View Full Version : Ron Paul Roundup (12-20-07)

12-20-2007, 05:57 PM

Ron Paul Roundup (12-20-07)
by RS Davis (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=194780914&blogID=339939094&Mytoken=BF84B125-60B6-46C8-AA0B9DC52E9DEF3153194625)

Hello Freedomphiles! I'd like to start today's Roundup by following up on a story from yesterdays edition. If you recall, I mentioned a piece (http://civilliberty.about.com/b/2007/12/17/is-ron-paul-the-best-republican-presidential-candidate-for-2008.htm)from About.com that was critical without being a hit piece. Well, one Freedomphile had a response from a guy named Over Unity in the comments section of my blog (http://blog.myspace.com/freedomphiles)that was so good, I suggested he make it into a blog of his own. Which he did. Check it out here (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=111540853&blogID=339646717).

Now, ever forward and on to the news. The Dawson Times reported (http://www.dawsontimes.com/news30534/six-million-dollar-man-ron-paul-shatters-all-recor.shtml)about Paul's record-breaking haul:

The campaign's Q4 fundraising totals have now surpassed $18 million.

Ike Hall, the Georgia State Coordinator for Paul's national campaign, attended the Boston rally and gives this report: "Along with at least seven other supporters from Georgia, we braved the winter storm in Boston to attend the Tea Party '07 Rally at Faneuil Hall. The atmosphere was electric as the crowd barely contained its energy enough to allow Tom Moor a chance to welcome us and give an historical narration of the nearby events that led to the American Revolution. But Jacob Hornberger, president of the Future of Freedom Foundation, was able to tap that energy in a rousing speech that brought the crowd to its feet several times, chanting 'Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul!' Dr. Rand Paul, Ron Paul's son, spoke to the crowd about his father's campaign and the ignition of a new, peaceful, movement for liberty.

And MSNBC is reporting (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/12/19/525674.aspx) about Paul's unique "problem:"

Ron Paul says he has a problem. Others, no doubt, wish they were so lucky.

Paul began his remarks at a Politics and Eggs breakfast by saying he is constantly asked about his fundraising. Earlier in the campaign, he said, there would be occasional bursts of attention and donations, usually after debates. "Back then, a burst was $50,000," he said. "But now, it's sort of gotten out of control, and I don't know what to do about it. I mean, the money just keeps coming in."

He said there is something "significant going on," and attributed it to the message, not the man. "It's not about me, as much as it is about this message, and the need for it to be heard," he said. "I'm especially excited about the young people willing to look at this and say, this is a grand idea, and this is what we need to do."

BTCNews is speculating (http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/1779) on why Ron Paul has the support that he does:

Lots of people seem baffled by Ron Paul's fundraising prowess. The answer seems obvious to me: an imploding GOP has assembled the most bizarre slate of presidential candidates in history, and Paul is the chief financial beneficiary. And he isn't only drawing from disaffected Republicans: his base includes aggravated Republican-leaning independents, Libertarians and Larouchites, the exaggerated but nevertheless real pool of "a pox on both their houses" voters, and Democrats willing to overlook his extreme conservatism in favor of an anti-Iraq occupation message more strident than some of their own candidates can muster. Those constituencies don't have much clout in the polls, but they can assemble some serious scratch when they're all pulling for the same guy. Obviously.

Did you hear that Dick Cheney - our own Governor Palpatine - has taken a page out of the Ron Paul playbook? Spoof! reports (http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i27870):

U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney has begun construction on a new weapon destined to be the most powerful yet in the American Empire, Ron Paul rebels said today.

The new weapon has been codenamed the "Death Blimp" according to documents captured by the Paul rebels. The documents were intercepted in an e-mail as it passed through the Internet, home to the Paul rebel base.

Lord Rothschild of the Bilderberg group ordered Cheney to begin construction of the massive war machine, rebel spies reported. Ostensibly it is to be used in an upcoming war with Iran, but the Paul rebels fear that the Death Blimp could be used to destroy the rebel fleet, which currently consists of a single rented dirigible. The Empire's new Death Blimp will be at least 25 times the size of the Ron Paul blimp, which is currently patrolling the Eastern coast of the United States on a diplomatic mission.

