The Coming aPaulcalypse
Suzanne Gamboa previews the Ron Paul Rally for the Republic with details on how Paul will be treated at the RNC (guess) and how Paul diehards are getting to the event.
Paul has no speaking role at the GOP convention. He said his staff made overtures to the party, but nothing came of its efforts.
Republican Party spokeswoman Joanna Burgos said she had to research whether Paul was invited to speak when asked about a convention role for Paul.
"Our focus is really on this side of the river," Burgos said. "We think there's enough excitement and energy on this side." McCain's campaign spokesman did not return a phone message.
Rally attendees can pay extra to attend an electoral boot camp. To save money, some are bunking outside the city.
Paul backers who aren't staying at the Minneapolis hotel or a budget motel planned to bunk in group cabins at Camp Ihduhapi on Lake Independence, park RVs or pitch tents at campgrounds or head to a Goodhue, Minn., dairy farm for Ronstock '08, an imitation of the 1960s Woodstock counterculture festival. Organizers there say a neighbor of the farm's owner is donating a cow to feed the flock.
Here's some of the combative final promotional material for the event (ostensibly written by the man, the doctor, the rEVOLutionary himself):
The situation our country faces is as dangerous as ever. A certain Democratic senator, recently passed over for the Republican vice-presidential nod, is likely to be our next secretary of state. Both major parties remain committed to militarism and reckless spending - and inflationism to fund it all.
At their convention the Democrats uttered barely a peep about the surveillance state, the police state, and the Bush administration's disastrous foreign policy. Needless to say, there was not a word about the Fed and what it's done to our economy. We can only imagine what the GOP Convention will have in store for us.
The Rally for the Republic is the first step in alerting our countrymen to these dangers, and holding out the message of freedom as the only remedy. We must resist the false choices the two major parties are giving us.
Here's the schedule:
12:30 - Intro: Tucker Carlson
12:40 - National Anthem: Matt Colvin
12:50 - Invocation: Barb Davis White
12:55 - Howard Phillips
1:10 - Doug Wead
1:30 - Tom Woods
1:50 - Grover Norquist
2:10 - Lew Rockwell
2:30 - Bill Kauffman
2:50 - Special Guest
3:10 - Bruce Fein
3:35 - Gov. Jesse Ventura
4:05 - John Tate‚ Campaign for Liberty Presentation
4:25 - Gov. Gary Johnson
5:00 - Aimee Allen
6:00 - Break
7:00 - Intro: Barry Goldwater Jr.
7:05 - Ron Paul
8:05 - Sara Evans
9:30 - End of Program
9:30 - Jimmie Vaughan After Party
Yes, Grover Norquist will share a green room with Lew Rockwell. The balance between the more nationalist, paleo Paul backers (Phillips, Woods) and the more media-friendly ones (Ventura, Johnson) is more or less 50-50. I'm not sure what I think about a whole hour of Aimee Allen. Also: If I read this correctly, Paul is speaking the same time that Rudy "Ask Me How Many Delegates I Won!" Giuliani will be grunting about 9/11 at the Xcel Center.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
If I was 15 years younger and single I would have gone to this to try to mobilize Paulistinians for a raid on the main convention.
The mainstream media will not even mention this event unless it turns into Chicago 68.
Fluffy,
You could call you republican insurgent group the PLF.
Paulistinian Liberation Front.
You could call you republican insurgent group the PLF.
Paulistinian Liberation Front.
But then it would splinter, with the new Paulistinian Liberation Alliance and the Paulistinian Liberation League shouting "splitters" and possibly yelling "In the name of Paul", etc. It's not worth it.
"But then it would splinter, with the new Paulistinian Liberation Alliance and the Paulistinian Liberation League shouting "splitters" and possibly yelling "In the name of Paul", etc. It's not worth it."
Yeah, the PLF are a bunch of sell outs. I'm backing the PLO(Paulistinian Liberation Organization).
Its bad enough we are hosting the RNC but now we have the Ron Paul nut cases. Wonder if its too late to book a trip out of here next week....
