Rand Paul gets Alex Jones’ stamp of approval

[compromise]

http://www.mofopolitics.com/2013/04/11/ruh-roh-rand-paul-gets-alex-jones-stamp-of-approval/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bJmtIZkCIy0

[itshappening]

He should go on Alex Jones more but I suspect he pissed off Jack Hunter and co when freaking out over the Romney endorsement but Alex has a huge audience and they're eager for liberty and willing to donate $.

Having Alex behind you is good and was essential to the success of those unbelievable moneybombs for Ron because he was pushing them on the air and fully behind them. He may not get fully behind Rand but his audience will.

[anaconda]

Rand Paul: "Going Toe-To-Toe With The Globalists.." :D

[Brett85]

He should go on Alex Jones more but I suspect he pissed off Jack Hunter and co when freaking out over the Romney endorsement but Alex has a huge audience and they're eager for liberty and willing to donate $.

Having Alex behind you is good and was essential to the success of those unbelievable moneybombs for Ron because he was pushing them on the air and fully behind them. He may not get fully behind Rand but his audience will.

It wouldn't be good at all for Rand to have an association with Alex Jones during a general election campaign.

[talkingpointes]

It wouldn't be good at all for Rand to have an association with Alex Jones during a general election campaign.

Just like it wasn't good for Ron too right. Why don't you grow a pair. Please this isn't human resource forums.

[itshappening]

It wouldn't be good at all for Rand to have an association with Alex Jones during a general election campaign.

Why wouldn't it? Going on there as a guest is important. Some of Rand's biggest supporters and donors are Alex Jones listeners. That's a fact.

And the Ron Paul moneybombs that we promoted along with Alex were raising like $5m in a day.

[talkingpointes]

Why wouldn't it? Going on there as a guest is important. Some of Rand's biggest supporters and donors are Alex Jones listeners. That's a fact.

And the Ron Paul moneybombs that we promoted along with Alex were raising like $5m in a day.

Dude is concerned with image, it's hollow and shallow, there is no reasoning involved.

[Krzysztof Lesiak]

Rand has been on Alex Jones's show even after he was sworn in as a senator.

It's also good that Alex now changed his view on Rand after the Romney endorsement fiasco.

[itshappening]

One thing Rand needs to lay out to us what the hell he's going to do about the out of control Fed.

Simply supporting an audit is no good. They're printing $85bn/month and buying assets. Sooner or later this has to stop and it's going to cause problems.

I'd like Rand to tell us exactly what he's going to do about the Fed if he was ever in a position to do something about it i.e is elected president.

This is pretty critical because there won't be any meaningful growth until that gang is stopped

[VoteRandPaul2016]

I have problems with Alex but he has a lot of supporters and we need their votes.

[itshappening]

They don't tend to vote.

They do have money though.

[mz10]

One thing Rand needs to lay out to us what the hell he's going to do about the out of control Fed.

Simply supporting an audit is no good. They're printing $85bn/month and buying assets. Sooner or later this has to stop and it's going to cause problems.

I'd like Rand to tell us exactly what he's going to do about the Fed if he was ever in a position to do something about it i.e is elected president.

This is pretty critical because there won't be any meaningful growth until that gang is stopped

How about appointing an Austrian-leaning Fed chairman? The Fed won't end in 2016, even if Ron were elected. In the immediate future, the best that can be done is to audit it and to appoint a chairman who's going to stop the BS.

[VoteRandPaul2016]

They don't tend to vote.

They do have money though.

How do you know they don't vote? Do you have cameras in their cars and inside their houses where you watch their every move? And how would you figure who out of the 300+ million people in this country is an Alex Jones viewer?

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Just like it wasn't good for Ron too right. Why don't you grow a pair. Please this isn't human resource forums.

It's about principle: no interviews with Truthers.

[itshappening]

How do you know they don't vote? Do you have cameras in their cars and inside their houses where you watch their every move?

I know his audience mindset since i've been listening for 14 years.

They dont tend to vote and are generally disgusted with politics.

They will support a liberty candidate though and will do so enthusiastically.

[Peace&Freedom]

It's about principle: no interviews with Truthers.

That's merely the 'principle' of an intolerant non-truther.

[itshappening]

How about appointing an Austrian-leaning Fed chairman? The Fed won't end in 2016, even if Ron were elected. In the immediate future, the best that can be done is to audit it and to appoint a chairman who's going to stop the BS.

Here's the problem though, once it stops the economy will collapse pretty hard. In the short term it would be terrible but in the long term growth will emerge from the ruins.

So any new administration with brains would institute the reforms in the first few months to get the contraction and the implications out the way and lay the foundation for growth going into year 3 (and subsequent re-election).

Any dithering or delay on such action would be unacceptable.

If I was advising Rand i'd want to get my man in at the Fed with a mandate to stop the asset buying stright away and i'd insist and pressure Congress day and night until they enact that 17% tax and pass a budget which immediately shrinks government by about 40%. This can all be done within the first 6 months but it MUST be done to get the transition out the way and lay the foundation for growth later in the 1st term. No excuses.

Lots of Federal workers would have to get pink slips. Painful transition but it has to be done and someone has to have the balls to do it.

I'd also install a business friendly EPA admin and approve a ton of projects to build power stations, nuke reactors and drill the crap out of Alaska and whatever else other projects private industry might be interested. I'd permit it all and quickly to get things moving and help create some jobs.

[Brett85]

Just like it wasn't good for Ron too right. Why don't you grow a pair. Please this isn't human resource forums.

Um, Ron didn't win a single primary or caucus. I think you proved my point.

[Brett85]

Rand has been on Alex Jones's show even after he was sworn in as a senator.

Which was absolutely stupid. As timid and calculating as Rand has been as far as taking liberty positions on issues, I can't believe he would do something so risky and damaging as to appear on Alex Jones' show. I think that Alex is funny and entertaining, but he's an absolute joke who would turn off 90% of the American people with his views. He's a 9-11 truther who believes that there's a government conspiracy to kill off 50% of the world's population. The guy is off his meds.

[torchbearer]

Um, Ron didn't win a single primary or caucus. I think you proved my point. ron won the louisiana caucus with 70% of the vote. That is verifiable by calling up the LAGOP and asking them who won the louisiana gop caucus in 2012. ask for a break down by congressional district.

