Ron Paul on How Government Dependency Lost Romney The Election

As most of you who read this blog know, I am not a fan of Ron Paul, but he is absolutely right in his assessment of the 'fiscal cliff', and why a little over 50% of the American people wanted Barack Obama to win. It all boils down to government dependency, and he believes that dependency spells doom for this country.

"We're so far gone. We're over the cliff," the Texas Republican told Bloomberg Television's "In the Loop" program. "We cannot get enough people in Congress in the next 5-10 years who will do wise things."

[snip]

Mr. Paul, who is retiring after 12 terms in the House, said voters on Tuesday rejected Mitt Romney because he had opposed the government bailout of General Motors and Chrysler.

"The people in the Midwest voted against him: 'Oh, we have to be taken care of!' So that vote was sort of like what we are laughing at in Greece," Mr. Paul said.

"People do not want anything cut," he said. "They want all the bailouts to come. They want the Fed to keep printing the money. And they don't believe that we've gone off the cliff or are close to going off the cliff. They think we can patch it over, that we can somehow come up with some magic solution. But you can't have a budgetary solution if you don't change what the role of government should be. As long as you think we have to police the world and run this welfare state, all we are going to argue about is who will get the loot."

I still don't agree with his isolationist position- there are times when we need to help our allies, but we certainly don't need to be sending financial aid to our enemies.  And I still partially fault Paul's supporters for the Romney loss, I'm sure most refused to vote, but I will give him credit for this.

A Ron Paul Vote, Johnson Vote, Or No Vote Equals a Vote For Obama

In Bill Whittle's latest video he appeals to those who are determined to vote Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or 3rd Party because they detest Mitt Romney as much as they do Barack Obama.

I'm not going to be so diplomatic. I blame all of you who voted for Barr or didn't vote at all, for the past four years of hell. Last time around I explained quite simply that it was all about the math, I wasn't thrilled with John McCain (I was a Giuliani gal) but I knew he would be a damn sight better than Obama. The same goes for Mitt Romney. I was even less thrilled with our picks this year, but Romney will be a far better choice than Obama. In July 2008, I wrote a post detailing why a no vote equalled a vote for Obama, and ended with:

And, for those of you who think that voting for Bob Barr, or not voting at all is the best course of action, remember those votes, or lack thereof, are votes for Obama. And if he happens to win, and this great country is led to ruin, you will have only yourselves to blame, along with all those other lemmings duped by his messianic message of change. No complaints allowed, but at least I won't have that burden on my conscience, and I will complain loud and hard.

I understand principle, and I know that Romney is not conservative enough for you, but he's more conservative than Obama, and a lot more capable of getting this country back on track. Four more years of Obama will effectively put the final nail in the coffin of this great country of ours, and YOU will have helped hammer it in.

I'm voting Romney/Ryan tomorrow and my conscience will be clear.

Ron Paul Says 9/11 Wouldn't Have Happened On His Watch

Ron Paul is truly an idiot. His naivete would get us all killed. Thank GOD, as I predicted, he would not win the nomination.

How can anyone take this man seriously??!! Really, how?  9/11 wouldn't have happened had he been in charge?  How dare he!

This man is as enamored of himself, and deified by his supporters, as Obama is/was.





Source: Buzz Feed

Mitt's The Man- Romney Wins GOP Nomination

Mitt Romney swept the Texas votes today by an overwhelming margin, which has secured him the GOP nomination for president. Romney won with almost 70% of the vote at this time, Ron Paul came in with a little over 11%, and unlike Obama who garnered 42 % of the "uncommitted" vote in Kentucky, Romney had a little over 4%.

Although Mitt isn't the perfect candidate, he's our candidate, and a far better choice than another four years of Obama.

Okay, Ron, you can go away now.

This election is going to get nasty.

Photo Credit

Oliver Stone, Chuck Norris and Other Celebrity Hollywood Nuts Who Support Ron Paul

Actor Vince Vaughn isn't the only Hollywood nut to support Ron Paul for president. Other celebrities have voiced their support for the Republican wannabee-nominee, even though he's actually a Libertarian.  I don't know how I missed this, but in January the latest to claim he will vote for Paul if he gets the nomination is, of all people, the liberal  iconic film director/producer Oliver Stone. I'm not sure if I'm shocked about this latest bit of news or not, after all, his son Sean just became a Shiite Muslim. 

