Hear Me Now, on WNYC 93.9 in New York

|

I'll be talking about a cat named Ron Paul.

NEXT: Hillary, Genius

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Paulbots have attacked. I can’t get on the site, very trafficy…

  2. He lights a Fortuna, takes a long slow drag and predicts, “187 posts.”

  3. Paul is so last week.
    It’s all about Hillbama ripping apart the corpse of the civil rights movement now.
    Next week…who knows? Evil corporations? Brown people? Transfat?

  4. Listening now. Brian Lehrer, the host is usually a little dismissive of Paul but he seems to be giving Matt an honest chance to explain about libertarians and Ron Paul.

    Good stuff.

  5. Guiliani getting pissed was great, but don’t forget how he was chuckling all the way through Dr. Paul’s answer.

    Who’s laughing now?

  6. Woo hoo! A pro-Paul caller rails against the North American Union! The “Amero” dollar!
    Like I’ve said before, they may be nut jobs, but at least they’re our nut jobs!

  7. Argh… it’s over now.

    The host wasted a lot of time taking calls from people instead of letting Matt speak.

    That is perhaps the first 20 minutes ever given to a serious discussion of Ron Paul on this NPR affiliate that I’ve heard though. So…

  8. I for one welcome our new back-bacon burrito eating overlords.

  9. Interesting that the word “newsletter” never once came up.

  10. Interesting that the word “newsletter” never once came up.

    I’ve noticed that the whole thing died pretty quickly, and I’m guessing that it’s mainly because Paul’s visibility outside of the internet is not enough to merit making a big stink of it…

  11. Yeah – that was a big surprise. So why do you think Lehrer took a pass on asking about the newsletters, Matt? Are we making a bigger deal of them than does the rest of the world?
    Or is Paul regarded as such a non-factor/curiosity that Lehrer figures they just don’t matter?

  12. Interesting that the word “newsletter” never once came up.

    Maybe that’s because the host doesn’t read Reason?

  13. I suspect that the real reason the newsletters didn’t come up as that reportors have become pretty jaded about stuff like this: McCain’s gook momenet, Huckabee and Hagee, etc. All are potential big stories but the media yawns. It is the (mostly pro-war) libertarians and Little Green Footballs Islamophobic holy warrior types who are most obsessed by the newsletters.

  14. Tak wins. Ron Paul is fading fast so media interest is on the possible winners. The Clinton-Obama tiff received much more attention.

  15. So why do you think Lehrer took a pass on asking about the newsletters, Matt?

    My guess is that he didn’t know about them, since he was otherwise keen in pointing out stuff like the Civil War, the “amero,” and so on.

  16. I think the reason that no one is publically attacking Ron Paul on race is that they would open themselves up to the same attacks. Like when Gore and Bush in 2000 decided not to make drugs an issue because it would just make them both look worse.

    How can McCain bring up race (history) with a straight face? I guess we could expect that regular media would bring it up on their own, but the same principle would apply. Could you image if we looked to all known racist statements made by people who remain affiliated with the major canidates?

    Look what is happening with Clinton. Bill, the first black president, is being questioned about his race credentials over nothing. I guess the replublicans are just trying to avoid this, which may explain why this issue was not directly raised by another contender but through TNR

  17. I think the reason that no one is publically attacking Ron Paul on race is that they would open themselves up to the same attacks.

    That could be. I think the explanation is simpler than that.

    Given that even Paul’s enemies acknowledge the newsletters are more likely a reflection of Paul’s incompetent management than his attitudes, there just isn’t a story here. Given that concession, they only thing that remains are some demands for the head of whoever did write the letters. Those may or may not be justified, but that information is apparently not going to be forthcoming. That pretty much leaves nothing to discuss…

  18. There are a different reasons to go on the attack. One, shore up your base. Depending on your political stripe, your core supporters want to hear what they want to hear. Two, deny voters to your opponent. It’s a bonus to swing a vote to you, but it’s almost as good just to turn voters off to an opponent and put those votes back into the field play. Three, you want to swing independents. There’s always a slice of voters available. If you don’t want higher negatives, you attack via proxy. Four, you attack to counter attacks. This can be preemptive strikes or “pre burn” attacks to limit exposure.

    To attack Paul makes no sense. He has a small slice of voters who are generally not going to be swayed. He doesn’t have the momentum or base to launch significant attacks. He’s trending downward and attacks only give the Paul candidacy credibility. Given Paul’s position, attacking him would be doing him a favor.

  19. TNR has alot more Newsletters released today, some clearly showing Paul wrote them and they are racist/bigoted and conspiratorial like the others.

