Drudge: NY TIMES Sunday Preview: Ron Paul Supporters 'Wackos'...

[Carl_S]

I hate this crap:

Drudge, front page, left column:

link (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003614862)

Rather than quote the NYT article itself, Drudge quotes a horribly biased and inaccurate spin of the NYT article. I guess this is supposed to pass for journalism these days...

[swatmc]

Embrace it.

I am a "Ron Paul Wacko."

We all are. Because we know he is the only person for the job of President.

[swatmc]

"Among many other things, we learn from the article that Paul had never heard of "The Daily Show" until he was a guest and referred to the magazine GQ as "GTU." It also notes that he was the only congress member to vote against the Financial Antiterrorism Act and the a medal to honor Rosa Parks, among many others tallies."

That sounds like a pretty freakin weak attempt to discredit the good doctor.

Anyone agree?

[Mort]

"Among many other things, we learn from the article that Paul had never heard of "The Daily Show" until he was a guest and referred to the magazine GQ as "GTU." It also notes that he was the only congress member to vote against the Financial Antiterrorism Act and the a medal to honor Rosa Parks, among many others tallies."

That sounds like a pretty freakin weak attempt to discredit the good doctor.

Anyone agree?

Ya, it is weak. It is also bias that he only mentions the Rosa Parks statue which could lead people to assume he is racist. He was also again the Reagan statue.

[swatmc]

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
-Mahatma Gandhi

We are past the point where they ignore Dr. Paul. We are past the point where they laugh at Dr. Paul.

We are currently at the point where they "fight" Dr. Paul.

Should be fun.

[Carl_S]

My favorite:

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."

-Mark Twain

[FSP-Rebel]

OK, Drudge is a MSM wacko, so what's his point?

[BLS]

The only line that gets under my skin is this:

"Ron Paul will not be the next president of the United States."

I feel like writing that on my car with window markers.

[rpf2008]

Matt Drudge is an idiot and a terrible web master.

75% of his headlines are massively misleading and don't reflect the overall feel of an article.

He NEVER host his own images .. he ALWAYS hotlinks to imgs.yahoo.com

The guys is a douche bag and a tool. I've been watching his site for years.

[Oddball]

Thicker skins, gang....thicker skins.

[spacebetween]

So the NY Times is a liberal rag....

[micahnelson]

He hasn't divided the story link from the story regarding some old lady getting run over. Fantastic.

[FreedomLover]

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
-Mahatma Gandhi

We are past the point where they ignore Dr. Paul. We are past the point where they laugh at Dr. Paul.

We are currently at the point where they "fight" Dr. Paul.

Should be fun.

That's my view. They force you to wade through the bullshit, but when you find the truth, it's that much sweeter.

And those are the kind of people we want. People who arn't brainwashed yokels, people willing to think and research for themselves. A movement of truly educated patriots. :cool:

[Mort]

Ya, I saw that too. That Drudge didn't separate the sorry from the old lady getting run over. Very odd.

[swatmc]

I don't know about you guys but I get excited when I read nonsense like this.

Like when George Stephanlolous (however the hell you spell such a goofy name) said right to Ron Paul face that he wasn't going to win.

It is just going to make victory that much sweeter when we all watch Ron Paul being sworn in live on TV in January of 2009.

Right as Ron Paul says "So help me God." I'd like the camera to quickly cut to Matt Drudge and Georgy Stephananalpoolous sitting by themselves in a corner looking sad.

Ron Paul has the truth and the Constitution on his side. Not to mention a growing army of "wackos" that believe what he believes.

Just my 2 cents. We'll be fine.

[Dary]

Yup.

We are wackos.

I'm wacko for freedom.

I'm a wacko for peace.

I'm a wacko for the rule of (moral) law.

I'm a wacko for liberty, justice, and prosperity.

I'm a wacko for fairness, tolerance, and love.

Star Trek... not so much.

Now Battlestar Galactica, that's another story.

[micahnelson]

Ironic, I recently wrote an article about the Media getting it wrong

Ron Paul Support is a Conspiracy, claims National Media (http://www.micahnelson.com/?p=56)

[PatriotOne]

Seriously...how many more times are people going to hear or read that Ron Paul can't win before they start wondering why the hell people keep saying it?

They will all just start listening to him closer to find out why all the loser predictions and then they will be ours....muhahahahaha :D

[micahnelson]

I think we a missing a crucial point. WE ARE BEING FEATURED IN THE NEW YORK TIMES! WE ARE ON THE COVER OF DRUDGE!

and he put Wacko's in quotes. Its possible that he is pointing out the perceived bias against Ron Paul supporters. The NYT article isn't that bad, and it introduces people to Ron Paul.

[PatriotOne]

Ironic, I recently wrote an article about the Media getting it wrong

Ron Paul Support is a Conspiracy, claims National Media (http://www.micahnelson.com/?p=56)

Excellent :D !