See, you can't force an Operation Chaos. You can't scheme to make it happen. It just has to come about organically.
Will the 9/11 truthers be there? What about Westboro Baptist?
If your gathering can't attract a Fred Phelps protest, you need to pack it in.
Heck, Westboro Baptist once picked my city's high school graduation ceremony.
oh goody...neo-Confederates like Tom Woods and Llewellyn are just who we need to prove how pro-liberty we are.
where's the speaking slot for the "biologist" who told Paul that blacks are incredibly fleet of foot?
"Heck, Westboro Baptist once picked my city's high school graduation ceremony."
Wow. What did your high school do to draw his ire? Did it have a Gay-Straight Alliance or something?
Oh, I forgot it's in Mass. It was probably the gay marriage thing there.
Now that I've had time to think on it, the only state Palin can really put out of play is Montana.
BDB,
Gay-straight alliances. They picketed Lexington and Lowell. In both places, they were met with big counter-protests.
Slightly off-topic, is it time to declare the Barr campaign a failure in its stated mission to give the LP more visibility? The last 5 people to whom I suggested I would vote for him gave the same response: "Who?" (All were reasonably politically-aware people.)
So, the Howard Phillips who wrote this:
"Homosexuality and perversion have come out of the closet, and, instead of such corrupt conduct being officially condemned, it is instead being celebrated morning, noon, and night - on television screens and in living rooms all over America - pursuant to broadcast licenses granted by the FCC - with the approval and under the authority of the U.S. Congress.
advocating that the FCC needs to regulate "homosexual and perverted" content, is some kind of friend of liberty?
Here's the link on this crank: Speech to CWA.
Oh, and the same Tom Woods whose book ("The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History") was criticized by Ron Radosh, Cathy Young and Max Boot?
Being a confederate apologist is supposed to somehow help?
Throw the bums out. I don't want them near me anymore.
Slightly off-topic, is it time to declare the Barr campaign a failure in its stated mission to give the LP more visibility?
So, your very scientific survey leads you to declare Barr's campaign a failure...two and half months before the vote?
TAO do you think the Palin pick takes away votes from Barr?
BDB - initially, perhaps, but all it is going to take is a few anti-conservative remarks to come out of her mouth before the economic-conservatives and "friends to libertarian" ones walk away again.
I wish McCain had picked Lieberman. Watching the Republican party tear itself to shreds would've been a blast.
He wanted Lieberman, but he bended over for his Party and did what they wanted him to do--chose a lightweight who is all image and has a womb.
It is so cool to have Sara Evans and Jimmy Vaughn on the same bill with Ron Paul.
In case nobody noticed, Sara Evans is totally hot.
What about Westboro Baptist?
Dude, that's got dam harsh.
Got a friend in Tn that volunteers with her shotgun to help keep those bastards away from funerals. She'd take that comment of yours pretty personal.
TWC-
I didn't mean they would be a part of the Paul convention. I meant would they be protesting.
Just talked to No Star and he is on his way to that biker BBQ downtown in Moses Lake Wa.
He can actually walk and claims he'll be able to eat a cheeseburger.
He's got a leg brace to keep his knee straight and help heal the break but he can get about with a cane.
Click my name if you want to send him a couple bucks to help out with the bills.
Evans married a former U. of Alabama quarterback. That brands her forever as mediocre.
BDB, I'm very sorry, my mistake. I just read it wrong.
Let me buy you a drink. 🙂
where's the speaking slot for the "biologist" who told Paul that blacks are incredibly fleet of foot?
Of course we all know that blacks are not any faster than whites. Watching professional and Olympic sports confirms that they are equal to a tee in this regard.
It's alright TWC. I just find fringe protesters to be one of the more fascinating/entertaining spectacles of these political conventions, since everything inside the hall is scripted.
Obviously, it's not cool when they do it at private funerals.
along comes pinky, right on cue.
did it ever occur to pinky that there are vast reasons why black athletes dominate certain sports, but don't fare so well in other ones? Other than some nebulous "it's gotta be that extra muscle" bullshit?
