National Review's John Derbyshire: "Why I'm for Ron Paul"

[THEBIRD]

Another conservative understands why conservative voters are flocking to Ron Paul and how our government has become so bloated and cumbersome. Only Ron Paul would REALLY CUT government the way it needs to be cut.
Liberty! Liberty!
Why I’m for Ron Paul.

By John Derbyshire
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWIzYWI4NTBjYTc3NGE1OGEwYWMyZjE1NDZjOWVmMDQ=

You can waste a lot of time in my line of work, noodling around on Internet search engines to not much effect.
I got into one of these whirlpools a few months ago, at the time of the Scooter Libby conviction. The thing I couldn’t get past was Libby’s being the vice president’s chief of staff. Why (I wondered) does the vice president need a chief of staff? Or even a staff? Where is that in the Constitution? Yes, this is going to be a Ron Paul piece. Patience, please — I’ll get there.


--snip--


My touchstone in these matters is of course our late, great vice president, Calvin Coolidge. From Claude M. Fuess’s mesmerizing biography:


As Vice President of the United States, Coolidge occupied a position which paid him a salary of $12,000 a year. In addition to this, he was allowed his own automobile and chauffeur, his own secretary, page, and clerk, and his private telegraph operator. His chief duty was to preside over the Senate; and he was entitled to a room in the Senate office building but also to one in the Capitol, directly behind the Senate chamber. In the Senate proceedings he had no vote except in case of a tie. He was also ex officio President of the Smithsonian Institution. His actual duties, beyond these, were not numerous, and he had plenty of time to himself.


--snip--


Which brings us back to Ron Paul, and the appeal thereof. How on earth did we arrive at this point of vast, bloated, and secretive government, in which the wives of inconsequential federal officials (the office of the vice presidency used to be a byword for inconsequentiality — “bucket of warm p***,” etc.) have chiefs of staff, whose actual staffs and actual budgets are undiscoverable by a reasonably intelligent citizen?



--snip--


Paul rallies heave with voters waving placards and shouting “Liberty! Liberty!”

Are those supporters crazy, as some colleagues tell me?Perhaps they are, to be shouting for liberty in 2007, after decades of swelling federal power and arrogance, of proliferating taxes, rules, and interests, of gushing transfers of wealth to politically connected elites from working- and middle-class grunts, of the college and teacher-union scams, of the metastasizing tort-law rackets, of ever more numerous yet ever more clueless intelligence agencies, of open borders and visas for people who hate us, of widening cracks in our sense of nationhood (“Press one for English …”), of speech codes and race lobbies and judicial impositions.

If those people are crazy, though, I want to be crazy with them. I’m for liberty, too. That’s why I’m for Ron Paul. And why do we have 75,000 soldiers in Germany?

[DesertFox]

why do we have 75,000 soldiers in Germany? WWII.

[Seabee]

Liberty! Liberty! Hmm let's change that to French. Liberté! Liberté! Yup, that is what the incredulous masses were screaming in votre ancien Paris. Why am I comparing Paulinites to the members of the French Revolution. Because they share a common almost fanatical cry for individual liberty and are willing to do everything irrational to acquire it. Now I am in no way suggesting that the Paulinites would go around killing every intellectual, politician, or wealthy person around. But I am suggesting that they are unstable in their approach to gaining their wants.

[UnkHiram]

Off Hand, I would guess the reason he is suporting Ron Paul is brain Damage

[Elgalad]

Or it could be that he's a CINO. :smirky:

Hey, I'll attack the messenger, why not? :rotflmbo:


Here are just a few excerpts from Withasaltipedia's article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Derbyshire) on this feller..

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/5462/johnderbyshire2td2.jpg
(John Derbyshire, a Beautiful Mind. NOT John Cleese. No, Really!)

