The One Man Who Can Stop Sarah Palin - Ron Paul

[purplechoe]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/50687.html


February 16, 2010
The One Man Who Can Stop Sarah Palin
Posted by Lew Rockwell on February 16, 2010 04:04 PM

Only a Ron Paul “ambush in Iowa” can stop Palin from being the Republican presidential nominee for 2012, says ex-Reagan aide Doug Wead. “I know Ron Paul. He is a friend of mine.” says Wead. “And Sarah Palin, you are no Ron Paul.” (Thanks to Norm)

I agree and would love to see Ron lay an intellectual smackdown on her in the debates.

[Pauls' Revere]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/50687.html



I agree and would love to see Ron lay an intellectual smackdown on her in the debates.

I sure hope so. So when will Ron annouce?

[0zzy]

I don't think Ron can win. I don't even think he'd make a great executive perhaps. I love his ideas, and he's a great man, but that doesn't automatically make him a great president, I don't think.

or maybe I just say this cause I'd rather not get my hopes up.
or maybe i'm speaking the truth.


Now Rand....wooo budddyyy, 2 terms in Senate Rand and you better run for President! :D

[purplechoe]

I don't think Ron can win. I don't even think he'd make a great executive perhaps. I love his ideas, and he's a great man, but that doesn't automatically make him a great president, I don't think.

or maybe I just say this cause I'd rather not get my hopes up.
or maybe i'm speaking the truth.


Now Rand....wooo budddyyy, 2 terms in Senate Rand and you better run for President! :D

so it's going to be Goldwater sparking a revolution and Reagan taking over for the revolutionary all over again... :) ;) :confused:

[0zzy]

so it's going to be Goldwater sparking a revolution and Reagan taking over for the revolutionary all over again... :) ;) :confused:

ya pretty much. cept this time Reagan and Goldwater are related and (hopefully) Reagan doesn't just talk the talk and does more walking .

[hugolp]

ya pretty much. cept this time Reagan and Goldwater are related and (hopefully) Reagan doesn't just talk the talk and does more walking .

Until he gets a bullet after 60 days at the presidency, and then starts being more obedient?

[anaconda]

I don't think Ron can win. I don't even think he'd make a great executive perhaps. I love his ideas, and he's a great man, but that doesn't automatically make him a great president, I don't think.

or maybe I just say this cause I'd rather not get my hopes up.
or maybe i'm speaking the truth.


Now Rand....wooo budddyyy, 2 terms in Senate Rand and you better run for President! :D

I'll happily settle for one-third of a term. Like another partial term Senator recently.

[anaconda]

Until he gets a bullet after 60 days at the presidency, and then starts being more obedient?


In this case, it would be more "pissed off" rather than more "obedient."

[0zzy]

In this case, it would be more "pissed off" rather than more "obedient."

Am I the only one here who thinks that Reagan didn't change cause he was shot? Like, what evidence is there? :X?

I don't think Reagan was going to be the person most thought he was gonna be. He didn't get shot and say, "well hell, I think I'm going to develop Reagannomics!"

[anaconda]

Ron Paul would be a wonderful President because he would be a non-stop truth narrative on everything that happens in Washington. That's mostly what Presidents do, is speak motivationally for policy. The Congress would likely work against a President Paul, and maybe even seek to impeach. But he could do a lot as commander in chief and with cabinet appointees and with executive orders.

[itshappening]

Ron Paul will not win in Iowa, because his campaign people are incompetent fools but it would be fun to expose Palin as the neocon she is

[0zzy]

Ron Paul will not win in Iowa, because his campaign people are incompetent fools but it would be fun to expose Palin as the neocon she is

ya. why doesn't this guy just run his campaign next time? didn't he help George W. win the presidency after all?

[Ricky201]

I don't think Ron would win either, but hell...if all he does is debate, debate, debate (hopefully he will get into the debates) and then make his campaign stops at college campuses...well then shit count me in!

[Bman]

Ron could win. It's going to be all about controling the message. If you watch the last debates (2008 election cycle) most of the other debates kept there mouths shut unless Ron talked about foreign policy. Then they came out in force. It' going to be our job to make these people talk when we want them to. If we can do that Ron stands to make a huge impact.

[purplechoe]

http://conspiracycards.com/Toys/RonPaul_RevolutionComics.jpg

http://www.kickapathy.com/images/ron-paul-baby.jpg

http://www.armyof1.us/ron_paul_(MOTY).jpg

http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com/bagnews/images/Ron-Paul.jpg

http://blogs.chron.com/txpotomac/ron%20paul%20-leno.jpg

[sofia]

Ron Paul will not win in Iowa, because his campaign people are incompetent fools but it would be fun to expose Palin as the neocon she is

^ this....


and Ron is too much of an intellectual and not a good enough marketing man. We squandered many millions of dollars on crap like "He's catchin on, I'm tellin ya." when we should have went with an all out attack campaign against McCain and flip flop Romney.

I think he is surrounded by people who really didnt want to win and cannot be trusted.

[Bman]

I think he is surrounded by people who really didnt want to win and cannot be trusted.

I don't know what's going on, but I think there may be a bit too much nepotism that goes on in the Paul staff.

[LittleLightShining]

so it's going to be Goldwater sparking a revolution and Reagan taking over for the revolutionary all over again... :) ;) :confused:I hope not.





and Ron is too much of an intellectual and not a good enough marketing man. We squandered many millions of dollars on crap like "He's catchin on, I'm tellin ya." when we should have went with an all out attack campaign against McCain and flip flop Romney.

I think he is surrounded by people who really didnt want to win and cannot be trusted.Absofrickinlutely.

[catdd]

I get fired up just thinking about it.

