Why is Ron Paul Struggling to be Understood? by EJ Moosa
(libertarian)
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Watching Meet the Press with Tim Russert today with his guest Ron Paul was a frustrating event for me. Why is it that I can understand the concepts and issues as Ron Paul presents them and Tim Russert cannot? Is it part of the strategy against Ron Paul to just act ignorant? Take a moment and read the following dialogue:
MR. RUSSERT: You say you're a strict constructionist of the Constitution, and yet you want to amend the Constitution to say that children born here should not automatically be U.S. citizens.
REP. PAUL: Well, amending the Constitution is constitutional. What's a--what's the contradiction there?
MR. RUSSERT: So in the Constitution as written, you want to amend?
REP. PAUL: Well, that's constitutional, to do it. Besides, it was the 14th Amendment. It wasn't in the original Constitution. And there's a, there's a confusion on interpretation. In the early years, it was never interpreted that way, and it's still confusing because people--individuals are supposed to have birthright citizenship if they're under the jurisdiction of the government. And somebody who illegally comes in this country as a drug dealer, is he under the jurisdiction and their children deserve citizenship? I think it's awfully, awfully confusing, and, and I, I--matter of fact, I have a bill to change that as well as a Constitutional amendment to clarify it.
Mr. Russert does not even appear to understand that it is constitutional to amend the constitution. Because he does not grasp this rather simple notion, he tried to corner Rep. Paul and paint him as not actually being a strict constructionist of the Constitution. Russert's "yet" makes that painstakingly clear. Paul does his bit to reeducate him on this topic, as he had to do on most every other topic discussed.
Russert is well educated, well versed, and interacts with national and world figures on a weekly basis. If he has difficulty grasping the topics that he brings up, and cannot converse coherently on the topics, then are we not in trouble as a nation? A man with the audience Russert has each week should have a better understanding of the subject matter.
How can we get a clear message across when the words used to do so have different meanings for so many people? "Freedom" does not mean what it once did. "Liberty" does not. "Republican" does not. Even "is" does not. Our language has been hijacked.
I feel I am living in the book '1984' by George Orwell. The meaning of words and phrases within our language has been so bastardized that we are no longer able to communicate important concepts. That is a dangerous place to be.
As George Orwell wrote at the end of Chapter 1 in 1984:
"War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength"
I am only now beginning to recognize how weak we who are not ignorant have become. Weak because we are so outnumbered by the ignorant, who cannot even realistically understand what we are saying.
I have seen polls where 49% of those polled said under no circumstance would they vote for Paul. How ignorant they must be to not realize they are also saying that they are against the Constitution, against freedom, and for big government if they are against Paul.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 26
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of EJ Moosa only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
EJ Moosa 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.
Posted By: Kevin Fitzroy
Date: 2007-12-23 12:35:53
I've seen no such poll that returned a figure of 47% saying they would "under no circumstances" vote for Ron Paul. Preposturous! From where did you get this information?
I have included the link in the story, and will post it here as well. I am not saying I believe it. But if I believe the negative on Hillary in the same poll, do I discount the other data presented?
Posted By: Louis Nardozi
Date: 2007-12-23 14:25:27
Tim Russert is really something. He investigates OTHER people back to what they said 20 years ago, but does Mr. Russert disclose his OWN conflicts of interest? No, instead he silently plans his character assasination attempt. Well, you kind of have to expect that type of hatchet job from someone who in bed with the status quo. I did my OWN little fact checking expedition and found the advertisers for Meet The Press.
GE lists 824 items regarding defense contracts on their website for 2007. http://www.ge.com/search/index.jsp
Boeing lists 72,200 items regarding defense. http://tinyurl.com/2nm5y8
Fidelity Investments - tax and 401k services, need I say more?
Hummer - child company of AM General the company that makes all the HMMWV's for the Army
UBS - Another banking company, certainly they have nothing to fear from Dr. Paul, right?
Toyota - makes cars which are CURRENTLY cheaper to make in Japan (and then assemble here).
Aleve - you think Bayer Pharmaceuticals has a reason to fear Ron Paul - who wants to allow yound adults to opt out of SS and Medicare and is vehemently opposed to socialized medicine?
ABE - (shill for coal companies) do they have nothing to fear from Ron Paul's desire to deregulate nuclear power so we have safe, clean unlimited power?
CVS - A Pharmacy whose bread and butter is insurance and Medicare. Dr. Paul wants to remove the incentives for hospitals to overbill us.
Xerox - another defense contractor. Here's a link to their defense contracts of 2006. http://tinyurl.com/2wjzbb
MasterCard - Huge banking coop.
Why didn't Mr. Russert let us know that he had a HUGE conflict of interest BEFORE THIS SEGMENT AIRED? When half of your advertisers are in defense, the other half split between banking and Big Pharma doesn't that constitute NEWS? I mean, Mr. Russert dug back 20 years or more on Dr. Paul to try to find "dirt". Why not look in your own mirror? I find the FACT the Mr. Russert did NOT disclose this relationship highly disturbing.
Posted By: Louis Nardozi
Date: 2007-12-23 17:34:11
Hi Mike,
Â
I'm just speaking to Mr. Russert's motivation. If everyone knows it, it will help to better explain Mr. Russert's actions as a shill for the MIC, Big Pharma, and banks.
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
