentious ones) we all cherish?

    ReplyDelete
  84. The Ron Paul campaign has just raised over $280,000 in less than 48 hours, all individual donations. Sure must be an awful lot of self-indulgent, obese, hirsute Nazis in this country.......Doh.

    http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

    ReplyDelete
  85. to any and every neo-con, ex-con, and future-con who is still drinking this kool-aid? You may be legion, but we are yet more.
    Take heart cons; there will be several million courageous Americans who will burp your and pat your corpulent tummies as the poison kicks in and the engineered global economic crisis forces the US into yet another endless war to manage oil prices and fear.
    Roeser, you don't seem to realize that some folks just do not share the same version of history. If we could divide them into two groups there would be the Constitution wrecking, war starting, terrorist supporting, Blackwater hiring, dollar depreciating, working-people hating crowd on one side and on the other side are future Dr. Ron Paul supporters.
    It ain't about the Democrat/Republican, intellectual/anti-intellectual, liberal/conservative paradigm any more. There is Dr. Paul, and then there's the rest.

    ReplyDelete
  86. I have heard you on the air many times and I believe that you are lacking in your political foundation. I will not be drawn into your questions that are better answered by the Art Bell Show.

    The Middle East is much bigger than Israel and you know that. It a part of the world that often defies common sense based on OUR sense of morality which is judeo-christian. Leahy, the world is full of danger from brown recluse spiders to rattlesnakes but that does not make me want to go after ALL of them with sticks...polking polking polking at them... inciting them! The neo-cons have a foreign policy that is reminiscent of the nineteenth century missionaries on a naive search for utopia. It is easy to preach war from the safety of the "think tank" bunker. How many of the neo-con intellectuals have served in the military? How many have relatives that have served in the military? Yet they they have the nerve to tell our country that Iraq was to have been a "piece of cake"! Man, they have their feet firmly planted in MID-AIR!

    Does that mean we should BLINDLY follow them and ask no questions- GET REAL LEAHY! So we are told to apply DEMOCRACY to IRAQ..... OK so we kick Sadaam the Sunni out and bring in the MAJORITY (democracy you know) and the majority is the Shiites who are even MORE radical than the Sunnis.... Brilliant move? I think not! Not in this "eye for an eye" part of the world where violence begats violance in the name of cult like tribal religions.

    Leahy where is the Iraqi Thomas Jefferson? George Washington? or other founding father types with a judeo-christian foundational morality or even a moderate set of values? I don't see any! You think you can solve it all.... sorry but ask any person of Greek or Serbian decent about dealing with the Muslims. Remember Leahy we are still in Serbia.... keeping these people from killing each other. And then there are those damnable rules of engagement that can get a soldier under the intense stress of the moment charged with MURDER if he makes the wrong decision... come on Leahy, tell me these are good? This PC nation building crap was bad in Vietnam!

    Leahy, take some time and watch Lawrence of Arabia. This film is a good metaphor for what is happening in the Middle East.

    So Leahy beware of the false promises of people who put the Republicans in this bad position.... A LOSING POSITION. They are the problem, not people like me.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Just wanted to say that we need an honest, sane president. We DO NOT NEED another sick, twisted war monger that belongs in jail. Dr Ron Paul for President in 2008.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Hi Susan Richmeier,

    I think this statement is quite insightful to why our local newspapers (and TV) stink so bad.

    "You act as if ignoring the Paul campaign, as the lamestream media has done all along, is somehow worse then lying and exaggerating about it, not to mention defaming the character of every individual involved with it. I'll take the Trib's silence over lies and misrepresentations any day."

    So that is what you get. A few busloads of Dr. Paul's supporters come over to http://www.cdobs.com and this site yesterday, shouting profanity, and generally neglecting consideration of the populist issues.

    In return the conglomerate of media players blackout the story. You're telling me that you would rather have censorhip than discourse, and that you are in favor of the US Consitution/Bill of rights?

    Please check Ammendment #1, and join in the discourse rather than trying to shout down anyone who disagrees with you, or rejoice in the fact that you will continue to be spoon fed garbage from the Trib, Sun-Times etc.

    JBP

    ReplyDelete
  89. "You're telling me that you would rather have censorhip than discourse, and that you are in favor of the US Consitution/Bill of rights?"

