View Full Version : Ron Paul Roundup (12-14-07)

12-14-2007, 12:07 PM

Ron Paul Roundup (12-14-07)
by RS Davis (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=194780914&blogID=338062318&Mytoken=A129BD1A-D0F6-44F6-A10A6F2605C5F4C633250334)

Hello Freedomphiles! The Baltimore Sun is now talking (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2007/12/a_blimp_flies_for_ron_paul.html)about the Ron Paul blimp, too:

In political season, signs are everywhere. Candidates' logos are plastered on television advertisements, front yard signs, T-shirts, buttons, you name it. But this week, the newest form of presidential advertising appears, this time in the sky.

Ron Paul supporters, acting independently from his official campaign, have subleased a 197-foot long blimp with the message: "Who is Ron Paul? Google Ron Paul." Organizers plan on flying along the Eastern Seaboard, weather permitting, to South Carolina on Friday. Their goal is to remain in the air until the Jan. 8 New Hampshire primary.

"It's really no different than a billboard; essentially, it's a flying billboard." said Bruce Altschuler, a political science professor at New York's SUNY Oswego.

But The Boston Globe is reporting (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2007/12/ron_paul_blimp.html)that not everything is going according to plan:

The Ron Paul blimp won't be in Boston on schedule because of bad weather and problems affixing banners.

The airship was supposed to have been launched in Elizabeth City, N.C., on Monday and to arrive in Boston on Friday. But organizers say on their website that the launch is now scheduled for Friday morning, after a second banner is put on the side tonight. Organizers hope the blimp will be a big attention-getter leading up to the Jan. 8 primary in New Hampshire.

It's unclear whether the blimp will make its way up the East Coast in time to take part in a fund-raising event on Sunday that supporters of the iconoclastic Republican presidential candidate hope will set a single-day campaign cash record.

The blimp is supposed to dump tea into Boston Harbor to commemorate the 1773 seminal event of the American Revolution.

Yesterday, when I reposted this blog at RonPaulForums.com, I included a poll question asking the Ron Paul Revolutionistas how much they thought he was going to pull in on December 16th. I picked $4 - $5 million, but almost 75% picked "over six million." Well, according to Larry Fester at USADaily, it is more likely they are right (http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=198155)and I am wrong:

Analysis-Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has a very good shot at topping 20 million for the quarter. In fact it could happen by the weekend. Paul may raise between 8-10 million dollars this Sunday making it by far the largest single fund raising day in presidential history. Ron Paul has already raised 11.4 million dollars this quarter.

Grass roots volunteers are attempting to get 100,000 people to donate $100 each to Ron Paul's presidential campaign this Sunday. The event dubbed the Tea Party is to commemorate the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party by protesting the Federal Reserve's 'inflation tax' along with income taxes.

Based on the number of people registered at the Tea Party 07 website it is likely that Paul will double his 4.2 million one day haul making Sunday an over 8 million dollar day. The November 5th fund raising drive had about 16,000 pledges on the website it looks like the Tea Party website will have about 32,000 people pledged to donate by the weekend.

But if that's not good enough for you, shoot over to Gambling911.com, where they are reporting (http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-121507.html) the bookmaker's odds:

Bookmaker.com (see website here) has spread the odds out a bit. You can bet on four different options:

- $1-3 million 3 to 1

- $3-6 million 5 to 6

- $6-10 million 11 to 10

- Over $10 million 2 to 1

The best payout would come with any bet on Ron Paul's campaign making between $1 and $3 million, a bet that would pay out $3 for every $1 wagered. The last one day fundraiser raked in just over $4 million.

Bookmaker.com believes that Paul will raise somewhere in the area of $3 to $6 million based on the odds that pay slightly under even. You would bet $6 to win $5 (and of course get your initial $6 back should the number fall within this range).

The bull's eye number is in fact $6 million. That's what Sportsbook.com has been offering after opening the line at $5 mil (see website here)

"There has been a lot of action on this offering and we were forced to move the line up," said Dave Staley.

National Review Online is reporting (http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OGI4OTllNDJhM2ExODRlOGNhNmFkNmE1NGQ1ZDI1YWI=) on the latest CNN poll numbers:

Another way to look at these CNN numbers in South Carolina, reported on Drudge: Ron Paul is six percent away from second place.

