Hey Greenwald, after knowing what everyone else now knows about Ron Paul,

[trumad]

are you still saying he's not a fringe lunatic?

Here's a May, 2010 lonnnng piece he wrote where he tries to make the case that Paul is not a "fringe" lunatic.
http://www.salon.com/2010/05/28/crazy_10/singleton/#comments

Damn thing about Greenwald is I agree with a lot of what he says about other politicians in the piece---but I damn well disagree with his assessment of Paul.

I think Paul is about as Phony as they come on many of his issues, and there is certainly enough proof out there that proves he's a major FRINGE lunatic.

[TheWraith]

1. Phony is Ron Paul all over.

An "anti-war" "libertarian" who signs life-begins-at-conception pledges, supports the invasion of Iraq, and wants a ground war with Iran.

[trumad]

2. I think he's against a war with Iran.

Defending the guy makes me feel dirty... just clarifying.

[TheWraith]

15. He supported attacking Iran before he was against it.

So, you know, typical Republicanism.

[trumad]

17. got ya..

Thanks

[FarLeftFist]

3. Well, he DOES have an (R) next to his name.

So HYPOCRISY is definitely in his blood. Not to mention Paul's LOOOONG shameful voting record.

[ProSense]

4. Two words:

batshit crazy!

[trumad]

5. Seriously---after reading his views I think there is no way you can't label him "Fringe".

[ProSense]

6. Look

at how this is sinking.


Very telling.

[etherealtruth]

7. I prefer the term D-E-R-A-N-G-E-D

He appears to hold many opinions that David Duke would applaud. I think his opposition to war is more akin to Pat Buchanan's isolationist beliefs than any sense of just war.

[gateley]

8. I had Greenwald in my Like column, too. This just baffles me. nt

[DevonRex]

9. I am totally baffled by GG's opinion of RP.

It is so ill-informed that it seems to intend to intentionally mislead.

[Luminous Animal]

11. "There’s no question that Ron Paul holds some views that are wrong, irrational and even odious."

Says Greenwald in the article.

[DevonRex]

13. Yet he waxes eloquent about all the "good" things

about RP. There IS no good thing about RP after knowing his beliefs about gays. Period.

[Luminous Animal]

23. Again. Missing the point of the article. His use of Paul is illustrative of his main point...

"This is a comparative assessment between (a) those routinely dismissed as Crazy and (b) the two party establishments and their Mainstream Loyalists who do the dismissing. Assessing (a) is completely nonresponsive and irrelevant without comparing it to (b)."

[trumad]

16. yes...

But those very views are what make him a Fringe Lunatic.

[Luminous Animal]

22. Ideas shared many if not most of the other Republican candidates.

[one_voice]

28. I was sooo hoping to use YOUR logic against you...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=92774

And look what I got, a gift with a big ole freakin' bow...

Well he [Greenwald] is against a couple of the views that Ron Paul hold, and that's all you need to know, right?

He calls some of Paul's views, wrong, irrational and even odious, so that must mean you endorse Ron Paul.

[Luminous Animal]

29. Given that my post to you was in jest, I'll take this one as a joke, as well.

[Luminous Animal]

10. It really does help to read the entire article...

"There’s no question that Ron Paul holds some views that are wrong, irrational and even odious. But that’s true for just about every single politician in both major political parties (just look at the condition of the U.S. if you doubt that; and note how Ron Paul’s anti-abortion views render him an Untouchable for progressives while Harry Reid’s anti-abortion views permit him to be a Progressive hero and even Senate Majority Leader). My point isn’t that Ron Paul is not crazy; it’s that those who self-righteously apply that label to him and to others invariably embrace positions and support politicians at least as “crazy.”"

[BootinUp]

12. Are you saying that the OP inaccurately stated the theme

of the article?

[Luminous Animal]

18. Yes.

And as Greenwald had to point out in an update:

"UPDATE: I’ll try this one more time: for those wanting to write about all the bad things Ron Paul believes, before going into the comment section, please read and then re-read these three sentences:

There’s no question that Ron Paul holds some views that are wrong, irrational and even odious. But that’s true for just about every single politician in both major political parties . . . My point isn’t that Ron Paul is not crazy; it’s that those who self-righteously apply that label to him and to others invariably embrace positions and support politicians at least as “crazy.”

This is a comparative assessment between (a) those routinely dismissed as Crazy and (b) the two party establishments and their Mainstream Loyalists who do the dismissing. Assessing (a) is completely nonresponsive and irrelevant without comparing it to (b)."

[BootinUp]

21. How can that be though?

Your equation spelled out would be something like this:

Greenwalds theorem:

Racist bigot liar Ron Paul = all politicians that describe him as a fringe lunatic.


The OP correctly points out that Greenwalds theorem is false and remains false to this day as proven by the fact that he is in fact a fringe lunatic racist bigot liar.

[Luminous Animal]

25. I honestly do not know what you are trying to say here...

From what I've seen, the Republican party is dominated by racist bigot liars. In that respect, he fits right in!

[trumad]

14. I read it twice....

GG says that Paul isnt a Fringe Lunatic and Im simply disagreeing with him.

[Luminous Animal]

20. Well, he doesn't say that. In fact he says this...

"My point isn’t that Ron Paul is not crazy"...

In fact, because people seem to have trouble understanding his plain words, he had to say it twice.



Rolling on the ground laughing!

[joshcryer]

38. You're right, he isn't not calling Ron Paul crazy. He just refuses to further marginalize...

...already marginalized, powerless, people.

[Luminous Animal]

40. So, you think that Paul had power in August of 2010? Rolling on the ground laughing.

Last edited Sat Dec 31, 2011, 09:24 PM - Edit history (2)

That is when the article was written. He barely has any more power now than he had then.

[joshcryer]

42. Nope. But I have no problem marginalizing even the most powerless...

...evil people or ideas under any circumstances.

And I defend the powerless and weak.

But I draw a line at pure evil.

[Luminous Animal]

43. So, you actually had no point. Rolling on the ground laughing!

[joshcryer]

44. The point is that Greenwald reserves deference for evil people.

Which shows that he has no moral integrity.

[Luminous Animal]

45. Greenwald eats babies, too. Rolling on the ground laughing!

[ProSense]

19. But

"There’s no question that Ron Paul holds some views that are wrong, irrational and even odious. But that’s true for just about every single politician in both major political parties (just look at the condition of the U.S. if you doubt that; and note how Ron Paul’s anti-abortion views render him an Untouchable for progressives while Harry Reid’s anti-abortion views permit him to be a Progressive hero and even Senate Majority Leader). My point isn’t that Ron Paul is not crazy; it’s that those who self-righteously apply that label to him and to others invariably embrace positions and support politicians at least as “crazy.”"

...he's a lunatic. Semantics?

Ron Paul Claimed An AIDS Patient Is ‘A Victim Of His Own Lifestyle’ In 1987 Book
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/12/30/395881/ron-paul-claimed-an-aids-patient-is-a-victim-of-his-own-lifestyle-in-1987-book/

more:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100294536

[cthulu2016]

24. It's a double-negative.

Greenwald isn't really a great writer, but the sentence parses fine.

[ProSense]

26. And to think

it’s that those who self-righteously apply that label to him and to others invariably embrace positions and support politicians at least as “crazy.”

...those who "self-righteously" calls Paul crazy are "at least as 'crazy.'”

So which views does he think these self-righteous people hold that are similar to Paul's views in terms of Aids, blacks, gays, and all things he considers unconstitutional?

I mean, when has it ever been self-righteous to call "crazy" what it is?

[BootinUp]

27. You can't say the core of the democratic party is as crazy or supports those as crazy as Paul

without meaning: he (Paul) is not a fringe lunatic.

[Luminous Animal]

31. Which, of course, Greenwald does not say.

[BootinUp]

33. ffs

get real.

[Luminous Animal]

34. Show me where he says that the core of the Democratic Party is as

crazy as Paul.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

30. UPDATE:

Paul still broken crock right twice a day,
Greenwald still windbag doing the twist.

[DevonRex]

32. ...

[dionysus]

35. !

[ProSense]

36. Good one! n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

41. !

[joshcryer]

37. Wow. "those who make that claim virtually always hold views at least as crazy"

I do not hold any view even remotely as asinine as Ron Paul.

The basic gist of the article is not to "marginalize" Ron Paul because "other" politicians are "at least as crazy."

He cites 26 democrats as voting to keep DADT, neglecting that 229 Democrats voted to repeal it. Ron Paul was one of the 5 Republicans who voted to repeal it. If we use his metric (which by itself is childish rhetoric), then 90+% of Democrats are in fact not crazy.

The left has the moral and ethical high ground to call Ron Paul crazy. The right may not, but he's chastising commentators who are admittedly from the left, for doing what he refuses to do. Marginalize poor little Ron Paul.

[trumad]

46. good post

[madinmaryland]

39. He's just a plain lunatic. Nothing fringe about him, as can be seen by the

direction of the repub party.