[Johnnybags]

one Ron Paul is well up to the task to handle.

[Carl_S]

Just sent this to Drudge:


Re: Your Ron Paul "Wacko" headline.

Why don't you refer to the actual NYT article on Paul instead of some biased hit-piece?

Original NYT article is here: http://dissentradio.com/eg/rp-nyt.html

Your headline is greatly misleading.

[MsDoodahs]

Thicker skins, gang....thicker skins.

We're going to need them, this is only the beginning of the fight.

Remember who and what we are up against.

They will not go quietly, kiddos.

They'll get dirtier and dirtier as the days go by...

[DjLoTi]

I don't think they're going to be able to hold that assertion for long....

[Mort]

I'd be willing to bet Drudge will link to the actual NYT article once it is available. He won't link to some copy off some site he doesn't know. We'll see I guess.

[rpf2008]

He's already removed it.

[Cindy]

All the more we have to get the the S.P.A.M. charity drives taking off at all of his rallies.

Who in their right mind is going to dare, calling those organizing charity for childrens shelters whakos, once word of it gets out?

People love any cause that helps the children of America in need. When they learn what Pauls supporters are doing , organizing a Good Will Tour Campaign, anyone who wants to blasts his supporters will look like a complete Jackass!

[micahnelson]

Seeing the headline Inspired me:

http://www.micahnelson.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/continental-congress.jpg (http://www.micahnelson.com/?attachment_id=61)

[Mort]

He's already removed it.

Ya, we lost out to the woman hit by the cart. lol

[swatmc]

Drudge just totally wussed out.

He pulled it after it was up for like 20 minutes.

[swatmc]

Nice pic micahnelson!

[DeadheadForPaul]

Two things of note:

1.) It misspelled Barney Frank's name...how serious of a publication/organization can this be?

2.) It introduced Mr. Frank as "liberal" rather than "Democrat"

This is clearly a biased rag

The best thing is to ignore it and not give them hits

[michaelwise]

Drudge, Hanity, types are pissed off that their mud slinging is having little effect on growth of support for Ron Paul. Their power is diminished. I herd Hanity out an out lying about Ron Paul's position on amnesty today. Paul really pisses him off.

[micahnelson]

Hannity, you're an angry american!

[PatriotOne]

We're going to need them, this is only the beginning of the fight.

Remember who and what we are up against.

They will not go quietly, kiddos.

They'll get dirtier and dirtier as the days go by...


Amen. For those more sensitive RP supporter's, better put on the gloves and turn on the "Eye of the Tiger" music and start training for the battle ala Rocky style.

We are going to win but we are going to take a hell of a beating getting there :)

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e198/Yekt40/Rocky.jpg

[V-rod]

The people in Germany who were anti-Hitler were considered Wackos too!

[Kuldebar]

Well, just look to Waco to see what happens to "whackos".

[Slugg]

Amen. For those more sensitive RP supporter's, better put on the gloves and turn on the "Eye of the Tiger" music and start training for the battle ala Rocky style.

We are going to win but we are going to take a hell of a beating getting there :)

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e198/Yekt40/Rocky.jpg

Absolutely!!!!!

[Jennifer Reynolds]

Ya, it is weak. It is also bias that he only mentions the Rosa Parks statue which could lead people to assume he is racist. He was also again the Reagan statue.


He stood up in Congress, pulled out a hundred dollar bill and said, I will pay for this out of my own pocket if all of you will do the same, otherwise I cannot authorize taking the money from the American people to do this. No one stood up with him.

[Syren123]

I swear to God it's like dealing with an entire industry run by 7th graders.

[Syren123]

"Ron Paul will not be the next president of the United States."



Hmm....what was that headline?....."DEWEY BEATS TRUMAN"?

Counting your chickens again.

[Kuldebar]

He stood up in Congress, pulled out a hundred dollar bill and said, I will pay for this out of my own pocket if all of you will do the same, otherwise I cannot authorize taking the money from the American people to do this. No one stood up with him.


Not Yours To Give
Col. David Crockett
US Representative from Tennessee



One day in the House of Representatives a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:

"Mr. Speaker--I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has not the power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member on this floor knows it.

We have the right as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I ever heard that the government was in arrears to him.

"Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:

"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.

"The next summer, when it began to be time to think about election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but as I thought, rather coldly.

"I began: 'Well friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates and---

"Yes I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine, I shall not vote for you again."

"This was a sockdolger...I begged him tell me what was the matter.

"Well Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting you or wounding you.'

"I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest.

But an understanding of the constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the honest he is.'

" 'I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake. Though I live in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by fire in Georgetown. Is that true?

"Well my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just the same as I did.'

"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means.

What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he.

If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give at all; and as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. 'No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity.'

"'Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this country as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have Thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.'

"The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from necessity of giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.'

"'So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.'

"I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.'