Huckabee 24%
Thompson 17%
Giuliani 16%
Romney 16%
McCain 13%
Paul 11%

This is good news for Huckabee, obviously. A co-blogger at another site thinks that Huckabee is peaking too early, that he's now a target for the other candidates, and that a lot of the not-so-great parts of his record are going to get a lot of attention between now and early January. After that scrutiny, he'll fall back to earth.

Eleven percent, bitches! Paul cracked the double-digit mark! Speaking of Huckabee and the downfall of peaking too early, perhaps Dr Paul noticed this, too. The Guardian UK reports (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-7152143,00.html):

Two former Republican legislators from Mike Huckabee 's home state are in Iowa this week criticizing Huckabee's record on immigration and taxes on trips paid for by Ron Paul, Huckabee's Republican presidential rival.

Paul's campaign said Thursday it was paying former Sen. Jim Holt and former Rep. Randy Minton about $5,000 each to go to Iowa for a series of radio interviews criticizing Huckabee's 10 years as Arkansas governor.

``We just want to make sure Iowans get the full picture of what Governor Huckabee did when he was in office,'' said Paul's campaign spokesman, Jesse Benton. ``There hasn't been a whole lot of information going out to Iowans and we want to make sure they get the full picture.''

The AP (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hytp26YdZq_Vfen6W_bGZLMBFHjQD8TGTOTO0)and The Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5377782.html)reported the same story. Are you falling asleep? This (http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20071213042357547) will wake you up:

Ron Paul is not your friend. He is not your ally. He is not fighting for you. While many so-called Progressives are busy hopping on the Ron Paul bandwagon, it is all too obvious that they have either forgotten or are oblivious to the nature of Libertarianism, so-called Anarcho-Capitalism.

Much like the various strains of anarchism, Ron Paul's libertarianism seeks to abolish the oppressive and coercive force which is government (strangely enough Paul aims to accomplish this abolition of government by assuming the throne and taking control of the state). Where Libertarianism and Anarchism split is in addressing the issues of hierarchy and force. While anarchists abhor all oppression as well as the oppressor's use of violence, libertarians are only concerned with the tyranny and violence of the state. Wherein anarchists would move to assure that no one in any society exerts dominance over a weak majority (as the case would likely be) or minority, libertarians believe that those with access to money, means to production, weapons, and mercenaries, should be allowed to freely exploit the vast masses of humanity.

Today in the United States, Ron Paul seeks to abolish what little services the state still provides for its poor, hungry, and dispossessed. These services were paid for in blood by reformist activists who aimed to alleviate the stress and misery of poverty for the American working class. While as anarchists we must work towards more than simple reforms, we cannot deny the reality that gains such as an eight-hour workday, minimum wage or welfare help those who cannot endure the nature of our survival-of-the-fittest capitalist state. Social and welfare services which have been forced upon the elite and conceded to the working class during the New Deal and the Great Society, amongst other epochs cannot be written off as unimportant.

This ignorant and uninformed opinion piece comes from MySpacer bigghigg. Check out his blog (http://www.myspace.com/bigghigg). He's a self-defined anarchist, who loves the welfare state. Do we need to know anything more about this knucklehead than that obvious contradiction to rate the worth of his opinion? Keep an eye on my blog, because I may write a more in-depth rebuttal today.

In other news, The Atlanta Journal Constitution is writing (http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2007/12/13/planning_ahead_ron_pauls_heir.html) about who may pick up the flag and carry-on if Ron Paul goes down fighting in the Republican primaries:

Guess which presidential candidate expects to benefit if Republican candidate Ron Paul loses the GOP primary and resists running on the Libertarian Party ticket instead?

Close, but no cigar. It's Cynthia McKinney.

The former Georgia congresswoman and ex-Democrat is running for president on the Green Party ticket and believes she can woo some of Paul's supporters should he fizzle out early, according to this report at Reason.com, a Libertarian website.

Forbes Magazine has a piece (http://www.forbes.com/technology/2007/12/13/google-search-rankings-tech-internet-cx_wt_1213techgoogle.html) online right now reporting the most-Googled names of '07:

The Mountain View, Calif., company on Thursday released a slew of similar results in its annual zeitgeist list of the most-searched topics in 2007. The topics included presidential candidates, lawsuits, Hollywood starlets, sports teams and song lyrics. Republican U.S. Rep. Ron Paul took the No. 1 spot in most-searched presidential candidates, beating out Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.

