Ron Paul, as we predicted, is overtaking the rest of the GOP candidates. After months of ignoring his sensible, level headed policies, the media are forced to take note and in the last two weeks there has been a plethora or pieces written on him. In mid-December, Katharine Q. Seelye in the New York Times noted "After Mr. Cain suspended his campaign on Dec. 3, many non-Romney, non-Paul voters coalesced around Mr. Gingrich....A November poll by the Des Moines Register placed him second in Iowa behind Mr. Gingrich, with the support of 18 percent of likely caucusgoers."
Note the words "behind Mr Gingrich." Then fast forward a week to Christmas day when the same reporter, talking about Gingrich's failure to even get on the ballot in Virginia, has this to say of Newt: "The misstep is bad news for Mr. Gingrich on several levels. Virginia is his adopted home state. Failing to gather enough signatures in one's backyard creates an image problem, at the very least." The state is one of 10 that vote on 6 March, known as Super Tuesday.
Some of the reporting on Paul was negative, as the press scramble to give its readers some idea of who he was, they turned to some old newsletters and found some articles that he had not written that they used to put him in a bad light - Jim Rutenberg and Richard A. Oppel Jr., on the 20th of December published an article titled "New Focus On Bias In Articles Paul Printed." Then it all disappeared as quickly as it came. Someone else tried to imply he was anti-Israel, conveniently forgetting that he was the only GOP congressman to defend Israel in 1981. Paul may be said to be neutral in Israel and more concerned with US interests than what other countries are doing. Aliyah Shahid of the New York Daily News on Christmas Eve weighed in with a distraction to all this when he talked about the Donald dumping the GOP - as if that made any difference to anyone.
That same day, in the Murdoch owned Wall Street Journal, David Yepsen, a longtime political correspondent for the Des Moines Register, noted that the one candidate attracting hordes of new people is Ron Paul. He follows with criticism of the GOP for their stance on immigration, which is alienating people of Latino ancestry and driving them into the Democratic Party. Prescient this was as Romney was to take a hard line stance on immigration during the holiday season, which saw most GOP candidates busy as beavers in Iowa. The NYT on the 27th went into detail about all of this, their poor reporters forced to spend their holidays far from 8th Avenue; some went even further and ventured yet further, going far afield of the main activitiy in Des Moines, where they noted that Ron Paul was operating in small towns like Maquoketa, a three-hour drive from the Iowa capital.
Wherever the canvassing was taking place, the fight was getting rough, and the NYT reported on the 30th that a wealthy Republican called up two servicemen to fly his private jet around Iowa and attack Ron Paul for his foreign policy. This never happened, and in the same article (by Richard A. Oppel Jr.) it is reported that "Mr Paul's national security positions drew raves from many veterans, students and others..." Quoting Ret USArmy Sgt 1st Class Tony Snook, the article showed strong support for Paul from the service. Snook noted: "He would get us out of our difficulties overseas. You should choose your fights wisely." Snook, it mentioned, was wounded in Iraq in 2007. Oppel went on to note that active-duty and retired service members overwhelmingly lean to Mr. Paul, who received almost double the amount of contributions that all the other GOP candidates together received in September. He is certainly gaining strength, and his opponents senseless attacks are not working. What is working is his common sense; Bill Watson, a former GOP central committeeman, summed it up for the article: "If you listen to him long enough, he makes more sense."
And people are now listening long enough, not being dissuaded by wealthy GOP members with private jets or ignorant journalists.
One person listening is Kelly Clarkson, the first ever "American Idol" winner, whose popularity shot up just after she tweeted her support for Paul; her new song, "Stronger", shot up on Amazon from #38 to #2 and is on Apple's iTunes charts at #10.
That's all for now folks, I am going out to buy a copy of "Stronger" and hope you will too...and of course, vote for Ron Paul - so this nation can be stronger.