[Brett85]

ron won the louisiana caucus with 70% of the vote. That is verifiable by calling up the LAGOP and asking them who won the louisiana gop caucus in 2012. ask for a break down by congressional district.

That wasn't a straw poll. I'm talking about the actual straw poll vote in any primary or caucus.

[itshappening]

Which was absolutely stupid. As timid and calculating as Rand has been as far as taking liberty positions on issues, I can't believe he would do something so risky and damaging as to appear on Alex Jones' show. I think that Alex is funny and entertaining, but he's an absolute joke who would turn off 90% of the American people with his views. He's a 9-11 truther who believes that there's a government conspiracy to kill off 50% of the world's population. The guy is off his meds.

Regardless of what you think of him (and I think you've been very insulting) he has large audience who are (were) active Ron and Rand Paul supporters. They have contributed and worked hard for both Paul's and should not be dismissed or treated with such contempt as you appear to want them to be treated.

You can just as easily say the neocon talking heads are off their meds when they're supporting trillion dollar wars against Iraq for example.

[NewRightLibertarian]

We got to hold Rand's feet to the fire when he does or says something reprehensible regardless if it's just meaningless rhetoric to win over conservatives though. Mindless hero worship doesn't do us any good.


Regardless of what you think of him (and I think you've been very insulting) he has large audience who are (were) active Ron and Rand Paul supporters. They have contributed and worked hard for both Paul's and should not be dismissed or treated with such contempt as you appear to want them to be treated.

There's a contingent of people within the liberty movement who want to do everything they can to alienate dedicated and loyal supporters, and they hurl the same insults toward supporters that the establishment bootlickers use on Ron Paul. Let these people run roughshod over the liberty movement and it becomes a watered down version of the Republican Party, accomplishing absolutely nothing except getting a new gang of opportunistic scum into positions of political power. A good recent example of this type of behavior is the anti-religious bigots throwing a tantrum over Gary North working on the Ron Paul curriculum.

[donnay]

Um, Ron didn't win a single primary or caucus. I think you proved my point.


Um, the Conservative Republicans/neo-conservative were the ones that threw Dr. Paul under the bus.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Regardless of what you think of him (and I think you've been very insulting) he has large audience

O'Reilly has the #1-rated cable news show on television, and Ron Paul spent 2011 refusing to go on his show (http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/0811/OReilly_says_Ron_Paul_wont_come_on_his_show.html). And O'Reilly does not have the Truther baggage.

[torchbearer]

That wasn't a straw poll. I'm talking about the actual straw poll vote in any primary or caucus. what do you mean it wasn't a straw poll? it certainly was a straw poll. each congressional district selected its delegates via straw poll. well, more precisely- paper ballot. we won 70% of that vote. it translated into 70% of the delegates.

[itshappening]

Also the reason the AJ listeners are such a potent force is because they do not listen to the neocon talking heads.

They're a hugely untapped and often ignored segment and if a liberty candidate comes along that Alex likes and his audience can identify with they WILL open up their wallets and provide enthusiastic support. These are the kinds of people who are/were showing up to GOP meetings supporting Ron and who had never gone before in their life and the GOP hate them!

[donnay]

O'Reilly has the #1-rated cable news show on television, and Ron Paul spent 2011 refusing to go on his show (http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/0811/OReilly_says_Ron_Paul_wont_come_on_his_show.html). And O'Reilly does not have the Truther baggage.


O'Reilly? O'Rly! :rolleyes: I praise Dr. Paul for standing his ground not to go on that clowns program!

[itshappening]

O'Reilly has the #1-rated cable news show on television, and Ron Paul spent 2011 refusing to go on his show (http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/0811/OReilly_says_Ron_Paul_wont_come_on_his_show.html). And O'Reilly does not have the Truther baggage.

O'Reilly's audience are grandmas who dont give a crap about liberty or the constitution so a candidate espousing these views gets a "meh". They're also the kind of people who support establishment candidates and dutifully send donations to the RNC. Rand will get more active support and donations from going on AJ than on a show like O'Reilly or even Levin, Rush, etc.

[S.Shorland]

By 2016,most Alex jones listeners will be trying to stay alive rather than donating to political campaigns.

[Brett85]

Regardless of what you think of him (and I think you've been very insulting) he has large audience who are (were) active Ron and Rand Paul supporters. They have contributed and worked hard for both Paul's and should not be dismissed or treated with such contempt as you appear to want them to be treated.

You can just as easily say the neocon talking heads are off their meds when they're supporting trillion dollar wars against Iraq for example.

I was talking about Alex Jones, not his listeners. I listen to him from time to time simply for entertainment purposes. I just don't see how anyone can actually take him seriously. I just view him as being a comedian.

[itshappening]

I was talking about Alex Jones, not his listeners. I listen to him from time to time simply for entertainment purposes. I just don't see how anyone can actually take him seriously. I just view him as being a comedian.

It's all entertainment. Do you think Hannity/Levin are intellectuals? they're not. I'd say they're more crazy than AJ. Levin thinks we're at war for example despite the fact that no war has been declared by Congress for 60 years. What the fuck is that about? That's crazy. AJ asking questions about 9/11 isn't. There are a huge slew of professional architects and engineers doing the same thing. Look it up.

[NewRightLibertarian]

It's all entertainment. Do you think Hannity/Levin are intellectuals? they're not. I'd say they're more crazy than AJ. Levin thinks we're at war for example despite the fact that no war has been declared by Congress for 60 years. What the fuck is that about? That's crazy. AJ asking questions about 9/11 isn't. There are a huge slew of professional architects and engineers doing the same thing. Look it up.

These truth denying cowards got their head buried so far in the sand that they'll never look anything up that isn't spoonfed to them by the establishment. Their cowardice is even more evident when they beg for a pat on the head for the likes of O'Reilly, Levin, Hannity, etc.

[itshappening]

These truth denying cowards got their head buried so far in the sand that they'll never look anything up that isn't spoonfed to them by the establishment. Their cowardice is even more evident when they beg for a pat on the head for the likes of O'Reilly, Levin, Hannity, etc.

