When someone says they’re “turned off” by something, and then won’t mention why that something turns them off… I get all… turned off…

@San Fernando Curt:

“When someone says they’re ‘turned off’ by something, and then won’t mention why that something turns them off… I get all… turned off…”

I’m sorry--are you dense?  Let me spell it out plainly: Christians who liked Ron Paul’s Christmas message won’t like his remarks on FOX News because they come across as if he believes that Christianity should have no place in the public square.

Tying Christianity to “fascism” is not exactly the way to convince Christians to support your campaign.

Scott,

Excellent post.  Yes, this was a mistake by Ron Paul.

There is a a positive consequence to all this. We’ll
soon know if Paul is humble enough to truly lead and
if his brand of libertarianism is the hum-drum kind
that requires a bifurcated self to function within the pluarist bazaar. An apology and explanation on the role faith plays in his life will
go along way to either restoring or ruining Paul’s
candidacy.

Ron, don’t mess with my Christmas. Put this behind you
now!

Mr. Richert,

Gosh, oh golly, gee… I guess I MUST be dense. Never for a moment did I think Dr. Paul was tying Christianity to fascism. I thought that, like Sinclair Lewis’ original “flag and cross” line, he was saying that jackboot authoritarianism would come to America wrapped in a pretty package – something that would appeal to… say… patriots… devout Christians. And something they wouldn’t necessarily recognize - until it was too late.

I don’t know – gee whillikers – I kinda LIKE someone reminding me to keep my eyes open. These are days when the president doesn’t even have time for the soggy-Kleenex justice of the FISA courts. Or Congress – when he wants to shock and awe. We must be aware of just how fragile our democracy has become.

…But, dang, thanks for the heads-up…

You can bet that Glen Beck will come out swinging on this tonight. This could be Ron’s Chance at a big turnaround. Make no mistake, FOX will send Beck with knives drawn for the sole objective of killing this candidacy tonight. Tonight will be decisive.

@San Fernando Curt:

“These are days when the president doesn’t even have time for the soggy-Kleenex justice of the FISA courts. Or Congress – when he wants to shock and awe. We must be aware of just how fragile our democracy has become.”

Of course.  And I’ve written about that very topic many times, here and elsewhere.  But you pretended as if you couldn’t figure out why Christians might be turned off by someone equating Christianity in the public square with fascism.  I took you at your word; that’s why I asked you if you were dense.

I didn’t realize you were just being disingenuous.

While I certainly approve of Ron Paul and his effort to repair the damage done to our constitution I dont think going back to the gold standard is feasible.

Was not a mistake, will rebound to his favour especially this weekend when Odious Russert attempts to use it to browbeat Dr. Paul.  Many people have read “It Can’t Happen Here.” And many know that it can.  Wrapped in a flag waving a holy book and carrying a cross, the conflation of The State and The One True Interpretation.  When Dr. Paul becomes the Republican nominee, the theologically driven voters will have the same three choices the rest of us face:  Vote for Dr. Paul, vote for one of his opponents--- either Democratic party or Bloomberg or some other third party, stay home and show your superiority by not voting.
Hypothetically he could have said:  “Haven’t seen it so I have not basis to make a comment on it.”
That would probably have been a lie.
He could have stopped with the:  “haven’t thought it through completely.” I suspect that would also have been a lie.
I think ( because I am sadly not a distant viewer of men’s souls ) that the visual trickery in the Huckabee advert/christmas card offended Dr. Paul as cheap subliminal demagougery and as a cheap shot at ALL the other candidates.
So far as it can be determined, God has not endorsed Huckabee.  So far as it can be determined, God has never bothered to endorse any candidate for any Earthly position.

The big difference in Ron Paul and the fiel is that he assumes people will know what he is talking about and avoids talking points and dumbed down rhetoric.  I am not sure that the people it will turn off will be the ones capable of understanding his message of anti-war, pro-life, limited government anyway.

that should read the field, not fiel. typing while blind is tough.

“I thought that, like Sinclair Lewis’ original “flag and cross” line, he was saying that jackboot authoritarianism would come to America
wrapped in a pretty package...”

He was and the issue isn’t whether Lewis was right or
not. It is RP suggesting that Huckabee is that “pretty
package” that is the issue here. Unless something new has
been unearthed about Huck’s positions, calling him a
fascist will alienate millions of Christians. Surely a
Christmas ad in a campaign doesn’t qualify. Neither
does supporting a mindless war.

@CK:

“Many people have read ‘It Can’t Happen Here.’”

You have got to be kidding me.  I like Sinclair Lewis, but this is the one book of his that I’ve never been able to get through, and I don’t know anybody who has.  And the people I know are generally sympathetic to the message of the book.  But it’s Lewis at his didactic worst.

I guarantee that if you called up 100 likely voters and asked each if he had read It Can’t Happen Here, you’d be lucky to find one who had.

And just when in the heck did window panes become crosses?
۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞

Merry Sol Invictus.

@ Tim H
Beck does not have the chops to do it.
It might get mentioned, my bet is that if it is, it will be right before a commercial break and never seen again.
Somewhere today I saw that everyone’s favourite catholic organization did not take all that kindly to Huckabee’s little subliminal gem.
One of the nice things about these internets is that very smart people can react to this kind of stuff much faster and render it foolish.  But hey nice shelf Gov Huckabee, nice christmas balls ( 3 of them ... wonder if that was a subliminal recall to those three Iranian’s who visited the manger on the first Christmas) too.

“the visual trickery in the Huckabee advert/christmas card offended Dr. Paul as cheap subliminal demagougery and as a cheap shot at
ALL the other candidates.”

Then say that. To call him a fascist was a blunder.

@M.Nucci:

“I am not sure that the people it will turn off will be the ones capable of understanding his message of anti-war, pro-life, limited government anyway.”

All right--let’s go through this one more time, slowly.  Ron Paul does have Christian supporters.  Some of those Christians, myself included, are going to think that this was a mistake.  And some of those are not going to be as forgiving as I am.

The arrogance expressed by some of Dr. Paul’s supporters here is unbelievable.  Apparently, folks like you believe that Christians are not “capable of understanding” his constitutional message.

Keep repeating that.  That’s sure to attract lots of voters to his campaign.

@ Scott
Your inability to finish “It Can’t Happen Here” is a valuable anectdote.
Your guarantee would depend on who designed the survey...would professors of English be forbidden to vote? liberal arts grads? well rounded American citizens?  I am a likely voter as is my wife, both of us have read it, so that is two likely voters who have read it.
And seen Elmer Gantry
And read Heinlein’s “If This Goes On ...”.

I notice in the Paul video, above, it also has a door with ‘panes’ that could be construed as crosses.

I think the whole subliminal thing is WAY overblown.

۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞†۞

Merry Sol Invictus.