In an interview with Rock Cellar magazine, Stone was asked if an economic collapse would lead to the fall of the American “empire.”

“I think it’s a given,” Stone said. “There’s no way that we can continue this spending spree. In fact, I think in many ways the most interesting candidate — I’d even vote for him if he was running against Obama — is Ron Paul. Because he’s the only one of anybody who’s saying anything intelligent about the future of the world.”

Of course, when it comes down to it, would he really vote for Paul?  I kind of doubt it. Talk is cheap. And Stone has always been a diehard, lefty liberal Democrat, and a strong Obama supporter. Not quite out there as Michael Moore, but pretty darn close.  His list of controversial films is a testament to how liberal he is: to name a few- Comandante (documentary about his meeting with Cuba's Fidel Castro), Salvador, Born On The Fourth Of July, Nixon, the documentary South of The Border which was criticized by many (including actress Maria Conchita Alonso) for portraying both Hugo Chavez and Castro in a positive light.

But they're not the only ones who heart Ron Paul. Although some of the celebs on this Facebook page list might just be wishful thinking on the part of the admins, some are rather surprising. Some not so much.

Other Paul endorsers:
American Idol singer Kelly Clarkson
Singer Michelle Branch (never heard of her)
Aerosmith guitarist Joe Perry

Chuck Norris
Clint Eastwood,

However, Nicole Scherzinger (and several groups I've never heard of) did not endorse him. They had their twitter accounts hacked by Ron Paul-ites. Way to go, Paul supporters.

But, Paul will never get the nomination, so all those Paul supporters who happen to be Democratic will probably vote for Obama.

Who Should I Vote For President In 2012

So far, the race for GOP nomination is wide open.  At this point in time it's too hard to predict who will get the nod with Santorum winning by a very slim margin the Iowa caucuses, Romney handily winning in New Hampshire and Gingrich's slam dunk in South Carolina.  I'm still not sure who I will vote for, but it's a toss up between Gingrich and Romney.

For those who are still stumped as to who to vote for in the upcoming elections (the next is Florida on January 31st), I posted  several quizzes to help you decide.

Now ABC News has created their own Match-O-Matic quiz that includes a list of candidate statements on everything from the economy to global warming to abortion.  All the candidates including Barack Obama and some who have already dropped out are represented, although not all categories include every candidate's statement. From 10 categories you get to pick which statement best represents your views on the subject matter.

You just might be surprised.  I know I was.

UPDATE: May 2012

Here's another quiz with all the current candidates, including some third party and independents.

Joke of the day: Ron Paul dubbed by BadLipReading.com

Ha! From www.BadLipReading.com

Ron Paul isn't the only one he makes fun of. There's Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain. There's no Obama, so we can probably assume the producer of these videos is from the "left" side of the tracks. But this one is pretty funny.

'RON PAUL' - A Bad Lip Reading SoundBite - watch more funny videos

Why The Iowa Caucuses Mean Bupkis

Let's face it, the U.S. electoral process is screwy. You've got caucuses, primaries and straw polls (all at different times of the year), delegates and conventions and electoral colleges, and none of it makes any sense at all.  But since I'm talking about caucuses and why they mean diddly squat, I'll keep on point.

First let's examine the difference between a caucus and a primary: 

Caucuses, especially in Iowa, are like down-home get-togethers where people gather at different venues, meet with the different candidates, and decide who they want to support. They then pick delegates to ship off to the various conventions.

Primaries, are the statewide elections held at official precincts where people get to vote in secret.

While some states use caucuses to determine who their presidential nominee will be, others use either primaries or a combination of both, and the dates for the caucuses, primaries and conventions span months.