    He should really thank the media for not tearing him to shreds by now, if he was a normal candidate he’d be run out of the country.

    Word is that more of this stuff will be released next week by another major beltway magazine.

  20. I think the reason to get the word on this out is to stop the Cult that he has made and to thwart his move to run 3rd party Constitution. Who would want him attached to their party with the dirt on him.

    when a candidate goes on Nutter Radio Shows routinely and placates to their views on wild conspiracy theories, engages in others openly like NAU, etc. and then has tons of Neo-nazi support and donations that he refuses to give back….its a HUGE RED FLAG.

    Watch Alex Jones trailer for his conspiracy DVD: ENDGAME
    and decide if any politician should give legitmacy to a thug fruitcake like Jones?

  21. I’ll give 2:1 odds that jp is a DONDERO!!! alias.

    The writing style is an exact match.

  22. jp: “Watch Alex Jones trailer for his conspiracy DVD: ENDGAME and decide if any politician should give legitmacy to a thug fruitcake like Jones?”

    Reminds me of David Boaz recent comments on teh Paul campaign: Libertarians stand for individualism, tolerance, and liberty (except for those we don’t like, of course).

  23. I don’t think so, matt. Dondero comments are replete (Replete! Hear me, Edward?) with spelling and grammatical errors — jp limited himself to just one (its).

  24. Make that two — no question mark after second sentence.

  25. jp,

    The latest TNR article is a little thin on meat and pretty long on sophomoric emotion. Would be nice if reason went over this stuff in an adult manner, like they did here.

  26. The newsletters have sort of become a non-issue because:

    1. Paul is not a threat to anyone now.

    2. It only gives Paul a chance to point out how the problem with race and the war on drugs. Ouch!

    BTR

  27. The second round of quotes posted by TNR are nothing too scandalous, unless you are an oversensitive urban leftie, liberaltarian or Rockefeller Republican.

    The main thing I didn’t like in Ron’s newsletters (I didn’t get every one – first saw it in ’87 or so as a teen) was the hyped up ‘impending crisis’ message, and of course the 1990-91 paleo era hard-right social conservatism (still not as bad as anything that ever came from the evangelical right). But just about any political newsletter / fundraising operation tries to convince you that The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die?, unless you send us money.

    The JBS-lite content wasn’t too bad either – after all, big banks do thrive off loaning money to the military-inudstrial complex. Or don’t they?

  28. An “impending crisis” always sells. I don’t understand the connections, but I ran into a bunch of Gary North disciples in the run up to Y2K. His Christian Reconstructionism is scary stuff. Apparently, North has/had ties to Ron Paul as does Lew Rockwell. Maybe at dinner they focus on von Mises and the gold standard rather than dwell on who’s saying grace? Another thing I have noticed is that these heavy hitters in the lunatic fringe all have newsletters and various sundry spin off businesses. It’s really a rather interesting subculture.

  29. Shocking Ali. They posted that at Huffer?

  30. Alex Jones peddles a conspiracy that the Bilderbergers are about to exterminate 2/3’s of the worlds population and enslave the planet. Of course the Bushies are part of this, he has Paul in the documentary. On his radio show they routienly talk about wild conspiracy theories, stuff like what was in Paul’s newsletters, anti-semitism, etc. Paul has gone on this nuts radio show countless times, and never tells them how wrong they are about 9/11 being an inside job, etc.

  31. calling MLK a gay pedophile and all is pretty bad, but the Soliticiation letter with all type of nutty conspiracy theories was the real kicker.

    the man has set back the legitimate freedom movement a generation.

  32. Was anybody else spewing out a bunch of money/market/corporate collapse nonsense in the 80s and 90s? I kept running into flakes all saying the same thing and it all sounded Rockwellish.

    One of the wackiest ones I had to endure was a mechanic, driving me to the METRO after I dropped off my truck to be serviced, who was going on and on about how corporations were all going to be replaced by small shops of 12 people. Nothing to help a fellow in a suit out in getting ahead of the impending implosion, of course. Just the predictions.

  33. So, I guess Reason isn’t going to be part of the Revolution, huh? That’s too bad. Matt, It’s a shame how you didn’t explain how debt based fiat currency and fractional reserve banking has stolen wealth from the poor/creditor class and how slavery IS antithetical to the Libertarian axiom of nonagression against anyones person or property and is not part of free market economics. Why are you not “all that interested” in protecting people from the government stealing people’s money? And you agree with Lehrer that the Fed “controls inflation”? How is that possible when the dollar buys SO much less than it did when the Fed was created in 1913? I suppose that every good on the market is that much better than it used to be, right? Bread, for instance, is 33 times better now than then. Sure it is.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.