"He laughingly replied; 'Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.'

"If I don't, said I, 'I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it.'

"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. 'This Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.

"'Well I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name."

"'My name is Bunce.'

"'Not Horatio Bunce?'

"'Yes

"'Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.'

"It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence, and for a heart brim-full and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him, before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

"At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.

"Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before."

"I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him - no, that is not the word - I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

"But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted - at least, they all knew me.

"In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

"Fellow-citizens - I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."

"I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

"And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.'

"He came up to the stand and said:

"Fellow-citizens - it affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.'

"He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.'

"I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.'

"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. "There is one thing which I will call your attention, "you remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men - men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased--a debt which could not be paid by money--and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $20,000 when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."

[jasonhlasvegas]

I am sorry but this is ridiculous. When did respect for our consitution and individual rights become a radical position?

[Wyurm]

Its ok, listen to people talk in general. You will find that the term "wacko" is usually used when talking about a view that the speaker doesn't understand, or more often doesn't like. So, they don't like us, we already know this. They prove it by insisting RP won't win, now I don't normally see that about longshot candidates. So, why is this line being used for RP? Especially just before Iowa? because they know he can win. Because they want you to give up and because they really don't want him to win the nomination. "They" refers to those who have money and power that would be threatened by RP's presidency.

What would help counter this? Well, a sane, well-known (did I mention sane?) celebrity would be of immense help. If RP had some star power behind him, it would create the effect of: "Well, so-and-so says RP is going to be a good president, and I trust so-and-so, so, I'll at least check out RP and find out if he's really a "wacko"." So either someone here needs to become an over-night (sane) celebrity, or we need to find one, nowish.

[Bergie Bergeron]

Fuck NRA, I'd rather have Barry Manilow.

[constituent]

The funny thing is that most people, whether they watch t.v. or not, have come to believe that nearly everything establishment is run by an army of whackos.

this is blowback for the ministry. the people were divided and misled through the clever use of propaganda implemented by the fascists who own the airwaves and direct government policy. in maintaining the guise of "competition" driving the media marketplace, cable newscasters have been blasting each other relentlessly for poor reporting and errors in judgement, people have turned them off even if they are still on. anymore 90% of people look to the ministry of truth to learn how not to feel.

when they want to think about something and form their own opinnion, they turn to the internet which sadly is increasingly dominated by ministry expats.

[hard@work]

The only attack they have against you is in marginilizing you. For every one of those you see, make a banner.

:)

[LibertyEagle]

I hate this crap:

Drudge, front page, left column:

link (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003614862)

Rather than quote the NYT article itself, Drudge quotes a horribly biased and inaccurate spin of the NYT article. I guess this is supposed to pass for journalism these days...

I don't see it on the front page.

[LibertyEagle]

The article closes with the author, Christopher Caldwell, attending a Ron Paul Meetup in Pasadena. The co-host, Connie Ruffley of United Republicans of California, admits she once was a member of the radical right John Birch Society and when she asks for a show of hands "quite a few" attendees reveal that they were or are members, too. She refers to Sen. Dianne Feinstein as "Fine-Swine" and attacks Israel, pleasing some while others "walked out."

Caldwell notes that the head of the Pasadena Meetup Group, Bill Dumas, sent a desperate letter to Paul headquarters: "We're in a difficult position of working on a campaign that draws supporters from laterally opposing points of view, and we have the added bonus of attracting every wacko fringe group in the country....We absolutely must focus on Ron's message only and put aside all other agendas, which anyone can save for the next 'Star Trek' convention or whatever."

Well, I think there's probably a lot of truth in here. What I'd like to know is what the heck Ms. Ruffley was doing pitching the JBS or talking about Israel, while leading a Ron Paul Meetup group. I would think the focus would be on DR. PAUL'S principles and stances on the issues. Not to mention trying to decide what they as a Meetup group could do to get him the Republican nomination!

Maybe this is what is called blowback. But, this time it is directed towards US.

[Scribbler de Stebbing]

The article closes with the author, Christopher Caldwell, attending a Ron Paul Meetup in Pasadena. The co-host, Connie Ruffley of United Republicans of California, admits she once was a member of the radical right John Birch Society and when she asks for a show of hands "quite a few" attendees reveal that they were or are members, too. She refers to Sen. Dianne Feinstein as "Fine-Swine" and attacks Israel, pleasing some while others "walked out."

I don't doubt that this happened. Please watch it people, especially when reporters are in the room. Better just to comport ourselves as ladies and gentlemen at all times, and we won't have to worry about it.

That meetup group just MORE than negated any good work they had done. Please don't be the one person that squanders the hard work of fifty other Ron Paul supporters by saying something unnecessary and in bad taste.

[Wendi]

Well, just look to Waco to see what happens to "whackos".
"Someone better buy some fire insurance." FBI Negotiator

Sure hope we don't need any of that ... :eek: