I figured it would be useful to have a thread just for this stuff.
First of all, we have this excellent piece by Justin T. P. Quinn, which outlines the "black swanning" of Ron Paul, even before the Iowa Straw Poll. (I mean it...it's excellent. Read it.)
Then of course we have the media blackout, which finally got some attention after that event...but of course still continued anyway...
And of course throughout, we've had the backlash about how well he does in the straw polls, with pundits going on and on, in an endless effort to make sure everyone was aware they didn't mean anything...
A really great one was Bill O'Reilly's poll, where he was actually taken off the ballot because a lot of people were voting for him.
Now of course, since it looks like he'll probably win Iowa, the effort to marginalize the entire caucus is already underway. Chris Wallace says a Ron Paul win would ‘discredit’ state’s caucuses...And Politico echos the same thing, and as Drudge notes, even the Governor of the state essentially says to ignore a Paul win. Tim Carney outlines the likely backlash that will ensue after such a victory.
As Gary North stated, the headline after Iowa will read: "Gingrich Defeats Romney for Second Place. Bachmann Comes in Fourth."
Next we'll get to discredit the Republican Convention, and finally on to 'discredit' the White House.
I love the fact that they're now saying if Paul wins Iowa, it will discredit the Caucuses, that's hilarious. I can see the headline now: "Ron Paul elected President, discrediting the democratic system!"
...Like I said.
And now we have this:
(You may remember this bald asshat from his exchange with Peter Schiff a couple years back.)...
This doesn't specifically play into the thread, but this might give one an idea of the mentality of some anti Ron Paul folks out there. These are all real arguments, cut and pasted, that I've heard surrounding Ron Paul.
Fasten your seatbelts kids....
"Interesting why Ron Paul suddenly fights for Muslims instead of Christians?Probably he is a clandestine supporter of stealth Jihad like Obama,or.... It is very difficult to understand why a guy who claims to be conservative is more Muslim as some CAIR employees overnight? Does dumb GOP really believe that Paul will represent its interests?Also, for the True Conservatives and Christians there is only one choice:Bachmann. All RINOs or Supporters of Islamization like Paul they can forget for ever.Only Bachmann can beat Obama, no one RINO or Quran-Admirer like Paul."
From the same person:
"Paul is either extremely dumb, or closet Islamist, in any case he is a gift for Obama who can beat him laughing. Bachmann is the last hope of GOP, only she can beat Obama!"
From another person, originally on the subject of race:
"With respect to Ron Paul being a racist, I don't know about that because I haven't paid close attention to that aspect of his career. However, I do know that he is an obsessed Jew hater. As a matter of fact, obsessed Jew hatred defines his entire worldview. In addition, I have also never met a Ron Paul supporter yet that didn't also hate Jews obsessively exactly like Paul, and just like Paul all of them are totally oblivious of the jihad threat, in addition to believing that Jews control America's foreign policy. In any event, I don't think that Ron Paul has a chance of winning simply due to the fact that there aren't enough Jew haters in America for him to win. Indeed, show me a Ron Paul anarcho-kook and I'll show you a Jew hater."
After a reply he argued this on the subject of terrorist backlash:
"Apparently, your idol is so unhinged that not only can't he tell the difference between jihad and terrorism, he is also oblivious to the existence of jihad as well. Obviously, because his obsession with hating Jews, which defines his entire worldview, has rendered him blind and oblivious. Apparently, it has had the same exact effect on you as well. Indeed, with all due disrespect, Ron Paul isn't qualified to be dogcatcher, let alone president."
And when I stated that I supported Ron Paul but did not hate Jews:
.... Long live democracy!
Why neocons could we worse than liberals.
A good rebuttal of the racist claim:
However, I do know that he is an obsessed Jew hater. As a matter of fact, obsessed Jew hatred defines his entire worldview.
Could someone make a demotivator of Ron Paul's Office, with the title "RON PAUL IS AN ANTI-SEMITE" and sub-title, "Wait, why does he have two pictures of Jews hanging on his wall?"
Latest Projects
"Even when leftists talk about discrimination and sexism, they're damn well talking about the results of the economic system" ~Neodoxy
While your enthusiasm is much appreciated let me give a little free advice.
Don't bother "debunking" everything you hear. You'll just end up wasting your time. Politics are a dirty game: remember when Hilary Clinton was publicly slandering Barack Obama at every turn? Did she believe her own words? Most likely not. Did she even know what she was talking about? Probably not, but the political theater required her to "bash" Obama and so she did.
Right now the political theater requires "bashing" Ron Paul. Problem is he's both a honest man (meaning hard to attack at personal level) and his ideas are very removed from mainstream. This means all the publicists and advisors racking their brains over ways of "smearing" him really have no clue what he's talking about. "Throw him a couple of racist and anti-Semite comments: they always work". That's really the best they can do. Don't bother with them.
If you really want to make good use of your time and resources there are many people out there who just need a little push through the door. These are usually the moderate types who say "I agree with his foreign politics but I have problems with his economical politics" or "I would vote for him but he's a Republican...".
As the man himself the important thing is not the vote itself but getting the message through.
Neodoxy, I see that the Israeli state's seige mentality - also known as "WE ARE AT WAR!!!!!!11one!!" - is alive and well over here, too.
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
Kakugo: While your enthusiasm is much appreciated let me give a little free advice. Don't bother "debunking" everything you hear. You'll just end up wasting your time. Politics are a dirty game: remember when Hilary Clinton was publicly slandering Barack Obama at every turn? Did she believe her own words? Most likely not. Did she even know what she was talking about? Probably not, but the political theater required her to "bash" Obama and so she did.
This was a reply to my post, but doesn't seem to make sense in that context. There is no "debunking" going on in that OP. Did you intend this for someone else?
Notice the guy says "The only person that's won the Iowa Caucus and then gone to win the Presidency is George W. Bush."
FALSE.
Gerald Ford did it. Jimmy Carter did it. Barack Obama did it.
Ron Paul would be the FIFTH person to do so...not the second, like this moron who doesn't know history claims.
You have to love the part in this one where the host claims "here's an interview where Paul seems to be quite knowledgeable about his newsletter's content"...
Plenty more where this came from...they're coming out of the woodwork...
Fox News Red Eye Calls Ron Paul Crazy 4 Times In 2 Minutes, Also Wacky & 70ish Weird Guy
Sell Out Brett Baier's Fox News Hit Piece On Ron Paul
Fox News Neocon: Ron Paul Is Dangerous, A Wasted Vote
Mike Huckabee: Ron Paul Can't Win, Obama Is Decent Patriotic American (LOL)
Senator Dick Lugar: America Can't Afford Ron Paul's Foreign Policy
Sleazeball Dick Morris: Ron Paul Is By Far The Most Liberal, Radical Candidate
CNBC: Ron Paul Is Not A Threat And Doesn't Really Have A Chance To Win
Newt Gingrich Wouldn't Vote For Ron Paul If He Gets The Nomination
CNN: Ron Paul Is Racist By Design And Is Not Going To Win The Nomination
Dim Witted Eye Candy: Ron Paul Doesn't Really Truly Want To Be President
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
Somebody on MSNBC just a few minutes ago claimed that Ron Paul thinks all gays should be executed.
I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, but I find it pretty hilarious and telling how the media is ignoring him.
They aren't ignoring him anymore though. They are actively attacking him. The Lawrence O'Donnell Show on MSNBC just had a segment on Paul's Bruno appearance where they called his 'homophobic' reaction "pathetic" and questioned whether all of Paul's young supporters really understand him.
I saw that, and there was nothing homphobic about his reaction.
John James: Kakugo: While your enthusiasm is much appreciated let me give a little free advice. Don't bother "debunking" everything you hear. You'll just end up wasting your time. Politics are a dirty game: remember when Hilary Clinton was publicly slandering Barack Obama at every turn? Did she believe her own words? Most likely not. Did she even know what she was talking about? Probably not, but the political theater required her to "bash" Obama and so she did. This was a reply to my post, but doesn't seem to make sense in that context. There is no "debunking" going on in that OP. Did you intend this for someone else?
It's a sort general advise post, sorry for the confusion.
I would like to see Lawrence O'Donnell's reaction to a guy misleading him into a hotel room and stripping bare naked. "Oh, uh....I don't want to offend or anything, but I'm not really into that. Oh dear, look at the time, I must be going..." That must be the non-homophobic reaction that O'Donnell is looking for.
crashproof:Somebody on MSNBC just a few minutes ago claimed that Ron Paul thinks all gays should be executed.
I actually found it hard to believe they would go that far, but of course...
I wonder how long it will be before Ron Paul gets the "Diamond Joe Quimby" treatment (in an episode of The Simpsons, the Springfield mayor gets a TV montage representing him as horned and surrounded by flames). Dining of unbaptized babies or kicking kittens may be next in the list.
Truth to be told it seems Ron Paul is finally getting recognition even by mainstream European press, which did its very best to keep him from the public view. In an amusing article published recently he was described as this "Ron Paul from Texas wants to end America's foreign wars, but only because they are too expensive". Of course lots of words were used to describe Newt Gingrich who, I assure you, will be the GOP candidate next year (unless he dies suddenly) and will end up brutally beaten by Obama, who will be shown as "the lesser of two evils".
How do you figure that Newt Gingrich will necessarily be the GOP candidate for next year?
Yeah, I fail to see Gingrich as president. If anyone of the current field, then Romney. Though I can see Chris Christie deciding that he might earn more money as president than he can as New Jersey governor.
That is, unless RP wins Iowa, comes in close second in NH, Huntsman drops out, Bachmann drops out and endorse RP. That would shake things up.
I somehow stumbled upon Free Republic--they think Ron Paul is a Democratic party-led Operation Chaos.and that Paul is a homosexual lover, Muslim lover, and pro-abortionist. The world is doomed.
In that case, the only appropriate plan of attack is
Marissa:I somehow stumbled upon Free Republic--they think Ron Paul is a Democratic party-led Operation Chaos.and that Paul is a homosexual lover, Muslim lover, and pro-abortionist.
So now the picture of Ron Paul is becoming clear...
A homophobic homosexual-lover who thinks gay people should be executed, a racist who does pro bono work for interracial couples, a pro-abortionist who argues for anti-abortion ideals, and a Democratic party double agent RINO Republican candidate who lives by libertarian principles.
Gotta love the haters.
The Economist just called him "wacky", "no-hoper", and "will never be America's president". Especially appalled by his stance on the Fed. Not the worst I've seen but a baseless hit-piece none the less. The central banking apologists are out in force.
Ron Paul's Big Moment
"Heading the polls in Iowa, whose caucuses on January 3rd mark the true start of the Republican race for a presidential candidate, is a 76-year-old libertarian from Texas with a worldview so wacky and a programme so radical that he was recently discounted as a no-hoper. Even if he wins in quirky Iowa, Ron Paul will never be America’s president.
...
In the end, Mr Paul’s obsession with the Fed is an anti-government conspiracy theory."
I don't think it's a coincidence that I've never seen this woman before and have no idea who she is, and she's being this combative with a Ron Paul guest. Somebody's looking to please the bossman, and apparently facelifts and large mouths aren't quite enough to compensate for not being able to string a single sentence together...
John James:So now the picture of Ron Paul is becoming clear... A homophobic homosexual lover who thinks gay people should be executed, a racist doctor who does pro-bono work for interracial couples, a pro-abortionist who argues for anti-abortion ideals, and a Democratic party-led Republican candidate who lives by libertarian principles. Gotta love the haters.
A homophobic homosexual lover who thinks gay people should be executed, a racist doctor who does pro-bono work for interracial couples, a pro-abortionist who argues for anti-abortion ideals, and a Democratic party-led Republican candidate who lives by libertarian principles.
Well, you know what they say...
Touché, my good man. Touché.
That statist made me laugh out loud. I've probably even seen it before, but it just works so well...plus the way it followed right behind the hater bird. Classic.
Gotta love this one:
I think Wallace makes it quite clear what he's trying to do. What I love so much about this is Paul is so unbiased that he doesn't even realize what Wallace is insinuating. It reminds me of the South Park episode with the "racist" flag, in which people were appalled that the children didn't have a problem with the picture on the flag...until it was realized that that was because they were the least racist of all (i.e. not at all)...(view the clip here, skip ahead to 1:42)
The same thing happens here, as when Wallace asks if Paul still believes that an individual suffering from AIDS is "frequently a victim of his own lifestyle" and shouldn't be forcing others to pay for his medical care, Paul responds without missing a beat and explains that sexually transmitted diseases are spread through sexual activity, and when that activity is promiscuous, it spreads diseases. This is what makes it so funny. Paul has no idea where Wallace is trying to go by digging up this quote from Paul's book from 25 years ago...so it's up to Wallace to make sure homosexuality is injected into the dialogue.
So he interrupts Paul and tries again, but this time with pointed demagoguery asking Paul if someone with AIDS should not be entitled to health insurance as much as someone with a "heterosexually transmitted disease". Did you get that? Apparently there's heterosexually transmitted diseases and homosexually transmitted ones, and apparently AIDS is one of those "gay diseases".
You know I really wish someone would have told me about that a long time ago. If I would have known AIDS was contracted through homosexual behavior, I might have felt a lot more free to be promiscuous. Douchebag.
Full interview
someone with AIDS should not be entitled to health insurance
Entitled? :)
Chris Wallace taking the side of socialized medicine and sounding anti-homophobe to attack Ron Paul. I thought Fox News viewers thought those types of people were dyed-in-the-wool leftists? I guess not, as long as we're dumping unfairly on Ron Paul.
Leave it to MSNBC...
This may very well be one of the worst (in terms of its attacks as well as accuracy) that I have seen yet. It really makes me wonder what the end game is here. I'm wondering why a network like MSNBC would spend so much time going after Paul instead of someone like Romney. My thoughts lead me down to two possibilities...it's a slow going on the news lately they have air time to fill and Paul makes for an easy target when the name of your game is character assassination and "fast and loose with the facts", or, they actually see Paul as a real threat to Obama (and possibly Democrat ideology in general) and feel he needs to be crushed. I tend to think it's a little of both...but the second is actually a pretty good sign ;)
(Either way, it's a good thing the two people who still watch that show aren't needed to win anything)
The two idiots made me cringe. How could anyone watch TV these days without having all of their neurons burned into oblivion?
z1235:The two idiots made me cringe.
Funny...I think they made each other a little hot and bothered, myself.
Damn they're trying hard. It makes me love the fact that this guy is a senator that much more.
Paul is winning the Drudge poll right now at about 30% ;)
I'd love for him to win the repub nomination, simply because it would be like stamping all the snakes out of the nest. Get rid of the damn RINOs.
It's long since time that we libertarians took over the GOP.
Do you mean Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt? ;)
Anenome's back! I hope he doesn't meet DLD :P