Thursday, December 22, 2011

MSNBC's Epic Failure

First, Fox did it. Not just Fox, but Sean Hannity:-

Then CNN challenged, and things got shirty:-

Hannity mentions the Ron Paul newsletters. He expresses disbelief that Paul says he doesn't know what's even in them. Sean Hannity, an avowed Republican, who never deviates from lockstep, actually questions the fact that Ron Paul, a Republican Presidential candidate, could be openly racist.

Gloria Borger of CNN actually confronted Paul, himself, about these letters - the end result of which was Paul refusing to be interviewed, ultimately, and leaving after offering the opinion that the letters were, themselves, irrelevant, but not before Paul had gone into a cross between meltdown and a hissy fit, accusing Borger (and people like her) of exaggerating the importance of letters which are clearly racist in general.

And now, even Eric Erickson is remonstrating about Ron Paul's writings:-

If you’ve been under a rock somewhere recently you may not know that Ron Paul published a bunch of crazy, racist newsletters in the late 80′s and early 90′s.

Ron Paul, ten years ago, took responsibility for the content, even admitted at one point that he had written some of them.

Today, Ron Paul claims he knew nothing about them even though they generated around a million dollars in income for him.

The newsletters were the “Ron Paul” newsletters and each was written in the first person as if from Ron Paul, without an author’s byline, conveying that the views expressed were Ron Paul’s.

No one doubts that someone other than Ron Paul wrote them, but they were written as if they were from Paul and he profited handsomely and at one point took responsibility for writing some of them himself.

One of the newsletters claimed that gays were going to donate blood en masse in hopes of infecting the American blood supply with AIDS.

Let’s presume Ron Paul did not write that.

But I know many Ron Paul supporters, including some in my church, who cast aspersions on Barack Obama for attending Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church for 20 years. They don’t believe Barack Obama didn’t know Rev. Wright believed the CIA invented AIDS to kill black men. They will give Ron Paul a pass, but they will not give Barack Obama a pass.


I fail to see how Ron Paul’s eponymous newsletter written in the first person as if from Ron Paul claiming gays intended to infect other Americans with AIDS through compromising our blood supply is any different from Reverend Wright claiming the CIA invented AIDS to kill black men.

If you know all these things about Ron Paul, and know he was perfectly fine with Neo-Nazis raising money for his campaign in 2008, and know he was perfectly fine going on Iranian national television to claim Israel keeps concentration camps wherein it routinely kills Palestinians, and you still intend to vote for him, I don’t really see that the Republican tent needs to be big enough to accommodate you.

Yes, I understand why the GOP is getting the heebiejeebies about Ron Paul. His foreign policy, such as it is, is more than slightly orthodox. He wants drugs and prostitution legalised. But his slash-and-burn domestic policy of paring the government to the size of a pea and reverting to the gold standard, of getting rid of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, of preaching the Gospel according to Ayn Rand, is the stuff-and-nonsense of the current Republican Party, dominated on Capitol Hill by the Tea Party variety.

Foreign policy apart, Hannity and Erickson are hand-in-glove with these compassionless ideals, and Erickson is also an employee of CNN; but these three media mouths - Hannity on Fox, Borger via the ineffectual Wolf Blitzer and Erickson on his widely-read conservative blog - all call out Ron Paul's racism - a racism which he doesn't actually deny, but won't discuss.

All the while these Rightwingers are whingeing about Paul's racism, this is what we hear from MSNBC on the subject:-

In fact, Rachel Maddow speaks of Paul's heroism in the face of being repudiated by Fox News, with a facial expression most people reserve for a warmly-loved, elderly uncle, whilst Chris Hayes is so orgasmically charged in talking about Paul, you wonder why a dark splotch doesn't form and spread across the front of his trousers.

Well, if Maddow, Hayes and the likes of Katrina vanden Heuvel (who helped to hand the election of 2000 to George Bush) are happy to ignore the fact that the man, who wants to legalise pot, disengage America from the rest of the world and end the fed, also doesn't have any qualms about pallin' around with neo-Nazis and neo-Confederates, if they'd rather share a podium with Stormfront instead of a Blue Dog politico, if it serves their ideal to ignore Ron Paul's racist associations, his own racism and the fact that Chris Matthews of MSNBC and Ms Maddow, herself, have called both father's and son's bluff about their racism, carefully couched as "property rights" concerns, then maybe there really isn't a proper place for them inside the Democratic big tent, or, indeed, the Left.

As someone said recently, anyone saying they're a liberal, who's thinking about Ron Paul in a positive sort of way, isn't really a liberal - especially if they're willing to overlook these pejorative Epistles of St Paul.

1 comment:

  1. What did you expect from Maddow who hosted Pat Buchanan on her show many times and referred to him as 'Uncle Pat'? Somehow I bet if Ron Paul starting talking mess about gay people THEN she'd give him the side-eye.