Thought not.
This is like people who say basketball is a "black" sport, while forgetting that African countries are terrible at basketball while lily-white Argentina, Spain, and Lithuania are some of the best teams in the world.
BDB - I'd say the even bigger error that the racists that latch on to Paul make is thinking that "black" and "white" are somehow significant biological or physiological groups.
This Paul thing is supposedly getting C-Span coverage.
Hopefully that damn hurricane will not distract from the Rally for the Republic. Should be a great day.
The rally isn't the story here, Paul finally announcing what his long-term plans are (i.e., what the hell the "Campaign for Liberty" will actually do) is the story. That's what I'm waiting to hear.
Ron Paul not allowed to speak at the GOP convention!? WTF!? With all the votes he received (twice as many votes as Guiliani, who is gonna deliver the keynote.....?!)-And the energy and willingness of Paul's backers to contribute their money to the cause-And Paul was the most solidly free-market, limit=ed government candidate among them.
Contact your state GOP headquarters, the national GOP headquarters, and influential GOP candidates and tell them that Paul must be slated to speak at the convention.
(Disclosure-I'm a Republican who is active on behalf of certain GOP candidates running here in Colorado)
What's with the weird Lieberman callout at the front of an otherwise very general statement of why "the situation out country faces is as dangerous as ever"? Is it because he's a
Go fly a blimp.
As much will come of the RP event as this, and the solution to both is the same: get a brain and start going negative. Of course, in the case of libruhtarians they're going to have to put away the DnD and stop sewing their costumes first.
Waterhouse,
Of course not. It's cuz Lieberman is a big government liberal and a hyper-interventionist war hawk who it seems sees no end in the amount of money and lives that we should sacrifice on behalf of what he believes is good for the Israeli government-He's a politician with nary a redeeming quality.
Lieberman is somehow special in this regard? Where does that put Biden? And why not call out McCain for the same reason?
They should call Kucinich. He agrees with them more than he disagrees.
Barr's giving Libertarians plenty of "great" publicity. For example, now folks think it's libertarian to sue a feel-good preacher for not-inviting you to a private event held on private property. More power to lawyers! Let's solve all problems by lawsuit!! Go Barr!!! (sigh...)
JMR
JMR - there's so much to criticize the two parties about, and you make that kind of stretch?
Please. You would leap at the chance for a Barr Presidency (at least, I'd hope you would)...so why the need for self-flagellation?
The Angry Optimist,
Biden isn't close to being as pro-foreign intervention as Lieberman is. McCain is certainly assailable on that account.
But to his credit, McCain is far more fiscally conservative when it comes to the total government spending voted for. Lieberman is anything but a fiscal conservative.
McCain:
http://www.ntu.org/main/components/ratescongress/details_all_years.php3?senate_id=11
Lieberman:
http://www.ntu.org/main/components/ratescongress/details_all_years.php3?senate_id=21
Anti-Globalism :
They should call Kucinich. He agrees with them more than he disagrees.
But a huge difference on economic liberty. That's critical.
It's not a stretch to mock an exceptionally stupid (and campaign time/money/reputation wasting) lawsuit. It's my typical behavior, in fact.
And I no more owe Barr my vote than any other politician. Chuck Baldwin & that new Boston Tea Party party both have NOT funded stupid lawsuits, and if I'm casting another "the message is: fuck you" vote this time I might just vote for one of THEIR candidates instead of Barr, who keeps diluting that message with unlibertarian behaviors.
JMR
JMR - define "libertarian" for me.
And I would say the odds are resolutely against you being able to vote for the BTP. They're on like, ten state ballots.
Lew Rockwell? You gotta be fucking joking me. So now we have a guy, Ron Paul, who wrote extremely bigoted newsletters and the guy who claims he wrote the bigoted newsletters to cover Paul's ass participating in the same event. Are they gonna kick it off with the ceremonial burning of a cross?
