We are about a month away from Election Day. And what a sad event it will be.
Ron Paul was not nominated by the GOP, and they are regretting their candidate
more and more. Romney cannot open his mouth without putting in foot. Last night he
did not do so badly against Obama, but O has his weak points, such as the economy, OK,
not really his fault, except for the fact that he, the good Democrat, once again drove the
getaway car as the GOP robbed the American banks.
But that's another story. We've, uh, 'moved on.' To a park bench because that is the only
place that some Americans call home. And if Romney gets in, we may run out of those
as he might call them a false sense of entitlement. Coming from the mouth of a man who did
no service (as Dr Paul did - in wartime) this is rubbish.
I met Romney once; shook his hand, the whole bit. He held a fund raiser here in NYC
at the Sheraton Centre midtown, I got on the list with actor Mike Stranger, and he had his
cell phone out for the moment I got to shake Romney's hand. Which almost did not happen, as I am
not one of his rich kid groupies. After mentioning that I was an ex serviceman, one of about
all of three in the crowd of 500, he reluctantly allowed me to shake hand - and I told him
to his face that he was a weak, selfish and foolish person who would destroy America, then
asked him to step down.
SECURITY! All around me his acolyutes and paid thugs pushed me back, and grabbed Mike's
cell phone. DAMAGE CONTROL! OK, the party was winding down and I agreed to leave -
but NO, they wanted to arrest me - for embarrassing a candidate. That did it. These thugs were
not cops or even decent strongarms. I told them if they even tried I would get them arrested
and proceeded to embarrass his hapless attendees - who had paid $2,500 to get in - and Romney
did not even provide any drinks, as he boasted. Suckers!
I heard the BBC gave an account of it and talked about how in the US dissenters are dealt with. At
least I did not get tasered like some who go against the GOP.
So in a way, I guess I stand to gain from his getting in. I will have confronted and embarrassed
a president of the US. Not enough to die happy, but a modest gain for me; but not for the US,
and I hope he does not win.
And Paul may not either. OK, barring a miracle, he is off to write his memoirs, but solid and honest
memoirs they will be of decades of public and medical service.
Romney, ironically, came close to getting in - had he chosen the Latin candidate, Marc Rubio, as his
running mate, he could have scored big time - but no, he chose some Ayn Rand reading bozo
he would be more comfortable with instead.
The Latin community is perhaps better off not having this association. I hear many of them
are voting for O - but as the lesser of two evils. They are not fooled. Romney is already a
footnote to them, and they have as much as written his obituary: Humberto Caspa,
in El Diario/La Prensa, 25 Septeber, has this to say:
'A Romney solo le importa Romney.'
Translation - 'The only thing that matters to Romney is Romney.'
Enough said. If only everyone understood this months ago, the GOP might have nominated Paul.
But geschehen ist geschehen. So I accept that he will not be president, my support made probably no
difference, and all I can do at this point is wish him a happy retirement.
Showing posts with label Ron Paul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ron Paul. Show all posts
Thursday, October 4, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Ron Paul talks about hemp in Dakota
Few candidates talk about such real issues as hemp, of which the first American flag was made, and which could bring jobs to the US. Some candidates may be nothing more than foreign agents hoping to obfiscate for years and keep Americans from getting jobs. Ron Paul is for Americans getting industry. This causes foreing American hating agents positioned in the press, including the Murdoch press, to take aim at him so Murdoch loving America haters can get in the candidate of their choice. Below is an article about Ron Paul talking to real Americans in North Dakota:
Friday, February 3, 2012
Latin radio on the GOP hustings
In the last four years, the Latin community has added 2 million voters; 500,000 Latins a year turn 18. And they are not usually inclined to vote GOP. Such facts were pointed on by Fernando Escuelas, and his guest, Congressman Luis Guitierrez earlier this week on Radio Wado, 1280AM in New York.
In yesterday's New York Daily News a reader's letter was full of thanks to Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich - for sealing the election for Obama this year.
But it does not have to be that way. Dr Ron Paul, who has a district full of Hispanics, many of whom are prosperous and contribute to his constant reelection success, is the one candidate who can get the Latin vote and beat Obama.
It seems that Romney and Gingrich go out of their way to lose the Latin vote; even when trying to pander to the Hispanic voter, the alienate him. Earlier posts on this blog by Carlos Reyes go into great detail on this, and Guitierrez pointed out that Romney and Gingrich tell Latins there are jobs in the military - which only highlights their deferments in the war. Rich kids who are ducking duty only to leave it to poor kids whom they hope will vote for them is how it pans out.
Maybe they do not think how this makes Ron Paul look good. By doing nothing, but letting these clowns speak, he looks good. Fact is he did not duck out. He was a doctor in the US Air Force, and continued in medical practice after his term.
There has not been much about him on the Latin radio, but let's see what happens with the Nevada primary, where he and his team will be talking to the largest growing bloc of voters. In general, he has been getting more press, including an entire article in the New York Times which is the post just before this one.
In yesterday's New York Daily News a reader's letter was full of thanks to Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich - for sealing the election for Obama this year.
But it does not have to be that way. Dr Ron Paul, who has a district full of Hispanics, many of whom are prosperous and contribute to his constant reelection success, is the one candidate who can get the Latin vote and beat Obama.
It seems that Romney and Gingrich go out of their way to lose the Latin vote; even when trying to pander to the Hispanic voter, the alienate him. Earlier posts on this blog by Carlos Reyes go into great detail on this, and Guitierrez pointed out that Romney and Gingrich tell Latins there are jobs in the military - which only highlights their deferments in the war. Rich kids who are ducking duty only to leave it to poor kids whom they hope will vote for them is how it pans out.
Maybe they do not think how this makes Ron Paul look good. By doing nothing, but letting these clowns speak, he looks good. Fact is he did not duck out. He was a doctor in the US Air Force, and continued in medical practice after his term.
There has not been much about him on the Latin radio, but let's see what happens with the Nevada primary, where he and his team will be talking to the largest growing bloc of voters. In general, he has been getting more press, including an entire article in the New York Times which is the post just before this one.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Albor Ruiz and the Hispanic press in NY on Ron Paul and Mitt Romney
The New York Daily News, which has not so far been partial to Dr Paul, gave him a good word on Wednesday (25 Jan.), when Albor Ruiz, in his article titled "GOP candidates play Cuba card to 'please' " - noted that the candidates were willing to say anything to "please" - exept for Ron Paul, of course...
The Latin GOP vote seems to be exclusively his - note that his district contains many Spanish speaking voters and they return him to office year after year.
In Saturday's (28 Jan.) El Diario/La Prensa, V. Morales Pagan writes an article titled "Romney so es amigo de PR" - pointing out that Romney was responsible for hundreds of job losses in the '90s in Puerto Rico; one victim of the unemployment was driven to consider suicide.
Romney has never been a friend of the Hispanic community. Utah, Michigan and Massachusetts are not states with a large percentage of Latin Americans.
In contrast, and as noted above, Congressman Paul has a good amount of them for supporters in Texas, and they will be reaching out to their brethren in the US to vote for Paul. No other GOP candidate has this base of support - that is why a recent article in El Diario/La Prensa was titled "Republicanos con problema ante latinos." It focused, however, on Romney and Gingrich and certainly did not include Paul as an example of GOP attitude against the Latin community.
Florida will be interesting, but even if, as Romney is hoping, he gets the Cuban vote in that state, he has no chance of getting the Latin vote in the rest of the nation. After Florida expect Romney to fall by the wayside.
Watch closely the Latin vote in these hustings, it has not yet been heard, but it will be.
The Latin GOP vote seems to be exclusively his - note that his district contains many Spanish speaking voters and they return him to office year after year.
In Saturday's (28 Jan.) El Diario/La Prensa, V. Morales Pagan writes an article titled "Romney so es amigo de PR" - pointing out that Romney was responsible for hundreds of job losses in the '90s in Puerto Rico; one victim of the unemployment was driven to consider suicide.
Romney has never been a friend of the Hispanic community. Utah, Michigan and Massachusetts are not states with a large percentage of Latin Americans.
In contrast, and as noted above, Congressman Paul has a good amount of them for supporters in Texas, and they will be reaching out to their brethren in the US to vote for Paul. No other GOP candidate has this base of support - that is why a recent article in El Diario/La Prensa was titled "Republicanos con problema ante latinos." It focused, however, on Romney and Gingrich and certainly did not include Paul as an example of GOP attitude against the Latin community.
Florida will be interesting, but even if, as Romney is hoping, he gets the Cuban vote in that state, he has no chance of getting the Latin vote in the rest of the nation. After Florida expect Romney to fall by the wayside.
Watch closely the Latin vote in these hustings, it has not yet been heard, but it will be.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Coast to Coast, Ron Paul and the NDAA
George Noory and Linda Mouton Howe on Coast to Coast had their hands full this morning, with Jonathan Eamord, David Simmon, Tyrell Ventura, Gerald Solante and Alex Jones weighing in about the National Defense Authorisation Act and the Enemy Expatriation Act - the latter poised to strip US citzens of their citizenship and their rights - without due process.
The acts are heinous and unconstitutional; no surprise that Obama signed the NDAA on New Years' Eve, when everyone was out celebrating and he could sneak it in. This NDAA allows the Department of Defense to arrest citizens and indefinitely detain them without charge or evidence.
Scarier still, it was voted on by the legislators almost without resistance.
Almost, but not quite; three guesses whose name came up constantly in the discussions. Yesterday, for instance, Ron Paul put forward a bill to amend this. Not that he got a lot of support.
I am sitting here in NYC in Carolyn Maloney's district, and she has been avoiding me when I call about the hemp bill, and she will now have to work extra hard because I will be calling now about the NDAA.
But let's get back to Ron Paul. Tuesday his name came up at the Mitt Romney fund raiser at the Sheraton - where I was famously almost arrested for the 'crime' of embarrassing a candidate by
some of his fly-by-night security guards - because his supporters were anxiously whispering that he might take a third party route; and they were afraid of it. There was visible tension over the issue.
And if he does, Terell Ventura informs us, he just may get the best VP in US history - Tyrell's dad, Jesse.
So we live in interesting times, and if half of what Alex Jones tells us, we are about to be
bombarded with Level 4 germs and shot by the Army on orders of POTUS. I take Alex Jones with a grain of salt, but unfortunately, much of what he says comes true. So I do not arrogantly dismiss it.
But even without the dire predictions of this Texan broadcaster, this act is simply stupid. And Ron Paul is sensible; he opposes it, and so do I.
But the rest of the GOP candidates and Obama are do not oppose this, and that is why Ron Paul gets more contributions from military personnel than all the other GOP candidates and Obama put together - 74%.
The acts are heinous and unconstitutional; no surprise that Obama signed the NDAA on New Years' Eve, when everyone was out celebrating and he could sneak it in. This NDAA allows the Department of Defense to arrest citizens and indefinitely detain them without charge or evidence.
Scarier still, it was voted on by the legislators almost without resistance.
Almost, but not quite; three guesses whose name came up constantly in the discussions. Yesterday, for instance, Ron Paul put forward a bill to amend this. Not that he got a lot of support.
I am sitting here in NYC in Carolyn Maloney's district, and she has been avoiding me when I call about the hemp bill, and she will now have to work extra hard because I will be calling now about the NDAA.
But let's get back to Ron Paul. Tuesday his name came up at the Mitt Romney fund raiser at the Sheraton - where I was famously almost arrested for the 'crime' of embarrassing a candidate by
some of his fly-by-night security guards - because his supporters were anxiously whispering that he might take a third party route; and they were afraid of it. There was visible tension over the issue.
And if he does, Terell Ventura informs us, he just may get the best VP in US history - Tyrell's dad, Jesse.
So we live in interesting times, and if half of what Alex Jones tells us, we are about to be
bombarded with Level 4 germs and shot by the Army on orders of POTUS. I take Alex Jones with a grain of salt, but unfortunately, much of what he says comes true. So I do not arrogantly dismiss it.
But even without the dire predictions of this Texan broadcaster, this act is simply stupid. And Ron Paul is sensible; he opposes it, and so do I.
But the rest of the GOP candidates and Obama are do not oppose this, and that is why Ron Paul gets more contributions from military personnel than all the other GOP candidates and Obama put together - 74%.
One recurring question on the show was "why are they doing this?" It seems that it was manipulated past the press rather skillfully, though it is not hard to get stuf past the press, so maybe it is just laziness on their part - but still, why this bill and why the secret meetings with the Department of Defense? Gerald Solante gave us a bleak outlook of the economy, as well he might, having been burnt in the Jon Corzine affair - for those of you not quite familiar with that, perhaps because the press is a bit too lazy to make you familiar with it, Corzine is a former governor of New Jersey, and was involved in a fund where $1.6billion disappeared just as fast as the $2.3trillion from the Pentagon did just before 9/11. Google around if this is news to you. If not, you will know that there is serious theft going on and that the same people benefitting from it are making laws to put American citizens behind bars stripped of their rights. And maybe the American citizens they decide to arrest will be the ones asking hard questions. Jones opined that maybe this was all to hide their crimes, giving them power to protect themselves from investigation and angry, ripped off taxpayers, and said: "that's why they're scared that Ron Paul is introducing legislation to repeal the provision."
He noted that Sen Joe Lieberman may have subconsciously admitted what they were after when he said "I want you to be scared."
And I want most of you out of office and under investigation. Lock them up till they 'find' the millions, uh, billions, uh, make that trillions, they 'lost.' And let's not hear any more about this NDAA and the EEA.
What next, forced microchipping on our hands and foreheads?
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Ron Paul and the Latin vote
Just in from Carlos Reyes, who blogs at http://www.cuentasdebolivia.blogspot.com/
The candidates debates are getting more and more numerous here...but most seem to miss a large part of the audience, the ever growing Latino voter. UP 26% from 2008, it is now 12 million here in los Estados Unidos. Do the math; a winner needs at least 50 million votes. Even though the selection for the president is not based on a clear majority, it is done by electoral college, a system somewhat unique to this country, there is still a numbers game. So 12 million will make or break it for the candidate.
The candidates debates are getting more and more numerous here...but most seem to miss a large part of the audience, the ever growing Latino voter. UP 26% from 2008, it is now 12 million here in los Estados Unidos. Do the math; a winner needs at least 50 million votes. Even though the selection for the president is not based on a clear majority, it is done by electoral college, a system somewhat unique to this country, there is still a numbers game. So 12 million will make or break it for the candidate.
And then there is the black vote. And the Asian vote, and that of many other groups. Just now, Obama may think he has most of the minorities and is safe. Four years ago he could think so; but four years is a long time in politics. So he may be in for a serious disappointment; which some say he has been.
