Ron Paul, The John Birch Society, and Individual Liberty

Looks like another smear compaign. RP doesnt support everything the JBS stands for. Now paranoia about big brother Watching over us? Nahhh, they want a national id chip. Nothing much to worry about there lol.
Now let me ask all of you. Who is the only legit candidate up there that isnt controlled by a special interest group. Instead of nitpicking on a few lines RP made that arenta big deal, why arent you all up at arms about each candidate(except for Ron Paul) being supported by a special interest group? This is what frightens me here about these posts.

 

Ping,

It isn't a smear campaign, and this isn't a conspiracy. It's a guy asking a question, based on the candidate's putative support for individual freedom, when I saw something that troubled me in his support for a group I consider "Liberty's" antithesis.

I do not agree with RP's platform in most other ways, since I am, at least in many ways, what you would call a modern day liberal. At the heart of it, even if I agreed with him, it is delusional, in my mind, to believe he will have the kind of dismantling power in place that he would need to in order to fulfill his campaign statements. The President cannot eradicate by Presidential fiat, and Departments, big "D", cannot be gotten rid of on the President's authority. So, for this and many other reasons, I'm not in agreement with his platform.

I don't consider JBS and its program, and RP's support of same, "aren't a big deal." It's why I have posed the questions. I would reaffirm, if questions such as these are themselves frightening, what will happen when the actual business of being President is at hand?

Look, it seems to me to be a pretty clear thing.

Option one, one accepts that the John Birch Society is a society devoted to the preservation of "Liberty," as most people would define the word. As Guerilla said on this board,

If you believe this view to be an accurate appraisal of the JBS, then there isn't a problem with RP standing on "Freedom," and supporting the John Birch Society at the same time.

Option two, if you believe the John Birch Society is antithetical to the notion of Freedom, then RP's support of JBS along the line of "Freedom" is necessarily a disconnect.

 

Try to respond without distorting what is being said or questioned. The people I knew that followed JBS were paranoid about the gov't and the 'big brother' thinking.

If you want a national ID chip, then have at it. I won't play any part of it. I am against the gov't having so much control (removing freedoms) so don't try to push certain beliefs on me that don't exist in me.

I am neither paranoid about nor am I for a 'big brother' government, which in many ways ours has and is becoming. Most of those complaining here that are from the UK are laughable, since many liberals in the USA want to be like the UK, yet say that Bush is the one pushing for the 'big brother' type of system which is what the UK has.

Kind of like boiling frogs though, no one notices it coming until after when they ask how it got there. Each law passed is one more for the 'big brother' How often is a law removed from the law books? One law builds upon another, next it will be illegal for people of the Christian faith to actually speak about things in the bible because of choices other want to make, and they don't want anyone to say anything is wrong with it. Then you will find the same people crying about freedom of speech, yet trying to take that freedom from those they don't agree with.

Do you not see the hypocrisy of many of those speaking about 'freedom of speech'?

 

Debunked, the "large frame" for me is that JBS was founded on conspiracy theory, and that framework has led it, in its goals and methods, to pursue a program of "sniffing out" anything it deemed "non-American." In this, it was very much aligned with HUAC, and in this, its key members' formation of the Western Goals Foundation, the intelligence gathering and dissemination clearinghouse, is ideologically quite consistent. Pick an issue - say, civil rights - and see what JBS's behavior has been. Timely enough, how about Martin Luther King (we had a thread started about him, and the RP "MLK Free At Last Money Bomb" over the last couple of days). How about a call to restore the good old House Un-American Activities Committee? It seems pretty apparent to me, anyway.

From the JBS website itself:

(Emphasis mine - yep, let's all reinstate the good ole' HUAC, that bastion of American "Liberty").

And by the way, the Ron Paul quote is also posted on the JBS website - they do ascribe it to him, as well (Briant, the "Six Degrees Attack" issue):

http://www.jbs.org/node/1220

Let me just toss out a question, to all defenders of "Liberty." If I am a socialist - a member, say, of the Democratic Socialists of America. Am I un-American? What is to be done, with someone like myself? My family? My friends?

 

You have officially jumped the shark as far as I'm concerned. Ron Paul is about as polar opposite from Hitler as you are going to find. You want a candidate who is whipping the national ferver and intent on consolidating power? Look no further than Giuliani or McCain. They will inject steriods into Homeland Security's assault on civil liberties IMO.

I'm not a historian or intimately familiar with JBS, but it seems clear enough to me that RP is praising JBS's efforts to educate people about issues that he cares about. If you can point to specific examples where JBS violated people's rights and RP supported those efforts, then I'll buy your argument.

 

Bernard, I didn't compare your candidate to Hitler, but I understand why you might have read it that way and therefore be taken aback. I'd ask for a re-read, and see if you still feel as you do. I picked the most egregious example I could of how praise for one activity doesn't necessarily mean praiseworthiness for all. You took issue with my not addressing the first part of Mr. Paul's quote, and I indicated it wasn't that part that I took issue with, but the parts I indicated - the "emphasis mine" parts, that I find troubling. Saying JBS is a "great educator" can be true, while, in the same quote, saying JBS is "a beacon of liberty" can be (is, in my book) false. This was my point. I reprint it here, for convenience's sake:

I hope this helps.