John Derbyshire (born June 3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_3), 1945 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1945)) is a British (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom)-born author who lives in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) and became a naturalized citizen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalized_citizen) in 2002. He is a columnist for the conservative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism) magazines National Review Online (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Review_Online) and New English Review (http://www.newenglishreview.org/). Derbyshire writes on a broad range of topics, including immigration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration), China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China), history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History), mathematics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics), culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture), politics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics), and race (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race).<sup id="_ref-0" class="reference">[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Derbyshire#_note-0)</sup><sup id="_ref-1" class="reference">[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Derbyshire#_note-1)</sup> Derbyshire graduated from University College London (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_College_London), where he studied mathematics. His wife is originally from China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China) and they have two children. While raised an Anglican (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican), he no longer considers himself a Christian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian) but rather a Mysterian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Mysterianism).<sup id="_ref-2" class="reference">[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Derbyshire#_note-2)</sup> Mysterian? who? whuh? :confused:

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/259/freakouteyesoj0.gif

Despite his oft-voiced opposition to illegal immigration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States), Derbyshire has admitted that he was an illegal immigrant himself in the U.S. before achieving legal residence and eventual citizenship (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship). He has even joked about his former illegal status, comparing himself to a "reformed drunk at a temperance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperance_movement) meeting."O, Rly.. :smirky:

http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/3570/potcallskettleblackon7.png

Wait, it just gets better.. :question:

Derbyshire has differed from his fellow writers at National Review on important subjects. For example, Derbyshire supported Michael Schiavo's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Schiavo) position in the Terri Schiavo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Schiavo) case, showed sympathy for class-warfare themes in movies such as Titanic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_%281997_film%29), argued that Pope John Paul II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_Paul_II) was totally unable to stop the secularization of the West, ridiculed George W. Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush)'s "itty-bitty tax cut, paid for by dumping a slew of federal debt on your children and grandchildren",<sup id="_ref-5" class="reference">[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Derbyshire#_note-5)</sup> has derided Bush in general for being too sure of his religious convictions and for his "rich-kid-ness",<sup id="_ref-6" class="reference">[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Derbyshire#_note-6)</sup> dismisses small-government conservatism as unlikely to ever take hold (although is not unsympathetic to it), has called for immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq) (but favored the invasion), opposes market reforms or any other changes in Social Security (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_%28United_States%29), defended Michael Jackson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jackson) as harmless, is pro-choice on abortion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion), supports euthanasia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia) in a fairly wide range of circumstances, and has suggested that he might (in a time of international crisis) vote for Hillary Clinton as president.Ouch! The Paulbots have certainly found a Powerful Conservative Voice to support their fuehrer candidate this time, we might as well just pack it in now. :sad:






















Or Not. :roar:


-Elgalad

[DoctorDoom]

I remember the Mysterians.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/DocDoom777/Entertainment/Mysterians.jpg

[jayson]

It may come as a shock to you, but the vast majority of Ron Paul supporters are regular folks.

That being said, the level of ignorance in the replies of this thread is astounding.

[DoctorDoom]

Not nearly as astounding as the level of ignorance in Derbyshire's drivel or the level of blissful cluelessness in Paulbots.

[DesertFox]

It may come as a shock to you, but the vast majority of Ron Paul supporters are regular folks. They are? Are you sure? How do you know? Is this just your opinion, or have you met the vast majority of Ron Paul supporters?

That being said, the level of ignorance in the replies of this thread is astounding. You're too easily astounded. Ignorance is the overriding condition of mankind, including you, O Great One.

[The_Elucidator]

Another conservative understands why conservative voters are flocking to Ron Paul and how our government has become so bloated and cumbersome. Only Ron Paul would REALLY CUT government the way it needs to be cut.


Not a chance, and to make that claim is just complete hyperbole.

[Elgalad]

It may come as a shock to you, but the vast majority of Ron Paul supporters are regular folks.

That has yet to be seen or demonstrated. :smirky:

That is of course, unless we just have a different definition of 'normalcy'..