Personally, I don't think he is quite such a disappointment - but then again, how did he let the bankers off in the latest round of Wall Street scandals? That hurt everyone. And he ought to have sent the bums to jail, not bailed them out. I just mean that I do not blame him for everything, or the general state of the economy, which is bad worldwide. Too may candidates are making their platform out of an anti-Obama tirade. Michele Bachman comes to mind, who was mentioned in El Diario/La Prensa (the largest Spanish largest daily in the US) as having, after Mitt Romney, the largest possibility of winning the GOP nomination. Heaven help us! She is so gaff prone that it scares me so bad I would rather see Obama in...I mean, the woman does not know her American history...and she brags about a John Wayne coming from her hometown, oddly named 'Waterloo'...which she has right except that the JW from Waterloo is not the star of the silver screen but rather a JW Gacy who screwed young men in Chicago and then chopped them up. No one, least of all all a Hispanic, wants a woman from Waterloo with a pyscho killer living down the road from her to be in the White House.
And the other candidates scare me as well, some simply for their lack of experience...or the fact that they quit the job they had to go on a campaign trail...
But on a positive note, there is one candidate in the GOP roster who has a good chance of getting that crucial 12 million votes: Ron Paul, who was listed as being in 4th back in November among the GOPers but has soared to second. He is a doctor (as was Che Guevara...apropos of doctors, and just to digress a bit...) and a former flight surgeon in the US Air Force...no draft dodger here.
His issues are spot on, with the economy at the top of the list. His district, in heavily Hispanic Houston-Galveston area of Texas, is doing very well. And of course, there is the big issue of immigration, which he is very realistic about. I say that in light of the fact that many think that to woo the Latin community they ought to go out and let in every last illegal and give them free this and free that. En absoluto; which translates as absolutely not. Those of us born here want to help our hermanos as much as we can, but we also have a respect for the law, and balance our desires in the light of reality. The US simply cannot let in everybody and their hermano...Nations have borders, whether they are between Texas and Mexico or Venezuela and Colombia. And people must work within the law or we would all just be stepping on each other. There is a problem with immigration to such an extent that it is not just illegals intruding into the realm of the anglo-sajone, but to the point that illegals are intruding upon their legal cousins and causing trouble in the ethnic communities in which they try to assimilate. And it cannot just simply go on.
That said, Obama is the only GOP candidate NOT endorsing the 'send 'em all back' mantra
or wishing to have an armed border.
Recently Obama visited Puerto Rico, in a veiled move to secure millions of votes - the boricua vote being the largest of any Spanish speaking voters. It may or may not work; the precedent for it is JFK, who gained a lot of support from that quarter, which has voted largely democrat ever since. That is how the likes of Charles Rangel stay in power here after all the scandals - bear in mind also he invests in the Dominican Republic, at least that is where he had his house which got him in trouble with the IRS.
The GOP seems to alienate many Latin voters, especially the likes of John McCain who after being against a border fence with Mexico is now supporting it and blaming the recent wild fires on illegal aliens; as if there were no other source of forest fires in the summer in Arizona. The Latin community was itself aflame at his remarks, which were rebutted by the likes of Fernando Escuelas here in NY on Radio Wado (1280 AM) on 21 June. It is one thing to be realistic about immigration - but another to fan the flames of rhetoric with unfounded accusations that target the Latin community - there has been enough of that lately, what with Casey Anthony trying to blame the death of her daughter on the maid, and the news reporter falsely crying rape and blaming non-existent Hispanics. That the GOP should join this chorus does not do much to secure 12 million votes.
What the GOP supporting Hispanic sees in this party is the pro-life stance, especially as over 10 million of those votes are Catholic; but was not JFK of that flock? And few people seem to know this, but Joe Biden is also a Catholic.
From perusing the Latin press, it would seem that the Latino vote is not set to go GOP - read Chris Canavan opining in El Diario/La Prensa on the 4th of July - and it is clear that the GOP, and its hardcore cousin the Tea Party, are not seen in a good light; he writes: "Al paracer, Bachman y sus aliados en el Tea Party prefieren ignorar la vision de Madison y, en su lugar, apoyar a una minoria en el congreso que promete detonar una bomba atomica si no consigue todas sus demandas." In plain English, it seems that Bachman and her mates in the Tea Party perfer to ignore Madison's ideas and replace them with their own, supporting a minority in Congress that will set off an atomic bomb if their demands are not met.
Of Democrats, who I personally see as much the same, I do not find such rhetoric in this or any other major Spanish language paper. Perhaps the fact that this paper is published in NY, along with a slew of others down to the freebies such as El Especialito - gives it a pro-Democrat slant; 11 out of 13 local reps are Democrats here, all or most long term incumbents. (12 out of 13 it was until Rep Weiner got caught with his pants down...)
And after such exposure Little Anthony got replaced by Bob Turner of the GOP, due in part to the Latino voters on Long Island.
Obama will not go as easily as Weiner; but whether he goes or stays I can guarantee will depend on the Latino vote. Which is not leaning towards the GOP lately, especially as Mitt Romney is in the lead. Romney, the son of a Mexican immigrant, well, technically, as his father was born in Mexico and came to the US at the age of five, is against most immigrants, as Albor Ruiz noted so well a few days ago in the New York Daily News - just in time to cast light on Romney's efforts to recruit the Latin vote in Florida. Today I heard this effort laughed at on 1280AM. So no wonder that in a room of 500 or so fundraisers last night at the Sheraton, right here in NYC with millions of Hispanics, there was not one to be found; the room was whiter than KKK meet in the deep south.
So with the far right of the GOP, or with the KKK, he may have made his mark. But he and most other GOP candidates these days are not wooing the 12 million.
It would behoove the GOP to choose the candidate(s) that will secure that for them, and Ron Paul is now the only choice.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Appeal to Iowa caucus voters to support Ron Paul
Today is the first day of the New Year. So far, so good. And even better that Ron Paul is gaining in the polls.
I happen to have some ties to his constituency, after all, it is my business address - my sister and I moved Minawear - a natural clothing company using hemp and other natural textiles - to it after many years in Santa Monica. In my youth I joined the navy in Houston, which is Ron Paul country. His district is one of the largest in the nation - about the size of the state of Massachusets. It is doing much better economically than that state, and much better than other districts on average. They call it the Golden Triangle.
So I have I guess a very basic reason to support Paul: the economy, stupid. But there are other reasons. One is the military. For starters, Paul was in. An officer and a doctor during Vietnam. Added to this he is balanced on his military thinking, not just running around gung-ho like some other candidates, many of whom were never in uniform. No surprise that there is presently a groundswell of support from active and former serviceman such as myself.
And then there is his initiative to create jobs in the US. That ought to be JOBS. Again, the economy stupid. But not without the ecology. What Paul wants is to make hemp - from which the first flag was made - and on which the original copy of the US Constitution was printed - legal for US farmers to grow. Some are against it, especially if they do not want the US to compete with China. Or to have its own textile industry, or manufacture paper....or use it for 25,000 other uses, as Popular Mechanics noted it had.
I spend most of my time on the East Coast. And I see what Santorium and Romney have done. And I compare it to what Paul has done. And I pray to God Paul wins.
And my plea to my fellow beings in Iowa is that you back the man who has the years of experience, military service, professional standing, is a veteran of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the House Banking Committee - Congressman Ron Paul. For a stronger America.
I happen to have some ties to his constituency, after all, it is my business address - my sister and I moved Minawear - a natural clothing company using hemp and other natural textiles - to it after many years in Santa Monica. In my youth I joined the navy in Houston, which is Ron Paul country. His district is one of the largest in the nation - about the size of the state of Massachusets. It is doing much better economically than that state, and much better than other districts on average. They call it the Golden Triangle.
So I have I guess a very basic reason to support Paul: the economy, stupid. But there are other reasons. One is the military. For starters, Paul was in. An officer and a doctor during Vietnam. Added to this he is balanced on his military thinking, not just running around gung-ho like some other candidates, many of whom were never in uniform. No surprise that there is presently a groundswell of support from active and former serviceman such as myself.
And then there is his initiative to create jobs in the US. That ought to be JOBS. Again, the economy stupid. But not without the ecology. What Paul wants is to make hemp - from which the first flag was made - and on which the original copy of the US Constitution was printed - legal for US farmers to grow. Some are against it, especially if they do not want the US to compete with China. Or to have its own textile industry, or manufacture paper....or use it for 25,000 other uses, as Popular Mechanics noted it had.
I spend most of my time on the East Coast. And I see what Santorium and Romney have done. And I compare it to what Paul has done. And I pray to God Paul wins.
And my plea to my fellow beings in Iowa is that you back the man who has the years of experience, military service, professional standing, is a veteran of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the House Banking Committee - Congressman Ron Paul. For a stronger America.
Support gathers for Ron Paul
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.
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.
Surprising turn around in New York Post
The New York Post usually seems to be anti-Paul, but an article by Jacob Sullum on 24th December is 100% in support, and rebuts the obnoxious critics. In its entirety, here it is below:
"Ron Paul vs. Empire"
Reporters routinely describe Ron Paul's foreign policy views as "isolationist" because he opposes the promiscuous use of military force. This is like calling him a recluse because he tries to avoid fistfights.
The assumption that violence is the only way to interact with the world reflects how oddly circumscribed foreign-policy debates are in mainstream US politics and why Paul's perspective is desperately needed in the GOP.
As the Texas congressman has explained many times, he supports international trade, travel, migration, diplomacy and cultural exchange. He supports military action when it's necessary for national defense - in response to the 9/11 attacks, for example.
The innaccurate "isolationist" label marks Paul as a fringe character whose views can be ignored. Given the dire consequences of reckless interventionism, that clearly isn't the case.
This week, America officially ended its Iraq war, nearly nine years after launching it based on the false claim that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to us because he had weapons of mass destruction.
The war, which replaced a brutal dictator with a corrupt government that may not be able to maintain peace, cost us $800 billion and nearly 4,500 American lives. More than 100,000 civilians were killed.
The regime American installed in Afghanistan is even weaker and more corrupt than the one in Iraq. Ten years later, we still have 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. So far, the war has cost about $500 bilion, 1,800 American lives and thousands of civilain casualties.
The United States would've avoided both of these costly nation-building projects if Congress had listened to Paul - or even to George W. Bush circa 2000, who (as Paul frequently notes) ran on a premise of a "humble" foreign policy that would not aim to solve all the world's problems. Now that the same people who supported the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are portraying Iran as an intolerable threat, some Paulian skepticism surely is appropriate.
That's especially true when the federal government borrows 36 cents of every dollar it spends, racking up a debt as big as the entire US economy. At the Nov. 22 debate, Paul corrected Mitt Romney, who complained that the Obama adminstration is "cutting a trillion dollars out of the defense budget." Actually, Paul said, "they're not cutting anything"; rather, "they're nibbling away at baseline budgeting and its automatic increases."
America has its military personnel in 150 countries, has nearly doubled its defense budget in the last decade and accounts for more than two-fifths of the world's military spending.
Paul challenges this mindless militarism. "We have an empire," he bluntly noted at the same debate. "We can't afford it."
For 35 years Paul has spoken truths that foreing policy mavens pf both parties prefer to ignore: that the Constitution give Congress alone the power to declare war, that unjustified interventions breed resentment that undermines our security, that there is a difference between military spending and defense spending, that foreign aid rewards autocrats and their cronies and that economic sanctions are an "act of war" that hurts people in the name of punishing the governments that oppress them.
If there's really no room for these arguments in the GOP, that it the party's fault, not Paul's.
"Ron Paul vs. Empire"
Reporters routinely describe Ron Paul's foreign policy views as "isolationist" because he opposes the promiscuous use of military force. This is like calling him a recluse because he tries to avoid fistfights.
The assumption that violence is the only way to interact with the world reflects how oddly circumscribed foreign-policy debates are in mainstream US politics and why Paul's perspective is desperately needed in the GOP.
As the Texas congressman has explained many times, he supports international trade, travel, migration, diplomacy and cultural exchange. He supports military action when it's necessary for national defense - in response to the 9/11 attacks, for example.
The innaccurate "isolationist" label marks Paul as a fringe character whose views can be ignored. Given the dire consequences of reckless interventionism, that clearly isn't the case.
This week, America officially ended its Iraq war, nearly nine years after launching it based on the false claim that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to us because he had weapons of mass destruction.
The war, which replaced a brutal dictator with a corrupt government that may not be able to maintain peace, cost us $800 billion and nearly 4,500 American lives. More than 100,000 civilians were killed.
The regime American installed in Afghanistan is even weaker and more corrupt than the one in Iraq. Ten years later, we still have 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. So far, the war has cost about $500 bilion, 1,800 American lives and thousands of civilain casualties.
The United States would've avoided both of these costly nation-building projects if Congress had listened to Paul - or even to George W. Bush circa 2000, who (as Paul frequently notes) ran on a premise of a "humble" foreign policy that would not aim to solve all the world's problems. Now that the same people who supported the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are portraying Iran as an intolerable threat, some Paulian skepticism surely is appropriate.
That's especially true when the federal government borrows 36 cents of every dollar it spends, racking up a debt as big as the entire US economy. At the Nov. 22 debate, Paul corrected Mitt Romney, who complained that the Obama adminstration is "cutting a trillion dollars out of the defense budget." Actually, Paul said, "they're not cutting anything"; rather, "they're nibbling away at baseline budgeting and its automatic increases."
America has its military personnel in 150 countries, has nearly doubled its defense budget in the last decade and accounts for more than two-fifths of the world's military spending.
Paul challenges this mindless militarism. "We have an empire," he bluntly noted at the same debate. "We can't afford it."
For 35 years Paul has spoken truths that foreing policy mavens pf both parties prefer to ignore: that the Constitution give Congress alone the power to declare war, that unjustified interventions breed resentment that undermines our security, that there is a difference between military spending and defense spending, that foreign aid rewards autocrats and their cronies and that economic sanctions are an "act of war" that hurts people in the name of punishing the governments that oppress them.
If there's really no room for these arguments in the GOP, that it the party's fault, not Paul's.
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.
Friday, December 2, 2011
No news is no news
I haven't blogged for a while. There seems to be no news on Ron Paul, while every day Herman Cain
gets about a full page; Perry and Romney get almost the same. Why? For lying? For suddenly not being able to remember your words mid-sentence, or not knowing the voting age or the right date of election day in America?
All of which means that bad candidates get free press. Lazy journalists love it, they have lots to write about, but the voters do not get much information about sensible candidates.
In the meantime, much press has been given to the OWS movement, which is headed by rich kids who spend $700 a night on hotel rooms and eat luxury organic food. Another waste of time.
The circus grinds on, fools are in fashion and clowns rule. Somewhere in the background a sensible candidate
is calling for the abolition of government red tape and for American farmers to grow hemp. And a tree falls in a forest. We hear nothing, we see nothing. Then we ask why it is all falling apart.
gets about a full page; Perry and Romney get almost the same. Why? For lying? For suddenly not being able to remember your words mid-sentence, or not knowing the voting age or the right date of election day in America?
All of which means that bad candidates get free press. Lazy journalists love it, they have lots to write about, but the voters do not get much information about sensible candidates.
In the meantime, much press has been given to the OWS movement, which is headed by rich kids who spend $700 a night on hotel rooms and eat luxury organic food. Another waste of time.
The circus grinds on, fools are in fashion and clowns rule. Somewhere in the background a sensible candidate
is calling for the abolition of government red tape and for American farmers to grow hemp. And a tree falls in a forest. We hear nothing, we see nothing. Then we ask why it is all falling apart.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Occupy Wall Street is not into 30 days...and it is coming soon to a park near you.
This weekend it came to Times Square, after finding Washington Square Park
last week. Mayor Bloomberg tried to have it leave Zucotti Park, which he said
needed cleaning, but that failed. The campers stayed happy in their sleeping bags,
still getting free pizza and bagels and lox...and of course, taking their anti-capitalism
rant into McDonalds.
Which irony Drew Grant, writing in the NY Observer, was quick to point out in a large feature
article, pp.18-20 in the 17 October issue.
Grant was also quick to point out that there were no Ron Paul sympathizers: "We spent all day looking for a possible Tea Party member or Ron Paul sympathizer and can up empty-handed."
Funny, the Ron Paul people had the biggest banner there, it took three men to hold it up on the East side of Zucotti Park. And I was there on the west side promoting this blog and hemp (which Ron Paul supports). I asked another protester, or 'occupier' as Arnie likes to be called, and he just laughed; he'd seen plenty and he was not even looking; maybe Grant is blind. Or a total liar. I'm not calling him a liar, but I am pointing out that he may be a liar. Fine line between pointing out the truth here and getting sued for, well, pointing out the truth. Did I say he was a liar?
If I did so what....
The New York Times on Sunday, 16th (which for some reason actually came out after Grant's article of the 17th) seems to go to lengths to put down Ron Paul in an article by Matt Bai, who alludes to the 'radical isolationism of Ron Paul.'; no mention of Dr. Paul's actual popularity and his presence on the House Banking Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Nor any credible example of this 'radical isolationism.' A page or two later, quoting some lobbyist named John Freehery, Bai talks about Republicans having to sort out their 'Ron Paul problem." Excuse me? Ron Paul 'problem'?
Ron Paul is one of their only credible members. One does not read his name in exposes like the Trance-Formation of America or Rolling Stone articles about banking fraud. So maybe, since he does not go in for sexual predation and embezzlement, as do some Republicans, he is a problem. One may have to put this statement into context.
A piece in the New York Post a while back basically admitted that journalists avoided Ron Paul. And one wonders why? Is it because common sense is anathema to the media and political elites who ripped off America? Yes it is. And let them sue me if they want.
But first they have millions of protesters on their hands; Arab Spring has become Western Fall...and the protesters, or 'occupiers' as Arnie prefers to call them, are not just going to go away.
And among them there are plenty of Ron Paul supporters. Their website is
www.RonPaul2012.com
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Wall Street is my occupation
The protests are growing like starfish that have been chopped up by angry fishermen. The massive arrests only made things worse. It this the start of something really big? It seems so.
Tomorrow I will meet my friend Arnie and join the throng. One thing I wish to accomplish is the founding of the Centrist Party.
And if this kick off well, we will be asking Ron Paul to join it. I am no fan of the GOP, which ripped off money from me via a Wall Street banker years ago.
So who knows....this is of course an ambitious post. It could fade into obscurity or it could be a bit of history. We shall see...stay posted.
For anyone wishing to join this new party, get in touch with us at thecentristparty@hotmail.com
Tomorrow I will meet my friend Arnie and join the throng. One thing I wish to accomplish is the founding of the Centrist Party.
And if this kick off well, we will be asking Ron Paul to join it. I am no fan of the GOP, which ripped off money from me via a Wall Street banker years ago.
So who knows....this is of course an ambitious post. It could fade into obscurity or it could be a bit of history. We shall see...stay posted.
For anyone wishing to join this new party, get in touch with us at thecentristparty@hotmail.com
Monday, September 26, 2011
Herman Cain beats Perry
While it would be hoped that Dr Paul would have come in first in the Florida straw poll, there is some joy in seeing at least that Rick Perry has not; rather, Herman Cain placed first. So much for the papers saying that
there were really only 3 main GOP contenders, Bachmann, Perry and Romney. Bachmann, by the way,
only got 1.5% of the votes. Maybe this time she did not have funds to bus in voter, basically bribing them with free hotel stays and food.
Perry seems a bit meteoric. He rose on the word of journalists, and fell on his own word like a soldier falling on his sword. Even the far rigth John Podhoretz was quick to shoot the fallen horse.
Cain has been very supported on this site, but given his total lack of any experience in political office, we have slotted him for VP. Experience is a big issue. Personality is one thing, but when it comes to getting a job done, we all know that experience is key.
And Dr Paul has that.
Some are heavily backing Romney now, but who wants a president who contradicts himself on major issues? Consistency is another issue, and again, Dr Paul has that.
When will the press wake up?
there were really only 3 main GOP contenders, Bachmann, Perry and Romney. Bachmann, by the way,
only got 1.5% of the votes. Maybe this time she did not have funds to bus in voter, basically bribing them with free hotel stays and food.
Perry seems a bit meteoric. He rose on the word of journalists, and fell on his own word like a soldier falling on his sword. Even the far rigth John Podhoretz was quick to shoot the fallen horse.
Cain has been very supported on this site, but given his total lack of any experience in political office, we have slotted him for VP. Experience is a big issue. Personality is one thing, but when it comes to getting a job done, we all know that experience is key.
And Dr Paul has that.
Some are heavily backing Romney now, but who wants a president who contradicts himself on major issues? Consistency is another issue, and again, Dr Paul has that.
When will the press wake up?
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
AP on Ron Paul/Rick Perry debate
Philipp Elliot of the Associated Press just did a piece on Ron Paul. Here it is:
The back-and-forth between two Texans, who never have been particularly close, could spill over into Wednesday's debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., a memorial to the conservative who counseled fellow Republicans not to speak ill about one another.
Since then, Paul has been poking at Perry, seeking to tarnish the governor's image.
Last week, Paul likened Perry to a "candidate of the week" and predicted Perry's poll numbers would fall quickly once voters got to know him better. He told The Associated Press, "Texas has had a lot of changes in these last eight years, not exactly positive either."
The ad said: "Rick Perry helped lead Al Gore's campaign to undo the Reagan revolution, fighting to elect Al Gore president of the United States. Now, America must decide who to trust: Al Gore's Texas cheerleader or the one who stood with Reagan."
Perry was a Democrat serving in the state legislature at the time. He switched parties in 1989 and successfully ran for state agriculture commissioner as a Republican.
Paul's ad drew a rebuke from Perry's campaign, which said in a statement, "Like President Reagan, Gov. Perry has cut taxes and freed employers from government regulations that kill jobs."
Perry aides also dug up and distributed Paul's 1987 letter of resignation from the Republican Party.
Video: Chuck’s First Read: It’s debate time (on this page)
In it, Paul wrote, "I want to totally disassociate myself from the policies that have given us unprecedented deficits, massive monetary inflation, indiscriminate military spending, an irrational and unconstitutional foreign policy, zooming foreign aid, the exaltation of international banking, and the attack on our personal liberties and privacy."
Paul ran for president as a Libertarian in 1988; two decades later he ran as a Republican.
"Paul thought President Reagan was so bad, he left the GOP," Perry spokesman Mark Miner said, calling Paul's letter a broadside attack on every element of Reagan's record and philosophy.
Paul advisers promised not to shy away from highlighting parts of Perry's record that they say are inconsistent with his campaign pitch.
What to watch in tonight's debate
"We don't think the fact that you used to be a Democrat is the big problem here," Paul campaign chairman Jesse Benton said in an open letter to Perry on Wednesday. "The real problem is that, too often, you still act like one."
In 2008, Perry, who previously supported Texans Phil Gramm and George W. Bush for president, backed former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani over Paul in the GOP nomination fight.
Asked at the time about Paul, Perry dismissed his home state lawmaker.
"I didn't ever consider Ron Paul," he said. "You get to make choices in life. And I made a choice. Ron Paul is not mine for president. It's pretty simple for me."
WASHINGTON — A Texas-sized rivalry is brewing in the Republican presidential contest.
Texas Rep. Ron Paul is calling Texas Gov. Rick Perry "Al Gore's Texas cheerleader" for once working to help elect the Democrat. Perry's team, in turn, is branding Paul a turncoat for once leaving the GOP. The back-and-forth between two Texans, who never have been particularly close, could spill over into Wednesday's debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., a memorial to the conservative who counseled fellow Republicans not to speak ill about one another.
So far, neither Paul nor Perry is heeding that advice.
Over the past few weeks, both have seen their standing in the GOP field rise. Paul, a libertarian-leaning Republican who has a strong legion of die-hard supporters and a big bank account, came within 152 votes of winning an important test vote in Iowa on the same day that Perry, who leads in several national and state polls, entered the race to great fanfare among the party's conservative base.Since then, Paul has been poking at Perry, seeking to tarnish the governor's image.
Last week, Paul likened Perry to a "candidate of the week" and predicted Perry's poll numbers would fall quickly once voters got to know him better. He told The Associated Press, "Texas has had a lot of changes in these last eight years, not exactly positive either."
The ad said: "Rick Perry helped lead Al Gore's campaign to undo the Reagan revolution, fighting to elect Al Gore president of the United States. Now, America must decide who to trust: Al Gore's Texas cheerleader or the one who stood with Reagan."
Perry was a Democrat serving in the state legislature at the time. He switched parties in 1989 and successfully ran for state agriculture commissioner as a Republican.
Paul's ad drew a rebuke from Perry's campaign, which said in a statement, "Like President Reagan, Gov. Perry has cut taxes and freed employers from government regulations that kill jobs."
Perry aides also dug up and distributed Paul's 1987 letter of resignation from the Republican Party.
Video: Chuck’s First Read: It’s debate time (on this page)
In it, Paul wrote, "I want to totally disassociate myself from the policies that have given us unprecedented deficits, massive monetary inflation, indiscriminate military spending, an irrational and unconstitutional foreign policy, zooming foreign aid, the exaltation of international banking, and the attack on our personal liberties and privacy."
Paul ran for president as a Libertarian in 1988; two decades later he ran as a Republican.
"Paul thought President Reagan was so bad, he left the GOP," Perry spokesman Mark Miner said, calling Paul's letter a broadside attack on every element of Reagan's record and philosophy.
Paul advisers promised not to shy away from highlighting parts of Perry's record that they say are inconsistent with his campaign pitch.
What to watch in tonight's debate
"We don't think the fact that you used to be a Democrat is the big problem here," Paul campaign chairman Jesse Benton said in an open letter to Perry on Wednesday. "The real problem is that, too often, you still act like one."
In 2008, Perry, who previously supported Texans Phil Gramm and George W. Bush for president, backed former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani over Paul in the GOP nomination fight.
Asked at the time about Paul, Perry dismissed his home state lawmaker.
"I didn't ever consider Ron Paul," he said. "You get to make choices in life. And I made a choice. Ron Paul is not mine for president. It's pretty simple for me."
Thursday, September 1, 2011
GOP fundraisers in New York
The GOP's fundraising parade this last weekend got rained on, with Romney having to cancel events on Long Island. By Tuesday, the weather was better, and David Niehaus went ahead with his fundraiser at the Rooftop at 230 Fifth Avenue.
Picketing outside was a man who a campaigner and fundraiser ripped off years ago, he is now homeless as a result. Not a lot of the GOP members gave a damn about that, they just wanted to call security on him, which would have worked but some of the GOP members did take the time to talk to him; not surprising, they were all Ron Paul supporters who did. The rest of them were just put off by the sign saying that they needed to stop acting like whine brats, stop cyring, stop threatening, and act like men. Turns out this GOP fundraiser dude begged money from a friend, a former serviceman, and then used the money on a congressional campaign, and on a luxury pad for himself. $40,000 of it. But all this was just a joke to most of the GOP partiers. Watching someone in America go homeless because of some creepy thing they did just makes them laugh.
Which does not reflect well on any GOP member, Ron Paul included. However, I am sure that while many of the GOP have these kinds of skeletons in the closet - Paul does not. And the protester made clear that while he is going to strike at the upcoming Rick Perry fundraiser, and any other GOP fundraisers he finds in the city, he will leave Ron Paul, and for good measure, Herman Cain, free to garner support.
So he has a heart and is not just taking random hostages, but has made clear that he is going to make the GOP pay for this weird nonsense of theirs. And good. They can serve as collateral for a bad debt.
There was also talk at the event of a Centrist Party emerging, taking the decent people out of both parties, nominating Ron Paul as the presidential candidate, and getting the US out of the mess that both major parties have caused.
That is probably the most intelligent move in US politics in several decades, since Teddy Roosevelt started his own third party. But they are not going to call it the Bull Moose Party. That was TR's mistake. Why are parties called after large mammals in the US? Well, not all. Actually there are quite a number of parties which aren't; the most aptly named, Democratus Rex. How about Elephantus Mortus?
Picketing outside was a man who a campaigner and fundraiser ripped off years ago, he is now homeless as a result. Not a lot of the GOP members gave a damn about that, they just wanted to call security on him, which would have worked but some of the GOP members did take the time to talk to him; not surprising, they were all Ron Paul supporters who did. The rest of them were just put off by the sign saying that they needed to stop acting like whine brats, stop cyring, stop threatening, and act like men. Turns out this GOP fundraiser dude begged money from a friend, a former serviceman, and then used the money on a congressional campaign, and on a luxury pad for himself. $40,000 of it. But all this was just a joke to most of the GOP partiers. Watching someone in America go homeless because of some creepy thing they did just makes them laugh.
Which does not reflect well on any GOP member, Ron Paul included. However, I am sure that while many of the GOP have these kinds of skeletons in the closet - Paul does not. And the protester made clear that while he is going to strike at the upcoming Rick Perry fundraiser, and any other GOP fundraisers he finds in the city, he will leave Ron Paul, and for good measure, Herman Cain, free to garner support.
So he has a heart and is not just taking random hostages, but has made clear that he is going to make the GOP pay for this weird nonsense of theirs. And good. They can serve as collateral for a bad debt.
There was also talk at the event of a Centrist Party emerging, taking the decent people out of both parties, nominating Ron Paul as the presidential candidate, and getting the US out of the mess that both major parties have caused.
That is probably the most intelligent move in US politics in several decades, since Teddy Roosevelt started his own third party. But they are not going to call it the Bull Moose Party. That was TR's mistake. Why are parties called after large mammals in the US? Well, not all. Actually there are quite a number of parties which aren't; the most aptly named, Democratus Rex. How about Elephantus Mortus?
Friday, August 26, 2011
Sarah Wheaton in the New York Times
On the 23rd, Sarah Wheaton of the NYT had a space devoted to GOP reaction to Libya; Michele Bachmann comes off as a dove, but one wonders if her protest is just to be contrary? I mean if W had nuked Libya, would she not be giving thanks and praise? One wonders...and one wonders why Wheaton omitted any word about Ron Paul. Are mentally challenged journalists shaking in their boots that there may come to power a president who does not do stupid things that they can go write about easily?
Just for the record, the complaints Romney and Bachmann make do not deserve the space - what is of note is the fact that Ron Paul wanted to limit the president's power to make war like this and he is right.
Whether or not Libya turns out OK, this is a democracy and the president's power needs to be limited in this regard as it was with Washington. Both parties have failed the American people in allowing this to happen. It could set a dangerous precedent - and just now it is too early to say if things are going well in Libya - but that is not the point; we hope the rebels establish a working government and there is lots of peace and love, which may not actually be the case - but whatever happens, it needs to happen lawfully.
Just for the record, the complaints Romney and Bachmann make do not deserve the space - what is of note is the fact that Ron Paul wanted to limit the president's power to make war like this and he is right.
Whether or not Libya turns out OK, this is a democracy and the president's power needs to be limited in this regard as it was with Washington. Both parties have failed the American people in allowing this to happen. It could set a dangerous precedent - and just now it is too early to say if things are going well in Libya - but that is not the point; we hope the rebels establish a working government and there is lots of peace and love, which may not actually be the case - but whatever happens, it needs to happen lawfully.
Friday, August 19, 2011
Ron Paul on front page now of New York Times
So now Ron Paul gets mentioned, albeit only slightly, in an article on the front page of the New York Times yesterday by John M. Broder, whose theme is that all GOP candidates bash the EPA. Well, not quite in Ron Paul's case. But let's not let a good headline be spoiled by a detailed study of things...
It is almost true, given that Bachmann and Perry want to either padlock its doors or impose a moratorium on environmental regulation. So good news for idiots who want to pollute America.
Herman Cain disappoints me in that he is ready to have independent commissions which would include oil and gas execs. Why not let child abusers run the schools while you're at it.
Broder, not wishing to spoil his own headline, did not bother to mention that Ron Paul is supporting a hemp initiative...see it on http://www.hempforvictory.blogspot.com/ Recently one of his contsituents sent him a letter and he replied, it is up there. Broder and his mates at the NYT can check it out. Or just write simplistic articles, which is much easier.
But I have to admit the GOP is the party that scares me when it comes to the environment; remember the joke, how much energy does it take to destroy all America's forests? Just one watt...an allusion to James Watt, Secretary of the Environment in the Reagan days...back then they figured that trees caused pollution. Watt went after trees and falconers with a vengeance, trying to get them framed (the falconers, not the trees) for smuggling in one of the biggest legal farces in US history. He did not like their pro-environemntal stance. Ultimately he, and not a single falconer, went to prison.
So there are lots of falconers in redneck states who are not going to vote GOP that easily, even if they are hunters. If the GOP is going to overcome its image as treekillers, it better get in Ron Paul.
And then there was an article on the back page of the paper, which said a lot of good about Ron Paul without bothering to mention him, but rather by NOT mentioning him; this one by Frank Bruni. Personally, of all the NYT political hacks, I like Bruni the best; I will forgive his ommission in regards to Dr Paul as his article was on GOP loonies, titled "Heroes, Until They've Arrived." It started off with Mr Mouth, Rick Perry; then made its way to mention Sarah Palin (the quitter), Chris Christie (of very little political experience), Paul Ryan ( Paul who?), Rudy Giuliani (of whom he notes: Some Republicans never learn), Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich (as the blue-eyed Grinch who stole Grandma's Boniva) and Marco Rubio (Marco who?).
So there you have it; that leaves us with Ron Paul and Herman Cain, even if the latter does have some less than perfect ideas about the environment.
It is almost true, given that Bachmann and Perry want to either padlock its doors or impose a moratorium on environmental regulation. So good news for idiots who want to pollute America.
Herman Cain disappoints me in that he is ready to have independent commissions which would include oil and gas execs. Why not let child abusers run the schools while you're at it.
Broder, not wishing to spoil his own headline, did not bother to mention that Ron Paul is supporting a hemp initiative...see it on http://www.hempforvictory.blogspot.com/ Recently one of his contsituents sent him a letter and he replied, it is up there. Broder and his mates at the NYT can check it out. Or just write simplistic articles, which is much easier.
But I have to admit the GOP is the party that scares me when it comes to the environment; remember the joke, how much energy does it take to destroy all America's forests? Just one watt...an allusion to James Watt, Secretary of the Environment in the Reagan days...back then they figured that trees caused pollution. Watt went after trees and falconers with a vengeance, trying to get them framed (the falconers, not the trees) for smuggling in one of the biggest legal farces in US history. He did not like their pro-environemntal stance. Ultimately he, and not a single falconer, went to prison.
So there are lots of falconers in redneck states who are not going to vote GOP that easily, even if they are hunters. If the GOP is going to overcome its image as treekillers, it better get in Ron Paul.
And then there was an article on the back page of the paper, which said a lot of good about Ron Paul without bothering to mention him, but rather by NOT mentioning him; this one by Frank Bruni. Personally, of all the NYT political hacks, I like Bruni the best; I will forgive his ommission in regards to Dr Paul as his article was on GOP loonies, titled "Heroes, Until They've Arrived." It started off with Mr Mouth, Rick Perry; then made its way to mention Sarah Palin (the quitter), Chris Christie (of very little political experience), Paul Ryan ( Paul who?), Rudy Giuliani (of whom he notes: Some Republicans never learn), Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich (as the blue-eyed Grinch who stole Grandma's Boniva) and Marco Rubio (Marco who?).
So there you have it; that leaves us with Ron Paul and Herman Cain, even if the latter does have some less than perfect ideas about the environment.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
New York Times on lack of Ron Paul coverage
Ron Paul was in yesterday's New York Times for the fact that he was not mentioned in the NYT - after coming in a close second in the straw poll; see previous post for details. Michael D. Shear writes:
'Is Representative Ron Paul getting a raw deal in the news coverage of his presidential campaign?
Jon Stewart, the host of "The Daily Show", thinks so. And so do many fans of Mr. Paul, who have taken to e-mail and Twitter to vent their frustration that his strong second-place finish in the Iowa straw poll is being largely ignored.
"It's absolutely horrendous and despicable the lack of media coverage Ron Paul is getting," one of them wrote on Twitter.
Readers of the New York Times expressed their views on its coverage of the straw polls in a flurry of e-mails. Mr Paul, a 12-term Republican congressman from Texas, lost to Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota by only 152 of 17,000 votes cast.
"We live in a democratic republic, where the votes of the people deserve to be reported by the media, not editorialized into obscurity, wrote Matthew H. Harder.
Richard Timm wrote that "Ron Paul's second-place finish merited much more attention in your article."
"Even if you don't believe he can win the nomination," Mr. Timm wrote, "don't you think it's worth given the only antiwar Republican worth a little more emphasis?"
But some skeptics have pointed out that Mr. Paul's strength at the straw poll seems outsized when compared with his popularity across the country, at least as measured by opinion polls.
Of course, Mr. Paul's followers would say that his low standing in the polls is a result of the failure of the news media to adequately report on his successes at events like the straw poll.
I called the NYT - 212-556-1234 to get to talk to this reporter, but the voice recognition machine either did not have him on as a reporter or sent me to other people. The NYT phone maze is hard to navigate, it's as if they want to write hit-and-run articles and then hide from the general public; once a reporter contacted me about a stash of stolen art I was privy to, and when I told him there were Picassos, he was so arrogant the refused to believe me; then it turned out there were Picassos - which had been stolen by the movers, who tried to sell them stupidly in NY.
The NYT has to learn to listen and it would be a better paper; it reports on Michele Bachmann, who got a write up yesterday again for her stupidity - when she remarked on it being Elvis' birthday - it wasn't - and on Rick Perry - again, for his stupidity - and he got a much lengthier column for saying something that sounded like a threat towards a government official. All the papers covered it, and even right-wingers like John Podhoretz were forced to note how wrong it was.
But when someone acts presidential, reporters ignore it.
I did get through to Jeff Zeleny, who is also covering the debates, and had to call his other number - 202-862-0401. I told him I'd been reading the paper for over 40 years and that they ought to listen to the people who pay their salaries. Next I will email him at zeleny@nytimes.com
So let's see...they missed the Picasso story, even when they were the ones to contact me, hopefully they will not miss the Ron Paul story as well.
'Is Representative Ron Paul getting a raw deal in the news coverage of his presidential campaign?
Jon Stewart, the host of "The Daily Show", thinks so. And so do many fans of Mr. Paul, who have taken to e-mail and Twitter to vent their frustration that his strong second-place finish in the Iowa straw poll is being largely ignored.
"It's absolutely horrendous and despicable the lack of media coverage Ron Paul is getting," one of them wrote on Twitter.
Readers of the New York Times expressed their views on its coverage of the straw polls in a flurry of e-mails. Mr Paul, a 12-term Republican congressman from Texas, lost to Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota by only 152 of 17,000 votes cast.
"We live in a democratic republic, where the votes of the people deserve to be reported by the media, not editorialized into obscurity, wrote Matthew H. Harder.
Richard Timm wrote that "Ron Paul's second-place finish merited much more attention in your article."
"Even if you don't believe he can win the nomination," Mr. Timm wrote, "don't you think it's worth given the only antiwar Republican worth a little more emphasis?"
But some skeptics have pointed out that Mr. Paul's strength at the straw poll seems outsized when compared with his popularity across the country, at least as measured by opinion polls.
Of course, Mr. Paul's followers would say that his low standing in the polls is a result of the failure of the news media to adequately report on his successes at events like the straw poll.
I called the NYT - 212-556-1234 to get to talk to this reporter, but the voice recognition machine either did not have him on as a reporter or sent me to other people. The NYT phone maze is hard to navigate, it's as if they want to write hit-and-run articles and then hide from the general public; once a reporter contacted me about a stash of stolen art I was privy to, and when I told him there were Picassos, he was so arrogant the refused to believe me; then it turned out there were Picassos - which had been stolen by the movers, who tried to sell them stupidly in NY.
The NYT has to learn to listen and it would be a better paper; it reports on Michele Bachmann, who got a write up yesterday again for her stupidity - when she remarked on it being Elvis' birthday - it wasn't - and on Rick Perry - again, for his stupidity - and he got a much lengthier column for saying something that sounded like a threat towards a government official. All the papers covered it, and even right-wingers like John Podhoretz were forced to note how wrong it was.
But when someone acts presidential, reporters ignore it.
I did get through to Jeff Zeleny, who is also covering the debates, and had to call his other number - 202-862-0401. I told him I'd been reading the paper for over 40 years and that they ought to listen to the people who pay their salaries. Next I will email him at zeleny@nytimes.com
So let's see...they missed the Picasso story, even when they were the ones to contact me, hopefully they will not miss the Ron Paul story as well.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Missing: Real News
The press in New York must not like Ron Paul; oddly for this city, it is lavishing its print space on Rick Perry, Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann. Michael Barone in the Post (owned by Rupert Murdoch) writes: 'Some candidates did mention intelligent policy initiatives in the debate.' But does he mention Paul? No. He praises Romney and Bachmann; who are not going to get many votes among New Yorkers. Then he goes on to talk about Thaddeus McCotter (excuse me, Thaddeus who?) for promoting debt-for-equity swaps.
Is McCotter on the House Banking Committee? Did he suggest the fed stop borrowing from the fed and by so doing reduce the debt in a single swoop? Where was Barone when Ron Paul put this forward? Or any of the rest of the press, for that matter?
The New York Times turns a lens on the press when it said in Sunday's paper the following: 'If politicians exhibited some silliness in Iowa, do did reporters. Like hounds to a whistle, they swarmed to Sarah Palin when she dropped by the state fair on Friday, again rewarding her coyness about the presidential race with extra-rapt attention. She dithers; we drool.'
And you are fools. You mislead the public, whether by accident or by design. The front page of yesterday's NYT one might call an out-and-out lie; it has a line in large print reading: 'Top 3 Contenders Set Sights on Obama and One Another.'
Top 3? Ron Paul was #2 in the straw poll, and only a point behind Bachmann - see the post before this to see why; some would say Bachmann's votes were bogus. But granting her first place, how is the runner-up completely forgotten the next day by so large a news outfit as the NYT? Or are the reporters lost in their silliness, drooling over Ms. Hotlips from Alaska?
The other two contenders they talk about are Rick Perry - who was not even present at the straw poll, and Mitt Romney. And Romney did not come even near to 2nd place. So how is he a top contender?
As to Perry, I think we are in real danger; he was Bush's vice-governor. Not a good sign. He is rather against gun control, having signed measures to make it easier to carry a concealed weapon - he has a permit for this himself.
But as the NYT reporters Jeff Zeleny and Michael Shear noted in yesterday's article, quoting Senator Charles E. Grassley - 'This is a very fluid situation right now. From here on, you are shooting with real bullets.'
Is McCotter on the House Banking Committee? Did he suggest the fed stop borrowing from the fed and by so doing reduce the debt in a single swoop? Where was Barone when Ron Paul put this forward? Or any of the rest of the press, for that matter?
The New York Times turns a lens on the press when it said in Sunday's paper the following: 'If politicians exhibited some silliness in Iowa, do did reporters. Like hounds to a whistle, they swarmed to Sarah Palin when she dropped by the state fair on Friday, again rewarding her coyness about the presidential race with extra-rapt attention. She dithers; we drool.'
And you are fools. You mislead the public, whether by accident or by design. The front page of yesterday's NYT one might call an out-and-out lie; it has a line in large print reading: 'Top 3 Contenders Set Sights on Obama and One Another.'
Top 3? Ron Paul was #2 in the straw poll, and only a point behind Bachmann - see the post before this to see why; some would say Bachmann's votes were bogus. But granting her first place, how is the runner-up completely forgotten the next day by so large a news outfit as the NYT? Or are the reporters lost in their silliness, drooling over Ms. Hotlips from Alaska?
The other two contenders they talk about are Rick Perry - who was not even present at the straw poll, and Mitt Romney. And Romney did not come even near to 2nd place. So how is he a top contender?
As to Perry, I think we are in real danger; he was Bush's vice-governor. Not a good sign. He is rather against gun control, having signed measures to make it easier to carry a concealed weapon - he has a permit for this himself.
But as the NYT reporters Jeff Zeleny and Michael Shear noted in yesterday's article, quoting Senator Charles E. Grassley - 'This is a very fluid situation right now. From here on, you are shooting with real bullets.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)