Monday, May 30, 2011

Why Mother Jones is Nervous About Ron Paul

How do you know Mother Jones is putting out a hit piece? They put in a negative light a libertarian who on Constitutional grounds calls for the legalization of cocaine.

Yup, good old Mother Jones, which in its April issue reviewed a book titled, I Am the Market: How to Smuggle Cocaine by the Ton, in Five Easy Lessons, is on the attack against libertarian Ron Paul.

The April review tells us:
The.... [book] teaches to transport a couple of kilos hidden up your ass, woven into your dreadlocks, or molded into shirt buttons. The second details how to secrete tons of white powder inside shipments of marble, granite, and copper cables so the corporations transporting it don't realize it. There isn't a moral here, just an astonishing inside look at a business like any other: "What is a drug smuggler, technically speaking? A service provider. Nothing else."
But, in their June issue, they are no longer highlighting a book that tells you how "to transport a couple of kilos hidden up your ass."

They instead list Ron Paul's call for the federal government to get out of the drug prohibition business as extreme. Of course, Dr. Paul's call is based on the Constitution, which was signed by, among others, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison, so extreme is certainly in the eye of the beholder. For some, ignoring the Constitution and creating a "war on drugs" might be a bit extreme.

Mother Jones, cleverly, in listing  the so-called extreme views of Dr. Paul, does not outright state the views are wrong, that would be difficult for the pro-drug regressives that run the magazine. But they get their point across about Dr. Paul by calling Ron Paul supporters, "cult followers" and accompanying the article with an uncomplimentary photo of Dr. Paul.
Mother Jones also lists as extreme Ron Paul's call to end the Fed, close down various government agencies etc.  And that is at the core of the regressive magazine's problem with Dr. Paul. Ron Paul is starting to make an impact with the rank and file Left that are beginning to understand that government intrusion into everyday life is the real problem. The regressive leaders can't have that, since they don't come anywhere close to the consistent view of Ron Paul that the government should stay out of people's private lives---across the board.

Mother Jones has all sorts of projects that it would like to see the government run. Thus, they will sacrifice a fellow traveler on the road to the legalization of cocaine, if that also means they have to be consistent on freedom and the elimination of government intrusiveness. But the fact that they have to pay attention to Ron Paul at all indicates that Dr. Paul is winning. They are real nervous that some of their readers may turn to the consistent freedom view offered by Ron Paul, and dump the regressive, interventionist views of Mother Jones. And so the line is clearly drawn for the Mother Jones readers, total freedom versus regressive interventionists.


  1. My impression is that the MSM has gone back to ignoring Ron Paul. The Republican editorial page clown of the Detroit News ignores him here while promoting local Republican clown Thaddeus McCotter. Really.

    I would think that an area devastated by the fatal distortions of the capital structure induced by funny money might want to hear what Ron Paul has to say.

  2. Interesting points. Tom Woods recently posted a video about the Mother Jones article ( that might be of interest.

  3. I seriously doubt you are going to find a regressive group that is going to come out and support anything Ron Paul stands for, so its not unexpected that they are going to do their best to marginalize him regardless if they share similar views on some things. Let's also be realistic, mainstream politics accepts and even expects moral inconsistency in ones views. For instance, a woman owns her body and has a right to choose but a drug user does not own her body and has no right to choose what to put in it.

    Consistent thinking like Dr. Paul's would force the control freaks (regressives and neocons) to have to take positions they might not otherwise want to take, so instead they pick and choose. When someone points out the inconsistency in their thinking, the only argument they can make is to kill the messenger.

  4. Until Ron Paul actually gets major votes in an actual election, he will always be marginalized or ignored by the "main stream". Nothing will change until Iowa or New Hampshire at the earliest (and only if he at least shows).