Showing posts with label New York Daily News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York Daily News. Show all posts
Monday, January 2, 2012
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Ron Paul takes the lead
For months now we have been getting press about this or that GOP candidate who was going to be the big winner. Bachmann started it off when she came in #1 in the Iowa straws, then fell fast; Rick Perry, who did
not even bother to attend the Iowa caucus, suddenly started off like a Texas messiah; he too fell fast after people questioned the sagacity of having a leader who could not finish a sentence; then Romney appeared to take the lead, but was hit hard with the fact that he does not stay true to issues; Newt Gingrich crawled out of a swamp and in some reptilian way started to outrun the hare, only to be undone by his own infidelities and inconsistencies. So yesterday's New York Post and New York Times were weighing the possibility, as we put forth here, that Ron Paul would wait and pace himself and despite the lack of press, emerge in the fore. Geoff Earle in the Murdoch owned Post, writing in an article titled "Newt's lead evaporates", was forced to note that a new Public Policy Polling survey shows Paul seizing the top spot, with 23%, Romney getting back up to 20%, and Gingrich falling to 14%. But leave it to Murdoch accolyte Rich Lowry to bash Mr. Paul; he writes that in 2008 the surest way to get applause in the GOP was to excoriate him. So what? Then he tries to dig up some material that Paul did not write that appeared in a newsletter years ago. And leave it to Murdoch to bash his opponents with anti-Israel views, which Paul does not have. Paul's warning about the CIA taking over the US military are then brought up, and if Lowry had a brain he would have given Paul much credit for this. Let us look at reality here, let us examine history...the CIA has ties to companies like Bechtel, which in WWII was instrumental in undermining the military in the Pacific by getting milions of tax dollars spent on useless projects in Alaska when money was needed for Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, etc. Tens of thousands died or were wounded while Bechtel used the war as an excuse to make money. And look at its relationship today to the Bushes, Halliburton, etc. Look at how in Vietnam Philip Habib suppressed genuine intel reports about Hanoi and US soldiers, left unprepared, were slaughtered. Habib, in an account by former DIA intel agent Mark Philipps, was more powerful at the White House than was Reagan in the Reagan years; third he was, according to Philipps and his co-author Cathy O-Brien, to George H. W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
Anyone who is well versed in the history of the CIA would see the pattern of it using the troops for rich idiots and failing to gather real intelligence; in yesterday's NYT there was also the story about the total lack of intelligence about Korea, which goes about building nuclear weapons and destablising the region - where is the CIA when you need it?
One answer could be - in the newsroom, trying to bring America to its knees by supporting stupid, hapless candidates who will do their bidding while trying to suppress an honest and experienced one who knows what is really going on...and another answer might be Dallas, shooting a president who tried to keep Operation Northwoods from going forward. Long would be this post if I were to explain such a stupid and evil plot that involved killing US military men and civilians to start another war-for-profit, so I will leave the reader to exercise their fingers on the google machine.
But getting back to Ron Paul and yesterday's coverage of him - Lowry belittles his fellow Americans when he closes his piece with this: "Iowa caucus-goers are protective of their pre-eminent place in the nominting process. If they deliver victory to a history-making Ron Paul, no one should take them as seriously again."
That from a man who works for a corporation known for aiding and abetting murderers and child molesters, and suspected of hacking into 9/11 victims' families' phones.
So not surprising the Murdoch press should attack Ron Paul. Nor does it surprise that the NYT follows, somewhat lightheartedly, by trying to associate him with racists in an article by Jim Rutenberg and Richard A. Oppel Jr. The New York Daily Mail did not cover this issue much, with its attention focused on the funeral of a policeman gunned down in the line of duty by a career criminal who was let out by some liberal judge, and then the man who set fire to a woman who had tried to help him; both of which atrocities show us the lack of leadership in America today and why, if we care, we need to get Ron Paul in and the clowns out.
So we watch the debates and see how the press will react, and hope that Ron Paul wins.
not even bother to attend the Iowa caucus, suddenly started off like a Texas messiah; he too fell fast after people questioned the sagacity of having a leader who could not finish a sentence; then Romney appeared to take the lead, but was hit hard with the fact that he does not stay true to issues; Newt Gingrich crawled out of a swamp and in some reptilian way started to outrun the hare, only to be undone by his own infidelities and inconsistencies. So yesterday's New York Post and New York Times were weighing the possibility, as we put forth here, that Ron Paul would wait and pace himself and despite the lack of press, emerge in the fore. Geoff Earle in the Murdoch owned Post, writing in an article titled "Newt's lead evaporates", was forced to note that a new Public Policy Polling survey shows Paul seizing the top spot, with 23%, Romney getting back up to 20%, and Gingrich falling to 14%. But leave it to Murdoch accolyte Rich Lowry to bash Mr. Paul; he writes that in 2008 the surest way to get applause in the GOP was to excoriate him. So what? Then he tries to dig up some material that Paul did not write that appeared in a newsletter years ago. And leave it to Murdoch to bash his opponents with anti-Israel views, which Paul does not have. Paul's warning about the CIA taking over the US military are then brought up, and if Lowry had a brain he would have given Paul much credit for this. Let us look at reality here, let us examine history...the CIA has ties to companies like Bechtel, which in WWII was instrumental in undermining the military in the Pacific by getting milions of tax dollars spent on useless projects in Alaska when money was needed for Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, etc. Tens of thousands died or were wounded while Bechtel used the war as an excuse to make money. And look at its relationship today to the Bushes, Halliburton, etc. Look at how in Vietnam Philip Habib suppressed genuine intel reports about Hanoi and US soldiers, left unprepared, were slaughtered. Habib, in an account by former DIA intel agent Mark Philipps, was more powerful at the White House than was Reagan in the Reagan years; third he was, according to Philipps and his co-author Cathy O-Brien, to George H. W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
Anyone who is well versed in the history of the CIA would see the pattern of it using the troops for rich idiots and failing to gather real intelligence; in yesterday's NYT there was also the story about the total lack of intelligence about Korea, which goes about building nuclear weapons and destablising the region - where is the CIA when you need it?