The truth is they all say some things that you wouldnt want to associate with so if we're going to play that game don't go on any of them!

[NewRightLibertarian]

The truth is they all say some things that you wouldnt want to associate with so if we're going to play that game don't go on any of them!

No doubt. And I wouldn't mind if Rand stayed off of Alex Jones' Show during his likely Presidential campaign in 2016. But the fucking bullshit around here blaming Infowars subscribers and those of similar beliefs for Ron Paul's campaign being a failure is complete trash. They did everything they could to make him a success and played a big part in getting the movement off the ground. The fact that these dispicable traitors now want to bend over backwards to kiss the asses of the establishment that DID cost Ron Paul a shot at the Presidency in actuality proves that they're piles of shit IMO, no better than the current ruling elite.

[itshappening]

No doubt. And I wouldn't mind if Rand stayed off of Alex Jones' Show during his likely Presidential campaign in 2016. But the fucking bullshit around here blaming Infowars subscribers and those of similar beliefs for Ron Paul's campaign being a failure is complete trash. They did everything they could to make him a success and played a big part in getting the movement off the ground. The fact that these dispicable traitors now want to bend over backwards to kiss the asses of the establishment that DID cost Ron Paul a shot at the Presidency in actuality proves that they're piles of shit IMO, no better than the current ruling elite.

I think any candidate who ignores Alex Jones is shooting themselves in the foot and ignoring a huge opportunity for support and donations. I'd put him on par with the neocon talking heads for influence and impact.

There's a reason why Ron kept going on there because he knew the value of those listeners.

[TaftFan]

Alex Jones knows if he asks reasonable he will get credibility because his main points are correct. But acting crazy will rightfully get you shunned.

I mean, he isn't an objective thinker. He isn't an intellectual. He thinks up connections and just runs with them.

He means well though. I enjoy some of his stuff (like exposes, interviews with various peoples)

[compromise]

The more radio talk show hosts, the better.

I don't agree with Jones' conspiracies, but he's got a lot of more mainstream right wing conservatives that listen to him (along with the other talking heads) and they will vote Rand in a GOP primary.

Regardless of your views on either, Jones and Beck will help Rand in 2016.

[Brett85]

Whether you like Jones or not, I don't see how anyone can fail to realize that Rand's association with Jones will hurt him a lot in a general election campaign for President. It will be Jeremiah Wright all over again.

[wormyguy]

Whether you like Jones or not, I don't see how anyone can fail to realize that Rand's association with Jones will hurt him a lot in a general election campaign for President. It will be Jeremiah Wright all over again.

Glenn Beck is Jeremiah Wright. Alex Jones is Louis Farrakhan.

[itshappening]

Whether you like Jones or not, I don't see how anyone can fail to realize that Rand's association with Jones will hurt him a lot in a general election campaign for President. It will be Jeremiah Wright all over again.

Obama won. twice.

How is he "associated" with him? He goes on his syndicated show. He's no more associated with him than with Rush, Hannity etc.

Just because you disprove of something he says or espouses. Well, I disapprove of a lot of what the other talking heads say or espouse. Big deal.

[wormyguy]

Obama won. twice.

How is he "associated" with him? He goes on his syndicated show. He's no more associated with him than with Rush, Hannity etc.

Just because you disprove of something he says or espouses. Well, I disapprove of a lot of what the other talking heads say or espouse. Big deal.

Rand choosing to publicly associate himself with Alex Jones would be like Obama choosing to associate himself with Louis Farrakhan (possibly worse). He has subscribed to every fringe conspiracy theory ever proposed besides Holocaust denial; truthers, birthers, Oklahoma City truthers, chemtrails, mind control, black helicopters, etc. etc. Dude seriously thinks the Bush family sacrifices children to Moloch.

[randpaul2016]

I have problems with Alex but he has a lot of supporters and we need their votes.

keep in mind even though we will gain votes, we will lose votes.

lol

[Inkblots]

It wouldn't be good at all for Rand to have an association with Alex Jones during a general election campaign.

Very true. Thankfully, Rand is a good enough politician to know this.

[The Northbreather]

Dr. Ron Paul going on ORielly's propaganda hour would have been an acknowledgement Of Bill's validity.

Fuck O'Rielly and all of the Ministry of Information.

I would donate weekly if judge Nap and Dr. Paul had an appealing (not low budget looking) cable news outlet or if there was on that they frequented.

Fight fire with fire.

[itshappening]

Rand choosing to publicly associate himself with Alex Jones would be like Obama choosing to associate himself with Louis Farrakhan (possibly worse). He has subscribed to every fringe conspiracy theory ever proposed besides Holocaust denial; truthers, birthers, Oklahoma City truthers, chemtrails, mind control, black helicopters, etc. etc. Dude seriously thinks the Bush family sacrifices children to Moloch.

"association" to me suggests a business relationship.

Alex Jones runs a syndicated talk show. So what.

The other talking heads have supported pre-emptive war, torture, the patriot act and god knows what else. That to me is even more crazy than harmless questions about what happened on 9/11, questions that are being asked by a slew of professional architects and engineers.

Just because you appear on a show does mean you endorse their views.

Is Rand endorsing Mark Levin's support for pre-emptive war and torture when he goes on there ??

Just because Alex doesn't fit neatly into your "allowed" opinion doesn't mean he should be ignored. Any candidate that ignores him is shooting himself in the foot. His audience is huge and dedicated and open to supporting liberty candidates.

If you want to actually get elected to Congress or the Senate then you should be talking to Alex Jones. Rand did plenty of times and its done him no harm.

[NewRightLibertarian]

Whether you like Jones or not, I don't see how anyone can fail to realize that Rand's association with Jones will hurt him a lot in a general election campaign for President. It will be Jeremiah Wright all over again.

Because he went on a radio show? Get real. The way the country's going, it'll probably help him with conservatives by the time 2016 rolls around.


The other talking heads have supported pre-emptive war, torture, the patriot act and god knows what else. That to me is even more crazy than harmless questions about what happened on 9/11, questions that are being asked by a slew of professional architects and engineers.

That's all fine and dandy though. We should be kissing up to those types of people and throwing anyone who the establishment doesn't like under the bus. That is the way we will achieve liberty for sure!

[wormyguy]

"association" to me suggests a business relationship.

Alex Jones runs a syndicated talk show. So what.

So it does Rand no good to in any way appear that he's in agreement with Jones.


The other talking heads have supported pre-emptive war, torture, the patriot act and god knows what else. That to me is even more crazy than harmless questions about what happened on 9/11, questions that are being asked by a slew of professional architects and engineers.

Just because you appear on a show does mean you endorse their views.

Is Rand endorsing Mark Levin's support for pre-emptive war and torture when he goes on there ??

Just because Alex doesn't fit neatly into your "allowed" opinion doesn't mean he should be ignored. Any candidate that ignores him is shooting himself in the foot. His audience is huge and dedicated and open to supporting liberty candidates.

There are two different types of "opinion." There are political opinions, such as opinions of war and torture, or taxes or drug legalization or anything else. These can be rationally disputed. Being interviewed by a person who subscribes to particular political opinions does not generally imply endorsement (although appearing with someone who supports extremely unpopular positions, like white nationalism, can be very controversial). But there are "opinions" based on denying objective facts, or absurd interpretations of objective facts. If you go on someone's radio show and interview with them in between a segment on HAARP mind control and one about the Bush Moloch child sacrifices, it certainly appears that you are endorsing that incredibly unpopular mindset. I might even agree that it's worse to support the consensus views on war or torture or privacy than to be a conspiracy theorist. But guess what? About 95% of the American voting public does not agree.


If you want to actually get elected to Congress or the Senate then you should be talking to Alex Jones.

Oh really? Please provide for me a list of Congressmen and Senators who have appeared on his show before being first elected to Congress.


Rand did plenty of times and its done him no harm.

Rand has done so once, which was one time too many, after already having been elected, and it has only not done him harm because the national media hasn't yet picked up the story.

[NewRightLibertarian]

Rand has done so once, which was one time too many and has only not done him harm because the national media hasn't yet picked up the story.

You're dead wrong. Rand's been on the Alex Jones Show way more than once, even doing a long extended interview with him. Try not to be so misinformed the next time you try to string together a post, K? And the only place where there will be a national media firestorm over Rand appearing on a talk radio show years ago is in your own deluded brain.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

I think any candidate who ignores Alex Jones is shooting themselves in the foot and ignoring a huge opportunity for support and donations. I'd put him on par with the neocon talking heads for influence and impact.

There's a reason why Ron kept going on there because he knew the value of those listeners.

It's not Alex Jones himself, it's the Truther stuff that he is so strongly associated with. Ask Medina if even the slightest whiff of trutherism doesn't kill your campaign; what kind of weapon it was against her after the Beck interview:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/02/texas-poll-preview.html


Debra Medina actually leads the race with people who think she's not a truther- with 33% to 32% for Kay Bailey Hutchison and 29% for Rick Perry. But with voters who think she is a truther, or that she might be, she gets only 7% to 51% for Perry and 30% for Hutchison.

[wormyguy]

You're dead wrong. Rand's been on the Alex Jones Show way more than once, even doing a long extended interview with him. Try not to be so misinformed the next time you try to string together a post, K? And the only place where there will be a national media firestorm over Rand appearing on a talk radio show years ago is in your own deluded brain.

He's done so once that I could find in my quick googling (playing a clip of someone speaking does not mean they are appearing on the show, FYI). But if you really want, 5 bitcoins says that if Rand runs for President his appearance or appearances on Alex Jones will be picked up on by the national media and will be reported on negatively. You can send them here: 1UEGzdeXgoZJh8azVGo1Wen9ABi5H9tfu

[NewRightLibertarian]

He's done so once that I could find in my quick googling (playing a clip of someone speaking does not mean they are appearing on the show, FYI). But if you really want, 5 bitcoins says that if Rand runs for President his appearance or appearances on Alex Jones will be picked up on by the national media and will be reported on negatively. You can send them here: 12ni6rWgMG9EFawcYbhSJzSJuaGRXMqGUV

He's been there repeatedly, and he's even done extended interview with the show. Your pathetic inability to 'quick Google' is no excuse for your ignorance. I don't use bitcoin BTW. Some outlet may try to smear Rand by tying him in with Alex Jones, but considering AJ's recent surge in popularity since his CNN appearance defending the 2nd Amendment it'll probably help him with conservatives.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

You're dead wrong. Rand's been on the Alex Jones Show way more than once, even doing a long extended interview with him.

Yeah, he did. And notice how politically savvy he was too:

http://www.barefootandprogressive.com/2010/11/the-embargoed-rand-paulalex-jones-interview-finally-surfaces.html

Rand Paul did an interview on Alex Jones in 2009, and it went missing for fourteen months. It suddenly surfaced in November 2010, conveniently right after he won the Kentucky Senate race. Almost as if Rand Paul didn't want Alex Jones to be an issue during his Senate campaign.

Even so, a man by the name of Issac spent money to run campaign ads on television attacking Rand Paul for him being on Alex Jones' show, in May 2010, right before the GOP primary:

http://pageonekentucky.com/2010/05/13/anti-rand-paul-ad-running-in-lexington/

[NewRightLibertarian]

Even so, a man by the name of Issac spent money to run campaign ads on television attacking Rand Paul for him being on Alex Jones' show, in May 2010, right before the GOP primary:

http://pageonekentucky.com/2010/05/13/anti-rand-paul-ad-running-in-lexington/

Right before his landslide victory? Heavens to betsy, we better avoid Alex Jones like the plague with results like that coming in! :rolleyes:


Rand Paul did an interview on Alex Jones in 2009, and it went missing for fourteen months. It suddenly surfaced in November 2010, conveniently right after he won the Kentucky Senate race. Almost as if Rand Paul didn't want Alex Jones to be an issue during his Senate campaign.

The reason it was shelved was likely because of the content of the interview, not because of associations with Alex Jones. If he was so ashamed of Jones, he wouldn't have appeared on his show repeatedly during his run for the Senate. You're all grasping at straws.

[wormyguy]

He's been there repeatedly, and he's even done extended interview with the show. Your pathetic inability to 'quick Google' is no excuse for your ignorance. I don't use bitcoin BTW. Some outlet may try to smear Rand by tying him in with Alex Jones, but considering AJ's recent surge in popularity since his CNN appearance defending the 2nd Amendment it'll probably help him with conservatives.

So he has appeared exactly twice that people on this thread have been able to find, the first of which Paul tried to embargo but Jones released right before the primary without his permission. That really helps your point. Alex Jones has not "surged in popularity with conservatives." The conservative reaction to his Piers Morgan appearance was generally anger that Morgan had invited a deranged lunatic to represent the opposing position, and the national media reaction to his appearance was universally negative, including in conservative media.

Bet's still open, by the way.

[NewRightLibertarian]

So he has appeared exactly twice that people on this thread have been able to find, the first of which Paul tried to embargo but Jones released right before the primary without his permission. That really helps your point. Alex Jones has not "surged in popularity with conservatives." The conservative reaction to his Piers Morgan appearance was generally anger that Morgan had invited a deranged lunatic to represent the opposing position, and the national media reaction to his appearance was universally negative, including in conservative media.

Bet's still open, by the way.

No, he's been on way more times than just twice. Please stop lying and just admit that you were mistaken and you should have been more informed before spouting off rather than just making excuses which make you look even more foolish. The 'national media' is the entity that is dying and doing everything they can before they completely go kaput to destroy our Constitutional rights. They're becoming more reviled by the American public everyday. Why should we be tripping over ourselves to kiss their asses and kowtow to them? It's a good thing that Ron Paul didn't have your mindset when he was in Congress.

[BlackTerrel]

I think any candidate who ignores Alex Jones is shooting themselves in the foot and ignoring a huge opportunity for support and donations. I'd put him on par with the neocon talking heads for influence and impact.

There's a reason why Ron kept going on there because he knew the value of those listeners.

How so? Hannity's audience is 10 million or so.... does Jones get even a million? I'd be surprised. Look how low his podcast ranks.

[BlackTerrel]

Even so, a man by the name of Issac spent money to run campaign ads on television attacking Rand Paul for him being on Alex Jones' show, in May 2010, right before the GOP primary:

I'm not a Jones fan but this is an overreaction.

No one gives a shit who you give an interview to and no one assumes just because you go on a guys show you agree with everything he believes. Unless it's David Duke or some sort of pedophile going on anyone's show is not controversial or negative.

[BlackTerrel]

No, he's been on way more times than just twice. Please stop lying and just admit that you were mistaken and you should have been more informed before spouting off rather than just making excuses which make you look even more foolish. The 'national media' is the entity that is dying and doing everything they can before they completely go kaput to destroy our Constitutional rights. They're becoming more reviled by the American public everyday. Why should we be tripping over ourselves to kiss their asses and kowtow to them? It's a good thing that Ron Paul didn't have your mindset when he was in Congress.

Everyone hates "the media" but they all love "their media". Limbaugh listeners love Limbaugh, Hannity listeners love Hannity, Huffpost readers love Huffpost etc...

It's naive to think people actually hate all media.

[alucard13mmfmj]

I think Rand should go on it once... just once to discuss the issues and stay away from "conspiracy theory" talk.

Agree to talk only about the issues like federal reserve, foreign policy and the US debt. Stay away from new world order, chemtrails, global warming carbon schemes and what not.

Alex does has a huge audience, I used to listen to him. In fact, I got into Ron Paul through Alex Jones. hehe.

However, when I watch it now... it seems to be getting more and more full of ads =s.........

[itshappening]

Yeah, he did. And notice how politically savvy he was too:

http://www.barefootandprogressive.com/2010/11/the-embargoed-rand-paulalex-jones-interview-finally-surfaces.html

Rand Paul did an interview on Alex Jones in 2009, and it went missing for fourteen months. It suddenly surfaced in November 2010, conveniently right after he won the Kentucky Senate race. Almost as if Rand Paul didn't want Alex Jones to be an issue during his Senate campaign.

Even so, a man by the name of Issac spent money to run campaign ads on television attacking Rand Paul for him being on Alex Jones' show, in May 2010, right before the GOP primary:

http://pageonekentucky.com/2010/05/13/anti-rand-paul-ad-running-in-lexington/

He won the primary by 22 points.

Not an issue.

Political opponents will try and make an issue out of anything. They will even say he's racist.

Rand going on Maddow did far more damage than going on Alex freakin' Jones!

[itshappening]

How so? Hannity's audience is 10 million or so.... does Jones get even a million? I'd be surprised. Look how low his podcast ranks.

If Alex is on 100+ stations he'll have a few million listeners a day (including online)

[RonPaulFanInGA]

He won the primary by 22 points.

Not an issue.

Political opponents will try and make an issue out of anything. They will even say he's racist.

Rand going on Maddow did far more damage than going on Alex freakin' Jones!

The Alex Jones ads run by Issac were extremely flawed:

1. They ran about a week before the primary, too late to have any real impact as most have their minds made up by then.
2. They only ran in Lexington, as opposed to all of Kentucky.
3. He only put $500 (or $5,000?) behind them to run on television.

If he dropped $1,000,000 on those ads in February 2010, maybe people here wouldn't be as quick to dismiss it.


No one gives a shit who you give an interview to and no one assumes just because you go on a guys show you agree with everything he believes. Unless it's David Duke or some sort of pedophile going on anyone's show is not controversial or negative.

Truthers are almost as controversial as racists and pedophiles. Not trying to compare them, but all three will instantly kill a national campaign. It's political poison.

[Brett85]

Rand's appearances on Alex Jones' show will do a lot more damage to Rand in a general election campaign for President than his past statements on the CRA or his position on abortion or anything like that.

[kathy88]

There is so much retardation in this thread. HUGE FAIL.

[jmdrake]

It's about principle: no interviews with Truthers.

I guess Rand will never been interviewed again by Geraldo Rivera or Andrew Napalitano.

[liberalnurse]

Speaking of Alex, he'll be on Coast to Coast Tuesday night. Let the haters hate.

Documentary filmmaker and alternative media activist Alex Jones will discuss how he became consumed with exposing the forces controlling world events many years ago, and how much of what he predicted is coming to fruition. Yet much is yet to come, he believes, such as how humans will be replaced by robots, and the matrix of information that will control our every move.

