Republican POTUS Candidates

[Enki]

Cincinnatus Your view of Obama is very much how I see it. I generally think most Obama criticisms are wide of the mark, but yours are dead on, or at least I am biased to agree with you. It's nice to see someone in a position such as yours confirm the suspicions that come from trying to cut through the internet disinfo.

[Enki]

I think you could leave out the part about the First Lady (sounds a bit petty to me), but I am in agreement with you otherwise.

Yeah...concurred.

[crashtech]

If Paul's opponents did a compilation of the alleged quotes that they believe to be "smoking guns," this could possibly change some minds. I'm a fairly inquisitive guy, but wading through all that 99.99% innocuous old news is just too boring and time consuming, and I would bet I am not alone.

If you really want to, I can get you a lot of stuff. It's pretty horrendous actually. It's totally smoking gun territory for people who care about such things.

Like: Martin Luther King Jr was a communist pedophile.

Post it up, it deserves to be seen, examined, dissected, etc.

[Enki]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/2 ... 67260.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de_CSuJC ... re=related

There's a couple places to start. I haven't been all that particularly interested in it so I haven't gone looking for primary sources. But you know, if there's slander to be said about a Republican candidate, all of my lefty friends will be on it when it becomes big news. I'd heard about this years ago and gave it a passing interest. As I said above, if he ends the drug war, then he will have done more for black people than anyone since Civil Rights, policywise at least.

[Typhoon]

Ron Paul.

Point:

Dorothy Rabinonitz attack on Ron Paul in the WSJ | What Ron Paul Thinks of America

It seemed improbable that the best-known American propagandist for our enemies could be near the top of the pack in the Iowa contest, but there it is.

Counterpoint:

Foreign Policy Journal | Ron Paul: Propagandist or Prophet?

[crashtech]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/2 ... 67260.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de_CSuJC ... re=related

There's a couple places to start. I haven't been all that particularly interested in it so I haven't gone looking for primary sources. But you know, if there's slander to be said about a Republican candidate, all of my lefty friends will be on it when it becomes big news. I'd heard about this years ago and gave it a passing interest. As I said above, if he ends the drug war, then he will have done more for black people than anyone since Civil Rights, policywise at least.

I looked at the Huffpost article, and started watching the Youtube vid. The vid in particular was a turnoff, he started in with insulting language before even presenting any information. I don't have patience for that.

The portion of the newsletter that I read seemed out there on the fringe, but I fail to see how warning of a coming "race war" in and of itself indicates racism. Paranoia, maybe, but racism?

In regard to the comments made about MLK attributed to Paul, these types of allegations were not at all unusual at the time and seem to have at least a kernel of truth to them. We may never know, because as we all know, official histories are often sanitized. At any rate, attacks on a person's character cannot automatically be, using MLK's own criterion, used as evidence that racism is the motive for such criticism. I for one am glad that MLK has his own holiday, we needed a hero like that, and if they had to erase a few warts, so be it.

So while I can see that some of the stuff is pretty distasteful, especially by today's standards, the lack of clear attribution and lack of specificity in the language, to me, adds up to no great shakes. Maybe that gives me something in common with Obama supporters who were so readily able to ignore the (even more extreme) language of Reverend Wright.

[Enki]

I looked at the Huffpost article, and started watching the Youtube vid. The vid in particular was a turnoff, he started in with insulting language before even presenting any information. I don't have patience for that.

Thing about Cenk is, he agrees with Ron Paul on a great many things.

The portion of the newsletter that I read seemed out there on the fringe, but I fail to see how warning of a coming "race war" in and of itself indicates racism. Paranoia, maybe, but racism?

In regard to the comments made about MLK attributed to Paul, these types of allegations were not at all unusual at the time and seem to have at least a kernel of truth to them. We may never know, because as we all know, official histories are often sanitized. At any rate, attacks on a person's character cannot automatically be, using MLK's own criterion, used as evidence that racism is the motive for such criticism. I for one am glad that MLK has his own holiday, we needed a hero like that, and if they had to erase a few warts, so be it.

Yea...it's going to make Paul persona non grata against people who might have voted for him otherwise though.

So while I can see that some of the stuff is pretty distasteful, especially by today's standards, the lack of clear attribution and lack of specificity in the language, to me, adds up to no great shakes. Maybe that gives me something in common with Obama supporters who were so readily able to ignore the (even more extreme) language of Reverend Wright.

It is what it is. Race is another dogwhistle that hurts rational politics. I think part of it is that a lot of people who voted for Obama probably agreed with Wright. I didn't think Wright was totally wrong. I don't know if MLK was any of those things, but I do agree that the US has done horrible things to the black community, continues to do, and has done dirty to the third world at large.

[crashtech]

...the US has...done dirty to the third world at large.

Yes, and ironically enough, Paul is the ONLY candidate facing that truth head on. As Mr. P pointed out on the Diegetics board, the current administration (as well as ALL the other R candidates, of course) seem ready and willing to continue using the Third World as our whipping boy.

[crashtech]

Ron Paul.

Point:

Dorothy Rabinonitz attack on Ron Paul in the WSJ | What Ron Paul Thinks of America

It seemed improbable that the best-known American propagandist for our enemies could be near the top of the pack in the Iowa contest, but there it is.

Counterpoint:

Foreign Policy Journal | Ron Paul: Propagandist or Prophet?

I find Ms. Rabinowitz's accusations that Ron Paul is not only a propagandist for our enemies (perilously close to crying "treason," imo) but "appreciates" the motives of the 9/11 terrorists to be heinous and defamatory:

True, we've heard the assertions before. But rarely have we heard in any American political figure such exclusive concern for, and appreciation of, the motives of those who attacked us

[Enki]

...the US has...done dirty to the third world at large.

Yes, and ironically enough, Paul is the ONLY candidate facing that truth head on. As Mr. P pointed out on the Diegetics board, the current administration (as well as ALL the other R candidates, of course) seem ready and willing to continue using the Third World as our whipping boy.

Agreed, which is why I'd like to see Ron Paul win the R nom.

That thing about supporting 'our enemies' is so ridiculous because they are enemies because people like the writer above decided they are our enemies.

[Typhoon]

Ron Paul.

Point:

Dorothy Rabinonitz attack on Ron Paul in the WSJ | What Ron Paul Thinks of America

It seemed improbable that the best-known American propagandist for our enemies could be near the top of the pack in the Iowa contest, but there it is.

Counterpoint:

Foreign Policy Journal | Ron Paul: Propagandist or Prophet?

I find Ms. Rabinowitz's accusations that Ron Paul is not only a propagandist for our enemies (perilously close to crying "treason," imo) but "appreciates" the motives of the 9/11 terrorists to be heinous and defamatory:

True, we've heard the assertions before. But rarely have we heard in any American political figure such exclusive concern for, and appreciation of, the motives of those who attacked us

I think that POTUS Paul would be a nightmare come true for many powerful vested interests that would very much like to see yet another war-mongering POTUS elected.
Hence, the hit piece in the WSJ.

However, one has to wonder how many more such spendthrift POTUS and US Congress the US can continue to afford.

[Typhoon]

The NAACP President Didn't Get the 'Ron Paul Is a Racist' Memo Either

[crashtech]

The NAACP President Didn't Get the 'Ron Paul Is a Racist' Memo Either

Linder joined Alex Jones for two segments on his KLBJ Sunday show this evening, during which he commented on the controversy created by media hit pieces that attempted to tarnish Paul as a racist by making him culpable for decades old newsletter articles written by other people...

...Asked directly if Ron Paul was a racist, Linder responded "No I don't," adding that he had heard Ron Paul speak out about police repression of black communities and mandatory minimum sentences on many occasions.

Dr. Paul has also publicly praised Martin Luther King as his hero on many occasions spanning back 20 years.

"I've read Ron Paul's whole philosophy, I also understand what he's saying from a political standpoint and why people are attacking him," said Linder.

"If you scare the folks that have the money, they're going to attack you and they're going to take it out of context," he added.

"What he's saying is really really threatening the powers that be and that's what they fear," concluded the NAACP President.

[Typhoon]

BBC | Republicans ready for Iowa test

Voters in the rural state of Iowa are preparing for the first test of the US election season as they choose a Republican candidate to take on Barack Obama for the White House in November.

Is the purpose of this event to winnow down the field of candidates?

Predictions?

[Azrael]

BBC | Republicans ready for Iowa test

Voters in the rural state of Iowa are preparing for the first test of the US election season as they choose a Republican candidate to take on Barack Obama for the White House in November.

Is the purpose of this event to winnow down the field of candidates?

Yes. In theory.

Predictions?

1. Santorum
2. Romney
3. Paul

[Typhoon]

LA Times | Near real time Iowa Caucus results

19:42 PST

1/ Santorum: 25%

2/ Romney: 23.2%

3/ Paul: 21.4%

Santorum?

[monster_gardener]

BBC | Republicans ready for Iowa test

Voters in the rural state of Iowa are preparing for the first test of the US election season as they choose a Republican candidate to take on Barack Obama for the White House in November.

Is the purpose of this event to winnow down the field of candidates?

Yes. In theory.

Predictions?

1. Santorum
2. Romney
3. Paul

Thank you Very Much for your post, Azrael.....

My congratulations.........

Hope you made some money..........

How good are you with dogs and ponies?

[Azrael]

BBC | Republicans ready for Iowa test

Voters in the rural state of Iowa are preparing for the first test of the US election season as they choose a Republican candidate to take on Barack Obama for the White House in November.

Is the purpose of this event to winnow down the field of candidates?

Yes. In theory.

Predictions?

1. Santorum
2. Romney
3. Paul

Thank you Very Much for your post, Azrael.....

You're welcome.

My congratulations.........

Thanks. Well, the night isn't over, but I think it will hold.

Hope you made some money..........

I'm afraid I didn't bet a dime.

How good are you with dogs and ponies?

Mediocre. Invest in a no load, low cost, broad index stock mutual fund. Vanguard has some good funds.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

Look folks

Don't want to go into what's going on in Iowa electorate mind

but

Romney and Santorum being front runner ! !

consider Obama American president for 4 more yrs

if Iranians can hold until election done, and Hussein Barak balls out of Zionist hands .. he might do a Nixon

.

[Typhoon]

Santorum: 29,968 votes | 24.5%

Romney: 29,964 votes | 24.5%

Paul: 26,186 votes | 21.4%

So was Santorum the come from behind candidate? I don't recall many pundits, except Azrael, predicting Santorum on top.

What was RP's standing during the last Iowa caucas?

[Mr. Perfect]

1. Santorum
2. Romney
3. Paul

Wow. You had me beat.

[Mr. Perfect]

What was RP's standing during the last Iowa caucas?

TV says 10%

[Mr. Perfect]

1. Santorum
2. Romney
3. Paul

Wow. You had me beat.

Breaking news. Romney squeaks it out.

[Typhoon]

1. Santorum
2. Romney
3. Paul

Wow. You had me beat.

Breaking news. Romney squeaks it out.

JrjOLKRi7wg

[Ibrahim]

Certainly its all fun and games to people who weren't going to vote for him anyway, but aren't there any Paul supporters out there who might see this stuff and think twice?

I don't find it compelling. As I see it. 'So what if he is a racist?' Lets take a look at it as though he is a racist, say we believe it's true, so what? The reason why is because he would do more to end the most racist policies in America than any other candidate. So even if he is personally a racist, his ideology doesn't even take race into account. He wants the law to be truly agnostic on the concept of race. He'd end the drug war which is the most racist policy we have in this country. Fewer black people would be harassed by cops, fewer black people would go to prison. So what if he won't let a black man marry his daughter? The result of a Ron Paul Presidency would make the United States a less racist country than a Barack Obama Presidency.

The issue isn't that the newsletters are just racist, the issue is that they are, collectively, insane. To me Paul supporters appear to be backing an mental case on the basis of him saying one or two clever things for every ten pages of lunacy.

But I'm out of date already. Paul is not the man of the hour anymore, Santorum is, and he's also a sinister insane person but without the zany charm.

I picked Romney months ago, and I stand by that.