The Guardian UK write up of Nebraska and the status of Ron Paul's campaign

[sailingaway]

I didn't like their title though, since 'interruption' isn't a goal


Ron Paul supporters bank on Nebraska vote to interrupt national convention

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/12/ron-paul-nebraska-national-convention?commentpage=last#end-of-comments

[freedomordeath]

This scares me to be honest, when the UK press start reporting on Ron Paul, that means they confident they have this movement contained. When Obama and Hillary were fighting it out, just about every 2nd day we would have front page news on every newspaper and TV here in the UK. With Ron Paul, virtually nothing, infact you ask anyone off the street they wouldn't have a clue who Ron Paul is. But everyone knows who Hillary Clinton is.

Keep fighting you brave Americans, everyday is a new day and a new challenge, but never surrender... Start writing letters to anyone of the 2400 delegates in TAMPA, we have to simply wake them up, it can be done.

[Britannia]

From the BBC's political comedy "Yes, Prime Minister".

Jim Hacker (Prime Minister):
"I know exactly who reads the papers.... The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country. The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country. The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country. The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country. The Financial Times is read by the people who own the country. The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country. And the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is."

Everything printed about Ron Paul in the British press has been picked up on the cuttings, which is why nearly all of it has been inaccurate and untrue.

I read a fawning article about Mitt Romney in the Daily Mail last week which would have left anyone who didn't know any better with the impression he's almost saintly. Apparently his religion forbids him to boast of his charitable works, so the Daily Mail decided they would pass on to it's readers tales of Mitt's good deeds.

Fortunately I do know better so the newspaper in question found it's way to the rubbish bin in a suprisingly short space of time.

[ClydeCoulter]

I didn't like their title though, since 'interruption' isn't a goal



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/12/ron-paul-nebraska-national-convention?commentpage=last#end-of-comments

Unless you consider, "interrupting" the direction we are heading and putting us on the right path :)

[freedomordeath]

Brittania, why does Nigel Farage not target the youth like Ron Paul has.. he also doesn't talk much about central banking. Its very hard to find a Brit to talk about such things. I do like UKIP, but don't actually know anyone thats familiar with that party.

[Britannia]

Brittania, why does Nigel Farage not target the youth like Ron Paul has.. he also doesn't talk much about central banking. Its very hard to find a Brit to talk about such things. I do like UKIP, but don't actually know anyone thats familiar with that party.

I like Nigel Farage very much but the truth is most people here consider him to be a one-issue politician and UKIP to be a one-issue party.

UKIP lacks the talent, base, money and infrastructure necessary to make the transition from fringe to mainstream politics. It's the kind of party one would vote for at the european elections as a protest vote but wouldn't seriously consider voting for at a general election.

Whenever I think of Nigel or UKIP I immediately think of Europe. I don't think of the economy, defence, transport or any other major policy area. It can't be that UKIP has no policies in these areas so it must be that it has a major presentation problem. It certainly did during the last general election when it's leader was Lord Pearson. He seemed to be a thoroughly decent chap but his presentation of the party's 2010 general election manifesto was risible. He mumbled, fumbled and bumbled his way through it, making the whole thing virtually unwatchable. I assume Lord Pearson agreed because he stood down soon after and Nigel Farage returned as party leader.

But to really understand why UKIP doesn't have broad appeal to the British electorate you have to understand the composition of the party and the shift in culture and politics that's taken place over the last several decades since the creation of the welfare state. UKIP is made up of people who were once on the right of the Conservative Party. They abandoned the Tories because they were becoming too liberal, especially on the issue of Europe. Over time the Tories have moved from the right of politics into the centre ground because that's what the people wanted them to do. They wanted to win elections so they had to change their positions.

The truth is the British people have become accustomed to being looked after by the nanny state. They're prepared to pay their income tax, national insurance tax, council tax, value added tax etc, and in return they expect the state to provide for them. It's amazing how many people here receive some form of benefit and the whole system has become unsustainable, but no political party will ever be elected pledging to cut the welfare bill because people have become addicted to their "free" goodies from the government. Now they don't simply expect them, they demand them.

PS I've never heard Nigel Farage discussing the merits or otherwise of the central banking system, but as a former banker himself it's a subject he should know something about.

[freedomordeath]

Cheers Britannia for your reply. Most poeple in Britian have been brainwashed by their media and feel if UKIP went into the universities and started talking about pulling troops out of the middle east, blow back, non-intervnetionist policies, more relaxed aproach to drug use, liberty etc etc, then they can get their hook in with the youth base. Also simply talking about the central banking con and how gold and silver is honest money will get them onto the internet and instead of watching Bieber they watch FED stuff on youtube. This can be done without focusing on the welfare problem (this will come later with more education) Also they at that age where they not hooked on the state yet, but the moral question of war will lock them in and the long process of the argument for weaning poeple off the state can start.

For me as a South African, the war with the muslim had sympathy from me to Bush, but Ron Paul's hook came with his fiscal policy. We were taught at a young age to sniff out a communist where ever he may reside. Once Ron Paul got me with his fiscal argument then it took over a year to be won over by the non-interventionist argument, the blow back thing blew my mind when I could understand it, lots of things in South Africa started making sense to me esp with the Angola bush war that raged on for 30years with Henry Kissingers dirty little finger prints all over it.

I often wondered to either go UKIP or a take over of the conservative party with a Daniel Hannan insurrection. The UK will implode anyway as soon as the focus is off Europe. The funny thing, unless they start with Euro Bonds, the Euro is acting as a gold standard at the moment and lots of the Euro nations because they can't print money are going through painful corrections. This is a good thing, but in the long term the Euro will become another FED and the United states of Europe even more socialist in nature to America will effect the whole European continent with fiat money.