I can take it down. It'll be just like shooting whomp-rats in Beggar's Canyon back home. Remember the little bit I pointed out to you about Ron Paul comparing Huckabee's cross to a quote about the rise of Fascism? Here's a refresher (http://www.alternet.org/blogs/election08/71066/) from Alter-Net:

This isn't your ordinary Happy Holidays event. Huckabee let's loose the Christian spirit, saying "what really matters is the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ." The ad also features a bookshelf in the background that appears to some like a "floating cross." The ad is a not-too-subtle play to Iowa value voters, who cringe at what they view as an increasingly secularized holiday.

Asked about the ad today, Ron Paul decried Huckabee's religious iconography with his own veiled reference on Fox and Friends:

"It reminds me of what Sinclair Lewis once said. He says, 'when fascism comes to this country, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross.' Now I don't know whether that's a fair assessment or not, but you wonder about using a cross, like he is the only Christian or implying that subtly. So, I don't think I would ever use anything like that."

Here's the actual ad. Do you agree?


And here's the video of Dr Paul's reaction so you can see for yourself:


James Pinkerton at Newsday.com thinks (http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-oppink5508038dec20,0,7299879.column)it's a cheap shot:

Is Mike Huckabee a fascist? That's the insinuation from Ron Paul, one of Huckabee's rivals for the Republican presidential nomination.

And it's a cheap shot. One needn't agree with, or even like, Huckabee to know that throwing around the f-word "fascism" is a low blow.

You've all heard of Don Black, haven't you? He's the white supremist leader of Stormfront who recently donated $500 to the Ron Paul campaign.

The campaign says they won't give it back, Jesse Benton saying, "Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and inalienable rights. If someone with small ideologies happens to contribute money to Ron, thinking he can influence Ron in any way, he's wasted his money. Ron is going to take the money and try to spread the message of freedom. And that's $500 less that this guy has to do whatever it is that he does."

It's a good point, but the real surprising point is made by the ironically named Black himself. The Associated Press reports (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hp_7eNYJJfvcUXW2po0M40ePbMeQD8TKOQHG0):

Black said he supports Paul's stance on ending the war in Iraq, securing U.S. borders and his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants.

"We know that he's not a white nationalist. He says he isn't and we believe him, but on the issues, there's only one choice," Black said Wednesday.

"We like his stand on tight borders and opposition to a police state," Black told The Palm Beach Post earlier.

Fair enough, dude. Have a Merry Christmas and welcome to the Revolution, you racist twat!

Yesterday, I reported about Andrew Sullivan (who I will defend no matter what some people have said) endorsing Ron Paul as the Republican candidate for president. Here (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/12/dissent-of-th-3.html) are some people who disagree, and here (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/12/ron-pauls-repub.html) are some people who agree.

In the same magazine, The Atlantic, Megan McArdle deftly proves (http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/12/rah_rah_ron_paul.php) how uninformed she is of the positions of Ron Paul:

Much of his persona, sincere or not, seems to boil down to "Foreigners are scary, and people who like foreigners are plotting to take away all your stuff."

Good stuff, Megan, you ignorant bint. But it get's better. Check out the snarky nastiness (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2007/12/ron-paulites-do.html) coming out of Andrew Malcom of The Los Angeles Times:

Supporters of Ron Paul should not read this item. Perusing the following paragraphs may cause dizziness, nausea, vomiting, disappointment and renewed anger at political polls, the mainstream media, all institutions holding financial power and anyone not terribly concerned about that mysterious planned highway across Texas that somehow threatens national security...

...Now, here's the news that would drive Paul supporters berserk if any had kept reading down to here, which they haven't: Ron Paul's polling numbers are now plummeting. Yup, going down, down. Once, he got the money to afford TV advertising in the Granite State, his support as measured by these no-doubt fraudulent polls began crumbling.

The new CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Primary Poll out today shows Paul's support falling from its high of 8% in early November to 7% at the start of December and 5% last weekend, when he had his big fundraising success. (The phone survey of 411 random, likely Republican primary voters was between Dec. 13 and 17.)