The reason why there is so much frenzied interest in the Iowa Caucus is that Iowans are the first ones in the election process to choose, not that their choices make much of a difference in who eventually winds up gaining the nomination. After all, since 1976 only three Iowa GOP caucus nominees have actually won. Gerald Ford got that honor in 1976, then Bob Dole twenty years later in 1996, and finally George W. Bush in 2000.  In fact, John McCain came in 4th, by a very slim margin. And Iowans still have the 99 county elections, state elections and finally the national convention to deal with.

The major problem with caucuses is that people like Ron Paul have the ability to galvanize the youth who have all the free time to bus it over to Iowa and spend the 3 plus hours it takes to hash it out. The more diehards you have show up, the more likely it is you will win. I still have no clue what the bizarre appeal is to his mostly young followers who cleave to him like a calf to its mama's teat. But he is most definitely popular.

I look at the Iowa caucuses this way, it might be nice to win Iowa, which is a little like winning the Golden Globe or SAG award for Best Actor, but it's the coveted Academy Award that matters most.

The schedule of 2012 electoral events .

Michael Gerson on Why Ron Paul Would Be A Disastrous Presidential Choice

Michael Gerson's Washington Post opinion piece on Ron Paul has the most cogent reasons why Ron Paul is so very wrong for this country:

Let us count the ways in which the nomination of Ron Paul would be groundbreaking for the GOP.

No other recent candidate hailing from the party of Lincoln has accused Abraham Lincoln of causing a “senseless” war and ruling with an “iron fist.” Or regarded Ronald Reagan’s presidency a “dramatic failure.” Or proposed the legalization of prostitution and heroin use. Or called America the most “aggressive, extended and expansionist” empire in world history. Or promised to abolish the CIA, depart NATO and withdraw military protection from South Korea. Or blamed terrorism on American militarism, since “they’re terrorists because we’re occupiers.” Or accused the American government of a Sept. 11 “coverup” and called for an investigation headed by Dennis Kucinich. Or described the killing of Osama bin Laden as “absolutely not necessary.” Or affirmed that he would not have sent American troops to Europe to end the Holocaust. Or excused Iranian nuclear ambitions as “natural,” while dismissing evidence of those ambitions as “war propaganda.” Or published a newsletter stating that the 1993 World Trade Center attack might have been “a setup by the Israeli Mossad,” and defending former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke and criticizing the “evil of forced integration.”

The rest here.

Ron Pauls Dubious Affiliations- article by James Kirchick, The Weekly Standard

James Kirchick's Weekly Standard article about the questionable views and company Ron Paul keeps is worth a read. Not that it will influence any die-hard Ron Paul lemmings, who are too awe-struck to see the truth. It actually reminds me of Barack Obama and all his fans who blindly voted an empty suit into office in 2008 without either questioning his dubious friendships and alliances, or just not giving a damn. 

Kirchick talks about all the very valid reasons why we should not vote for Dr. Paul including his affiliation with whacked out conspiracy theorist Alex Jones of Infowars.

We might not have control over who are fans are, but we do have a choice in the company we keep, and those people are definitely a reflection of who we are.

Read the article here.

Ron Paul is Pro Hamas

Famous Ron Paul quotes

And for those who might not believe that Paul is actually more pro Hamas than he is pro Israel, watch the following words flow from his lips in the following video:  "the tragedy of Gaza" [snip] "I look at it like a concentration camp, and people are making homemade bombs, and like they're the aggressors?"  Well, yes, Dr. Paul. If you did your homework, you would know that Israel has always responded to aggression from Palestine, not the other way around. Throw enough bombs onto my property (homemade or not) and I'm going to fight back, sir.

And if he also researched Hamas a little further, he would know that Hamas' Charter specifically calls for the annihilation of Israel.

"Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors."

Article Seven: ....Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad, which is a Jewish tree (cited by Bukhari and Muslim).

Article Eleven: The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf . ... This is the status [of the land] in Islamic Shari’a, and it is similar to all lands conquered by Islam by force, and made thereby Waqf lands upon their conquest, for all generations of Muslims until the Day of Resurrection.

