Green Eggs and Townhall HAM

Good luck with this....the Paulindrones are a very viscious bunch.

Hi

I'm from just outside Phila. (home of
the Liberty Bell) and the name caught
my eye.

Just wanted to wish You luck with Your
Blog, and to let You know that I agree
with what You say. I left the repub's
in Sept. 2006 being fed-up with the
conduct of the repub. congress, and
the lack of repub. leadership. I'm
an independent-conservative and I was
castigated pretty-good on the pages of
townhall for voicing my displeasure
at the repub congress and lack of
leadership.

Anyway, best of luck with Your Blog.

Davecatbone and Ed,

I appreciated your kind and encouraging comments. Thank you for taking the time to respond.

Dave, I write NOT for "the Paulindrones," a clever term by which I presume you mean those anti-Paulian individuals, whose thought processes are so predictable, in their seemingly congenital predilection for ad hominem attack, that they run the same way forward or backwards. I write instead for thoughtful, creative persons like you, for disenchanted "independent," former conservative (not neoconservative) Republicans like you, Ed. I write for all Americans who have experienced "castigation" by those individuals who were subconsciously and involuntarily conscripted for the cause of the pseudo-conservatives who hijacked this nation. These people, who attack so viciously, are the former passengers and crew on the “American Ship of State” (the damaged and retired U.S.S. Liberty), who have joined the pirates, many of them having been co-opted and maintained in their indentured servitude by fear, and who are willing to be incarcerated on a prison island as long as their masters guarantee their safety.

I write for Americans who sense that there is something wrong, perhaps radically wrong, with the way things are in our Republic. I write for those who are newly activating or recovering their citizenship. I write for those who envision a better life, a freer life, a life that provides the liberty to exercise that freedom through creative action, not those who would return us to feudal darkness of the Middle Ages or those who would become the vassals of feudal lords.

It ceases to amaze me how conservatives harbor such vitriole for Congressman Paul.

A lot of my friends are conservatives who believe we should fight these wars. I don't even use "neo" conservative, as it seems derogatory. For several years, I was absolutely behind Bush and these wars.

Congressman Paul's message resonated with me. Why? He made me for the first time critically analyze the root causes for terrorism and wars for the past 50 years. I was part of the group-think, that because Bush was President, he should be re-elected. Because Giuliani was leading in the polls, he was our best hope.

I was intellectually dishonest with myself. People who are "neo-cons" aren't bad people, they aren't warmongers. They are people like me, who just have not been honest with themselves and spent time taking a critical look at history.

The deep roots of conservatism can unite us all. Too long people like me have honestly been ignorant of examining and questioning history with respect to the current state of geopolitics.

Paul supporters would be well-advised not to attack "neo" conservatives, but to foster a discussion that provides a critical examination of the ROOT causes of today's world, not just what is fed to us by the media.

If I can change, so can these folks.

Respectfully,
Ryan

Ryan,

Thank you ever so much for your response. I could not agree more with your comments. I have the utmost respect for your willingness to open up your mind and critically examine what you have been believing, which is usually what others have subtly programmed us all to believe.

There are the true neo-cons and there are those who have been neo-conned by them. You make a good point about avoiding attack and focusing on discussion. It is inappropriate to attack people who espouse the beliefs of the true neo-cons simply because that is what they have been fed by the media. It is our job to engage them--to educate, not alienate or annihilate.

Again, I appreciate your willingness to comment publicly and to share your valuable experience. I have been referring people here to read your remarks.

LIkkerish - No worries, glad I contribute to the dialogue. Like most of the folks who read Townhall, I'm well educated with two degrees from a Top Tier school. Unlike some of the readers, I don't have any liability for being honest with my views. Someone like Ms. Ham whose views have put her in the position she is today of prominence in "conservative" circles, is much less likely than someone like me to suck it up and be honest with themselves, but that in fact is what is needed.

It comes down to the simple statement, "To thine own self be true". Personally I have a lot of respect for people who change, and can cite why they did so. It doesn't matter if you're 25 or 55, we can all grow intellectually. As one gets older, the likelihood of doing so decreases, and this is a shame. The two pivotal points for me were 1) Giuliani's rude dismissal of Paul's assertion that American Foreign POLICY affects international relations which precipitated 2) Reading Michael Scheuer's (ex-head of the CIA Bin Laden Unit) book "Through Our Enemies Eyes".

Those with vested interest and obligations to elected party heavyweights are unlikely to change their views quickly, as they have reputational issues at stake. This also goes for pundits who have large public followings. THAT BEING SAID, if these conservatives were to be completely objective in listening to Paul's message, and then read Michael Scheuer's book, I truly believe they'd question the status quo. Even if they didn't return to Paul's constitutional stance, they would contribute by questioning the current direction of the Republican Party (it's looking gloomy right now), and possibly provide suggestions as to the root causes of our current downward slide (supporting absymal foreign policy).

Just my two cents. To thine own self be true.

And, that you are, Ryan! Thank you for mentioning Michael Scheuer's book, "Through Our Enemies' Eyes." It is good to have this mentioned as often as possible, so I repeat it here.

You make some good points regarding the psychological inertia that exists in people, thus preventing change. People generally have difficulty with change. The brain seems, in most cases to crave consistency, predictability, and certainty, so that anxiety and fear do not rear their nasty heads and mess everything up. There is a great fear of the unknown. People need to be sure of where they are. This is why your openness reflects inner strength. We need to be sensitive to the existence of this latent strength in others and to help it to surface.

Mahalo (Thank You), Douglass...

The skills which you mention are useful in patching "The Crack in the Liberty Bell," as well as, hopefully, shooing away the bats in the cracked belfries of the supporters of Imperialistic pretenders to the Global Throne.

You will be hearing more from me...much more...limited only by the time available.