Comment: Trust the past or the present?

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Don't trust Naomi Wolf (see in situ)

Michael Nystrom's picture

Trust the past or the present?

As I have said elsewhere, and I will continue to say it, we need everyone on board to fight in the revolution. All of those things you say may be true, but they are also many years in the past. Let the past be past, and please listen to her words now and judge her by what she is saying now.

To wit, in her most recent blog post she praises Ron Paul:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/finally-action-ron-...

She says:
----

On Monday, Rep. Ron Paul, the outsider Republican presidential candidate who has long upheld these values and who was an early voice warning of the grave danger to all of us of these abuses, introduced the AFA's legislative package into Congress. (The mainstream press has an irrational habit of disparaging outsider candidates -- as if corrupt money and machine endorsements equal seriousness of purpose -- even though the Founders hoped that the system they established would lead citizens, ideally those unembedded in the establishment, to offer their service to the nation.) It is the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007, and you should read it in its entirety: just as accounts of the recent abuses send chills down your spine, this beautifully argued document feels historic and has the ring of great power to correct great injustice.

------

Note she does not call him a "longshot" but an outsider, which is accurate. She goes on to say:

------

Ron Paul was the first of all the presidential candidates, red or blue, to step up in this way -- and all credit is due to him for getting there first. May the others of both parties race to follow his lead. These days, as we have seen from how reluctant some candidates have been -- even on the Democratic sign -- even to sign a mere pledge to uphold the Constitution, it takes some courage to stand fast against the assaults of this administration -- and their manipulations of the terms "patriotism" and "terror threat" -- and insist with legislation on the Founders' vision and on restoring democracy.

------

Congressmen and women say off the record that they can't support liberty, much as they'd like to, because they are scared of "looking soft on terror" and they want to run out the clock -- a naive and self-serving posture in a time of crisis. Make them more scared of you if they don't. Tell them you will bombard their donors with the message that they have sold out liberty. Tell them you will denounce them as traitors to the Constitution in your local and regional letters to the editor and op-eds. Tell them they are unpatriotic to stand by while liberty is disemboweled. Tell them you will stop at nothing to ensure their future defeat unless they support this and make it the law of the land.

Let's do it. There is no excuse now. The restoration of democracy is up to you -- as the Founders intended it should be.

--------

Geez - what more do you want? Do you want to go back 10 years in time and judge her on what she did and said then, or take her at face value now? In order for us to RESTORE THE RULE OF LAW we need all Americans on board and on the same page.

Once people wake up and want to climb aboard, what good is it to say, "I don't trust you!"

In my book, anyone who wants to help restore the rule of law, get rid of torture, abolish the secret prisons, allow congress to challenge presidential signing statements.

And you've only read part of the book? Please read the whole thing and then decide. It is a unified argument that should be read by all Americans. Her solution is not more government, her solution is NOT Hillary.

Her solution is to restore the rule of law and follow the constitution.

He's the man.