Article Twelve: Hamas regards Nationalism (Wataniyya) as part and parcel of the religious faith. Nothing is loftier or deeper in Nationalism than waging Jihad against the enemy and confronting him when he sets foot on the land of the Muslims. And this becomes an individual duty binding on every Muslim man and woman.

Article Thirteen: [Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad. There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. The initiatives, proposals and international Conferences are but a waste of time, and exercise in futility.

By supporting Hamas (a registered terrorist organization) he is basically supporting those goals, which makes him, by definition, anti-Israel.

Video and photo H/T Tom Trento The United West

Ron Paul Is Truly Dangerous- Editorial by New Hampshire Union Leader's Joseph W. McQuaid

A spot on editorial by New Hampshire Union Leader's Joseph W. McQuaid on why Ron Paul is truly dangerous:

Ron Paul is a dangerous man. While his domestic libertarian views are quite attractive to some voters fed up with politics as usual, it is Paul’s position on issues of our national security that are truly dangerous.



Those views have been largely overlooked by a news media more interested in the presidential “horse race” than in the candidates’ positions on issues. But we expect New Hampshire primary voters will examine the facts and act accordingly.


A Wall Street Journal columnist notes that Paul is “a leading spokesman for, and recycler of, the long and familiar litany of charges that point to the United States as a leading agent of evil and injustice, the militarist victimizer of millions who want only to live in peace.”


Perhaps this warped view is why Paul believes that al-Qaida terrorists caught in the United States ought to be treated as common criminals, not enemy combatants. He wants them read Miranda rights to which they are not entitled and he wants them tried and sentenced in civil courts rather than by military tribunals.

Read the rest here. It's short but to the point.

Ron Paul Video- If China Attacks America (Just imagine)

Video ad from Ron Paul PAC Revolutionpac.com. The speech is one of Paul's with the overly dramatic embellishment by revolutionpac. 

Their mission statement:

The Revolution PAC seeks to widen the range of allowable opinion in the public square and to bring to the attention of the American public the neglected alternative of freedom, sound money, self-government, and a non-interventionist foreign policy. This is the answer to the big-government progressives and big-government neoconservatives who have brought our exhausted country to the brink of collapse.

Interesting to note-  the "allowable opinion" pertains to Ron Paul-ites and no-one else.

Buh, Bye Mitt- Romney Says He'd Vote For Ron Paul If He Becomes The GOP Candidate

Any chance that I might have voted for Mitt Romney in the primaries is dead and gone.

But Romney isn't the only one who told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that he would vote for Ron Paul if, God forbid, he happened to get the GOP nomination.  Rick Santorum said he would too.

It was an unfair and stupid question, but what were they thinking!

Ron Paul Is Anti-Israel According To Former Aide

Ron Paul is definitely anti-Israel, at least so says Eric Dondero who worked with Paul (on and off) for 12 years from 1987 through 2003 as a Travel Aide/Personal Assistant, National Organizer, Campaign Coordinator and finally Senior Aide. There have been accusations resurfacing about Paul being anti-Semitic, a racist and homophobic- prompted by some newsletter articles published 20 years ago (which he claims he never read)- but according to Dondero, although Paul is not anti-Semitic, he is however anti-Israel.

In a statement posted on the 'Right Wing News' blog to set the record straight, Dondero says that in all the years he worked with Paul he never heard him utter any racist or anti-Semitic epithets, although he does admit he's definitely "out of touch" with Blacks and Hispanics. And though Paul has no problem with "American Jews", he is

"... most certainly Anti-Israel, and Anti-Israeli in general. He wishes the Israeli state did not exist at all. He expressed this to me numerous times in our private conversations. His view is that Israel is more trouble than it is worth, specifically to the America taxpayer. He sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs"

As for being a homophobe, Dondero says:

"Well, yes and no. He is not all bigoted towards homosexuals. He supports their rights to do whatever they please in their private lives. He is however, personally uncomfortable around homosexuals, no different from a lot of older folks of his era."

The article really only criticizes his stance on Israel, and yet the usual pro-Paul drones are accusing him of lying, and Paul campaign officials are calling him a disgruntled ex-employee.