One answer could be - in the newsroom, trying to bring America to its knees by supporting stupid, hapless candidates who will do their bidding while trying to suppress an honest and experienced one who knows what is really going on...and another answer might be Dallas, shooting a president who tried to keep Operation Northwoods from going forward. Long would be this post if I were to explain such a stupid and evil plot that involved killing US military men and civilians to start another war-for-profit, so I will leave the reader to exercise their fingers on the google machine.
But getting back to Ron Paul and yesterday's coverage of him - Lowry belittles his fellow Americans when he closes his piece with this: "Iowa caucus-goers are protective of their pre-eminent place in the nominting process. If they deliver victory to a history-making Ron Paul, no one should take them as seriously again."
That from a man who works for a corporation known for aiding and abetting murderers and child molesters, and suspected of hacking into 9/11 victims' families' phones.
So not surprising the Murdoch press should attack Ron Paul. Nor does it surprise that the NYT follows, somewhat lightheartedly, by trying to associate him with racists in an article by Jim Rutenberg and Richard A. Oppel Jr. The New York Daily Mail did not cover this issue much, with its attention focused on the funeral of a policeman gunned down in the line of duty by a career criminal who was let out by some liberal judge, and then the man who set fire to a woman who had tried to help him; both of which atrocities show us the lack of leadership in America today and why, if we care, we need to get Ron Paul in and the clowns out.
So we watch the debates and see how the press will react, and hope that Ron Paul wins.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Budget debate
Sometimes I think it might be best to take politics and mix it with the WWF...We might have stories like
BOEHNER vs. WEINER go head to head...hand to hand...and accomplish nothing.
Reid and weap for this is what is going on. The voice of the extremists in both parties has drowned out reason. The far right in the GOP ask for tax cust for the rich and the Democrats give them what they want...
Every year $100 billion in taxes is lost to offshore companies, some of these working for the Pentagon. The sum of the revenue collected by the Treasury today is just 14.8% of the GDP, the lowest in 50 years.
Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, writes in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that "if the Republicans have their way, the entire burden of deficit reduction will be places on the elderly, the sick, children and working families."
Which is just about where it belongs, they seem to think.
But not all of them. What is happening here is a failure of the press; which is so bad that they have been caught giving cell phones to the parents of a murdered child so as to bug their conversations. A week ago they only bugged the cell phones of murder victims, but with each passing week we hear more of the vile antics of the Murdoch Empire - from his rivals, about whom I am sure we could hear much the same.
But we do not hear about intelligent politicians such as Ron Paul who are NOT advocating tax breaks for the rich; they are not on baord with much of the media - and for this alone we ought to single them out. Why are we hearing about Bachmann's headaches and Weiner's weiner?
Because the media empires are full of, get this, RICH PEOPLE....who like to promote the politicians that help them. Here in NY the NY Times Building got indecent tax breaks...a story broken by their rival, the Daily News...why? Because they knew how to cuddle up to politicians. And these politicians in turn get publicity. And some live in fear of the press - but not Ron Paul. This is a kind of litmus test of a politician - what relationship does he or she have with the press?
Notice how little we hear about Dr Paul...yet he is one of the few who understands finance and does not support these tax breaks.
Murdoch does not seem to like him; nor does Sulzberger; or Zimmerman, or Moon, or, or, or, or....
So there.
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote against Murdoch et al. That is a powerful vote.
BOEHNER vs. WEINER go head to head...hand to hand...and accomplish nothing.
Reid and weap for this is what is going on. The voice of the extremists in both parties has drowned out reason. The far right in the GOP ask for tax cust for the rich and the Democrats give them what they want...
Every year $100 billion in taxes is lost to offshore companies, some of these working for the Pentagon. The sum of the revenue collected by the Treasury today is just 14.8% of the GDP, the lowest in 50 years.
Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, writes in the Wall Street Journal yesterday that "if the Republicans have their way, the entire burden of deficit reduction will be places on the elderly, the sick, children and working families."
Which is just about where it belongs, they seem to think.