"He wanted Lieberman, but he bended over for his Party and did what they wanted him to do--chose a lightweight who is all image and has a womb"
At least she can give birth to children. Obama doesn't even have that going for him.
It's a shame that I can't go. That has to be quite an entertaining freak fest.
I'm a huge Ron Paul supporter, but he has one serious flaw. He can't tell people to shove off. So he gets surrounded by nuts and wackos many of whom are deliberately destroying his reputation.
If it was just Ron Paul speaking (and Jimmy Vaughan playing), I might just go. But half of these people would have be walking out in disgust.
Good Lord. How about we drown them in bile? The last thing we need is more libertarian activism, especially by imperfect people. Pretty deliciously sad.
Oh no, Rockwell is going to be there. He is a neoconfederate, right? Wants to bring back slavery?
Yeah, right. Rockwell wants to bring back slavery. Exactly. That's exactly right.
Rockwell can be a huge asshole, but how fucking stupid are some of you people?
That's a somewhat wacked out lineup. But then the Ron Paul folk have always been a bit wacked out. Jesse Ventura? Do we really need to be giving space to 9/11 Troofers?
I long for a libertarian movement within the Republican party that is based on reason, rather than crazy conspiracy theories.
It's as if we're trying to peel the lunatic fringe away from the Democratic party. Good luck with that.
Dems loving a hurricane. Sick bastards.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrBus8ORR78&eurl=http://www.powerlineblog.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrBus8ORR78&eurl=http://www.powerlineblog.com/
.. glad to see that Gary Johnson will be there .. what a dream VP pick he would have been!!
.. Hobbit
Irrespective of all that, Sara Evans is still hot and has a couple of good tunes.
Jimmy Vaughn is not hot, and has lots of good tunes.
I'm with Fluff, I was a few years younger I'd be on a bus to Minnesota.
I know this chick in Fla who told me her old man is going. I didn't ask her why she wasn't.
It's a good weekend.
B
So now we have a guy, Ron Paul, who wrote extremely bigoted newsletters and the guy who claims he wrote the bigoted newsletters to cover Paul's ass. .
It's already been established that Ron Paul didn't write the questionable passages. If Lew Rockwell did write them, shame on him (BTW, I know for sure that Rockwell has seemed to make pretext for police brutality in a previous writing), but it doesn't follow that all his subsequent writings should be discounted-far from it. Much of his analysis is cogent.
It's already been established asserted that Ron Paul didn't write the questionable passages.
Fixed that for you.
Angry Optimist. Define "stretch" for me.
JMR
Where's my girl Karen Kwiatkowski?
Where's Bacevich?
Where's dat li'l ho Pat Buchanan?
Where's batshit Paul Craig Roberts?
etc., etc.,
If we want to oppose the War from the Right, we got to, you know, get on the donkey (as the song says)
What a hefty group of assholes in that list. I know my week wouldn't be complete without some douchebag saying "Two Planes don't bring down three buildings!"
I'm 21, so I'm at the age a lot of you older folks seemed you'd have to be to go, but I'll give you the main reasons why I'm not.
1. Sausage fest.
2. Near the RNC sausage fest (except for the GOP VP pick...hot.)
3. I don't get drunk off of other drunk people yelling about steel frame buildings.
4. I'm in an interracial relationship. OH NOES!
5. They'll be checking my weight against a duck when I don't drink from their punch bowl.
6. I can easily simulate the event at my local Ron Paul meetup group by yelling "CFR! Bilderberg! Federal Reserve!"
I would have totally been for Ron this election if he had thrown Rockwell under the bus for writing that stuff on par with Coulter saying women shouldn't vote because their vote swings democrat. If he doesn't endorse somebody I'll be pissed. All that energy from his campaign will be severely diminish if no one takes the banner on the national stage.
This is like people who say basketball is a "black" sport, while forgetting that African countries are terrible at basketball while lily-white Argentina, Spain, and Lithuania are some of the best teams in the world.