[asurfaholic]

Ick another AJ thread.

I don't personally like AJ, but I wouldn't think going on the show would hurt rand much. He needs to go on all the shows he can, loaded with ammo, ready to show all the audiences he can that he is presidential material.

I don't foresee AJ ever being an issue with voters. What is going to hurt rand will be CRA stuff. Several weeks of non stop racism accusations before Iowa and that's how the cookie will crumble. What makes or breaks Rand is how well he responds to it.

[Matt Collins]

Dude is concerned with image, it's hollow and shallow, there is no reasoning involved.Elections are won and lost on "image".

[Republicanguy]

Just like it wasn't good for Ron too right. Why don't you grow a pair. Please this isn't human resource forums.

Playing the macho card are we? Read this ignorant person, Alex Jones is bad shit crazy who denies America faces a serious energy problem and doesn't know shit, except for his narrow perception of globalists, money and power. This guy talks crap, twists events, and history.

[Matt Collins]

I think any candidate who ignores Alex Jones is shooting themselves in the foot and ignoring a huge opportunity for support and donations. I'd put him on par with the neocon talking heads for influence and impact.

There's a reason why Ron kept going on there because he knew the value of those listeners.Very true, and I am probably the biggest anti-AJ guy around. But there is a danger and a risk to putting a candidate on his show because it does open oneself to attack. The good thing is that AJ's interviews are usually pretty levelheaded and reasonable which makes them ok to do. The other side is that his cult-like following can be very beneficial for donations and viral messaging.

[Matt Collins]

I guess Rand will never been interviewed again by Geraldo Rivera or Andrew Napalitano.I think those guys are skeptics, which is not the same as conspiracy theorists.

[itshappening]

Very true, and I am probably the biggest anti-AJ guy around. But there is a danger and a risk to putting a candidate on his show because it does open oneself to attack. The good thing is that AJ's interviews are usually pretty levelheaded and reasonable which makes them ok to do. The other side is that his cult-like following can be very beneficial for donations and viral messaging.

The attacks are lame and nothing to worry about.

Alex is no different to the other talking heads. I prefer him mostly than them even with his theories and rants. The others have caused much more damage with their cheerleading for war and god knows what else.

Going on Maddow and talking about the CRA has done far more damage and opened him to far more attacks (now and in the future) than appearing on Alex Jones.

So there.

[jmdrake]

Playing the macho card are we? Read this ignorant person, Alex Jones is bad shit crazy who denies America faces a serious energy problem and doesn't know shit, except for his narrow perception of globalists, money and power. This guy talks crap, twists events, and history.

Ummm.....huh? So AJ is "crazy" because he doesn't buy into the peak oil scam? I haven't seen Rand Paul or most republicans buy into that nonsense either. Yes we have serious energy problems, and they're all created by government. Forget sources of oil that have been put off limits through regulation. There's enough thorium in U.S. to supply all of our energy needs for the forseeable future. And thorium is cheaper, safer and cleaner than plutonium. But you can't make nuke warheads from thorium. So guess which energy source the government artifically props up?

[itshappening]

Rand's appearances on Alex Jones' show will do a lot more damage to Rand in a general election campaign for President than his past statements on the CRA or his position on abortion or anything like that.

No it won't. The networks will not run day and night with his appearance on the ALEX JONES show in which he says nothing controversial. They will run with his Maddow appearance and bring that up. You can bet on it.

They're still bringing it up after 3 years... see the coverage from last week.

Where do they ever bring up his various appearance's on Alex Jones? Never!

[RonPaulFanInGA]

I guess Rand will never been interviewed again by Geraldo Rivera or Andrew Napalitano.

The difference is, those two aren't known for being conspiracy types.

[itshappening]

The difference is, those two aren't known for being conspiracy types.

There are lots of conspiracies. Most of what AJ relays is actually sourced. He's not the only one asking questions about 9/11. There are professional engineers, physicists and architects doing the same thing.

[Matt Collins]

There are lots of conspiracies. Most of what AJ relays is actually sourced. He's not the only one asking questions about 9/11. There are professional engineers, physicists and architects doing the same thing.Except that if he were only asking questions I don't think that would be a big deal. You're right that lots of people have questions, as they should. But it's not AJ's questions that cause problems, it's his leaps in logic, hyperbole, conjecture, innuendo, and not to mention his personality which lends himself to being thought of as mentally unbalanced. Although to be fair I think most talk radio show hosts have some psychological quarks to them, AJ's just seems to be more amplified.

[jmdrake]

I think those guys are skeptics, which is not the same as conspiracy theorists.

Let's see. If Debra Medina had told Glenn Beck "Well...I do wonder about building 7." how do you think she would have been charactarized?

Anyhow, the MSM has no interest in giving Alex Jones lots of exposure. You saw how he wasn't invited back to Piers Morgan while Larry Pratt was. For that reason, I wouldn't expect the media to make a huge deal about Rand Paul being on the AJ show. If Rand's enemies plan to make an issue over that, then they call already dig up the times Rand was on the show prior to the Romney endorsement. I suspect the reason Rand hasn't been back on is because of the reaction of AJ to the endorsement itself. And frankly it's probably not the right time to go back on...if ever. There aren't any serious moneybombs scheduled.

[jmdrake]

The difference is, those two aren't known for being conspiracy types.

Most people's initial exposure to Geraldo Rivera.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy7grh_BZu8

[jmdrake]

Except that if he were only asking questions I don't think that would be a big deal. You're right that lots of people have questions, as they should. But it's not AJ's questions that cause problems, it's his leaps in logic, hyperbole, conjecture, innuendo, and not to mention his personality which lends himself to being thought of as mentally unbalanced. Although to be fair I think most talk radio show hosts have some psychological quarks to them, AJ's just seems to be more amplified.

Meh... He's "leaps in logic" are no worse than what I've seen in MSM. The difference is that instead of attacking "one side" or "the other side", he attacks both. If Alex Jones simply attacked liberals he'd be as popular among conservatives as is Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and the list goes on and on and on.