The former aide "has zero credibility and should not be taken seriously," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton told CBS. In a statement to CBS, the Paul campaign on Tuesday dismissed Dondero as a "disgruntled former staffer who was fired for performance issues."

Israeli/U.S. citizen, Dr. Leon Hadar (one of Paul's foreign policy advisers during his 2008 Presidential bid) seems to concur, saying that Paul is not anti-Israel nor does he advocate for the end of an Israeli state. Of course, Hadar simply advised Paul during one campaign year, and Dondero worked closely with the man for twelve years. What it all boils down to is the classic 'he says/she says', but it wouldn't surprise me at all if he was.

As for the newsletters he claims to have had no knowledge about until a decade later, one has to wonder.  Either he is lying and he's just trying to cover his proverbial behind, or he was stupid enough to allow newsletters to be published in his name without vetting the content.  Either way, he doesn't deserve to be the leader of this country.

Dondero's full statement, including anecdotes of Paul's discomfort with gays.

Glenn Beck Would Consider Ron Paul Over Newt Gingrich If He Runs Third Party

According to therightscoop.com, Glenn Beck on his radio show said that although he hates Ron Paul's Middle East policies, he would consider voting for him if Paul went Third Party. I'm not sure what Beck would do if he didn't run for Third Party and Newt did happen to get the nomination, but I find that, along with the Ron Paul love-fest in the rightscoop comment section, quite disturbing.

Not many are enamored of Newt Gingrich, but most have the sense to know that he and Mitt Romney have the only chance in hell of winning the 2012 presidential election, and will vote for either if they happen to be the Republican nominee.  The rightscoop  encourages people to vote for Gingrich if he does get the nod, I would encourage people to do the same, or Romney if it goes to him.  However, if Ron Paul happens to miraculously win the Republican nomination, or runs Third Party, I could not in good conscience vote for him.  I would do what I criticized people for in 2008, sit it out. 

Now, let's see how many Paulbots come slinking over here to slam me.

Hypocrite Ron Paul Accuses Newt Gingrich of "Serial Hypocrisy"

Here is Ron Paul calling Newt Gingrich a serial hypocrite in a campaign ad.



And here's what Jeffrey Lord from The American Spectator has to say about Ron Paul's hypocrisy.

Congressman Paul has made much of his opposition to Washington "special interests." But when it comes to funding his political career --where has Congressman Paul gone?


Yes indeed. Hat in hand -- and hand out -- Paul is not a whit different from Newt Gingrich.


Take a spin through these contributions Paul has taken over the years as formally listed by the Federal Elections Commission here.


Interesting, no? Talk about political profiteering! Right there in black and white candidate Ron Paul is recorded as taking money from the Bigs.


The Bigs? Yes, the Bigs:


Big Insurance
Big Banking
Big Medicine
Big Financial Services
Big Beer


And so on and on and on and on through every Big Money special interest out there. Ron Paul takes money from the Builders and Contractors, from AFLAC, from AT&T, from milk producers and Bank of America and… well… take a gander at the very long list yourself.

Granted, none of the listed campaign contributions are recent, but it still proves that Dr. Paul is not the complete "outsider" he claims to be.

Who Should I Vote For In The Republican 2012 Primaries?

Let's face it, our pool of presidential hopefuls isn't very thrilling, and it's hard to determine which of all the candidates has the greatest potential to beat Barack Obama in the 2012 elections.

But fear not, the UK Telegraph has a great little test to help you with that decision.  With a series of questions from Defense/Foreign Policy/Homeland Security to Healthcare,  it matches you with the candidate who is most closely aligned with your political beliefs.  Obviously, not all the candidates are listed, only the main contenders.

Those listed in this particular quiz (in alphabetical order) are:

Michelle Bachmann
Herman Cain
Newt Gingrich
Ron Paul
Rick Perry
Mitt Romney

To take the test, click here. At the end of the quiz, where it asks you to enter your email address, just click on "skip this", and you will get your results.

I can't vouch for its accuracy, neither does VoteMatch, the company that created the quiz, but it certainly is a fun way to give you an inkling of who you should consider.