Scott you may be right, but with all due respect huck is hiding away and he had to be confronted,plenty of Christians are offfended by the prowar wannabe christians like huckabee who say the war was a mistake but we have to stay there and keep killing people.Justin Raimondo is right its time to act like a top tier candidate, kick ass.He has the money and the tv expose to do some good now is the time to move.

As far as I know, Lew Rockwell is a strict Catholic, yet he has no problem with calling a spade a spade:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/017843.html

Scott also Huckabee seems to think he is the annointed of God which is what the commericail was all about.Ron is never going to win by playing it safe and not saying what he thinks. Huckabee is already on the defensive not Ron Paul.

Mr. Richert,

Debating tactics is healthy, but at some point, acknowledging that Dr.Paul the Politician knows what he is doing and the remainder of the Right and his supporters should try to understand his point.

I am certain this was a mistake in the sense he would have liked to phrase it a bit better or take a different opportunity to fire a broadside at Huckabee’s Christianist pandering and general dislike for the Constitution etc. but he takes what he is given in the brief moments he has on national tee-vee.  I.E, Paul wanted to state that Huckabee represents a brand of fascism--which I believe is what Mr.Raimondo and folks like myself heard, i.e. entirely independent of the commercial.

Is he being reckless and taking chances?  At first that is what I thought, but now I see him in a different light, as a skilled and accomplished politician

why would christians be offended by his remark?  Can you iagine a ron paul ad with a huge cross in it?  of course not.  it’s cheap

Most people voting for Ron Paul are voting for a the ideas of freedom, peace, and prosperity, and could really care less about what Paul thinks about Huckabee’s ad.  Paul’s supporters also realize that Huckabee is in fact a promoter of what Lew Rockwell calls “red-state fascism” in both word and deed, and will be wise enough to see Paul’s remark in this context.  Justin was right in that it is OK for Paul to make some digs at other candidates from time to time, even if they aren’t 100 percent justifiable.  Besides, nobody is perfect.  For God’s sake, how often has Paul’s name been vilified for no good reason?  Remember when George W. Bush called some guy an a--hole when talking with Cheney and the microphones overheard him?  My Pastor thought nothing of that incident and still supported him.  Anyone who discontinues their support for Paul over this is not a true believer in the concepts of liberty, prosperity and peace.

The comment was very uncharacteristic of Paul
and yes, I cringed.
Of course I know he was not associating fascism
with Christianity but the competition is going
to pounce on this.
Next time I’m sure he’ll have some coffee before
going on air.

look at this still from the ad

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/4895/thumbs/s-MIKE-HUCKABEE-large.jpg

is he running for grand wizard or president?

Ron did not mean it that way, and I am a Christian and so is Dr Paul.

Merry Sol Invictus.

Merry Billie Sol Estes to you too

@CK:

“Your inability to finish “It Can’t Happen Here” is a valuable anectdote.”

Of what?  The fact that, as a work of art, it ranks at the bottom of Sinclair Lewis’s works?

“Your guarantee would depend on who designed the survey...would professors of English be forbidden to vote? liberal arts grads? well rounded American citizens?  I am a likely voter as is my wife, both of us have read it, so that is two likely voters who have read it. ”

I was talking about a random sample, and I stand by my guarantee.  You, on the other hand, claimed that “many people” have read it, then you offered . . . two.

@Jack:

“Justin Raimondo is right its time to act like a top tier candidate, kick ass.”

Then Paul should kick ass, and I’ll be right there cheering him on.  But that’s not what this was.

Kicking ass would be asking Huckabee during a debate how a good Christian supports sending Christian boys to die in an unnecessary war.  Or how a good Christian can support a policy that’s taken a country where Christians could live in relative peace and turned it into one which Christians have had to flee in order to avoid being killed.

the cross is bigger than his head

@Jack:

“Scott also Huckabee seems to think he is the annointed of God which is what the commericail was all about.”

So what was Ron Paul’s Christmas ad about?

@C Bowen:

“Dr.Paul the Politician knows what he is doing and the remainder of the Right and his supporters should try to understand his point.”

Actually, I don’t think that’s at all clear.  He’s clearly fatigued; he comes across as tired and even a bit irate.

Maybe he would have said the same thing if he’d had a good night’s sleep, but I think there’s a very real possibility that he wouldn’t have.

As someone else mentioned in another forum on the topic:

One problem with Paul’s statement is that it is no longer necessary for fascism to come to America. It took up residence here some time ago.

When the governing party favors aggressive war, extrajudicial detention, torture, systematic government surveillance, a substantial welfare state, pervasive military and traditionalist symbolism, and in general subscribes to the idea that the perception of safety for the group always outweighs the rights of the mere individual, you are living in a fascist state.

@Neil Davis:

“Anyone who discontinues their support for Paul over this is not a true believer in the concepts of liberty, prosperity and peace.”

And when’s the last time a presidential election was won solely on the strength of true believers?  I can’t think of one.  I can, however, recall campaigns that have gone down in flames because true believers thought that they were all that was needed.

@Scott:

In another post I pointed out that Libertarians have
their own brand of Christianity-haters, whose inspiration
is the warmed over Niezscheanism of Ayn Rand, and who
seduce small governmetn Christians with their rethoric.

You hve to understand the difference between those who
object to Government spending on the poor because it
is not the proper way to assit them, and those who
object to any money at all going to the poor. Make
no mistake, there are too many Libertarians out there
who thikt that Blessed Theresa of Calcutta was perveers
and anti-life for devoitng her life to caring for the
poor insted of some productive endeavor.

It is bad enough that the gnostic Straussians got to be
so prominent. Are we to feed yet anohter snake in our
bosom?

Scott, Huckabee is already on the defensive defending his add in a story on yahoo.His plan was to avoid all confrontation and there would be no more debate. He refused to go on Russert’s program because he would need at least 2 weeks prep time.He is the one who has been bringing religion into this, by snide comments about Romneys religion.It may hurt Ron Paul but I doubt it.The last 2 weeks are when all the rough stuff gets going with his couple off hand comments he did more damage to Huckabee that all of romney’s advertising the last 2 weeks.

Adriana arrives to see her words in print on the Internets…

Anyway, Mr.Richert, if the question was: “what do you think of Mike Huckabee claiming to be God’s chosen candidate?” the same answer he gave, would of course, sounded better.

Rather, he got a different set-up.  And I agree, perhaps if he was on his game a bit better he would have offered a better bridge to the same answer.

I personally cringed, even though I agree, with his replies regarding Blowback in the May Debate, and on more local issues like the Brown-Tax Resistors of New Hampshire.

He navigated the territory with a skill that comes from experience...and we are talking about someone who called out Jesse Helm’s sell-out in the Mid-80s when he was a still conservative darling (folks caught on to his act when he became a big UN-guy in the late 90s.)

