Ron Paul's electability

By Ilana Mercer
October 12, 2007

About one thing Mike Huckabee is right (OK, maybe two): The presidential hopeful told Chris Matthews that if Republicans want to win the 2008 election, they must nominate a candidate who'll appeal to as many independents and Democrats as possible. Dark horse Huckabee expressed the hope that he was the man.

Wishful thinking aside, when it comes to Iraq, Huckabee and the rest of the Republican candidates for president, bar Ron Paul, are at odds with the American people. According to every conceivable poll – Gallup, Rasmussen, ABC News/Washington Post – most Americans now oppose the war in Iraq, deem it a mistake and "support the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq within the next year."

Like it or not, these are the facts. Iraq, polls predict, will dominate the 2008 elections. Yet nine of the Republican candidates are still flogging that fiasco with brio. On this salient issue, they've adopted a position in opposition to popular wisdom; on Iraq, the Republican candidates are mimicking a man whose approval rating is in the low 30s.

Rabbiting on about how Iraq is part of a grander ideological war against terror won't wash any longer; Americans are hip to that hoax. The idea that we can rehabilitate what we ruined in Iraq is delusional – a function of a collective mindset that rejects reality and its lessons. We can't fix Iraq because of what we wrought – because of the original sin of invasion. The sinner cannot turn savior.

(Column continues below)

Article

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

It would guarantee a Republican loss, followed by a power blckout from all the paper shredders in the White House, followed by a signing statement by Bush removing all the illegal powers he gave himself.

Yes, I've heard that lately as well. Apparently he's recently picked up endorsements from Stormfront, as well as David Duke who calls him "Our King."

He certainly seems to have the White Power persuasion tied up.

Ron Paul is only like Hitler in the sense that when he is talking about a few key issues, he seems quite likeable. But when you find out what he actually believes you will run away scared.

Ron Paul - War in Iraq is bad.
Hitler - I will improve the economy.

Ron Paul - No More FREE trade.
Hitler - Kill Jews.

I guess you could apply this to everyone, but the point being, most people that support Ron Paul have no clue what it would mean and what he believes regarding life in America.


Ixtellor

P.S. Ron Paul could NEVER be elected President.

__________________
_______________________________________
George W. Bush "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building"

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

Ron Paul is this decade's "Ross Perot."

He's got a few good ideas, but he's clueless on America's real problems. He has some good goals for America, but has no idea how to attain them (ie: South Park's Underpants Gnomes). ...and he comes across like a crazy old coot...kinda like Perot.

These people are going to vote for the Republican candidate regardless.

A candidate can't control each and every individual that votes for him or her.

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

Your arrogance is really appalling.

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

Why do the storm troopers like Paul anyway?
Is there something racist about Paul I don't get?
Or is it just the neo-fascists suffering their usual delusions that they are the constitutional libertarian types?

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

Because he's not for policing of the world, and we shouldn't be trying to force our views of other foreign nations. Especially if their religion goes against it.
The troops like him because they don't want to be in Iraq a lot of them are republicans so there for Paul stands out for them.





__________________________________________________ _____________
"You wanna get rid of drug crime in this country? Fine, let's just get rid of all the drug laws." -Ron Paul

No, there's nothing racist about Paul.

If you're really interested in Ron Paul's views on Racism, read this article written by the good doctor: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul381.html

And here's a longer article that totally refutes the allegations made against him:


http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=41822

Ron Paul Race Smear Erased?

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com

Internet information claiming that presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX) is a racist – and made derogatory comments about African Americans - has been making the rounds within the blogosphere. But sources close to the editorial group that published the newsletter (or newsletters) that supposedly carried the comments claim that Ron Paul never had anything to do with them, and wasn’t even aware of them.

These sources say that editorial operation in question was a fairly large one, and profitable for its time - focused in large part on measures that one could take to generate a lifestyle independent of government influence and intervention.

The publication, or publications, comprised a business venture to which Ron Paul lent his name. Headquarters were “60 miles away” from Ron Paul’s personal Texas offices. At the time that the publications were being disseminated, primarily in the 1980s, Ron Paul was involved in numerous activities including Libertarian politics. He eventually ran for U.S. president as a Libertarian.

“This was a big operation,” says one source. “And Ron Paul was a busy man. He was doctor, a politician and free-market commentator. A publication had to go out at a certain time and Ron Paul often was not around to oversee the lay out, printing or mailing. Many times he did not participate in the composition, either.”

This source and others add that publications utilized guest writers and editors on a regular basis. Often these guest writers and editors would write a “Ron Paul” column, under which the derogatory comments might have been issued.

Says one source, “Ron Paul didn’t know about those comments, or know they were written under his name until much later when they were brought to his attention. There were several issues that went out with comments that he would not ordinarily make. He was angry when he saw them.”

Ron Paul has said that he did not write the comments in question, but, nonetheless, has taken "moral" responsibility for them.

An excerpt from an apparent interview with Texas Monthly as quoted on the blog Everything2.com clarifies the above information as follows:

"In spite of calls from Gary Bledsoe, the president of the Texas State Conference of the NAACP, and other civil rights leaders for an apology for such obvious racial typecasting, Paul stood his ground. He said only that his remarks about Barbara Jordan related to her stands on affirmative action and that his written comments about blacks were in the context of 'current events and statistical reports of the time.' He denied any racist intent. What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U. S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this.

"When I ask him why, he pauses for a moment, then says, 'I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. It wasn't my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady.' ...

"His reasons for keeping this a secret are harder to understand: 'They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them . . . I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn't come from me directly, but they campaign aides said that's too confusing. "It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it." ' It is a measure of his stubbornness, determination, and ultimately his contrarian nature that, until this surprising volte-face in our interview, he had never shared this secret. It seems, in retrospect, that it would have been far, far easier to have told the truth at the time."

http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=Ron%20Paul

The operative sentence in the above would seem to be: “What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U. S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this.” The remarks may well have been seen as out of character because they were not written by Ron Paul, and he had no knowledge of them and no input into their composition, even though he eventually took responsibility for them.

Adds a source aware of the current tempest over these remarks, “Anybody who claims that Ron Paul made the comments in question is deliberately mis-stating what occurred to make political points. It is a measure of [his opponents] desperation that they are dredging this up again. Anybody who reads all that he has written – and there’s lots of it – could see that right away.”


I have no clue why they support him. It's their usual delusions.

And every indication would say those folks voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004.

The KKK didn't officially come out and endorse George Bush, for the reason given in the following inverview with the KKK's grand wizard:

Liberator: Quite some time age, David Duke was into politics. But I haven't heard The Klan rally behind a party or endorse a candidate since.

Berry (KKK Wizard): Say The Klan liked George W. Bush. If we came out and supported him, don't you think that would hurt him?

Liberator: Yea...it may be perceived as the kiss of death.

Berry: If we wanted George W. Bush to win, we would make an announcement that we support his opponent because people hate the Klan so much. Just because we support a candidate, the media is going to find something racist about him and make him loose the election.

http://www.liberator.net/articles/KKKJeffBerry.html

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer