Jeffrey Toobin is one of those generic journalists, writing so much in so many different places, so un-memorably, that even though you know his name when you hear it, it doesn’t matter because you can’t recall a damn thing he ever wrote. He’s no George Will, that’s for sure. Anyway, Toobin said that Ron Paul is a conspiracy theorist for mentioning the North American Union, when the fact is Ron Paul was asked a question about it and didn’t bring it up himself.
What Toobin didn’t know or didn’t say (demonstrating incompetence either way) is that a bill offered in Congress to prevent funding of the NAFTA superhighway got more than 40 co-sponsors before dying in committee. And, even if it doesn’t exist, why not pass that bill? Who wants a 10-lane highway going from Mexico to Canada? But no, the bill wasn’t passed, and that’s what makes me suspicious about the whole thing. Who in Congress wouldn’t want to vote on a bill prohibiting a huge superhighway connecting Mexico and Canada built by eminent domain on hardworking Americans, even if it is just a fantasy? Pass the bill prohibiting it, the fantasy ends, and everyone is happy.
Tags: Jeffrey Toobin, Jeffrey Toobin North American Union, Ron Paul, North American Union, NAU, Ron Paul NAU, SPP, Vincente Fox
I think you are already living in a NAU, it is not just a superhighway http://www.cfr.org/publication/8102/
it is a lot more of little invisible pieces, why your gov arent doing anything about illegal immigrants ?
May be, it might violate one of those little pieces signed…
Louis
December 1st, 2007
I agree, the government does nothing about illegal immigrants, at least Mexican ones. It is in the interests of large corporations to have illegal immigrants to employ (no payroll taxes, no health care, low wages, etc.) I read an interesting article a while ago about how an illegal immigrant from Germany who didn’t know he was illegal was deported a week after he went to the INS so he could get a Social Security number to put on his college applications. At the same time, a Mexican illegal immigrant who appeared on the front page of the Denver newspaper was reported to the INS and nothing was done. There does seem to be a bias towards Mexican illegal immigrants as opposed to those from other countries. They’re the ones providing the cheap labor.
libertariangirl
December 1st, 2007
Toobin is 100% correct. Ron Paul is a complete conspiratorialist. In fact, it’s almost wrong to call him a “libertarian.” He’s more of a “Conspiratorial-tarian.”
I worked for the guy for 12 years. I used to have to drive him for hours on end to events. He wouldn’t shut up about kooky stuff like the Kennedy assasination, UFOs like the Roswell thing, and most especially the Tri-lateralists, Bilderbergers, CFR, Jewish Bankers, et.al.
But what’s worse about Paul is he’s a selective Conspiracy theorist.
I once asked him about the Oklahoma City bombing, and Radical Islamic connections to Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols. He just shut up. Didn’t want to get into that subject at all. It didn’t fit his anti-American/Pro-Pacifist Lyndon Larouchie template.
That’s when I lost a lot of respect for him.
He’s all into conspiracy theories, but only supports those conspiracy theories that support his narrow view.
Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide
US Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX)
1997-2003
Eric Dondero
December 7th, 2007
The burden is on you to prove that, Mr. Dondero, because Ron Paul is a very respectable medical doctor and longtime congressman. I don’t buy that he would ever single out “Jewish bankers,” anymore than he would specifically mention that the economists he respects so much, Murray Rothbard and Frederick von Hayek, are Jewish. He seems to very much respect people individually for their ideas, not for their religion or color. I met his South Carolina campaign coordinator, who is African-American, and she told me the same.
Many people are interested by the Kennedy assassination– there are scores of books on it. I find it interesting myself, and my grandfather reads most books about it. That doesn’t make someone kooky, just interested in the happenings of the world.
libertariangirl
December 7th, 2007
Hey, libertariangirl, apparently you are unaware that I am Jewish. I worked for the guy for 12 years, and was used by him as a “token Jew” in front of the media, to disprove claims by our Democrat opponents like Lefy Morris, and others, that he was an Anti-Semite. I stupidly allowed myself to be used by him, cause he would oddly come up with huge bonuses, each time I threatened to quit his staff.
I can tell you straight out, while he’s not an explicit Anti-Semite, he’s about as close as anyone can possibly be, without stepping over the line. He uses code words like “Jewish bankers” instead of explicitly anti-Jewish words, like “Dirty Jews.”
I was there at all those fringe meetings. I met the attendees at these meetings, none of whom knew I was Jewish. They just talked to me like I was a fellow non-Jew, and talked quite openly about all their conspiracy theories, most of which involved some sort of Jewish banker conspiracy in one way or another.
I’d add, that Ron Paul’s Campaign “Jews for Paul” organization was recently exposed for being a complete fraud. Turns out the leader of the group, was a Budhist/Agnostic and not at all Jewish.
Eric Dondero
December 9th, 2007
Sure, many people are interested in the Kennedy assassination. No problem with that. I’ll admit, there’s some funky stuff that went on there. Could be something more to it than just the lone gunman Oswald.
That’s not the point libertarian girl. The point is Ron Paul chooses his conspiracy theories selectively.
Notice he never, ever talks about the cover-up on the Oklahoma City bombing. There is far more evidence, and 10 times as many witnesses that McVeigh and Nichols did not act alone, as there are on the Kennedy assassination. But Paul, never talks about it.
He absolutely refuses to accept the notion that Middle-Easterners were involved or that evidence indicates that Iraqi Intelligence officers advised Terry Nichols on bomb building in the Southern Phillipines 5 times the year before the bombing.
Similarly, you never hear Paul talk about Clinton and the Mena, Arkansas drug-running operation. Or, the cover-up on the Vince Foster murder.
Any conspiracy theories against the Left or the Democrats are not of interest to him.
Only conspiracy theories that indict fellow Republicans like Bush, are highlighted and talked about ad nauseum by the Doctor.
Eric Dondero
December 9th, 2007
I don’t believe for a minute that Ron Paul is an anti-Semite– he seems to be one of the most opening and welcoming people.
I know two Jewish people who are members of “Jews for Ron Paul,” so there are definitely some actual Jews in there. You can also be Jewish as a race and not be Jewish as a religion– you could be Jewish genetically and be Buddhist or agnostic.
Maybe Ron Paul isn’t as interested in talking about conspiracy theories regarding Democrats because he’s not one. Bush has done incredible damage to the Republican Party, and all Republicans have suffered as a group for that.
I have personally found it interesting that people are so willing to believe that Middle Easterners and terrorism are behind everything that happens today, but dismiss out of hand the idea that they could have influenced the Oklahoma City bombing. I really have no opinion on that, though. McVeigh was upset about Ruby Ridge and Waco, which were complete oversteps by the federal government (especially Ruby Ridge).
libertariangirl
December 9th, 2007