Catholic League president Bill Donahue has attacked the Huckabee ad: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D8TK2B682.html
‘But Catholic League president Bill Donahue said the former Arkansas governor went way beyond wishing people a joyous holiday.

He was especially disturbed by the cross-like image created by a white bookcase in the background of the ad, saying he believed it was a subliminal message.

“What he’s trying to say to the evangelicals in western Iowa (is): I’m the real thing,” Donahue said Tuesday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox and Friends. “You know what, sell yourself on your issues, not on what your religion is.” ‘

Martin;

Thank you, I hadn’t seen that, but it would appear Paul knows what he is doing.

I won’t be seeing slimy Glenn Beck tonite am off to bible study of all things and it would only raise my blood pressure.I can immagine it will be quite a show.Go Ron go tell the truth as you see it, thats why we love you.

You can bet that Glen Beck will come out swinging on this tonight.

Beck is a Mormo-fascist who appears on Headlines News, not FAUX News

Perhaps this controvesy is JUST what Ron needed?
Afterall, Huckster is obviously franchising the
MOST sacred symbol in our culture for political gain.
It seems to me that this will turn out to be a
serendipitous event!
No doubt FOX will spin this but Ron will win hands down.

Then Paul should kick ass, and I’ll be right there cheering him on.  But that’s not what this was.

Mr. Richert. Whenever I am watching Paul, on TV, The Bride says, “He is such a wimp. He might have some good ideas but he whines. America won’t vote for him”

As usual, The Bride is right. Great message. Poor candidate.

There is no fascism in America. Such talk bolsters the left which is always out there witch hunting for fascist under every conservative rock. Post 9/11 and before there is an authoritarian strain among some conservatives that has lead to our current warfare/security state, some conservatives are two deferential to law enforcement, and some conservatives are two nationalistic. For this they should rightly be criticized. But fascism is a specific word that implies specific policies. It is a boogie word thrown around by the left. We should not do their bidding for them.

Conservatives should not be trying to out pluralist and out tolerance the left. There is nothing wrong with Christians explicitly supporting another Christian. And for that matter there is nothing wrong with a Christian considering Romney’s Mormonism. There is something wrong with supporting un-Christian ideas such as aggressive war in the name of Christianity, and Huck should be called on that. But Christians should never subjugate their faith to the liberal political principle of pluralism. Please show me where the Bible demands religious pluralism.

From other things I have seen, Ron Paul does think, for example, that considering Romney’s Mormonism is out of bounds. I think he is partly afraid religion can be used cynically, but I think he also objects to it from a philosophical libertarian viewpoint. I simply disagree with him. I am not a libertarian.

Paul should, as I said, get himself on the side of right by decrying all the politically correct thought-censorship. He could easily be true to his libertarian roots by saying if Huckabee wants to talk about Christmas, use a cross, and say he is a Christian leader, etc. then that is his right to do so without a bunch of thought police correcting him.

‘There is no fascism in America.’

Scoff!
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/red-state-fascism.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts75.html

Why is Donahue waxing all pluralistic on us? With friends like these ...

Martin, what did I say? Fascism is a specific word with a specific meaning. One thing it means is a type of ethnic nationalism. Is there any ethnic nationalism in America? You have got to be kidding me. The same liberal thought police that want to stamp out any mention of Christianity would go ape at any hint of ethnic nationalism. Fascism also implies state/corporate centralized economic policies. While we have some of this in reality, conservatives at least mouth free-market rhetoric.

Like I said, there are authoritarian elements on the right, but they are not fascists. All that is authoritarian is not fascist. This is the same problem with the grossly imprecise “Islamofascism.”

So scoff right back at you.

I agree with Scott Richert that Dr. Paul seems tired in the clip.  The point he was trying to make, that fascism (meaning in this case militarist, messianic nationalism) abuses Christianity for its own ends, is a valid one. In the era of the left-behind Armagedonites and Christian Zionists it is more important than ever.  But the term “fascism” has long since lost its punch and any precise meaning because of overuse and the reference to Sinclair Lewis, let alone to the specific book will seem obscure to most vieweres of the clip.  Yes, it was a mistake, but hardly a costly one.  People are less likely to be offended than simply perplexed.

“Conservatives should not be trying to out pluralist and out tolerance the left.”

Amen Red, yet the Stockholm Syndrome is very powerful and clearly at work here. It’s not just neo-cons whot accept the Enlightenment’s view of human nature. It is the paleo’s too. The former will flourish because they embrace Liberalism, while the latter are rendered impotent and torn by the internal contradiction that comes from trying to fit the remnants of Christian civilization within it’s usurper.

I thought Paul was different then the parade of poseurs, hacks and opportunists that blight our political landscape. I thought he would introduce serious thought to an electoral process that appeals to the lowest common-denominator.
Today, he carelessly threw out a bumper-sticker slogan used by every high school English teacher in government employ and wound up becoming collateral damage himself.

Depressing. And Andrea’s right a lot of libertarians are hoping that this is just the beginning.

Am I the only political junkie here? Mr.Donahue, besides doing a job for the folks he represents via Heritage neocons, probably didn’t care for Huckabee’s anti-Catholic tactics last Summer against Brownback.

I think their is a strain of the paleo mind that has fallen for the well crafted schtick of Huckabee Populism and rather than rethink the set of political tactis a fraud like Huck is using, folks like Kevin and Adrianna, are fearing the menace of anti-Christian liberatianism...a close cousin of Islamofacism I assume.

@C Bowen:

“I think their is a strain of the paleo mind that has fallen for the well crafted schtick of Huckabee Populism and rather than rethink the set of political tactis a fraud like Huck is using, folks like Kevin and Adrianna, are fearing the menace of anti-Christian liberatianism . . . ”

Of course.  Because it couldn’t possibly be that people who support Ron Paul actually want him to do well, and they wince when they sense that he has made a mistake.  No, instead, anyone who thinks it was a mistake has to be a moron who is really a closet Huckabee supporter.

Every last person on this thread who thinks that Paul made a mistake is, I believe, a Paul supporter.  Just because we disagree with you doesn’t mean that we’ve gone over to the dark side.

Keep up the lockstep libertarian attacks on anyone who expresses a thought that departs from yours, however, and you’ll probably convince a few people that supporting Paul is no longer worth it.

FWIW, I watched Mr. Paul on Glenn Beck’s show. Beck came across as a nitwit with his questions to the candidate about putative Paul supporters (truthers, I guess) who emailed him death threats.

T’Hell does that have to do with Paul’s ideas?

In any event, Paul was ok but he seemed vapid and unprepared when Beck questioned him as to where the money would come to operate the govt after we ditched the IRS.

I thought Mr. Paul’s response was VERY weak especially considering Mr. Paul ought to have expected that question after claiming he’d trash the IRS.

We always did ok before we had it in 1913 (paraphrase0 as his response makes him appear as very radical and shallow imo.

He should have been better prepared. It appears Mr. Paul is not up to the task.

Sad.

Red Phillips-As Kirt Higdon helpfully pointed out, fascism partly entails militaristic, messianic nationalism. The sad fact is that, especially since 9/11, we have had plenty of that on display in the US.

So which is, Mr Richert, are we having a tactical debate or not?

I have only suggested that Paul might actually be employing a set of tactics, that yes, might make us cringe; he does so as he reads the zeitgeist in the moment, while some Paul “supporters” are either suggesting he apologize (why? do they mean tactically it will benefit them or were they “offended” i.e. glad to be validated in not sending money or doing a darn thing for RP, like Adrianna and Kevin?)

@C Bowen:

“I have only suggested that Paul might actually be employing a set of tactics, that yes, might make us cringe; he does so as he reads the zeitgeist in the moment . . . ”

Seriously?  Did you watch the same clip I did?  Dr. Paul isn’t reading “the zeitgiest in the moment”; he’s dog-tired and shooting from the hip.

If you’re seriously suggesting that Ron Paul’s tactic is to shore up support among people who are already completely devoted to him (libertarians who throw around words like “fascism” without understanding what they mean historically, and are so afraid of public expressions of Christianity that they think that they call any mention of Christ “Christianism"), then Dr. Paul is a worse tactician than I thought.

He needs the votes of Christians.  Period.  He cannot win the nomination, much less the presidency, without them.  Red Phillips--a Ron Paul supporter--has explained quite well how Paul could have answered the question in a way that is consistent with his principles and yet not only would not have alienated some Christians but would have shored up support among them.

Bur if you folks want Ron Paul to get only the votes of people like yourself, then, by all means, keep on doing what you’re doing.  Thank goodness I know that you don’t speak for Ron Paul, else I might very well have said “To hell with it” by now.

I saw that Dr.Paul found a way to get on Drudge and somehow be on the same side of the anti-Huck forces on the Right, whilst getting props from the Left.

What did you see?

@C Bowen:

“I saw that Dr.Paul found a way to get on Drudge and somehow be on the same side of the anti-Huck forces on the Right, whilst getting props from the Left.”

Uh huh.  Because the Left is going to win him the Republican nomination.  Tell me, Mr. Bowen, what do you think the ratio of Christians to leftists is in the Republican primaries?

At least I gave Dr. Paul the benefit of the doubt and thought that the remark was made in a moment of weakness.  You want to claim that it was a calculated move, to get “props from the Left.”

Again, if this is your idea of good tactics, I’ve got to wonder what you’ve been smoking.

Scott:  (libertarians who throw around words like “fascism” without understanding what they mean historically, and are so afraid of public expressions of Christianity that they think that they call any mention of Christ “Christianism")

What libertarians are these? Cato-ites? Randians?

Scott please dont lump all libertarians in with the left-libertarians to which you were probably referring to.

@Daniel J. Maxwell:

“What libertarians are these? Cato-ites? Randians?”

How about the libertarians on this and the previous thread?  Do a search for “fascism” and “Christianism” on this very page.

Is C Bowen a “left-libertarian”?

My goodness, I can’t tell if this is serious debate about tactics, or the pre-amble to a forthcoming piece about why we all have to withdraw from politics.

Re-read what I have said: I cringe as much as anyone, but he finds a way to make it work for him.

Two: he obviously wanted to get a point across about Huckabee and his militarist Christian approach.  Did he think out the calculus of offending folks versus gains, maybe maybe not, just making an observation that his track record says sit back and trust him.

This isn’t about whether you (or the this insufferable Kevin fellow who won’t post his last name so I can go check whether he has ever sent RP a dime) are offended, but whether it will work over the next 8 weeks that will determine a victor.  Where is the discipline?

Check your donor rolls at Chronicles, Mr. Richert, before hasty judgements.

And while doing so, tell me if Adrianna and Kevin are on there.

@C Bowen:

I’m not making hasty judgments, and yes, I know your name.  I also know that you can take it as well as give it, so I’m not too worried about offending you.

By the way, just what is the ratio of Christians to leftists in Republican primaries, do you think?

@Scott

I had not read all the comments on this page yet, just now caught up.

I admit libertarians (am I guilty of this too) overuse the term ‘fascist’ but it goes just as well for ‘communist’ or ‘socialist’.  The historical meanings of fascism have long been blurred, and those who are saying it is in ethic-nationalism are not quite right either. 

But Scott, I knew this would happen. The left-right coalition supporting Ron Paul has at times been shaky and it is evident in this thread. 

I am just concerned now.

@Daniel J. Maxwell:

“The left-right coalition supporting Ron Paul has at times been shaky and it is evident in this thread.”

That’s precisely the point.  Paul needs a broad coalition to be a serious contender, and one part of that coalition is small-government Christian conservatives.  This remark didn’t do anything to shore up his support among them, and it may well have hurt that support.

And the sad thing is that the tension in the coalition was created by Dr. Paul himself, through an ill-thought-out remark.

@Scott

Even as a traditionalist Catholic, the remark did not bother me. I knew what he meant, but I fear others will not.  Those who know what he meant, it is obvious - these so called ‘Christian’ leaders are some of the worst war-mongers around.

I predict it will pass over quickly.

@Daniel J. Maxwell:

“I knew what he meant, but I fear others will not.”

Of course, as did I.  But that’s precisely the point.  It won’t affect our support for Paul, but it may very well push some Christians who were considering voting for Paul away.

Good its time to take on the prowar fascists.Like Gerrry God is prowar Falwell.Fascism to me is undeclared war, wiretaps without warrents. crying islamfascist all the time.  Bombing innocent people, setting up concentration camps, torture,using the Cross as a political symbol, the patriot act,no habeous corpus. Scott what Paul was doing was showing his very large handsome family in a Christmass setting. Huckabees family is a big bunch of fat ugly slobs so he goes with this Cross symbol which he now calls a bookcase.it was just an attempt to use The greatest Christian symbol as political cover.Paul is a great prolife antiwar Christian who thinks its dispicable what Huckabee has been doing see his interview with Howard Fineman at Newsweek.Huckabee is supopped to be leading so he should be able to take a little heat,heaven knows he’s going to get a lot more.

@Jack:

“Huckabees family is a big bunch of fat ugly slobs so he goes with this Cross symbol which he now calls a bookcase.”

Spoken with true Christian charity.  If this is what political discussion entails today, then maybe Mr. Bowen is right, and I should write a piece about the virtues of withdrawing from this sordid arena.

C Bowen,
“he finds a way to make it work for him.”

“whether it will work over the next 8 weeks that will determine a victor… Where is the discipline?”

“...tell if this is serious debate about tactics,”

Given your preoccupation with utility at the expense of veracity, you should “withdraw from politics.” Please.