    No, that's not what I said at all, but way to try and turn things around in your favor. My point was that if our only choices are to be ignored or slandered, I'll take the silence. I'm curious as to how Mr. Roeser's article could be construed as "discourse." "Discourse" usually includes things like "valid points" or "facts", not insults, pettiness and slander. On the other hand, I'm new to all these ridiculous political games and mumbo jumbo, but perhaps what they say is true: Any press is good press? One can only hope in the case of the Ron Paul campaign.

    "Please check Ammendment #1,and join in the discourse rather than trying to shout down anyone who disagrees with you, or rejoice in the fact that you will continue to be spoon fed garbage from the Trib, Sun-Times etc."

    Perhaps YOU should take a look at Amendment #1. Again, you twist and skew to turn things around. I never said that Mr. Roener should be "shut down" for airing his hateful comments. I said that he should not act so surprised when those he's slandered rise up and want to respond. As well, I wonder how you come to the conclusion that just because Mr. Roener chose to write about the Ron Paul campaign, it somehow qualifies as something other than "spoon-fed garbage" from the major news outlets. Garbage is garbage, no matter where it comes from.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Personally, I enjoy JBP trying to go after the easy targets and blatantly ignoring the valid arguments. His pitiful retorts illicit humor in my office.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Susan and Jacob,

    If you have an issue, post it. But please allow the independence necessary to scrutinize political campaigns.

    The sniffy Libertarian is a new one on me. I can't recall ever meeting such super-sensitive types in 15+ years of being (sort of) Libertarian myself.

    If you want to mix it up in a political discourse, have at it. But don't be alarmed if not everyone agrees with everything you believe.

    JBP

    ReplyDelete
  92. The question becomes whether the servers got overloaded or the egos got tinged.

    I regularly checked back during the heat of the debate and found the site to be loading and working normally without the sluggishness found by an overload caused by a Drudgereport link for instance.

    Thus me thinks that the egos got a wee bit tinged by the comments!

    After all, politics is NOT a cakewalk! It has always been rough and tumble and heated with emotion. I guess we can blame Patrick Henry for that!

    ReplyDelete
  93. "If you have an issue, post it. But please allow the independence necessary to scrutinize political campaigns."

    I've already posted my "issue." In case you've forgotten, I took "issue" with being slandered as a self-indulgent, obese, hirsute, pot-smoking Nazi. As far as I can tell, my complaint has in no way hindered your "independence" in scrutinizing political campaigns. When will that scrutiny begin? All I've seen so far is childish name-calling and innuendo.

    "I can't recall ever meeting such super-sensitive types in 15+ years of being (sort of) Libertarian myself."

    Mr. Roeser has compared or at least implied a resemblence between Ron Paul and Hitler, and between his supporters and Nazis. He's tried to make some association between an honest and dignified candidate and the worst mass murderer in modern history. And you complain that we're being "super-sensitive"???

    "If you want to mix it up in a political discourse, have at it. But don't be alarmed if not everyone agrees with everything you believe."

    I never asked for anyone to agree with everything I believe in. I've responded on this site NOT to try and persuade Mr. Roeser to change his mind and become a Ron Paul supporter, but to express my outrage at the nasty implications he has made against 1500 individuals he doesn't even know.

    I would suggest that if you and Mr. Roeser would like to avoid the displeasure and wrath of readers, he would do well to refrain from comparing people to Nazis in the future. I'm simply amazed that I actually have to MAKE such a statement.

    ReplyDelete
  94. It is my firm opinion that when Mr. Roeser attended the weekend event that NO ONE recognized him! There were no friendly pats on the back saying, HI TOM, how are ya!

    Remember Savannah, Tom thinks he is one of the core players in conservative politics in Chicago given his radio show, TV/Radio show with Bruce Dumont, blog, columns and involvement in the City Club. The Ron Paul movement crept up on him and he didn't see it coming or understand it.

    So you can imagine his distress to find himself in the midst huge group of Ron Paul supporters who are essentially conservative, numerous, much much younger than he, and NOBODY KNEW HIM! Talk about being left OUT of the party! It is like waking up and suddenly finding oneself, IRRELEVANT and part of the past... a past that he is so vociferously writing about these days.... for his grandchildren.....

    So, ego pinched, he set out to POOP BIG TIME in the Ron Paul punch bowl.... especially given his strong neo-con bent these days (its easy for him to get all the neo-con attack language he wants because the main neo-con pundits, think tanks, and "rags" have been either ignoring Dr. Paul or are doing MAJOR hatchet jobs on him due to his lack of Iraq War Support amongst other things).

