How the Washington Post smears defenders of liberty with dishonest reporting

(NaturalNews) Political correctness. Allowable thought. Approved perspectives. Permitted speech. The political Left has a number of ways in which it seeks to control what Americans think and what they say, as well as how they perceive certain issues.

Such techniques are anathema to our constitutional principles, especially the First Amendment's right of free speech and freedom of association. The agreement was supposed to be something like, "We all don't have to agree on everything, but we all have the right to say what we think."

Not anymore.

Increasingly, when Americans venture outside the lines of what the Left considers "approved" behavior, they are punished with attempts to marginalize them, assassinate their character, impugn and smear their reputations, and -- a favorite of liberal media -- grossly misrepresent what they say, think and believe.

All of these measures were employed recently against former U.S. Rep. Dr. Ron Paul, a Texas Republican long known to promote and support an originalist view of the Constitution -- this time by a writer from The Washington Post.

Topic of secession considered too taboo to broach

As noted by Thomas E. Woods recently on his talk radio program, The Tom Woods Show, Episode 326, the writer did a hit piece on Paul following a public event in Houston, in which Paul appeared and where some politically incorrect topics such as secession were discussed.

The event, the "Mises Circle Event on Secession," was hosted by the Mises Institute, an organization and think tank promoting the economic liberty principles of Austrian scholar Ludwig von Mises. The event was focused on revisiting the principle of states breaking away from others in the face of rising tyranny and loss of liberty:

The growing number of secession movements around the world gives rise to our topic: breaking away from current government structures that do so much harm to liberty, peace, and prosperity. We will examine the philosophical and historical underpinnings of secession, the benefits of radical decentralization, and how disengagement from tyrannical states may be the last, best hope for the endangered classical liberal tradition.

The Post reporter, Woods said on his program, "we all knew was there to do a story smearing Ron, and smearing all of us because, as you know, the idea of secession is not on the 3 x 5 card of allowable opinion."

Woods went on to play a clip of his speech at the event, stating that he fashioned his remarks "fully aware" that the Post reporter (David A. Fahrenthold) was in the audience listening to every word. "My entire talk was a response to the mentality of the mainstream media," he told his radio audience.

"Not on the 3 x 5 card"

Woods said when the Post piece was published, others who spoke at the event were mentioned by name in the report -- but not him. A Natural News review of the Post article posted online found no reference to Woods, as he stated.

Here is a short compilation of what Woods said during his Houston speech:

-- One of my themes over the years has been that the American media and political classes behave as if there is a 3 x 5 card of allowable opinion, and if you stray from that 3 x 5 card, you will be smeared, condemned, written out of polite society... [but] you won't be refuted.

-- You can make all the reasonable arguments you want, but if you're taking a position that is held by neither Mitt Romney nor Hillary Clinton, you are wrong by definition. So there is no need to refute you.

-- Secession is nowhere to be found on that 3 x 5 card. ... You can favor 38 percent top income tax rate, or 37 percent, that's on the card. You can favor the federal courts telling you to do this or do that. ... But secession is like, I don't know, it's in some other galaxy that hasn't been discovered.

Watch the broadcast segment available in its entirety below.



Sources:

https://www.youtube.com

https://mises.org

http://www.washingtonpost.com