Daniel J Maxwell,
“I knew what he meant, but I fear others will not.” Well what did he mean? Or, is there a Straussian code that I missed? A lot of us anxiously await his answer.

I was at bible studies and missed Glenn Becks interview I saw 10 minutes on u tube however and I thought Paul was terrific and Beck was fair.Huckabee is nothing but a shill for Giuliani Pat Buchanan suggested months ago that Rudy could make hay by using Huckabee to bring down Romney in Iowa.Because Romney has all that money, he has been Giuliani’s only real rival untill Dr. Paul came along.Dr Paul has a tremendous following on the left because of his antiwar stand. They even forgive him for being prolife.
On a lighter note my wife went to lunch with 9 other female workers and found out of the ladies are rabid for Ron.this is going to be a slugfest for weeks. Lets not get our underpants in a bunch.

Great discussion.  But let’s get a little perspective here.  Paul breaks the single-day fundraising record, Fox brings him on, and the first question is, what do you think of the background imagery in someone else’s commercial (and the controversy we are trying to stir up with it).

Paul looks dead-tired.  Perhaps because he’s been up all night tryng to keep up with his own campaign volunteers who, pretty much all on their own you know, just BROKE THE SINGLE DAY FUNDRAISING RECORD. 

And Fox wants to talk about someone else’s commercial.  That there’s a cross in the background.  What gives?

Anyway, yeah, it wasn’t the most politic comment.  But in a way it was kind of impressive.  I mean, there he is, putting up with this crap from Fox, dead-tired, now in Iowa. flush on the heals of a glorious but surely busy weekend, and they ask him this goof-ball, non-newsworthy, superficial question about SOMEONE ELSE’S CAMPAIGN IMGAGERY, and he fires off a fairly on the point, literate response.  For goodness sake, they asked him for his impressions of the visuals --the background visuals!!-- in a commercial for another candidate --not even what Huckabee said in that commercial, and Paul responded that it reminded him of what Sinclair Lewis said about how mis-rule might LOOK like if it ever came to America. 

After the initial cringe, I thought, hey, that’s pretty good. And: is that Sinclair Lewis guy originally from Iowa?  That be something if he referenced one of Iowa’s own on point in response to such a stupid & insulting question.  (Turns out no, Lewis was apparently from Minnesota.  But still.)

As you might be able to tell, I’m already sold on Ron Paul.  This just makes me more committed.  I see it as another example of our goof-ball major media ignoring the real story. 

Possible more important questions to have asked Ron Paul: What are you going to do with the money?  Who gave you the money?  Why?  Where did the money come from?  How, if at all, will this affect your campaign plans?  Your policy positions?  After a few minutes of this, then maybe you could lead him into a compare and contrast discussion.

IMO, Paul was not aiming the quote so much at Huckabee but at the political establishment in general, which Huckabee is a part of, as it wages war without declaration, holds people without trial, wiretaps without warrant, taxes unconstitutionally etc. His comment opens up the opportunity to warn of what can happen and what has already happened. If Ron Paul has a chance it is in convincing 51% of the people that the federal government needs to be taken down a peg right now or we risk losing freedom and prosperity in the long term. 51% of people are not going to understand why the gold standard is beneficial and why the Fed is not.  So pointing to government’s abuse of freedom and dignity is a big part of Paul’s appeal. I think the comment will end up being small potatoes, but was maybe not so good if only because it can be misconstrued.
BTW, Glenn Beck, who I had written off as hopelessly obnoxious, actually did a fair, and in some ways complimentary interview with Rep. Paul.  He went off the tracks a bit by interrogating Dr. Paul about 9/11 conspiracies but was even a bit apologetic about that.  Why, I thought, is the guy being more decent that expected?  No doubt he realized he was going to be getting a slug of new viewers for the Paul interview and hoped not to alienate them all away from becoming regular viewers.

Scott,

I did not mean to suggest that Christians would be unable to understand what Ron Paul said.  I am saying that those who are going to take offense to it first of all may call themselves Christian in name but would hardly be Christian Conservatives and are probably all in the liberal Huckabee camp already.  A true conservative Christian will be offended by Huckabee’s ad and Huck himself and will recognize the true Christianity of Ron Paul.  I disagree that Ron Paul is hurt by attacking Huckabee.  Ron Paul is not pandering to anyone as Huckabee obviously is.  This is the mass appeal of Paul.  His fresh take on the whole political arena is the whole attraction to his remarkable run for president.  Next to Giulliani, Huckabee may be the slickest candidate in this race.  In the debates he has an easy joking manner that is very appealing to some.

I saw Ron Paul on Joe Scarborough this morning and on Glen Beck tonight.  He did exceptional on both and his comments on Huckabee were not mentioned.  On Joe he reminded us all that Bush originally ran on a non-interventionist foreign policy.  I think his answer to what we will do without the IRS was right also.  Basically he believes we won’t have to do anything and Beck more or less agreed with him.  He made huge hay out of the inevitable Israel question where he said that our policies do not help Israel in the least but make them a dependent of the U.S. 
The sleazy expected attack by Beck came in the form of the idiotic mention of death threats where Ron finally said “I don’t think I should have to answer these questions.” He was right.  It was a vicious attack but Beck was fair and seemed genuinly concerned about at least sounding like he is giving Ron Paul a fair shake.  The media are starting to shy away of attacking him head on because Ron Paul’s supporters are the most dedicated well informed of all supporters.
In short the phenomena you described of Ron Paul supporters forgiving his faults is working in his favor now because it has the media tenative to attack him.  Other candidates are the same way.  He is the only one on the stage who can show an untarnished record of consistently being proved right so no one wants to give him any more air time if they can help it.

Mountain meet mole hill.

Richert relax, Dr. Paul was not associating Christianity with fascism.

Talk about much ado about nothing.

Whether it was politically smart or not I don’t know, but sometimes you just have to speak your mind. Huckster is playing the religion card and it really is sickening to watch. Last week, it was this stuff about Mormons believing Jesus and the Devil were brothers. This week he is posing in front of Christmas trees with big white crosses in the background (which he claims are merely white bookcases!). I would be the first to admit that such blatant pandering usually works. After Huckster’s political hit job in the New York Times, Romney’s campaign probably is dead save for the state of Utah. And indeed, Huckster looks like he has the believin’ states of Iowa and South Carolina in the bag based on the latest polls. But while it is effective politics to play up one’s evangelical religiosity in today’s GOP, Huckster is also dividing, alienating, and misleading people as well as setting up a sort of religious litmus test for the Presidency. If Huckster keeps these type of appeals up, run for cover, because fascism is right around the corner.

@ Mr Richert, “If this is what political discussion entails today, then maybe Mr. Bowen is right, and I should write a piece about the virtues of withdrawing from this sordid arena.”