    Remember, Savannah, the neo-cons are in BIG TIME TROUBLE over the failure of the Iraq war which they promoted to the hilt and the public's dislike and distrust of their other big government and globalist policies all the while they are pressing pressing pressing for an IRAN WAR too! They are desperate to expand their Middle Eastern hobby wars to another playing field!!!! Another war is their only path as they have laid out so many times in neo-con article after article.

    Given all this, Tom went over the top with his wildly silly Hitlerian metaphor especially given the following:

    http://www.jews4ronpaul.org/

    It all backfired on Tom....

    I really believe that Tom is simply and politically out of touch these days and is licking his wounded ego.

    Notice how few came to his support!!!

    Given his years in politics, that is tough to take!

    What a pity.........

    ReplyDelete
  95. http://www.jews4ronpaul.org/!!!

    Yes, perhaps we should ask this group how they feel about Mr. Roeser's comparisons.....

    Well said, and well done, Lawrence.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Would someone explain how an intellectually honest Libertarian-Conservative could jump into bed with the Ron Paul phenomenon, whose members berate Ronald Reagan, post endless blog notes, echoing Al Gore in his horror over "global warming", and suggest that other than their sainted Paul, the only acceptable candidates are Dennis "the Menace" Kucinich and "Wackizany" Mike Gravel?

    Do real Constitutionalists make these kinds of noises?

    Look at the Ron Paul You Tube posts. At his speeches, when he calls for unilateral, immediate withdrawal from the Middle East, or for legalization of drugs, he gets wild applause.

    When he asserts the need to ban abortion, control the border or defend the right to keep and bear arms, he is met with stony silence by his very own supporters.

    Something funny is going on here.

    When his MidWest co-ordinator, Anita Andrews told a group of prospective supporters that she had managed a national Presidential campaign before, she was asked, "For whom?."

    She responded: "I can't tell you."

    What's going on here?

    Serious Conservatives of a genuine Libertarian bent have a responsibility to ensure that these people are thrown off the ballot in Illinois.

    They are so inept and naiive at the nuts and bolts of practical politics, that it won't be at all hard.

    Tom Roeser is right. There is scary Hitlerian quality to this odd little crowd. They throw people out of their chat groups if they dare criticize the supreme Leader.

    This political idiosyncrasy shouldn't be hard to nip in the bud, just as it would have been easy and preferable to do so to Hitler and his adoring crew in 1928.

    ReplyDelete
  97. You did it! You compared Ron Paul to Adolf Hitler and, suddenly, people who never heard of you before are leaving comments on your blog. Kudos, Tom! Your little publicity stunt worked.

    Oh, and to all those who disagree with what Tom wrote: please be civil. Egos are fragile things. And no personal insults. Leave that to the professional journalists. Name-calling will not be tolerated -- unless, of course, you are comparing libertarian Texas congressmen to genocidal dictators and calling their female supporters obese, shaggy, unkempt, hirsute, noisy, obstreperous, rambunctious, and raucous.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Is it possible that Americans are being 'set up'? The popularity of Ron Paul is such that he would have never of had this type of support, or any support for that matter in any other period of American history. Is it possible that elite individuals are screwing things up on purpose so that the American people will rise up against the Neoconservatives? Are people's freedoms being taken away on purpose so that people will be forced to rebel against the system? Is extreme change only possible in extreme situations?
    Perhaps hiring an Israeli for Attorney General is a little too obvious. Contracting an Israeli security company to guard the Nation's nuclear weapon supply is a recipe for disaster. Are things like this being done so that Laws can be made in the future to prevent such idiotic practices? It just doesn't make sense to me why this sort of thing can go on without there being a hidden agenda. Everyone knows the Federal Reserve is not under government control. Would it be crazy to suggest that people are secretly working undercover to destroy freemasonry?

    ReplyDelete
  99. The appeal of Ron Paul is very simple!

    Many many conservatives and a lot of the American Public feel disaffected by both the Republicans and the Democrats. Many have simply given up on voting because the parties have become so much of the same...

    Who would ever think that you would see a Republican President "holding hands" with Teddy Kennedy! Who would ever thing that a Republican President would boost the Welfare state to the hilt with medicare meds! or expansion of the Department of Education with "no kids left behind", a socialist dream of Teddy Kennedy! Who would ever think that as Republican President would ever let spending get so far out of control? Who would ever think that a Republican President would embrace Nation Building in foreign lands or PC Police work for the US Military! Who would ever think that a Republican President would say, "wouldn't it be nice..... Bush Clinton Bush Clinton"!