For years, basketball was a predominately Jewish sport. Think of Red Aurbach coming straight outta Brooklyn. I've seen references to articles people wrote explaining the biological traits that made "the Hebrew race" better basketball players.
Jim Treacher:
Fixed that for you.
You appear to be months behind the information curve.
Cosmoterian:
What a hefty group of assholes in that list.
To the contrary-Although I'm not familiar with a few of them, they're mostly scholars and honest enquirers after the truth-As are most certainly, Karen Kwiatkowski, Bacevich, Pat Buchanan, and Paul Craig Roberts.
man i bet you could pick up some hot ass pussy at this thing.
A good forensic pathologist (coroner) can tell from a skeleton whether someone was a negro or a caucasian...or a mongol. Seems pretty "physiologically significant" to me.
Give me a break, people. I'm sorry I wandered over here. I was captured by the tagline... Reason: Free minds and free markets? Judging by the comments of readers on here I think they should change the name of this publication to better fit the audience. How about: Irrationalism: Loyalist Jingoist Fascists and Mercantalism? Or maybe: Unreason: Closed Minds and World Socialism? Or even: Give me a Reason: Brainwashed Corporate Media Kool-Aid Drinkers and Corporatist Cartel Monopolies. Go ahead and wrap yourselves right in that flag after you're done wiping your asses with it.
Oh goodie, the racists and the lunatics have arrived. Color me shocked.
It's whatever. This thing will probably be a blast, as in, you can get high as fuck and listen to a bunch of awesome shit. Most likely kick it with some really cool people. If I lived within a state away there's no question about being there.
A good forensic pathologist (coroner) can tell from a skeleton whether someone was a negro or a caucasian...or a mongol
Show me a forensic anthropologist who uses this extremely outdated classification system and I'll show you a crank.
The fact that you just used the old "three races" classification system screams ignorance and stupidity.
TAO - What do you mean? I have it on good authority that the former pathologist for the state of Mississippi used that exact system!
Show me a forensic anthropologist who uses this extremely outdated classification system and I'll show you a crank.
The fact that you just used the old "three races" classification system screams ignorance and stupidity.
The only screaming that's going on around here is your hysterical name-calling. If you can calm your emotions for a moment, your reading comprehension might improve enough that you will notice I said pathologist and not anthropologist. If you don't know the difference, I suggest that possibly it is you, yourself who is "ignorant."
Furthermore, the fact that a classification system is an older one does not necessarily mean that it is an invalid one - it is more likely one that is not sufficient to a particular purpose.
he's hypershrill, blindingly obsessed with RP. he should just go to the convention, smoke a monster spliff, and enjoy himself for once in his life.
uh, I know the difference, idiot. I was correcting your improper use of terms.
I'm no more in the mood to argue science with someone as intellectually deficient as yourself than I would be to wrestle with a pig.
You appear to be months behind the information curve desperate attempts to salvage an already futile campaign.
Fixed that for you again.
Jim Treacher,
That one didn't quite work cuz it wouldn't be me saying that but that's ok. Anyway, it's the evidence that matters here and that evidence solidly indicates Dr Paul didn't write the questionable passages.
Here, enloy this fine vid from the Thompson Twins that I picked out spesh for you!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZU2yzp3xnk
Anyway, it's the evidence that matters here and that evidence solidly indicates Dr Paul didn't write the questionable passages.
Oh no! Someone called me a fascist! How did they know that's my only weakness! I'm melllllltiiiiiiing.
For me the question would be, are the Ron Paul "nut cases" worse than the regular Republicans who advocate.. hmm.. warfare in foreign countries?
Sorry, at least, the Paulistans are relatively peaceful and don't tend to start violence all over the place... In this, their body count is probably lower than McCains...
A good forensic pathologist (coroner) can tell from a skeleton whether someone was a negro or a caucasian...or a mongol
This is actually true. They can take a DNA sample.