I have shown examples, I believe, where JBS grossly violated the notion of "individual liberty." And so I remain troubled if the candidate holds them up as "beacons" of the same.

Edited to add: Debunked - I earlier missed your post regarding "dishonesty," just caught it on re-read. Sorry. We disagree on most things, when it comes to politics and religion, but no, I do not consider you "dishonest."

 

Debunked, they day they tell me that i cant speak from the bible is the day that im moving to another country. To me my faith comes first and it has had a huge impact on how i treat others. I would also like family values to be in the media more instead of all these political smear campaigns. Another thing i like about Ron paul is hes been married to teh same woman for 50 years. Nothing liberal about that.

 

I knew a few JBS people debunked and you have a good point lol, but then again they are but one group. Im sure i can even find one thing that
Obama and the kkk both believe in if i tried hard enough. My point is that americas the most powerful country in the world yet our economy is floundering. people living in dubai or singapore are enjoying the best standards of living. Why shouldnt we enjoy the same standard of living here.

 

Any thoughts as to what that might be?

 

I could just as easily ask if you are an American Muslim and one of Homeland Security's commission members deems you a terrorist, what politician is going to be fighting to protect your rights? Which threat is more real and which is more imagined?

I may be a bit thick, but I don't recall seeing where you posted an example of JBS violating anyone's liberty or rights.

 

At various points in our history, both are. American socialists of the 1950's-1960's, real or imagined, where the menace that many (wrongly, I believe) feel American Muslims are today. That JBS is an organization extant, today, calling for the resurrection of the House Un-American Activities Committee, is something I would say "Liberty Loving" people would find repulsive.

I don't consider you thick. I have made many posts establishing that the Western Goals Foundation was founded by the President and at least three top level leaders of the John Birch Society - Roy Cohn, John Rees, and Nelson Bunker Hunt. As I said, one may conclude whatever they wish from this fact. I would also call this "dishonest," since the JBS was only too happy to aid the FBI and other governmental agencies, so long as the investigation was in line with JBS's ideological bent:

http://www.publiceye.org/huntred/Hunt_For_Red_Menace.html

Finally, I have stated that as JBS was founded on the presumption of a global communist conspiracy - reaching to the highest levels of government (e.g., President Eisenhower), to the lowliest citizen - by definition, the right to Freedom of Association is something JBS devalues in the extreme. For instance, it has called for the renewal of HUAC. If you believe HUAC exemplies American liberty, you would conclude JBS does as well. If you don't, then you must conclude accordingly, regarding JBS.

 

northpointaiki, I think you are being a bit intellectually dishonest in your attempt to paint Ron Paul as someone who supports witch hunts and violations of individual rights. His voting record, his speeches on the house floor and all his writings over 30 years (available in the links I provided earlier) speak quite clearly to his strong and earnest defense of individual liberty against intrusions from government.

You seem troubled by an apparent inconsistency. I think it is only because you are choosing to read into it more than is there.

 

Or maybe he knows that there isnt more to it than that and is intentionally reading into it, only northpointtaki knows for sure

 

Bernard, you may think whatever you would like, of course. Again, I have provided answers to every question, and facts whenever asked. Trying to discern my intents behind posts, again, is dangerous water for all of us. I can "think" for instance, that Ping and Briant are blind loons, who wouldn't view (much less analyze) a fact if it were served with their happy hour beer. But that wouldn't do any of us much good. We have to go with facts.

I am aware of the congressman's stated stands - and, again, thank you for the additional links. Which, also again, is why I was, and remain, puzzled by his support for JBS. More broadly, I remain in strong disagreement with the statement:

 

Like i said earlier, people of all views can have a common point of aggreement . Just because he happens to agree with some of their points doesnt make him a supporter. The pope for instance said catholics and all religions should find common ground for agreement. Does this mean the pope supports redaical muslims or radical christians? Thats a big fat NO.

 

This thread is just a bait to get the smears more attention. That is why he bumped it multiple times after most everyone here saw it for what it was. The "Ron Paul is teh raciste" and these other smear threads are pathetic; and if you read those threads, you get a good education in how disingenuous the people attacking Ron Paul are.

 

Hahaha, yep, this is all just a massive onslaught from the forces of evil (in my case, a nefarious, left-leaning idealist), a smear campaign, nothing whatsoever to do with, oh, don't know, the actual questions of the thread itself.

Thanks, fellas (or ladies, as the case may be), really helped get to the heart of things.

 

Ron Paul can't save America. Ultimately no one can save a socialist republic.

People need to take personal responsibility for their own situations.

 

northpointaiki, all of the candidates from both sides are deeply flawed in some way. Its a matter of choosing the least bad.

 

Well after thinking about this thread and all that I read in it about JBS and Ron Paul along with those I knew involved in JBS. Maybe Ron Paul sees the aspect I have seen (limited but bear with me.) Maybe JBS does currently stand more for personal liberties, such as the people I knew would say. They were against the gov't taking away liberties and being involved in their lives, hence the big brother is out to get me thinking.

So, just my 2 cents, maybe what North is seeing just isn't there for Ron Paul and you know I am not just trying to defend RP, because I see the whole racist issue as just that.