[BillyDkid]

I don't think Ron can win. I don't even think he'd make a great executive perhaps. I love his ideas, and he's a great man, but that doesn't automatically make him a great president, I don't think.

or maybe I just say this cause I'd rather not get my hopes up.
or maybe i'm speaking the truth.


Now Rand....wooo budddyyy, 2 terms in Senate Rand and you better run for President! :DMaybe what we need is not a "great executive" but rather an honest man who actually believes in and conducts himself and the government by the principles on which this republic was supposedly founded. The last thing we need is a "great President" in the tradition of all the preceeding great Presidents. We need simple honesty, integrity and the courage to defend genuine American principles and the Constitution.

[Krugerrand]

Lew is linking to here:
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/ron-paul-is-back/


Ron Paul is back!

By Doug Wead

Once more, after being written out of the script by the newspapers and television producers, the scrappy congressman from Texas, Ron Paul is back in the mix. And big time. Sarah Palin, of all people, put him there.

After turning down thousands of speaking invitations over a six month period Sarah Palin finally accepted a gig for the National Tea Party, a grass roots phenomenon that owes its life to that unstoppable old man from Texas. And then the news that she is endorsing Rand Paul, the congressman’s son, and an emerging star in the Kentucky Senate race. Who says Sarah Palin is dumb? She is tapping into the hottest political movement going.

This is no accident for it is Ron Paul, the old congressman, not Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee, or Newt Gingrich that now stands between her and a shoe-in for the GOP nomination.

Palin is a fighter. She will quickly approve TV ads blasting away on Romney’s flip flops from his Massachusetts gubernatorial days. He is already reportedly moving more to the center, writing off some southern states. Using that momentum she will likely push him all the way off the leftist edge. Her commercials will make Huckabee’s 2008 Iowa Romney attack ads look puny by comparison. And as for Huck? After the Arkansas parole board scandals he will see those revolving door – Willie Horton ads resurrected and showing ad nauseum on untraceable You Tubes. Newt Gingrich can go on James Dobson’s radio show and repent as much as he wants, he can even publicly cry like Jimmy Swaggart, but Palin’s people will anonymously spoon feed Dateline and 20/20 every tiny morsel of his private life. Palin is no softy.

The fact is, Sarah Palin can only be stopped on her way to her GOP coronation by a Ron Paul ambush in Iowa. Only Paul has activists who will fall on their swords for him and will go to work early enough to make a difference.

Yes, I know. Ron Paul is too old. And he did not poll well last time. But his base only really discovered him late in the process and they have been very busy since. He has grown on a lot of people. What looked nutty in 2008, like actually auditing the Federal Reserve, is now widely accepted as common sense. The national Tea Party sprang from his loins.

But the biggest and most powerful issue that separates Ron Paul from the pack is the ongoing War on Terror. Every major candidate in both parties buys into the idea of a “just war.” Palin praised Obama’s speech to the Nobel Prize Committee in Oslo, actually claiming that the President had picked up on themes she, herself, had written in her memoir Going Rogue.

“Wow, that really sounded familiar,” Palin said to USA Today. Newt Gingrich was quoted as saying President Obama gave a “very historic speech.”

Ron Paul would say, “Hogwash.”

He believes that by waging wars in distant lands we create ten new terrorists for every one we kill. And only Ron Paul, among all public figures, states this clearly and has held this position consistently. While former vice president Dick Cheney and current vice president Joe Biden argue over degrees and who supported the surge when, only Ron Paul says that “no war” is better than any new and improved version.

Now this is significant for a very important reason. For the first time last summer national polls showed that a majority of Americans, 51% agreed that the war is not working. Less than half, 47% thought it was worth the price we were paying in dead Americans.

Can Ron Paul, the fringe candidate of 2008 actually emerge in the upcoming presidential election? Well, here is some simple arithmetic for you to ponder.

Obama, Palin, Clinton, Biden, Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich, Cheney and all the rest can split the 47% of the American public who think that it is economical sound and morally effective to spend $500 million and 50 young lives to re-conquer for the third time a windswept city of 100,000, where the Taliban once lived but have now mostly abandoned. And they will not even notice when we give the city back again next year.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul, alone will speak for the 51% who would bring back our boys. Does he have a chance? If the war becomes the issue, Ron Paul, who appeals to right and left, young and old, Democrat and Republican, gay and straight can pull an upset.

When Palin appeared at the Tea Party event last week all the television networks and major newspapers covered the moment. But not a single journalist even mentioned that this grass roots phenomenon was inspired by the Ron Paul movement. No one dared suggest that Sarah Palin was trying to co-opt the incorruptible old, iconoclastic congressman from Texas. The media remains fiercely disciplined in excluding Ron Paul from any exposure, even when his absence is itself newsworthy. The people paying those media salaries apparently don’t want to see an audit of the Federal Reserve or an end to government subsidized banks or an end to profits from foreign wars.

But nothing they write or say or fail to write or fail to say can hide the truth from the millions of Americans who have heard the clarion call. In 2008 Ron Paul slipped through their nets and onto television in the Republican Debates. And America will never be the same.

Sarah Palin has the right idea, and give her credit for trying. But I know Ron Paul. He is a friend of mine. And Sarah Palin, you are no Ron Paul.

[AParadigmShift]

I don't think Ron would win either, but hell...if all he does is debate, debate, debate (hopefully he will get into the debates) and then make his campaign stops at college campuses...well then shit count me in!

Yep.

Just look what happened with Paul after the last go-round - he's become a veritable celebrity. His ideas, which were once thought quaint, if not wholly anachronistic, are now at least discussed as having merit. Where once he was written off as a crank, he's been remolded - by the media, but not all media - into an intellectual and principled elder statesman.

How could he change the debate in 2012? How much more could the liberty movement be furthered by another RP presidential bid? It gives me goose bumps to imagine it.

:D