Marissa Mayer, Google's vice president of search products and user experience, told Forbes.com that Ron Paul's popularity was surprising, but his online campaign "shows what an effective tool the Internet is. He's not nearly as covered [in the media] as Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, but he has marketed himself online. He's using the Internet to his advantage."

ABC7 News out of Virginia is reporting (http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1207/480289.html) on the signature campaign to get Ron Paul on the ballot:

Volunteers and staffers for Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul plan to turn over 20,000 signatures Thursday to the State Board of Elections to get the Texas congressman on the Virginia primary ballot.

Paul has attracted significant momentum from voters across the political spectrum, including conservatives who back his stance on fiscal matters and liberals who agree with his views on ending U.S. involvement in Iraq. All presidential hopefuls have until Friday to submit their signatures, and so far Republican Mitt Romney and Democrat Barack Obama are the only candidates officially on the Virginia ballot.

OpEdNews.com is writing (http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_amydemic_071212_ron_paul_rocks_miami.htm) about the Univision debate:

On Sunday, Ron Paul was in Miami Florida at the Univision Debate, and his supporters lined up waving flags, holding signs, and cheering for him everywhere he went. Early in the day Ron Paul supporters stood outside the famous Versailles restaurant, welcoming him to Miami. "...a great symbol at Versailles, that the Cubans have welcomed the one man who is for liberty and freedom."

Later, everyone resurfaced across the street from the Univision Debate for a rally. There was no one supporting anyone else ...Ok there was a Mitt Romney supporter, walking by himself down Ponce De Leon Blvd and there was an alleged duo carting Huckabee signs. Perhaps they were overshadowed by the Ron Paul Revolution, (because it is big). A subject that the Main Stream Media ignores and Sunday was no different, their cameras were far enough away from the rally and they could tell their viewers whatever story they wanted, and that's just what they did.


Justin Riamondo at Anti-War.com is analyzing (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12053) the attacks on Paul from the neo-con right and the neo-lib left (they are interchangeable):

I was going to go into Jonah Goldberg's analysis of the Paul campaign, but I see this column threatening to get so long as to test the patience of my readers, so I'll save that for a later date. I would simply note that Goldberg, too, hits the "isolationist" meme – a favorite theme of the lapsed Trotskyists of the neoconservative movement, who also conjure the supposedly scary persona of Pat Buchanan in this regard. What's interesting is that not only is the analysis quite similar, but so, too, is the motive: Goldberg and his confreres at National Review want to prevent their conservative flock from defecting to the Paul campaign, just as the ISO is horrified that many on the liberal-left and even left-radicals are rallying to the banner of the Ron Paul Revolution.

Well, isn't that just tough?! Both the orthodox "left" and the neoconservative "right" are intellectually and politically bankrupt: they have nothing to offer but empty slogans, stale dogma, and an outmoded paradigm that has kept us barreling down the road to tyranny and perpetual war, a process that seems to have accelerated ominously since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Rather than support the only antiwar, anti-authoritarian candidate on the ballot, the sectarians of the ISO would rather stand on the sidelines and stew in their own watery juices.

Well, then, let them. The Paul campaign is so much bigger than the ISO, so much more capable of launching a real revolution in this country, that it isn't even funny. Surely Wolf recognizes this – which accounts, one would guess, for the unusually venomous attack.

Anthony Gregory over at LewRockwell.com is analyzing (http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory152.html) Ron Paul's foreign policy prowess:

"Mr. Speaker, peace is always superior to war," said Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) on the House floor on September 18, 2002, six months before President Bush took America to war with Iraq. This viewpoint comes through consistently in his foreign-policy speeches to Congress, spanning the years 1976 to 2006, now collected together in his book A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship.

Whereas Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, often derive their hawkish and dovish positions from partisan calculation, the winds of political opinion, or the urgings of special interests and domestic constituencies, and not by a set of coherent principles or deep understanding of the economics and history of American foreign policy, Ron Paul is different. From the Reagan years through the Clinton years and past the aftermath of 9/11, Paul has consistently upheld the Jeffersonian principles of nonintervention, peace, honest diplomacy, and free trade as the path to American security, freedom, and more harmonious relations with the rest of the world.

One theme he has often stressed is the irrationality of U.S. policy abroad, most clearly demonstrated by America's shifting alliances and commitments to both sides of various squabbles. The United States has had commitments to both Britain and Argentina, both Israel and the Arab states, both Greece and Turkey, and so on, regardless of any conflicts that may arise between the two allied interests. One decade, the U.S. government will be supporting the Taliban or Saddam Hussein and the next decade it will be at all-out war with the former ally.

Reason Magazine's David Weigel is reporting (http://www.reason.com/blog/show/123914.html) on Paul's dominance in the last frontier:

According to the newest survey by Anchorage's Channel 2:

Which Republican presidential candidate will you support in Alaska's caucus?

Ron Paul - 29
Mike Huckabee - 22
Rudy Giuliani - 14
Fred Thompson - 12
John McCain - 9
Mitt Romney - 9
Other - 6

Alaska is an odd state—married to federal money, distrustful of Democrats, and very warm to insurgent candidates. Thirty years ago Dick Randolph won a state House seat and became the first elected LP legislator. Twenty years ago, Jesse Jackson won the state's caucuses. And Alaska holds a caucus that's 1)poorly attended (4,330 showed up in 2000) and 2)early in the process (Feb. 5). We're looking at a situation where Ron Paul could win more states than John McCain and Fred Thompson.

Toby Harnden over at The Telegraph UK is pondering (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/foreign/tobyharnden/dec07/ronpaul.htm) Ron Paul's position on 9/11 and American security:

No, Ron Paul isn't a moonbat 9/11 "truther". But at a rally I went to in Sioux City, Iowa yesterday he stated that had there not been a surfeit of government involvement in airline security then the al-Qa'eda hijackers might well have had their plot foiled by gun-toting pilots - or defiant citizens overcoming them on not just one but all four planes.


...My first reaction was that Paul's theory was a bit nutty. But then I thought about it further and I reckon there's something in what he says - or certainly the bit about federal regulations leaving the pilots with no easy means of fighting back. Here's my piece from Iowa on the Paul campaign and here's what the popular hero of the Ron Paul revolution said about 9/11.

"If the responsibility had been on the airlines to protect their planes and their cargo, which it should have been rather than the government, the conditions would have been quite different. The pilots would have been allowed to have weapons on the airplanes. At the same time, we wouldn't have been told we never should have resisted hijackers.

"The government was in charge and unfortunately we haven't moved in the proper direction. What we have done is turn over all the security to the government and unfortunately it hasn't made travelling any more pleasant. It's an awful lot less pleasant.

And finally, are you planning on donating on December 16th? If so, might as well get a calendar of the Ron Paul Hotties (http://www.hotties4ronpaul.com/purchase/):

For immediate Pre-order, calendars are $8 each (to cover cost alone) sent to my paypal account + an e-mailed receipt from headquarters (www.RonPaul2008.com) showing a donation from you made to the Ron Paul Campaign (www.RonPaul2008.com) of $10 per each calendar, using the code word "Juliet" in the specially-allotted code section after the forward slash (/). This e-mail receipt must be forwarded to: Hotties4RonPaul@Hotmail.com. Thank you!


12-14-2007, 03:29 PM
Okay, so I DID write a detailed refutation of the offending article. Click here (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=194780914&blogID=338112264&Mytoken=768F34B7-8B7F-413F-B8A00CDF09ABF83912389341) to come see it.

12-14-2007, 03:48 PM
I just discovered these daily updates. This is great stuff. Thanks!

12-14-2007, 04:10 PM
I just discovered these daily updates. This is great stuff. Thanks!


kaleidoscope eyes
12-14-2007, 07:31 PM
no. now, if there was a Ron Paul MALE hotties..... perhaps. ;)

Ira Aten
12-17-2007, 08:49 AM
In today's Austin American Statesman, they blatantly mislead people (go figure) about the number of people at the event.

A city of Austin mortorcyle officer (one of about ten or twelve on motorcycles escorting us) stated there was "...well over a thousand" in attendance.

Our so called "newspaper" claimed that "...about 200 people attended the event".

Then, they took tight shots of only the re-enactors in the boat, not showing the crowd.

That paper has the exact same credibility that Faux News possesses.

Why the purposeful tactics to mislead? They didn't even mention the fact that we set a record for single day donations (surpassing John Kerry) and DARN sure didn't mention there were no special interest money or PACS involved.

Just individuals donating about 50 bucks each. The lack of integrity of the media, is ASTOUNDING.