But not all of them. What is happening here is a failure of the press; which is so bad that they have been caught giving cell phones to the parents of a murdered child so as to bug their conversations. A week ago they only bugged the cell phones of murder victims, but with each passing week we hear more of the vile antics of the Murdoch Empire - from his rivals, about whom I am sure we could hear much the same.
But we do not hear about intelligent politicians such as Ron Paul who are NOT advocating tax breaks for the rich; they are not on baord with much of the media - and for this alone we ought to single them out. Why are we hearing about Bachmann's headaches and Weiner's weiner?
Because the media empires are full of, get this, RICH PEOPLE....who like to promote the politicians that help them. Here in NY the NY Times Building got indecent tax breaks...a story broken by their rival, the Daily News...why? Because they knew how to cuddle up to politicians. And these politicians in turn get publicity. And some live in fear of the press - but not Ron Paul. This is a kind of litmus test of a politician - what relationship does he or she have with the press?
Notice how little we hear about Dr Paul...yet he is one of the few who understands finance and does not support these tax breaks.
Murdoch does not seem to like him; nor does Sulzberger; or Zimmerman, or Moon, or, or, or, or....
So there.
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote against Murdoch et al. That is a powerful vote.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Citizen Murdoch and his team of politicians
It seems politicians these days are having to distance themselves from a crime suspect - Keith Murdoch, better known by his middle name of Rupert. Yesterday in Parliament, he had to answer questions after having to sell the News of the World - the kind of paper that takes a story from a illegal immigrant about how bad other illegal immigrants are but omits to notice that their source is in fact the world's largest heroin dealer...it is no loss, but to heroin dealers who have stories to sell.
Conveniently for Murdoch, the main whistleblower, who was contradicting the Murdoch line that the hacking was more or less of a one-off, ended up dead. He just 'happened' to die, and there is nothing suspicious about his death or the timing of it...so say the police who just 'happened' to check on him for some odd reason. And so, before the toxicology reports are even started on Sean Hoare, the police have cleared Citizen Murdoch. Which is really very nice, because Murdoch's staff were bribing the police right and left, and quite a few have had to step down. Maybe there are none left to investigate any more mysterious deaths in the realm?
Which is really nice also for the politicians who courted him, from Tony Blair to David Cameron. The whistleblowers die and the police quit and Murdoch can go on forcing his politicians on the public. Yesterday he seemed to be endorsing Michele Bachmann in some tired piece by a J T Young in the New York Post. Makes me wonder what criminal acts Bachmann is into to be on his good side. Hacking into 9/11 victims's phones? Paying off the police? Evidence tampering? Who knows.
It may just be a good policy to avoid any and all politicians whom Murdoch has espoused. Wipe the slate clean and get in people who do not make friends with the devil.
That is one reason to support Ron Paul. Murdoch, Sulzberger, Zuckerman and Sun Myung Moon - (Fox/NY Post; NY Times; NYDaily News; Washington Times) - do not get in bed with him - and we need independent candidates more than candidates need the press. Get out and write to your local papers and support Ron Paul, let them know you do not want Murdoch and others putting their minions in power. Just look at the meltdown that has happened in the UK - a country the US fought to get away from...now is time to fight to get away from Murdoch - and his politicians.
Conveniently for Murdoch, the main whistleblower, who was contradicting the Murdoch line that the hacking was more or less of a one-off, ended up dead. He just 'happened' to die, and there is nothing suspicious about his death or the timing of it...so say the police who just 'happened' to check on him for some odd reason. And so, before the toxicology reports are even started on Sean Hoare, the police have cleared Citizen Murdoch. Which is really very nice, because Murdoch's staff were bribing the police right and left, and quite a few have had to step down. Maybe there are none left to investigate any more mysterious deaths in the realm?
Which is really nice also for the politicians who courted him, from Tony Blair to David Cameron. The whistleblowers die and the police quit and Murdoch can go on forcing his politicians on the public. Yesterday he seemed to be endorsing Michele Bachmann in some tired piece by a J T Young in the New York Post. Makes me wonder what criminal acts Bachmann is into to be on his good side. Hacking into 9/11 victims's phones? Paying off the police? Evidence tampering? Who knows.
It may just be a good policy to avoid any and all politicians whom Murdoch has espoused. Wipe the slate clean and get in people who do not make friends with the devil.
That is one reason to support Ron Paul. Murdoch, Sulzberger, Zuckerman and Sun Myung Moon - (Fox/NY Post; NY Times; NYDaily News; Washington Times) - do not get in bed with him - and we need independent candidates more than candidates need the press. Get out and write to your local papers and support Ron Paul, let them know you do not want Murdoch and others putting their minions in power. Just look at the meltdown that has happened in the UK - a country the US fought to get away from...now is time to fight to get away from Murdoch - and his politicians.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)