I tend to agree, at least as far American politics goes.  Of course I withdrew all the way to Australia, and not just because of politics.  We’ve just been through a national election which took just six weeks and involved almost no rancour, let alone the kind of alarming behaviour I’m beginning to see - from a distance, via youtube etc - among, inter alia, the slovenly and menacing types of Ron Paul supporters who are beginning to remind me more and more of Mao’s Red Guards, by which I mean I perceive a potential for Paul’s populist “revolution” to degenerate into anarchic political violence, perhaps especially if and when Paul loses the election.

Recently someone altered me to a new, but evidently growing phenonenon of 9-11 conspiracy theorists arranging “confrontations” with prominent political leaders (including Giuliani, McCain, Obama, etc etc), in which they ambush the
person in public - usually offstage or when the person is leaving a public event - and surround him and shout “confrontational” questions at him.  Videos of these “confrontations” are being posted on the website, wearechange.org Those “confrontations”
involve physical menace, including blocking the targeted person’s freedom of movement.  From such behaviour, it’s just another short step toward actual violence or, quiet conceivably, attempts at assasination.  In any case, such behaviour is all too similar in spirit to that of the “struggle sessions” of Mao’s Red Guards.

It is entirely conceivable that escalating economic crises and political frustrations, combined with America’s general decay of civility, combined with typical “revolutionary” rhetoric, could soon give rise to the kinds of anarchic, barbaric political violence which most of
Ron Paul’s supporters on THIS site do not want to see.  But it’s time to begin thinking honestly about that latent danger.

Mr. Richert

Dr. Paul addresses his comment in this interview. He is forthright in stating that Fox “caught him off guard” and elaborates further on his reaction: http://69.65.26.137/~ronpaula/RonPaulWHOJanMikelsonInterviewIowa121807.mp3

@James:

“Richert relax, Dr. Paul was not associating Christianity with fascism.”

James, did you bother to read any of the discussion?  The question is not whether Dr. Paul was associating Christianity with fascism; the question is whether Christians, whose votes Paul needs, might read the comment that way.  And, if so, whether the remark was wise.

Everyone at the site must be very, very, smart because when I heard the response to the specter of a cross in the Huckabee video I just assumed Ron meant that diffent people have different understandings of items such as the cross. Is it the symbol of peace or the cross of war. I never thought for one minute that he was saying that Huckabee was a fascist.

Get over it Scott, Hucky is another Huey Long and he did use the Cross in a political add and now lies and says they are bookcases.Hucky would support the fascist Giuliani but won’t support Ron Paul.Roberson and Hagee are fascists with there support of the immoral wars and attacking people.They are wrong and have to be confronted.there is only 2 weeks till the votes start coming in you have to do some negative campaigning or you can’t win.
there is a great article on the Pope at Lew Rockwell’s site by the way I think you might be intrested.

Mr Nucci, Lew Rockwell adresses Glen Beck and why he was such pussey with Ron last night.It wasn’t because he was a nice guy.
Mr. Ball the people who picket for Ron in public places and peacefully are in a great American tradition.I was at the first demonstation against Lyndon Johnson in history holding a Barry Gold water sign 3 days before the 1964 election.Johnson didn’t like it, but so what.

So the cretins who worship at the neoconic Fox “News” and Free Republic altars don’t like what Ron Paul had to say about “Christians” who where their religion on their sleeves.  Who cares?  These morons don’t support Dr. Paul anyway.  Besides, are people going to throw their support to someone else or not vote because of a single comment Ron made when he was fatigued?  Remember the Wehrmacht soldiers had a religious phrase on their belt buckles: “God is with Us”.  How’s that for a slick political slogan?  Look at the totality of what Ron Paul stands for and don’t judge him based on a single sound bite.  You don’t like Ron criticizing Huckabee the hypocrite and huckster?  Then go vote for the huckster, you idiots!

So the cretins who...don’t like what Ron Paul had to say about “Christians” who wear their religion on their sleeves.

Ron has the courage to say what he thinks, not voice platitudes about what he thinks a certain constituency (Christians, etc) wants to hear.

I hope you are feeling very safe in Australia, John.  Here in the US you can get arrested for wearing an anti-war t-shirt at a Bush rally, but with your uncanny insight, you’ve identified the real menace - the Ron Paul “Red Guard”.  Who knew?  You’ve previously advised us that Stalin was not a Communist; now you’re telling us who really is.

Just a few days ago, I attended a meeting of Ron Paul supporters, a group of average middle class people, at the apartment of a retired psychiatrist.  Nobody was in uniform, we snacked on cheese and sipped wine, and planned for the Texas primary.  Yes, there was one young fellow there who was a 9/11 “truther” and he and I had a vigorous but friendly debate.  It certainly didn’t feel like a Red Guard meeting, but I guess you see things more clearly from Australia.

@Jack:

“Get over it Scott, Hucky is another Huey Long and he did use the Cross in a political add and now lies and says they are bookcases.”

What did they feed you at Bible study last night, Jack?  Because I don’t think you’re firing on all four cylinders.

Nothing I’ve written is a defense of Huckabee.  I’m a Ron Paul supporter.  My point is that Ron Paul needs Christian votes to win the Republican nomination, and, whatever else this comment might do, it’s not going to win him Christian votes.

But see--this is modern politics.  If you criticize even a single mistake by a candidate that you support, the true believers immediately call you a traitor and accuse you of going over to the other side.

No wonder voter participation has declined, as these types of tactics have increased.

@Cherusci:

“Ron has the courage to say what he thinks, not voice platitudes about what he thinks a certain constituency (Christians, etc) wants to hear.”

Except that Ron Paul is a Christian--a real one, by all accounts.  So why say something that will turn off other real Christians (not the FOX News types) who were considering supporting him?

“Except that Ron Paul is a Christian--a real one, by all accounts.  So why say something that will turn off other real Christians (not the FOX News types) who were considering supporting him?”

Scott, if thoughtful Christians only consider the point he was making - that is, throughout history political charlatans have used religion to further their (often selfish) objectives - they will see that Ron Paul is correct.  Those politicians who use religion to further their goals (arguably like Huckabee) should be seen by true believers as sinners because this co-opting of Christ’s message to achieve earthly political ends borders on blasphemy. If certain Christians are offended by this statement of fact, they are denying reality.

RE: leftists to Christians

I’d argue that the calculus is Rightists to “Christian Republicans” of a nationalist bent who watch Fox News, rather than Leftists--or do I repeat myself? 

Paul the Moderate seems to have carved out a middle ground between Huck and Romney and I think it pretty clever.

Further, let’s indeed argue if competing for the war-apologist vote is ‘important.’ Ask Tom Tancredo’s team how they are doing in Iowa.

Ask the Minutemen who saw their head embarrassingly endorse Gov. Tyson Chicken.