Even without the DNA, there are plenty of clues a skeleton can have about the identity of its owner. There could be evidence that the person was stunted, had an expensive surgery, etc... Because certain "races" tend to have different access to healthcare and food, you can make a guess. Like a stunted skeleton would be more likely to come from a black person than a white one.
The chemical composition of the skeleton might also give clues as to where the person lived. I know that some scientists found a way to tell where someone is from by looking at their hair. It had something to do with the differences in the drinking water across regions. And of course, race strongly correlates with location.
So am I now a TAO-certified intellectually deficient racist?
Also, I'm not Just Another Racist.
Jim Treacher,
Nice one! You deserve to enloy this-just cuz she's so cute and it's a nice tune as well...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rz1RiIp-9mU
Jim Treacher,
Nice one! You deserve to enloy this-just cuz she's so cute and it's a nice tune as well...
Rob, that was almost as funny as [T]reason magazine.
Which reminds me. The Rockwellians LOVE to call it treason, and yet they claim to hate the state. Treason is treated as a crime of betrayal to the state however. Whoops, I guess being anti-state only applies if you are a part of the cult of personality.
There is no god but Paul, and Rockwell is his prophet.
Uh, apparently you don't know. A forensic pathologist is someone who deals with human
remains to identify the cause of death and to determine that they are in fact human.
Naturally he is also called upon to determine what sort of human the remains
are from. Yes, there is such a discipline as forensic "anthropology" and yes, that,
too, deals with the study of skeletal remains, although that field is more properly known as forensic osteology, I believe. The term anthropologist is more often used to refer to the broader field of anthropology, which largely is one of the social sciences.
But rather than quibble over terminology, why don't you address the point that I made above? Namely that there is enough "biological" or "physiological"
difference among the "races" (your word) to determine from morbid remains (skeletal) to which race an individual belonged. Contrary to what you aver, I'd say that constitutes "significance."
But of course, you'd rather not address the issue, because you aren't "in the mood."
You'd much rather make general statements and hope like hell that no one calls you
on them. Or if someone does, you just hurl a few insults and hope no one notices
that you skinned out of it all. Yet you call me intellectually deficient? Well I guess I wouldn't want to argue science either,
if I couldn't offer anything more substantive than personal attacks. Hope you are
better at wrestling pigs.
BTW, the word "idiot" by which you addressed me? I believe that's a term from one
of those "outdated classification systems" you mentioned - psychologists no longer use that word.
I don't think your intellectual dishonesty, personal dishonor, and general disrespect
merit any further response from me - except maybe just to simply say "fuck you."
Aimee who?
Junter Klops,
Nice, cogent response, dude - though you may have wasted your time.
Also, I'm not Just Another Racist.
In my use of that "handle" I was using the term racist ironicly. I'm no more a racist than anyone else around here.
Just another...Junter actually smacked down your outdated tripe with a real answer.
and "fuck you" too...I'm not the racist classifying people as Negroid, Mongoloid and Caucasiod. Go dog-whistle that shit elsewhere.
although that field is more properly known as forensic osteology, I believe.
given google a workout, are ya kid? Or am I to believe that you just "read that somewhere" and knew it? Was the little aside of ",I believe" supposed to make that little spectacle more believable?
did it ever occur to pinky that there are vast reasons why black athletes dominate certain sports, but don't fare so well in other ones?
Yes, it did. Black athletes tend to dominate in sports - and in positions within those sports - which require speed and jumping ability. I know it's considered unspeakably racist to say this, but it's pretty obvious to anyone with common sense. Why are there no white cornerbacks in the NFL but many white linemen? Because whites don't generally possess the speed of blacks but they do okay on bulkiness. Why are almost all running backs black?
Why do whites still dominate the quarterback position - while almost all black quarterbacks are, gulp, running quarterbacks?
I see that Ron Paul may have another "ghostwriter issue" according to todays Washington post that claims Tom Woods wrote his best seller.
Hm. This thread brings to mind something that Robert Simmons once wrote: "Ridicule is the first and last argument of fools." Seems especially fitting here. 😉
Where/when/how can we tune in?? Will there be TV coverage?