Here's something you might not like to hear, Andy - one poll does not make a trend. Bob Parks makes some negative but compelling points (http://www.americandaily.com/article/21321) on The American Daily:

We all know Ron Paul is generating some excitement and raising money. Thereby, he can keep his campaign headquarters' lights on and pay his people. However, many other candidates are inundating the airwaves with an obnoxious amount of campaign ads. If Ron Paul is getting all these campaign contributions, what's he waiting for? Where are his ads?

YouTube freebies only get you so far.

Ron Paul is currently polling around four percent. Now, if he were in the twenties, people would be talking about him. But no one covers the last place team, except to watch them further stumble. If Paul can get out of the cellar, he'd be a player.

Ron Paul may have this great message, but it's worthless if no one hears it. I don't work for Ron Paul. I'm available (just joking), but it's not my responsibility to get his message out and promote his candidacy. That's HIS responsibility, and again, if he can't (or won't) promote his message, why should he be considered a credible candidate?

As you may recall, Ron Paul was on Glenn Beck's show on Tuesday night. Here are some highlights compiled by Reason Magazine:


In The Daily Herald, Ron Hart thinks (http://columbiadailyherald.com/articles/2007/12/19/opinion/02hart.prt) that the two party duopoly may come to regret Ron Paul:

Ron Paul is not your typical politician. He strikes me as the only one running who is more likely to be listening to a constituent in a bar rather than getting a $400 haircut or running his opinions by a focus group. He is a smart, conscientious and an accomplished private sector doctor who went into politics for the right reasons. He is a man who stands firmly by his beliefs and does not pander to the worst in human instinct. As such, and if history is any guide, rest assured that he has no chance in hell of winning.

Reason Magazine is reporting (http://www.reason.com/blog/show/124031.html) of an exchange between David Frum and an Austrian economist. Here's (http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=169952) what Frum said:

Just a little lower down in the polls is a libertarian candidate named Ron Paul. Paul is best known for his vehemently isolationist foreign policy views. But his core supporters also thrill to his self-taught monetary views, which amount to a rejection of everything taught by modern economists from Alfred Marshall to Milton Friedman.

Huckabee and Paul have not the faintest idea of what they are talking about. The problem is not that their answers are wrong -- that can happen to anyone. The problem is that they don't understand the questions, and are too lazy or too arrogant to learn. But say that aloud and their partisans will shout back: Elitism!

And here's (http://austrianeconomists.typepad.com/) what Peter Boettke said in reply:

Pundits like Frum believe that economic policy can be designed to avoid the unpleasant side effects of previous policy errors. But there isn't any silver bullet here to provide a quick and easy fix to decades of monetary irresponsibility. As I said before, we don't need government intervention, we need market correction. Market forces, if allowed to operate freely, will work quickly to reallocate labor and capital and shift resources to higher valued uses.........As Milton Friedman said, we have been misled by false teaching in economics to believe that there is a trade-off between inflation and unemployment. This dichotomy is false. The choice is not between inflation and unemployment, but between high unemployment as a result of inflation, or unemployment as a temporary side-effect of the cure for inflation. Playing the policy game of always pushing off market corrections through easy money, is as Hayek warned like holding a 'tiger by the tail'.

Right at the time that David Frum is ridiculing Ron Paul's for holding economic ideas that have been rejected from the time of Marshall to Friedman, we learn that the European Central Bank is injecting $500 billion into the banking system to ease the market corrections that must result from the previous credit expansion. That tiger is getting awful hard to hang on to!!!

And, Mr. Frum should look up the various Nobel Prize winners in economics, starting with Hayek, who have been concerned with government monetary policy and looked to a commodity backed money as a viable alternative. The 'self-taught' economics of Ron Paul (whatever other problems I might have with him and his presentation of these ideas) is grounded in sound scientific economics. An understanding of the logic of human action, the coordinating capacity of the market economy, the problems with bureaucracy, the special pleading of interest groups, and the destructive capacity of inflation are fundamental to his economic policy message. I hope my students learn those lessons from reading Adam Smith, David Hume, J. B. Say, F. A. Hayek, and James Buchanan. None of these names are on the 'crackpot' list of economists.

Frum got served! Jive-ass turkey. Have a good night!


12-20-2007, 09:58 PM
"Death Blimp"! :D