September 13, 2010 09:41 PM UTC

Anti-U.N. and anti-government paranoia

• 0 Comments
• by: ninothemindboggler

It was my reporting in April on a Tea Party rally where J Paul Brown spoke that led to Brian O’Donnell to ask Brown some rather pointed questions during Saturday’s debate in Durango. While today’s ColoradoPols diary scratches the surface regarding some of the far-out rhetoric Brown engaged in (as did Joe Hanel’s article on Sunday in the Herald), those diaries only scratched the surface: what I quoted brown saying back on April 15 in Pagosa Springs was too rich to ignore. For example:

Brown continued with statements that are often staples of Tea Party speeches and Internet legends. Regarding the student loan provision in the health care reform act he said, “They’re going to take over all student loans … now, I wonder why? They want to control our kids.”

What that provision did, in fact, was remove third-party lenders from the process, for an estimated $61 billion in savings over 10 years.

Brown also pointed to a provision in the act that would activate 6,000 medical workers and emergency responders in the event of a national emergency. “Section 5210 established a ready reserve corps. That’s Obama’s private army.”

Speaking to one of the Tea Party’s biggest issues – gun rights – Brown said, “Can you imagine what Barack Obama would do if we didn’t have guns? No telling what he’d do; this guy’s after power, let me tell you, and they want to take away our guns.

“Hillary Clinton is talking about a treaty with the U.N. to do exactly that,” Brown continued, referring to a United Nations small arms treaty agreed upon last fall. Setting international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons, the treaty would allow nations to remain in charge of arms export control arrangements, but would legally oblige countries to follow terms set forth in the treaty.

“I tell you what I know, that you guys will stand right with me. It’s going to be civil war when they try to do that,” Brown added, his statement met with a loud, “Amen!” and applause.

“The United Nations is not going to tell us what to do with our guns and they’re not going to with our land, and they’re trying to do that all the time, right now,” Brown said.

While the treaty would set controls for the import and export of conventional weapons between nations, the treaty would not subject citizens of one nation to the laws of another. Furthermore, in 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (in District of Columbia v. Heller) that, “(T)he enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home.”

This morning, O’Donnell called me to say that Brown had denied saying anything “Obama’s personal army,” asking if I had indeed recorded the rally; not only had I recorded the entire rally, I also took copious notes.

As you pointed out, Brown’s stances should make for an interesting legislative session, if he gets elected. What is more interesting is the fact that O’Donnell is holding Brown accountable for the things he said in April (which I reported) and now Brown is either walking back or flat-out denying (and thus, lying).