Now see, I tend to agree with the Dictionary's version:

nor·mal http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/premium.gif http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnghttp://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2 Fnormal) /ˈnɔrhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngməl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[nawr-muhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective

<table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">1.</td><td valign="top">conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural. </td></tr></tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">2.</td><td valign="top">serving to establish a standard. </td></tr></tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">3.</td><td valign="top">Psychology. <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">a.</td><td valign="top">approximately average in any psychological trait, as intelligence, personality, or emotional adjustment. </td></tr></tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">b.</td><td valign="top">free from any mental disorder; sane.</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table>
But I guess you just have a different definition. Hey, it's still a free country, isn't it? :D

(er, as long as we don't ridicule your fearless leader, anyway..)

That being said, the level of ignorance in the replies of this thread is astounding.

:question:

Back to the dictionary again..

ig·no·rance http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/premium.gif http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2 Fignorance) (ĭg'nər-əns) Pronunciation Key (http://cache.lexico.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html)
n. The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed. <!--BOF_HEAD--><!--EOF_HEAD--><!--BOF_DEF-->
<!--EOF_DEF-->
Gonna have to disagree once again.. Not buying into the fantasies of your candidate is most certainly Not the same thing as being uninformed.

We know damned good and well who he is. :rolleyes:




-Elgalad

[THEBIRD]

So a writer has some off the wall beliefs.....Not unlike in 2004 when some gay groups came out in favor of GWB for the election.

[jayson]

They are? Are you sure? How do you know? Is this just your opinion, or have you met the vast majority of Ron Paul supporters?

I have met far more Ron Paul supporters in person than most if not all of the members on this board. Therefore, I think I have the best experience to say the vast majority of people who support Ron are regular folks.

As for Elgalad studiously looking up words in the dictionary, I think he made my point about the ignorance. Sadly, many people here in this thread choose to use isolated incidents as examples, then taking it further by assuming that we all are nuts. It's just not true.

But you all don't want to hear that. You would prefer to listen to exaggerations and slander just because it backs up your beliefs, whether or not it has any basis in reality. (Snarky "Getting lectured about reality by a Rupaul supporter" retort inbound in 4...3...2...)

It's no wonder this country is ripe for change.

[Naturalized-Texan]

We know damned good and well who he is. :rolleyes:

Yep! We know damned good and well who he is: Ron Paul is a traitor who is giving aid and comfort to our enemies during a war in which our very survival as a nation is at stake.

Ron Paul is ignorant of the dangers to our nation posed by international Islamofascist terrorists and, even worse, the Paulbots are either too ignorant to see those dangers or don't give a sh*t.

[Timberwolf]

ALL of the RP supporters I've met...face-to-face...are LOONS. Not a sane one in the bunch.

[DesertFox]

I have met far more Ron Paul supporters in person than most if not all of the members on this board. Therefore, I think I have the best experience to say the vast majority of people who support Ron are regular folks. I see. Move the goal posts. The question wasn't, "Do you have the best experience to say the vast majority of people who support Ron Paul are regular folks." That's the question you answered, but it isn't the question I ast.

But you all don't want to hear that. You would prefer to listen to exaggerations and slander just because it backs up your beliefs, whether or not it has any basis in reality. Darn. You caught us in the act. Reality is so... so ... so boring. And so is Ron Paul. Haven't you ever noticed that he's older'n dirt? Ugly, too. Flaky, too.

But you know what I think about Ron Paul supporters? I think you would prefer to listen to exaggerations and slander just because it backs up your beliefs, whether or not it has any basis in reality.

[Naturalized-Texan]

I haven't met any RP supporters in person. The one RP supporter I saw was in front of our local Valero station holding a Ron Paul sign and passing out Lyndon LaRouche literature.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Haven't you ever noticed that he's older'n dirt?
Hey! Watch that! :D He's 3 years younger than me.

[The_Elucidator]

Hey! Watch that! :D He's 3 years younger than me.

Which reminds me Tex; do you still have Noah's new address? :smirky:


I have met far more Ron Paul supporters in person than most if not all of the members on this board. Therefore, I think I have the best experience to say the vast majority of people who support Ron are regular folks.


I haven't met any Rupaul supporters here in the RGV with it having Mexicans and all; we know how his base feels about those "other" people... The local Hitler Youth Rally HQ was turned into a Taqueria years ago...