UPDATE:

Here's another great quiz, with different questions, from selectsmart.com.  It has a more comprehensive list, including Obama, and also has listed politicians who might not be running.

UPDATE 1/23/12

And another presidential quiz from ABC that includes Obama.

Ron Paul Groupies As Clueless As Ron Paul

I just spent precious time (that I will sadly never regain) responding to a Ron Paul devotee who also happens to be a mega asshole.  Unrighteousfury, who is obviously  as enamored of Ron Paul as Chris *tingles* Matthews was of Barack Obama (back in the day before his recent disillusionment), stumbled upon my blog post about clueless Ron Paul's naive belief that we can reach out and befriend the Iranians. Like Paul, unrighteousfury is under the delusional assumption that we can actually engage Iranians through "offering friendship and open trade", as if a little kumbaya and trading some rice and kebabs for some snicker bars will make things all better. 

He accuses me in an uber-long, yawn-inducing post on his blog of being a "dolt", a "dumb ass woman" and for not doing my research. Ironically, the man obviously has not done his research because he has absolutely no clue about Islam, let alone the inner workings of ultra religious conservatives like Ahmadinejad and the Iranian Mullahs.  He, like Paul, believes that Iran's nuclear ambitions are overblown. Why? because there's no actual proof.  Unrighteousfury, lets call him UF,  apparently has no idea about the concept of 'taqiya', nor does he have any clue why Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs' belief in the "12th Imam" might be reason enough to conclude their nuclear ambitions are far from innocent.



He can be forgiven for the woeful ignorance he shares with all the other Ron Paul groupies out there, who for some reason are drawn to a wacky former doctor-turned-politician, but UF is a piece of work. This is what he says about women in the piece dedicated to me:

I swear we need to repeal women’s voting rights. They keep writing this crap and I keep debunking it. Women should just stop blogging about politics all together. Stick with what you know. Here are some helpful examples of things you can occupy your time with that are far more productive than your silly ass opinion about politics.

But checking out the rest of his blog, it's quite obvious the man is a misogynist. In an incredibly insensitive post about women and rape, he says all women claim to have been raped and says this:

Look, to all you dumb women out there: We know that rape is a terrible thing and a tragedy. By lying about it over and over again, people literally lose interest in it even being a big deal.

Well, UF, I have never been raped nor do I have any friends who were, so your claims are bogus, as is the whole piece you wrote about it. But if you peruse most of UF's posts, you will find that they are replete with references to his 'manliness', which begs the question- why doth the man protest so much?

Ron Paul groupies are certainly a bizarre bunch, unable to respond to criticism of their guru in a civil manner. But we encountered that back in 2008, during his last bid for Presidency. I'll be glad when this is all over.

Clueless Ron Paul Wants To Befriend Iran To Deter Its Nuclear Ambitions

Thankfully, presidential-hopeful Ron Paul is in no way a viable candidate- straw polls be damned- because if this country wasn't in trouble already, we'd take a further nose dive under his leadership.  Paul is a naive fool at best when it comes to foreign policy.  His latest comments regarding Iran categorically prove that he is totally clueless, and would be a monumental disaster for the U.S.

Most everyone in the world knows that Iran is in no way trustworthy, and that their nuclear ambitions are not as innocent as they would have us believe.  In fact, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.N.'s  nuclear watchdog,  is set to publish a report claiming that the Iranians  worked diligently and secretly (thanks to Russians, North Koreans and Pakistanis!) on gathering all the information needed to build nuclear weapons.  Apparently they now have pretty much all they need, and with a mere 6 months to enrich uranium they would be good to go.  They are not saying that Iran has plans to do that, but the possibility of a nuclear Iran should strike fear in everyone.  But not Ron Paul.  No, Paul believes that the Iranian nuclear issue has been "blown out of proportion", and seems to think that "offering friendship to them"  is a far better deterrent to their nuclear goals than sanctions.  At least that's what he told Fox News Sunday.  Well, I have news for Mr. Paul. It won't work. They have no desire to befriend "the great satan".  They despise us and everything we stand for. 

Ron Paul isn't going to change the Islamist mindset, and he's a major fool to think he can.