Again, it was unfortunate that Paul got his point across about Huckabee with the backdrop of a Christmas ad, but his point still stands and as you noted 100,000 views.  I am sure Huck’s network of supporters will try to use it to their advantage, just as they noted Brownback, being a Catholic, really wasn’t one of their own.

And if indeed it ‘rips’ us apart, props to Huck’s political skills and the dark talents of our Conditioners and mercy on those who associate the Prince of Peace with a war of aggression.

“Ron has the courage to say what he thinks”

So did Lenin and Mao.  I am by no means equating Dr Ron Paul - who, in opinion seems to be a good-hearted and honourable man - with Lenin and Mao.  But there is no virtue per se in “saying what you think”.  And the very fact that candour - a quality (but not necessarily a virtue) which Ron Paul has - is now widely mistaken for “virtue” by so many Americans, is evidence of how corrupt public discourse has become in America.

Candour is not always a virtue, nor is candour always honourable.  In fact, one of the qualities of a real Gentleman is that he is not always totally candid.

In his own defense - Huckabee said “if you play it backwards, you can hear ‘Paul is dead’.

Sarcasm? Or perhaps a Fruedian slip, you decide.

So far the media at least are focussing on attacking Huckabee not Paul.  I honestly don’t think that there are a lot of Huckabee/Ron Paul fence sitters.  Huckabee voters are disenchanted Giulliani/Romney supporters.  Ron Paul is creating his support literally out of thin air by getting people who have never taken part in the political process before.  His appeal is to a more intelligent and informed individual who sees the threat from our current government.  What Paul did that was cagey is he quoted someone else in making his comment. A smart political ploy even though he was fatigued and probably would rather have not said it. If any attention is focused on Dr. Paul over this it will be an opportunity for him to inform people of his own Christianity and draw more support.  More important than courting Christian voters Ron Paul is appealing to traditional Catholics like myself who feel completely unrepresented in the political arena.

Scott, one quick question.  You mentioned that Ron Paul should have attacked the notion of Christians fighting a war of aggresion in Iraq and you think that would not alienate Huckabees Christian militants?  When Huckabees supporters will switch to Ron Paul is when they are faced with the alternative of secular atheism presented by the Democratic Party.

@C Bowen:

“I’d argue that the calculus is Rightists to “Christian Republicans” of a nationalist bent who watch Fox News, rather than Leftists--or do I repeat myself? ”

Nice dodge.  You were the one who said that this was about winning “props from the Left,” and, on that basis, you thought it was a strategic move.  So I call you on the number of leftists who will vote in the Republican primary, and you change the argument.

@C Bowen:

“Further, let’s indeed argue if competing for the war-apologist vote is ‘important.’ Ask Tom Tancredo’s team how they are doing in Iowa.”

Where have I suggested that Paul should be attempting to compete for the “war apologist vote”?  I’ve suggested that he needs the votes of Christians.  If you want to say that “Christian” is a synonym for “war apologist,” then say it.  But don’t put words in my mouth.

And @ Mr Higdon, a gentleman toward whom I have never expressed any personal animosity or discourtesy on this forum (and so, Mr Higdon, I think your above comment to me was unfairly worded):

“I hope you are feeling very safe in Australia, John.”

...I do, but my reason for emigrating to Australia had more to do with personal connections in Australia than with wanting to feel ‘safe’”. 

“Here in the US you can get arrested for wearing an anti-war t-shirt at a Bush rally, but with your uncanny insight, you’ve identified the real menace - the Ron Paul “Red Guard”.  Who knew?”

...I didn’t say there was a “Ron Paul Red Guard.” I pointed out that the behaviour of many of his supporters resembles that of Mao’s Red Guards, because (sorry, Steve Sailer and Jared Taylor and other “racial realists") - well, being “White” has never been a reliable guarantee against being a barbarian.  The history of our ancestors in Western Europe from circa 300-1100 AD ought to be proof of that, not to mention the coda of what happened in Nazified Europe in the 1940s.

“You’ve previously advised us that Stalin was not a Communist; now you’re telling us who really is.”

...Mr Higdon, what the hell are you talking about?  I didn’t say anyone was “really” a Communist.  In fact, I believe almost NO ONE has EVER been a Communist, except for a handful of intellectual wankers.  Please withdraw those words that you put in my mouth.

“Just a few days ago, I attended a meeting of Ron Paul supporters, a group of average middle class people, at the apartment of a retired psychiatrist.”

...so far so bad, because most of the people who ended up either supporting or cooperating with the Nazi Party were all too “normal” and “respectable.”

“Nobody was in uniform”

...neither was Lenin in 1917, or at any time.  Actually, coming from a military family tradition I tend to have great respect for men in military uniform.

“we snacked on cheese and sipped wine”

...so what?  So did Goering, and Charles De Gaulle (a hero whose name I mention with respectful humility.) Cheese and wine are morally neutral, come on.

“and planned for the Texas primary.  Yes, there was one young fellow there who was a 9/11 “truther” and he and I had a vigorous but friendly debate.  It certainly didn’t feel like a Red Guard meeting”

...I’m sure it didn’t, and I don’t believe that you, or most Ron Paul supporters on THIS site, are potential anarchists or criminals.  But that doesn’t mean that many of Ron Paul’s supporters ARE potentially anarchic and potentially violent.

“but I guess you see things more clearly from Australia.”

...Mr Higdon, let me remind you that I’m not exactly untraveled.  I’ve spent many years in former and current Communist states, far, far away from the comforts and civic and political courtesies of the West.  Please don’t imply that I’m naive about the potentials that ALL men of ALL nations have for political violence, unless and until you’ve spent around a quarter of your life living in anarchic, politically violent, politically psychotic nations as I have done.

That said, Mr Higdon, you still have my personal respect, and I hope that your implied insult to my intelligence was just a temporary lapse.  You still have a few drinks coming from me, if we ever meet, as long as you agree on our continuing mutual respect.

@M Nucci:

“Scott, one quick question.  You mentioned that Ron Paul should have attacked the notion of Christians fighting a war of aggresion in Iraq and you think that would not alienate Huckabees Christian militants? ”

[BANGING HEAD ON DESK]

Of course!  It would alienate people who weren’t going to vote for him anyway.  What I’m talking about are Christians who would consider voting for Ron Paul.  This remark did nothing to attract them, and possibly something to alienate them.

“I saw that Dr.Paul found a way to get on Drudge and somehow be on the same side of the anti-Huck forces on the Right, whilst getting props from the Left.”

That is what I wrote, two points for the right and one point for the Left, but you only saw the point for the Left?

Paul is on the same side of Donahue who takes marching orders from Heritage which like it or not (and I don’t) is on the Right.  Drudge is also generally considered ‘Right’ in our fallen times.

Catholics in particular should be aware of that anti-papist tactics of Huck’s minions.

As noted with quotation marks, “Christian Republican” like it or not, is an apologist for war mongering.  Which label do would you rather self-identify with: Christian Republican or Christian conservative?

