Hear Robert A. Taft's Ron Paul Moment
As media and political elites continue to demonize Ron Paul for his comments in the debates, it is remembering that another candidate, who said much the same thing, once came within a hair of winning the Republican presidential nomination.
In 1950, Senator Robert A. Taft of Ohio firmly explained to dumbfounded interviewers on “Meet the Press” why he opposed sending more U.S. troops to Europe. He condemned the deployment as encirclement and warned that it needlessly provoked the Soviet Union. To hear the entire audio of the interview, go here.
Taken as a whole, Taft was generally less thoroughgoing than Ron Paul in his defense of non-interventionism overseas and smaller government at home. Even on this show, he backtracks a bit toward the end from his earlier statements and has some unfortunate things to say about Joe McCarthy. But for the first fifteen minutes or so, he sounds as radical and confident as Ron Paul ever did.
Be patient, the audio might be slow in loading and you'll have to listen a couple of vintage 1950 commercials but it is well worth the wait.
Kudos to Scott Horton at Stress for putting up the audio link.
comments powered by Disqus
David T. Beito - 7/17/2007
Despite the fact that he comes from Mencken's former magazine, Spivak does not seeem too sympathetic!
Sheldon Richman - 7/17/2007
Thanks, David! And Lawrence A. Spivak was still editor of the American Mercury. Very cool!
- Florida professor to burn Confederate flag
- Could another English king be buried under a parking lot?
- Huckabee says archaeology supports the Bible
- George W. Bush's CIA Briefer: Bush and Cheney Falsely Presented WMD Intelligence to Public
- Unfinished film about the Holocaust made in 1945 to finally be seen by audiences
- Daniel Pipes calls the rulers of Iran "madmen" on official Iranian TV
- A Professor Tries to Beat Back a News Spoof That Won’t Go Away
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- Sean Wilentz is being called “Hillary’s Historian"
- Hundreds of British historians challenge assumptions of “Historians for Britain” campaign