    What ever happened to America as the shining city on the hill? with the dollar is tanking and the trade and gov deficits ballooning, an policies that peck away at the soverignty of the US for the sale of short term Wall Street profits. ie the sacrifice of states like Ohio on the alter of miniscule wage overseas labor under the false idea of FREE TRADE.

    Simply put the neo-cons baited and switched on AMERICA. The Republican Pary is losing because of it and it is time for MAJOR CHANGE back to the ideals that made the Republican Party a winner.

    Thus Ron Paul is fresh air in the Republican Party and people are responding.

    Think about it!

    ReplyDelete
  100. Ron Paul says that he is diametrically opposed to abortion.

    So how about if we see a throng of these passionate Ron Paul devotees out in Aurora picketing the proposed abortion mill there. You can bring your Ron Paul signs and even amend them to say "Ron Paul wants the baby killing stopped."

    Think we'll see that?

    The scrawny little 72 year old backbencher from Texas says that he is opposed to the invasion of Mexican illegal aliens into our neighborhoods.

    So how about if the Ron Paulistas all show up to the Minuteman symposium in McHenry Co. with "Vote Ron Paul, Stop the Alien Invasion" signs?

    Think that will happen?

    But invite them to a NORML marijuana legalization rally and they'll be there in droves, Ron Paul signs in tow.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Politwriter, your post is lame and trite, maybe you should put down your joint and write something profound that supports your side. For example tell us how wonderful you think the IRS is. Tell us how the big government style spending of the Bush administration is conservative. Tell us how is immigration bill was "conservative". Tell us that the tens of thousands of Iraqi refugees that BUSH is allowing into USA will not include terrorists. Remember BUSH was sold to us as being MORE conservative than his father. HA HA
    He succeeded with his policies on getting the House and Senate flipped to the Democratic catagory. If the Republicans keep on listening to people like you, this country WILL hit the wall.

    ReplyDelete
  102. In response to:

    "The scrawny little 72 year old backbencher from Texas says that he is opposed to the invasion of Mexican illegal aliens into our neighborhoods.

    So how about if the Ron Paulistas all show up to the Minuteman symposium in McHenry Co. with "Vote Ron Paul, Stop the Alien Invasion" signs?

    Think that will happen?

    But invite them to a NORML marijuana legalization rally and they'll be there in droves, Ron Paul signs in tow."

    Lies and assumptions are what one uses when one does not have any valid arguments. I have protested publically against illegal immigration with my Ron Paul sign in hand. And I have NEVER smoked pot, nor used any other drug with the exception of the occasional beer. If that's the best you can do in your attempt to smear Paul and us, I guess we don't have too much to worry about.

    There are MANY non-drug users who believe that the "War on Drugs" have been a complete and utter failure. Prohibition of alcohol didn't work, and prohibition of drugs isn't working for the same reasons. Keeping them illegal empowers inner city gang-bangers and fosters a cycle of violence, which effects us ALL.

    I believe in the second amendment right to bear arms, yet I don't own a gun. How is that different from believing that drugs ought to be decriminalized while not personally desiring to use drugs.

    Perhaps you should stop labeling and pigeon-holing people.

    ReplyDelete
  103. See Glenn Greenwald's post of today.

    ReplyDelete
  104. Wake up Tom, Ron is speaking before the Robert A. Taft Club a week from Thursday. It would appear that the followers of Robert Taft have the opposite view of Ron. How else can we prove you more wrong?
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/015789.html

    ReplyDelete
  105. I was there.I didn't see anybody on dope, although I did see a few pony tails. What's wrong with that? As a matter of fact, what's wrong with legalizing dope? It is certainly not as
    bad for you as that twenty-dollar scotch that you can afford to drink.
    You want intellectual content? Then read Human Action by Ludwig von Mises.
    Ron Paul has read him, and you should
    too. You want to see Nazis? Go to a Rudy Giuliani rally. He's the guy who
    supports the Seig Heil patriot act and
    wants us all to give up our guns and
    carry national i.d. cards. You want
    freedom and peace? Vote Ron Paul. Anybody who has the guts to support Randy Stufflebeam can buck the Establishment, flash a smile, and say-
    "The Doctor is in!"

    ReplyDelete
  106. You call yourself a conservative? Or, are you really a Communist symapthizer? You have horrid collectivist fallacies of logic on display in this piece.

    X Buried.

    ReplyDelete