@C Bowen:

“Catholics in particular should be aware of that anti-papist tactics of Huck’s minions.”

Of course.  I watched the tactics that the Huckabee campaign used against Brownback.  I can’t say that played into my decision not to support Huckabee (I’d already decided long before to support Ron Paul), but I certainly didn’t care for those tactics.

But again, what is wrong with you people?  Are you incapable of following an argument?  Saying that Ron Paul made a mistake is not saying, “I support Huckabee.” I don’t.  Period.  I support Ron Paul.  Period.  The fact that I acknowledge that Paul is human, and that he made a mistake here, is not tantamount to endorsing Huckabee.

“Which label do would you rather self-identify with: Christian Republican or Christian conservative?”

I’m a Catholic.  Full Stop.

There are some on this thread who forget that Ron’s
message is much larger than himself. His base of
supporters have “found him” as Ron said in a
recent interview.
His comment about Hucksters add was the right response
to the right question at the right time.
It may well be the defining moment in his campaign.
My guess is that the media will ignore it for this very
reason.
Ron’s comment calls to attention the very phenomena we
are witnessing in America today which is the rise of
legalistic moralizers who claim a purpose and cause above
the law.
They need to be stopped dead in their tracks.
Ron can do it, with our help and support.

@Scott:

“But see--this is modern politics.  If you criticize even a single mistake by a candidate that you support, the true believers immediately call you a traitor and accuse you of going over to the other side.”

Absolutely, Scott. This is one of the defining characteristics of fanatics and ideologues, particularly libertarians and neocons. No deviationism! No defeatism!

In answering the query about whether you are a Christian Republican or Christian conservative, you also echo our parish priest, who says: “I’m not a liberal, I’m not a conservative, I’m a Catholic.”

Scott,

In that what Ron said about Huckabee was a mistake you are correct.  But then would it not be considered political suicide to oppose the military industrial complex, advocate the end of the IRS, Federal Reserve, and numerous other institutions that we have become conditioned to believe that we cannot do without? Ron Paul comes out and blatantly supports these positions and many others that scare the hell out of the establishment and numerous sheep as well. The end result is that his support continues to grow at a record clip.  His whole appeal is not playing it safe.  The end result is that there are a slew of candidates who are struggling to explain to you why or how they are different from the next guy and still no one can tell the difference.  Then there is Ron Paul who immediately stands appart from the pack.  No talking points, no script, just honest truth.

I have long felt the best and last line of defense against a fascist ascendancy
is not in our system of our procedural liberalism, but in the active faith of
so many Americans. Should that line break and it’s wearing very thin, then alll the
electoral calculations and tortured rationalizations offered in defense of
Paul’s comment will be remembered only with bitter irony.

“Should ever that taming talisman break--the Cross--then will come roaring back the wild madness of the ancient warriors, with all their insane, Berserker rage, of whom our Nordic poets speak and sing. That talisman is now already crumbling, and the day is not far off when it shall break apart entirely. On that day, the old stone gods will rise from their long forgotten wreckage and rub from their eyes the dust of a thousand years’ sleep.’ H. Heine

I have long felt the best and last line of defense against a fascist ascendancy
is not our system of our procedural liberalism, but in the active faith of
many Americans. Should that very thin line break, the electoral
calculations and tortured rationalizations offered in defense of
Paul’s comment will be remembered only with bitter irony.

“Should ever that taming talisman break--the Cross--then will
come roaring back the wild madness of the ancient warriors,
with all their insane, Berserker rage, of whom our Nordic
poets speak and sing. That talisman is now already crumbling,
and the day is not far off when it shall break apart entirely.
On that day, the old stone gods will rise from their long forgotten
wreckage and rub from their eyes the dust of a thousand years’ sleep.
At long last leaping to life, Thor with his giant hammer will crush the
gothic cathedrals… No, laugh not at the visionary who knows that in
the realm of phenomena comes soon the revolution that has already
taken place in the realm of spirit. For thought goes before deed as
lightning before thunder. There will be played in Germany a play
compared to which the French Revolution was but an innocent idyll.”
Heinrich Heine

The best and last line of defense against a fascist ascendancy is not our system of our procedural liberalism, but in the active faith of
many Americans. Should that very thin line break, the electoral calculations and tortured rationalizations offered in defense of
Paul’s comment will be remembered only with bitter irony.

“Should ever that taming talisman break--the Cross--then will come roaring back the wild madness of the ancient warriors,
with all their insane, Berserker rage, of whom our Nordic poets speak and sing. That talisman is now already crumbling,
and the day is not far off when it shall break apart entirely. On that day, the old stone gods will rise from their long forgotten
wreckage and rub from their eyes the dust of a thousand years’ sleep. At long last leaping to life, Thor with his giant hammer will crush the
gothic cathedrals… No, laugh not at the visionary who knows that in the realm of phenomena comes soon the revolution that has already
taken place in the realm of spirit. For thought goes before deed as lightning before thunder. There will be played in Germany a play
compared to which the French Revolution was but an innocent idyll.”
Heinrich Heine

The best and last line of defense agaisnt a fascist ascendancy in this country
is the active faith of many Americans and not our systesm of procedural rights.
Should that very thin line break, all the tortured rationalizatiosn offered in
support of Paul’s comments will be remembered only in bitter irony.

But again, what is wrong with you people?  Are you incapable of following an argument

America exists in a binary political world. Period. If you criticise candidate A it means you support candidate B.

The idea you could both support candidate A and offer analysis and criticism of something candidate A did is intolerable to the binary mind.

It is just the way it is today.

First I find it strange that Ron Paul would be quoting an Atheist. Sinclair Lewis was a rabid Atheist. For all Atheists---Christianity is Fascist! and there is an undercurrent of Atheism in Libertarianism.

There is NO such thing as Seperation of Church and State. The Fundamental paradigm of Western Culture and Western Civilization is “Throne and Altar” or “God and Country”.  This is the heart of Christendom.  America is not Western Culture or Western Civilization. That Ron Paul subconsciously attacks the core of Western Culture, assaults “God and Country” and equating that with Fascism--is totally Libertarian.

So I take it that St. Joan of Arc is a Fascist? The peasant girl that wore a Cross and carried the French Royal colors is a Fascist? That thousands of god-fearing Christian crusaders, wearing cross and bearing their national colors--are Fascists? That the Byzantine Empire that lasted over 1000 years is Fascist?  That Christendom, the Hapsburg Empire, is Fascist?  That the Czarist Government of Holy Mother Russia is Fascist?

It is obvious to me that millions of Americans, esp. Libertarians, and their leader, is so clueless about True Western Culture and Western Civilization---i.e. Christendom. Ron Paul true colors came out---hatred of Christendom.

Why was my comment deleted? What was wrong with it?