[Republicanguy]

Ummm.....huh? So AJ is "crazy" because he doesn't buy into the peak oil scam? I haven't seen Rand Paul or most republicans buy into that nonsense either. Yes we have serious energy problems, and they're all created by government. Forget sources of oil that have been put off limits through regulation. There's enough thorium in U.S. to supply all of our energy needs for the forseeable future. And thorium is cheaper, safer and cleaner than plutonium. But you can't make nuke warheads from thorium. So guess which energy source the government artifically props up?

And you know all this, you have the answer for all the world's current and future energy needs?

Will Thorium power all vehicles?

For all these pessimists out there, such as Richard Heinberg who has been talking about this for years, and first read the Club of Rome report that continued population and resource comsumption on a finite planet will lead to disaster.

And you do understand that you cannot drill, mine all the resources to the hilt, right? You do realise there is a fundamental limit of what you can get out of a mine or deep underground? In Texas, there is plenty of crude, but the expensive stuff, low quality won't sell cheaply.

[Matt Collins]

Let's see. If Debra Medina had told Glenn Beck "Well...I do wonder about building 7." how do you think she would have been charactarized? GB & Co set the trap and she unfortunately sprung it. They were trying to take her down, and unfortunately she fell for it.


I suspect the reason Rand hasn't been back on is because of the reaction of AJ to the endorsement itself. Yeah, he should've thought about that before he acted the way he did.

[itshappening]

What you don't realize Collins is that whenever Rand goes on Hannity, Levin etc. they're asking probing questions and want to bring him down.

He's just too smart for them.

Alex Jones has no such agenda.

[jmdrake]

And you know all this, you have the answer for all the world's current and future energy needs?

I know that most republicans aren't into "peak oil" and believe the answer to our energy problems is "drill baby drill." So let's separate fact from opinion shall we?

Fact: Republicans don't dislike Alex Jones over his views on energy. They dislike him because he attacks GOP politicians just as vigorously as he does Democratic politicians. FTR they hate Ron Paul for the same reason.

Opinion: How to best solve America's future energy needs. You have your opinion, I have mine.



Will Thorium power all vehicles?


Directly? No. A thorium reactor for your car is impractical from what I can tell.

Indirectly? It could. Thorium could provide the electrical energy needed for homes and vehicles. Thorium is more abudant the uranium, more efficient (less refining needed before usage), cleaner and safer. What's standing in the way of thorium? The government.



For all these pessimists out there, such as Richard Heinberg who has been talking about this for years, and first read the Club of Rome report that continued population and resource comsumption on a finite planet will lead to disaster.


The Club of Rome are the same crackpots pushing global warming. And why? Because they want global government. Next you'll be quoting Kim Jong Un to me.



And you do understand that you cannot drill, mine all the resources to the hilt, right? You do realise there is a fundamental limit of what you can get out of a mine or deep underground? In Texas, there is plenty of crude, but the expensive stuff, low quality won't sell cheaply.

I do understand that ^this is your opinion. And I do understand the difference between opinion and fact. The fact, which should be easily for you to acknowledge if you wish to be intellectually honest, is that rank and file Republicans agree more with Alex Jones on this issue than they do you. While association with Alex Jones might hurt Rand Paul with Republicans who dislike Jones for other reasons, it will not hurt Rand Paul politically because of Jones' views on energy.

If Rand Paul starts talking about the need to "restrict population growth" and "consumption of finite materials" then he can kiss the presidency goodbye. Not only would I not vote for him, but 70 to 90% of republicans would not support him either.

[Matt Collins]

What you don't realize Collins is that whenever Rand goes on Hannity, Levin etc. they're asking probing questions and want to bring him down.Uh no, I don't think so :rolleyes:

[jmdrake]

GB & Co set the trap and she unfortunately sprung it. They were trying to take her down, and unfortunately she fell for it.

I'm in ^100% agreement of that.



Yeah, he should've thought about that before he acted the way he did.

Lots of people overreacted to the Romney endorsement. Most didn't have a radio show. ;) Alex isn't hurting for guests these days and Rand isn't hurting for media outlets. At some point their interests may converge again. Who knows?

[itshappening]

Uh no, I don't think so :rolleyes:

You want to bet?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wbDpVBQAKs

Hannity is throwing various 'threats' at him and trying to get him to say what he'd do to confront them.

Rand is too smart to look like he's weak on these issues. That was Hannity's agenda here.

Believe me, they're not his buddies. They hate him and his father. They want to probe him and expose him to the base or for any potential political opponents.

Don't be so naive.

Alex has no such agenda. In fact, he's the opposite. He gives him soft interviews.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

http://i46.tinypic.com/2gsoaxu.png

Y'all are deluding yourselves if you don't believe Jones is a big reason for the 'Ron Paul 9/11 Truther' meme, that probably hurt Paul's presidential campaigns. It's one thing to go on Jones' show once, but Paul was going on it every other week it felt like for a while there.

[itshappening]

Ron Paul's presidential campaign exceeded expectations.

His approval with GOP voters was -30 for years and he was able to get a quarter of the vote in the early states.

That's a huge success as far as i'm concerned.

[jmdrake]

Y'all are deluding yourselves if you don't believe Jones is a big reason for the 'Ron Paul 9/11 Truther' meme, that probably hurt Paul's presidential campaigns. It's one thing to go on Jones' show once, but Paul was going on it every other week it felt like for a while there.

When Ron Paul himself said on the house of the senate that the U.S. was in danger of a "Gulf of Tonkin" type event to get us into war with Iran, that set the 9/11 smear machine in motion. I know because the first radio host to really push this, Steve Gill, is based here in Nashville TN. Cynthia McKinney was similarly smeared for having the audacity to ask the question "What did Bush know and when did he know it" even though that became the main driving point for the 9/11 commission (which failed at answering the question).

You're deluding yourself if you believe that a republican candidate for president could win the GOP nomination by challenging the party orthodoxy on terrorism, either by "blowback" or by "9/11 truth." Yes the exchange between Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani thrilled the "faithful" and won over some converts, who are already leaning away from GOP orthodoxy anyway, but it hurt Ron with rank and file republicans. Ron criticizing the "killing" of OBL hurt him in this last election cycle as well. In all of my canvasing I rarely (as in never) ran into anyone that didn't like Ron Paul because they thought he was a 9/11 truther. I ran into many that didn't like his foreign policy.

