That Jamie Kirchick is such a scamp; one just can't keep up with him. While some of the adults are still cleaning up from his first dump on the Ron Paul, campaign, he's gone and done at least four more since.
In his latest, of today, Our Jamie throws a hissy at "Pat Buchanan's American Conservative magazine" for having the gall to endorse Ron Paul for the GOP nomination, after he told the libertarians and conservatives NOT to do that. For some reason, Jamie seems to take particular exception to this line:
Ron Paul has been a breath of fresh air in an otherwise desultory Republican campaign. Long may he run.
Oooh ... that Pat is such a bitch! And Jamie lets him know in no uncertain terms. "Respectable libertarians," he flounces, "like the writers at Reason magazine and the Cato Institute," want nothing to do with that "fringe presidential candidate and his works." (I guess that means Cato president and founder Edward H. Crane III, who just expressed his own preference for Paul, doesn't write there anymore.) He then tells poor Pat that it's over: "Endorsing him now, knowing what we know, puts one out of the bounds of intellectually acceptable debate" [stress added]. Then, just in case, Pat still doesn't get it, Jamie resorts to quoting ... himself:
As I wrote several weeks ago, "the only people still defending Ron Paul are the openly bigoted or the comically credulous."
No, no, Jamie; that's only twice. You have to say it three times before it becomes true.
It may come as a surprise to our drama queen, but some people do not have as high an opinion of his opinions as he does himself. Some libertarians do not care what this LINO, who Came Out as a libertarian only because he was not receiving sufficient head as a conservative, thinks is or is not "respectable" libertarianism.
Oh, and also: Some politically sophisticated adults, when trying to decide whom to support for President of the United States, do not normally consider 15-year old rants written by someone else the deal-breaker. To make that point, and thereby end this on a happier note, consider how the good editors of the Lima, Ohio, News dealt with the issue today in their article, "Freedom View: Ron Paul:"
If there is any candidate who in many ways comes closest to the libertarian values to which The Lima News' editorial pages are devoted, it is 10-term Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul, who has made more of a splash, drawn more votes and raised more money in the early primaries than almost anybody expected.[...]
Paul also allowed his name to be used on newsletters in the early 1990s that included questionable rhetoric about blacks and gays. He didn't write them, and he's no bigot, but he could have exercised better control.
He has been right from the beginning, however, on the most important issue of recent times, the ill-advised war in Iraq. Despite considerable abuse from other GOP candidates, he has not backed down on this key issue. He combines it with a thoroughgoing critique of U.S. foreign policy, making the case for a strong defense of the U.S. itself and a policy of nonintervention in the affairs of other countries, combined with free and open trade.
During his time in Congress, Paul promised not to vote for legislation or spending that, in his view, violated the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution was explicitly written to create a government of strictly limited powers and prerogatives.[...] Politicians with such firm principles don't come around that often.
©2008 George Dance, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Last modified: Tuesday, February 5, 2008
The views expressed in this article are those of George Dance only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. George Dance is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by George Dance of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
| More Articles By George Dance |
Reader Comments:
Posted By: exLP
Date: 2008-02-04 22:52:22
Let’s see. Ol Jamie is a terrible person for showing that Paul’s newletter, edited by Rockwell, expressed racist and anti-gay viewpoints. Mr. Dance disagrees and to prove his point makes snide remarks using anti-gay stereotypes as their foundation. This to prove the absence of prejudice.
So the expose is him being a “drama queen” having a “hissy fit”. Perhaps Mr. Dance would like to explain that blacks upset by Paul’s published racism are just “uppity niggers” as well. I find Mr. Dance’s appeal to anti-gay stereotypes personally offensive and disgusting but no doubt he has a career writing for Lew Rockwell. You prove Kirchick’s very point. Apparently the Paul campaign does appeal to bigot. Mr. Dance and his stereotypical views of gay people is a good example of that.
And the argument that Paul wasn’t paying attention doesn’t wash. Paul’s own wife and daughter were on the staff of the newsletter. Did they keep him in the dark as well? Or were they fraudulent employees collecting a salary but doing no work? Paul’s good buddy Lew Rockwell was the editor. He’s still Paul’s good buddy. Did Lew lie to Paul and keep him in the dark? And why can’t Paul name the author? Perhaps, it is because he never severed his links with the author at all.
Posted By: Logical Premise
Date: 2008-02-04 22:58:43
I find myself in the vastly amusing position of being a black man, who does not support Ron Paul or his positions or how he represented himself in this whole newsletter mess, who must now defend him.
Let's be blunt -- NO ONE listens to Kirchick. I'd get more intellectual repose from digging around in my own toilet. The man is a histronic, and most of what he says is quote-clipping crap.
NO one thinks Paul is a racist, most believe he should have openly disavowed the guy who wrote the crap. Kirchick seems to think he can dictate terms to people, and that's just.. complete and utter fail.
Please, we have had enough histronics from the Paul supporters, we don't need MORE.
Posted By: James Moore
Date: 2008-02-04 23:23:43
Jamie Kirchick is an ass, from all I've seen. He just tried to make a name for himself, and is disappointed with the results. Let the little prick whine, no one cares.
Posted By: George Dance
Date: 2008-02-05 10:33:55
exLP: "I find Mr. Dance’s appeal to anti-gay stereotypes personally offensive and disgusting[....] Apparently the Paul campaign does appeal to bigot. Mr. Dance and his stereotypical views of gay people is a good example of that."
Old news. Jamie already Outed me as a bigot, remember, without knowing that I existed or anything about me. How did he manage that? By stereotyping, of course; imagine that! He can't complain if I conform to the stereotype he's been busy constructing and demonizing.
You sure as hell can't expect me to intellectually deal with his beliefs, when he's just declared that my kind aren't "respectable" enough to be allowed into the "intellectual debate" in the first place.
Rather than intellectual debate, Jamie prefers name-calling and moralistic ranting. If that's what he wants, that's what he should have.