[Matt Collins]

Hannity is throwing various 'threats' at him and trying to get him to say what he'd do to confront them.
You said "always" and I said no.

That interview was a while ago, things have changed quite a bit since then. Rand is significantly more popular now, and talking heads know they can only shovel so much crap before their audience goes elsewhere, so it isn't all top down. Hannity can't beat up Rand, and if he does, it wouldn't last very long because Hannity's audience would revolt.

[itshappening]

You said "always" and I said no.

That interview was a while ago, things have changed quite a bit since then. Rand is significantly more popular now, and talking heads know they can only shovel so much crap before their audience goes elsewhere, so it isn't all top down. Hannity can't beat up Rand, and if he does, it wouldn't last very long because Hannity's audience would revolt.

It was a month ago.

[jmdrake]

You said "always" and I said no.

That interview was a while ago, things have changed quite a bit since then. Rand is significantly more popular now, and talking heads know they can only shovel so much crap before their audience goes elsewhere, so it isn't all top down. Hannity can't beat up Rand, and if he does, it wouldn't last very long because Hannity's audience would revolt.


It was a month ago.

The difference is that Hannity et all are being "nice" to Rand at the moment because Rand's current momentum. Alex Jones genuinely agrees with 99% of what Rand actually stands for. You won't get the race baiting Rand got from Rachel Madcow or the pacifist baiting Rand got from Sean Vanity. That said, there are things Rand agrees with Jones about, that it's not safe for Rand to talk about.

[itshappening]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tp3pHBYWq7w

Don't be fooled by Sean 'Let Freedom Ring' Hannity.

Yes, he's being polite but he's pushing and probing. Same with Mark Levin and Rush. For example in his Rush interview at the end he said "some people say you're like your father when it comes to foreign policy...". These kinds of comments are an attempt to subtly undermine him to the base and attempt to portray him soft on defense.

That's exactly what Hannity is doing throwing imaginary threats at him.

He's trying to trip him up and will continue to do so especially as we get nearer to 2016.

Rand is far too smart for the likes of Hannity (thank goodness).

They're not his buddies and spent 4 years trashing Ron (if they mentioned him at all).

Beck is probably the most friendly to him and does not try to probe so much but you never know with him.

Just know this... Alex has no agenda, in fact it's the complete opposite. He will give him a soft interview and project his concerns about various pieces of legislation or policy that none of the rest will even acknowledge let alone talk about. He's actually trying to sell Rand to his audience and make him look good rather than undermine him.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tp3pHBYWq7w

Don't be fooled by Sean 'Let Freedom Ring' Hannity.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/24/Let_Freedom_Ring.jpg/200px-Let_Freedom_Ring.jpg

[itshappening]

Believe me they're being polite because he's an elected United States senator who's popular and probably running for president.

They never even spoke to him before his blowout victories. He had to go into the vipers pit of Rachel Maddow.

They may also like some of the populist positions he's been taking and the trouble he's able to cause for team blue in the Senate.

However, they do hate him and his father and everything he stands for. They will try and subtly undermine him. That's their agenda.

Rand is too smart to fall into their traps and is a top notch candidate. He will challenge their assumptions and throw things like foreign aid at them.

[itshappening]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/24/Let_Freedom_Ring.jpg/200px-Let_Freedom_Ring.jpg

Sean's a great American!

... with the smile of an assassin.

[radiofriendly]

Alex Jones "stamp of approval?"

How did Rand Paul mess this one up? lol

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Alex Jones again confirms he's either insane or an entertainer playing a role for cash:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?411378-Alex-Jones-Boston-Bombing-a-quot-False-Flag-quot

[NewRightLibertarian]

http://i46.tinypic.com/2gsoaxu.png

Y'all are deluding yourselves if you don't believe Jones is a big reason for the 'Ron Paul 9/11 Truther' meme, that probably hurt Paul's presidential campaigns. It's one thing to go on Jones' show once, but Paul was going on it every other week it felt like for a while there.

Maybe this has something to do with it:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_ADYLUOk1I

Or perhaps this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8crFLXv-AY

[BlackTerrel]

Truthers are almost as controversial as racists and pedophiles. Not trying to compare them, but all three will instantly kill a national campaign. It's political poison.

No they aren't.

If Rand was a truther no he wouldn't win.

If he went on a radio show with a truther no one would give a shit.

Just like if he went on a show with someone who opposed gun rights people wouldn't assume he opposed gun rights.

[BlackTerrel]

What you don't realize Collins is that whenever Rand goes on Hannity, Levin etc. they're asking probing questions and want to bring him down.

He's just too smart for them.

Alex Jones has no such agenda.

Like what? What questions do they ask that would indicate they want to bring him down?

If someone is well prepped I doubt there is much you could be asked that would trip you up.

[BlackTerrel]

Like what? What questions do they ask that would indicate they want to bring him down?

If someone is well prepped I doubt there is much you could be asked that would trip you up.

With the exception of "have you told your parents you're gay yet?"

....There is no good answer to that one.

[itshappening]

The Alex Jones ads run by Issac were extremely flawed:

1. They ran about a week before the primary, too late to have any real impact as most have their minds made up by then.
2. They only ran in Lexington, as opposed to all of Kentucky.
3. He only put $500 (or $5,000?) behind them to run on television.

If he dropped $1,000,000 on those ads in February 2010, maybe people here wouldn't be as quick to dismiss it.



Truthers are almost as controversial as racists and pedophiles. Not trying to compare them, but all three will instantly kill a national campaign. It's political poison.

Are you putting these THOUSANDS of professionals on par with racists and pedo's? SERIOUSLY?

http://www2.ae911truth.org/signpetition.php

Screw you.

[jtstellar]

dont know, i'm aware of all the debra medina, show style, hyperbole based on half facts etc many people have attacked him for, but personally i've always taken a liking to alex in terms of temperament, passion etc, especially when he appeared on piers morgan. i grimaced when he brought up the nwo stuff, but even for that i still liked the confrontation, that's how much his passion has overcome, even for someone like me who's not much into conspiracies at all.