-
Dick Morris’ Bad Entitlements Advice
April 1, 2013 | 41 comments
-
Will Welker Walk?
March 11, 2013 | 273 comments
-
Not Yet Elite, But Pretty Neat
February 5, 2013 | 8 comments
-
The Harbaugh Bowl
January 22, 2013 | 33 comments
-
Tom Terrific
January 14, 2013 | 55 comments
Special Report
Can Dr. No’s Supporters Take Yes for An Answer?
Rand Paul and the GOP promised land.
TAMPA, Florida — When Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) concluded his speech at the Republican National Convention, one writer was particularly effusive in his praise.
Paul’s national debut “can only be described as a humdinger.” His speech was “brilliantly succinct” in its dissection of the anti-business populism currently in fashion among Democrats. It was an “undeniable triumph.” The senator himself is “a star.”
Surely this scribe publishes at the American Conservative or Chronicles. Perhaps LewRockwell.com or somewhere more conventionally libertarian, like Reason.
Actually, it was Commentary editor John Podhoretz, son of Norman. So surely this was indeed an undeniable triumph?
Don’t tell the Ron Paul delegates. Many of them are still protesting the Republican National Convention’s refusal to seat more Paul delegates from Maine, establishment chicanery that was designed prevent a nomination showdown between the elder Paul and Mitt Romney.
As the hour of the Pauls gave way to Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) call to advance the “forward strategy of freedom” in Iran, Syria, and elsewhere, some Paul delegates began to protest. “As Maine goes, so goes the nation!” they chanted. Others were passing around buttons reviving the old Spanish-American War slogan, “Remember the Maine.”
The Paulites’ displeasure was understandable. They worked hard to secure delegate slots in places like Massachusetts, Louisiana, and Maine, only to have the Republican leadership thwart them at every turn. (Though some deals were cut to include more Paul delegates ahead of the convention.)
But isn’t their convention presence — and acceptance from the party leadership — clearly greater than at any time in recent memory? The Washington Post noted in a piece about the RNC’s winners and losers, “The idea that a full hour of nighttime programming at a GOP convention would be dedicated to the Pauls would be unthinkable as recently as a few years ago. Tonight it became a reality.”
The Romney camp approved a salute to a primary opponent who hasn’t even endorsed the Republican ticket. Paul Ryan openly appealed to Paul supporters.
Wouldn’t a video tribute touting Ron Paul’s succesful activism and impeccable credentials as a fiscal conservative do more to sustain the Paul movement’s momentum within the GOP than a disruptive and ultimately futile convention fight?
The video didn’t mention foreign policy (though it did feature four antiwar Republicans and two others who sometimes vote with Paul on these issues). Neither did Rand Paul’s speech, though he did push back against the GOP consensus on defense spending and civil liberties.
American Conservative’s Jordan Bloom called it “a shame” Senator Paul didn’t delve more into foreign policy. Reason’s Jesse Walker tweeted, “Apparently, if you challenge GOP orthodoxy on civil liberties and military spending, it’s a good idea to rush to the Reagan references next.”
Well, yes. A political audience is likely to be more receptive to your more challenging arguments if they accept that you are generally on their side. As Podhoretz put it, though I’d certainly quibble with some of his phrasing, “Having established his bona fides as a mainstream Republican, he then dipped into his father Ron Paul’s kit bag — calling for defense cuts and offering a libertarian attack on homeland security.”
One of the biggest problems Ron Paul had with a majority of Republicans is that he seldom stressed areas of agreement: the fact that he was a pro-life and pro-gun congressman who had never voted for a tax increase or unbalanced budget, who had voted for all the Reagan and Bush tax cuts. The second is the heavy-handedness with which he expresses his disagreements on foreign policy and elsewhere.
Rand Paul is trying to correct both problems. But will his base look at positive press from Commentary and conclude he is selling out?
The danger, of course, lies in completely silencing the foreign policy disagreements and becoming indistinguishable from docile Romney Republicans. Yet winning in politics requires a willingness to risk defeat — and to build on the little victories.
About the Author
W. James Antle, III, author of the new book Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?, is editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation and a senior editor of The American Spectator. You can follow him on Twitter @jimantle.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (125) | Leave a comment
More Articles by W. James Antle, III
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/30/can-dr-nos-supporters-take-yes
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Boys and Girls
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- The Demise of Money and Credit
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
aware| 8.30.12 @ 6:29AM
Yeah, the Paul supporters should forget the delegate stripping, changing the "rules", refusal to seat delegates, obvious fraud in Iowa, counting votes behind locked doors, buses getting "lost" until after rules vote, and refusal to allow Paul to speak unless Romney "approves" the speech.
It's not like they have a case at all. Just because the GOP runs its show dictatorially doesn't mean they aren't "champions" of "freedom", right?
Jack in Wi| 8.30.12 @ 6:55AM
Romney is never going to win without us. If he sneaks in the job because Obama has been a terrible President and the economy stinks he will never govern in any king of success unless he does a lot more to accomidate us. The farce over rules at the convention got a lot of activists in the party very mad and a lot of them were not Ron Paul supporters, but other conservative activists.
SCPOret| 8.30.12 @ 10:18AM
For once I agree with Jack - I'm not a Paul Supporter although he has enjoyed my support as my congressman for years. The RNC and their underhanded BS has me incensed. I have decided to vote for the Constitution Party for President and support my state and local conservative politicians down the ticket. And there are a lot more like me who find this crap to far gone to support. This may be the time when we see a real 3rd party come to the front. It will be to the detriment of the republicrats.
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:31AM
SCPOret;
I think you will find that Debbie Blabber-Mouth Schultz wants to friend you on Facebook. Good luck with that.
Oh, yes and the littlest socialist President wants to thank you for your support. If you got any cash for your last birthday, he thinks you should sent it to him - he knows better what to do with it than you obviously do...
Don't Tread On Me
TLP| 8.30.12 @ 8:19PM
McCaskill 45 - Akin 44.
John Navratil| 8.30.12 @ 10:41AM
SCPOret,
I haven't given a skinny dime to the Republicans since George the First presided over the, then, largest tax increase in U.S. history. I share your frustrations. However, like it or not, ours is a two party system. Voting for a third party is the same as not voting as far as the outcome is concerned. The Tea Party has wisely, I think, decided to work to change the party which is has done to a degree. Jim DeMint, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and others would not have been elected had they run in any third party. That's reality. A third party can be built... in about forty years. We don't have the time.
Romney was not my man, but he has my vote. Ryan took a lot of the stink away, for me.
Stkman| 8.30.12 @ 11:22AM
A third party can be built in two years. I would love to see the Tea Party break from the Republican party. Take the truly conservative from the Republican party and let the RHINO's fend for themselves.
The Republicans have incensed a lot of people over their treatment of Ron Paul and his followers. They've also incensed a lot of people over several other things they've done during this convention. How many of us have been screaming for 3 and 1/2 years that we didn't want Romney, and yet, we got him. I'll vote for him, but only to remove Obama from office. In four years I'll vote for a third party candidate if he doesn't secure our borders and bring back some manufactuirng jobs for those Americans who donb't hold a college degree. They deserve better than a job at McDonalds or Wal-Mart.
TLP| 8.30.12 @ 4:12PM
Obviously, you've forgotten two runs by Ross Perot.
This is easy.
You can Vote for Romney, and then hold his MFing Dick to the Fire?
Or you can POUT, and this Greatest Experiment in the Repubilican Form Of Government since Greece and the beginning of Rome, will be gone, FOREVER, from the face of the World.
Is that what you want?
Cause, that's what you're gonna get.
John Navratil| 8.30.12 @ 4:26PM
TLP,
And don't forget "A vote for John Anderson is a vote for John Anderson"! Now, who the hell was John Anderson? Someone just slightly less memorable than Ross ("that great sucking sound") Perot who delivered Clinton to us.
Stkman is right, however. It is possible to build a third party in two years - just slightly more probable than the water in my glass jumping up to form an ice sculpture.
TLP| 8.30.12 @ 5:07PM
It is not possible to build a third Party.
Democrats make up 40% of the Electorate.
The Republican Party makes up another 40%.
A Third Party will KILL the Republican Party, opening the door for Democrats, till the End of Time.
It's just Math.
Democrats will NEVER leave the fold.
C'mon.
Snap out of it!
Ned Ferguson| 8.30.12 @ 7:29PM
SCPOret, I agree completely. I was ready to forget all the underhanded primary shenanigans and vote for Romney up until they pulled this stunt. I'm furious. I just cannot support anyone who acts this way. It's unacceptable. Period.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 7:54PM
And Ned, I just ask you to notice that all the attacks don't even attempt to reference the actions I mentioned by the GOP, but rather descend right into the usual personal attacks on Paul and everybody else disturbed with said actions. Damn Trotskyites never change.
By the time November gets here some of these Romney supporters will be furious with him too. And themselves.
TLP| 8.30.12 @ 8:34PM
McCaskill 45.
Aikin 44.
Slacker| 8.30.12 @ 12:02PM
The Paul supporters should be honored. They gained enough influence to spook the neocons. No small accomplishment.
Predictably the neocons respond by cheating. Predictably American Spectator rushes in to defend the neocons. Predictably neocon commenters cheer.
This says a lot more about neocons than Paulbots. This needed to happen.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 2:08PM
Yes, the neocons are soooooooo spooked!
I guess that's why Romney is the nominee, and Ron Paul is retiring?
Occam's Tool| 8.30.12 @ 3:27PM
I'm voting for Romney. Obama is a traitor, but then, so is Ron Paul.
John Navratil| 8.30.12 @ 4:32PM
Occam's Tool,
A bit harsh with the traitor appellation, I think. I could vote for Ron Paul for Congress any time; never for Commander in Chief. They are two different jobs with different responsibilities. His principles serve him well in Congress but would fail him miserably as President.
TLP| 8.30.12 @ 5:09PM
I gotta agree with Navratil.
He's not a Traitor.
I'm thinking - Old and Confused.
Slacker| 8.30.12 @ 4:18PM
Screwing Paul’s supporters affected the outcome in what way?
Your better believe the neocons are spooked. Just when they thought they had purged all the paleoconservatives, these grass roots liberty people show up advocating a lot of the same shit.
It isn’t about Ron Paul. It’s making sure the neocon agenda is never challenged.
Romney's neocons did everybody a favor. The paleoconservatives, libertarians, and tea party types got the message to stop wasting time with GOP.
Breakups can be good. You guys can go back to a Bush chic party, flex your imperial muscles, and lose more wars. Enjoy.
spike59| 8.30.12 @ 6:29AM
here comes the tinfoil hat brigade....wait for it, wait for it...
aware| 8.30.12 @ 6:37AM
And the mindless partisan Romneybot defenders.
JFGalt| 8.30.12 @ 9:29AM
Does your name calling make you feel better. Maybe it makes you feel like the MSM liberals do when they try to negate something by name calling to show that they have nothing of note to add except hate. Ron Paul didn't have a chance to win but he did earn a spot to at least be thrown into the nomination. He met all the rules but the establishment played their foolish games. All they did was alienate Ron Paul's supporters. If they would have been included in the process which Romney would have taken anyway then they could feel included and would have likely lined up behind Romney. Instead it only showed a party that is trying to cling to power by any means available to them whether legitimate or not. It was a dumb move on the party's part and will only serve to create greater division in hte future which the liberals will be happy to exploit.
FarmersDaughter| 8.30.12 @ 6:37AM
Romney would be wise to start announcing potential Cabinet appointments including Ron Paul as Secy of the Fed. If he'd do that, those thousands upon thousands of young PThe Paul supporters across the country should be inspired to fire up and get to work to get Obama defeated. Romney and Paul need to sit down and put together a plan to unite to defeat Obama. Remaining at odds is only helping the Democrats.
Jacob McCandles| 8.30.12 @ 8:32AM
It would be nice for Romney to dedicate some time in his speech outlining the numerous hazards of nation building. Maybe state his opinion on not going to war without a declaration, and how you simply cannot force democracy on a nation of Muslims whose very religion excludes the possibility of individual freedom.
But he better also make clear that cutting military weapons development must never happen. Peace through strength. You can't have just the best military force in the world, you must DOMINATE to deter the ambitions of our enemies. And if we have to go to war again, make destroying the enemy the ONLY objective. If I hear "winning the hearts and minds" one more time my head will explode.
JP| 8.30.12 @ 9:29AM
There is no Sec of the Fed. There is a Fed Chairman position, which isn't a cabinet post. Could you be confused with Treasury?
BTW, the last person I would want as Fed Chairman is Paul.
Crassus| 8.30.12 @ 9:32AM
Painful, painful, painful.
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:20AM
Crassus;
You are either a reALLtor in the habit of tripling your every thought so as to make it more, what, important? "Location, location, location!"
Or you are a follower of Jesse Jackson, Senior-Senile, who always speaks in triplets.
Which one?
I'm curious; I'm not trying to be mean, mean, mean...
Don't Tread On Me
Boar Hunter| 8.30.12 @ 11:29AM
DTOM, If I remember correctly Crassus is on our side and does post reliably intelligent comments. I think he does the three thing to irritate and mock the libs "parroting" of liberal talking points.
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 9:49AM
No, Honey Farmer, it would be a bad time to start naming appointments.
Each name would bring a history and a Lamestream vetting that will only cloud up the process. Remember what the explosion of hubris about Sarah Palin did to McCain?
No, we have all the pieces on the board we need - do not introduce new faces and variables. These two are the right weapon for the fight - let's keep them sharp and well-aimed!
Don't bring up any names -none, not any. That plays into their hands and would cause us to lose focus.
Farmgirl, I'm sure your intentions are good - but that would hurt, not help our cause...
Now, we need to talk about one thing: how poorly this little President has performed. Talk about his bad performance, his hopeless promises, and nothing else, nothing!
Don't Tread On Me
RCV| 8.30.12 @ 11:34AM
The chances of Romney being seen with Ron Paul, let alone naming him to a cabinet position (guffaw!), are zero. His aim is ensure that the Paul wing of the party is denied access to any influence from here on out, as the delegate purging indicates.
Boar Hunter| 8.30.12 @ 4:07PM
I thought it was already agreed that Ron was going to be Mitt's Towel boy.
TLP| 8.30.12 @ 8:35PM
McCaskill 45.
Aikin 44.
TLP| 8.30.12 @ 4:13PM
Agreed.
Jack in Wi| 8.30.12 @ 6:44AM
Romney needs us a lot more then we need him. Unless he gives us something on foreign policy forget about it. A good start would be to say that he will never start another war unless he goes to Congress for a declation of war. That his main foreign policy goal is to work for peace. That he will bring all the troops home from Afganistan now.
I used to run hundreds of tough cconstruction workers and dealt with many different governments. I used to watch the debates in which Romneey and Paul took part. I consider myself a good judge of body language. When Dr. Paul was talking in many instances I could see Romney's head bobbing in agreement. In no way do I think Romney is the warmonger that he has let himself be portrayed as. This country can never get it's fiscal house in order until it stops all this foreign interventionism. Every war we have fought for 100 years could have been avoided by sane leaders and sound leadership.
Romney should win this election a cakewalk. Obama has been a terrible President and the economy stinks. If he moved toward the Pauls on foreign policy he wold be doing a lot better then tied at this time. His whole slippage in the polls in July was caused by his wacky neocon planned foreign trip. He looked like a warmongering idiot. It is time to dump the Neocons who have always been a cancer on the Republican Party. They control almost zero votes.
Jack in Wi| 8.30.12 @ 6:50AM
Romney will never get the votes of libertarians, the young, dissafected Democrats, and independents that he needs unless he moves toward a much more realistic and peaceful foreign policy. This country is broke and it's troops are broken. End these wars now and bring home all the troops. The world will just have to figure out how to take care of itself.
C. Vernon Crisler | 8.30.12 @ 8:02AM
Face it Jack, a McGovernite foreign policy isn't going to fly in the Republican Party.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 9:28AM
Suicide rate among troops was higher in July than causalities from hostiles. Do you know any soldiers serving, Vern? I do and they ain't happy.
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 8.30.12 @ 10:14AM
"Suicide rate among troops was higher in July than causalities from hostiles. Do you know any soldiers serving, Vern? I do and they ain't happy."
But America is the GREATEST country in the world and we must KILL our enemies before they kill us. Kill kill kill.
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:24AM
Alan,
So your idea is what?
"Let them kill us?"
"Resistance is futile?"
"We're not worthy?"
My suggestion - you are irrational.
And are you related to crassus, crassus, crassus?
Does he rent empty space in your brain? Is it still empty? Is he in there? Are you?
Don't Tread On Me
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 10:40AM
Now you're talkin'!
It's like Governor Martinez said last night, Alan...You didn't even know that you ARE a Republican!
Welcome aboard!
spike59| 8.31.12 @ 5:53AM
yes, i do...family members, in fact; and they would, to a man, be delighted to have Bush back and ObaMao sent back to organize some community somewhere...but they'll be happy to vote Romney/Ryan
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 9:58AM
Jack, that hole you are trying to stick your head into is NOT in the ground. It's up the little President's butt. You, Jack, don't know your Ass from a hole in the ground!
Sorry for the crudity - but I just couldn't help myself.
DTOM
PS Memo to Jack and all Paulbots everywhere:
"The Ron Paul show is over. At 77 years of age today and 81 years of age in 2016, Ron Paul is too old to be a viable candidate-especially one challenging a sitting President from his own party.
And in 2020, can an 85-year-old Ron Paul take on a two term, 50-year-old Vice President Ryan who can still do one-armed pushups?" Methinks not.
Ron Paul, "your time is up."
Ain't my fault, it's the calendar's.
Paulbots-will Rand have you? Will you have him?
DTOM
spike59| 8.30.12 @ 6:50AM
Jackie, playing with Lincoln Logs in mommy's basement does not qualify as running 'hundreds of tough construction projects'...face it, the GOP voters have spoken, and DrRon is yesterday's punchline; time for him to pack it in, reboard the mother ship, and go back to writing his whackadoodle newsletters
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 8:32AM
So we should have avoided World War 2...by appeasing NAZI Germany?
By letting them decimate and swallow Europe whole?
Because they were no real threat to us, right?
That's what you really mean, Jack, so why don't you just have the stones to say it?
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 8.30.12 @ 10:17AM
"So we should have avoided World War 2...by appeasing NAZI Germany?"
Economically, Japan and Germany won the war!
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:26AM
No actually the 200 Communists that Wisconsin Senator Joe McCarthy said were in the State Department (and he WAS right!) have had their way with our government with the help of the despicable likes of you and your beloved little socialist President!
Occam's Tool| 8.30.12 @ 3:28PM
No, no, they didn't. Japan is a basket case and Germany is dying out. We play long term ball here, Alan.
John Navratil| 8.30.12 @ 4:55PM
Alan Obama Fan Brooks,
Tell me this is your "crazy" day. Germany's unemployment rate has been over 10% forever. In the last few it has dropped to 7% and that's it. Japan has a 200% debt to GDP ration and both have inverted population age distributions - they're getting old with no kids.
Do you and Purp buy your Cracker Jacks at the same store?
William R| 8.30.12 @ 2:27PM
We did avoid the first two years of WW 2 until Japan attacked the United States. It would have been wise to let the Germans and Russians fight it out.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 4:27PM
No, it wouldn't have been "wise," because the Germans would have won.
The Soviets could not have survived without lend-lease, and the Brits, for all their determination, would have eventually crumbled.
This would have led to a NAZI-empire stretching from the North Atlantic all the way through western Asia and northern Africa.
Eventually, the NAZIs would have developed the a-bomb and we would have had a Cold War with a far smarter, far more clever adversary than the Soviets.
Or...maybe without the motivation provided by the war itself we never would have developed the bomb, and a statue of Hitler would be decorating the mall in New Berlin (formerly Washington DC).
Either way, it had to be done.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 4:36PM
While you're looking into that crystal ball why not tell us will happen next.
Crassus| 8.30.12 @ 9:33AM
NEOCON! NEOCON! NEOCON!
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:00AM
Crassus,
You sure shewed him!
Dolt!
DTOM
PS If you respond to me with, "Oh, yea!"
I will respond to you with, "Yea!"
That'll help!
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 9:42AM
So what?
I agree with lots of what Ron Paul says, too...except for the insanity that spills from his mouth when he starts talking about foreign policy.
In that regard, Paul is a naive, dangerous, deluded fool.
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:02AM
Doc, you forgot "old."
Is there anything more pathetic than an old fool - all that experience and still didn't manage to learn a thing...
DTOM
Jack in Wi| 8.30.12 @ 7:01AM
We control enough vote to sink Romney. Unless we turn out in good numbers and hold out noses for Romney he can't win. He needs our votes to get over the top. You don't get them by insulting us and dissing a lot of other conservatives. I read a lot of conservative blogs and there are many people disgusted with the way this is going. This is not a good way to start the campaign.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 9:41AM
"We control enough vote to sink Romney. "
No, you don't.
You're even a minority within the larger group of Ron Paul supporters, most of whom are smart enough to figure out the vast difference between Obama and Romney.
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 8.30.12 @ 10:20AM
"most of whom are smart enough to figure out the vast difference between Obama and Romney."
You mean Romney the Eastern Seaboard Rockefeller liberal-type you have always despised?
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:35AM
As opposed to the littlest socialist. Do you want to be shot in the head or in your foot?
That's a hard one, isn't it?
OBAMA IS THE PROBLEM. Romney we can manage.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 10:43AM
Yup.
Better the highly educated, highly experienced "Eastern Seaboard Rockefeller liberal-type" businessman and government executive than the ignorant, economically illiterate, ideologically bankrupt, Marxist empty-suit from Kenya/Hawaii/Indonesia/Chicago/wherever...
Appleby| 8.30.12 @ 7:09AM
Ron Paul is such a caricature. Every 1940s movie has a character like him in it; all he needs is a cloak with a hood and he'd make a dandy Sheriff of Nottingham.
Jack in Wi| 8.30.12 @ 7:18AM
Appleby you are an idiot. The Sheriff of Nottingham is Romney. Ron Paul is Robin Hood standing up for the people who have no power and are abused by the powerful. Romney can't win unless we go out and hold our noses and vote for him. It is about time he started working harder for our votes.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 8:34AM
The amount of Paul supporters who stay home will be negligible, and far outweighed by cross-over votes from Democrats and Independents who supported Obama in '08.
Keep dreaming, Jack...
aware| 8.30.12 @ 9:30AM
I'm sure you will do all you can to alienate them too. Good luck, neo con.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 9:35AM
You're welcome, Paul-Bot!
Now don't forget to make your mandatory donation to the "Defense of Israel" fund before the door-knob hits your sulking rear-end!
Also...make sure and attend next week's seminar, "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the New World Order." Prime Minister-for-Life Netanyahu will be stopping by afterwards for a meet-n-greet, I'm sure you won't want to miss it!
BTW...If you still have any of those anti-Semitic pamphlets that Ron Paul used to print, I'd advise you to get rid of them ASAP - The Elders don't look kindly on such things.
L'Chaim!
aware| 8.30.12 @ 3:45PM
Yeah and you're real brave as long as somebody else has to do your fighting for you, neo con. If you're so obsessed with Israel why not move?
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 4:33PM
I'm not obsessed with Israel, dummy...
You are. You and all of your infantile, moronic Paul-Bot buddies who see a Jewish plot behind every foreign affair.
You're a clown. I'm laughing at you and your "hero," Ron Paul.
BTW, monkey-boy...I'm a vet. Are you?
Doubt it.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 7:44PM
I think YOU brought it up not me. I think highly of the Israelis, just think they, like us, have career criminals running their "government".
And while I support many of Paul's views, I don't happen to be a supporter of Paul or any other politician.
And it's not a Jewish plot that I think about, it's a Jesuit one. But I'm sure you know nothing about it. Tools never do.
I make no claims as to what I am, how does anybody know what is being posted is true? That is why I just post my opinions, not my history.
Being a vet, if you are, gives you no more right to make claims on others lives than anyone else. If you're not posting from Afghanistan, I say it is irrelevant.
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:08AM
Ron Paul is over - too old. 81 in 2016, 85 in 2020. Done. Toast. Finis.
Not our fault. Actually his and yours. He never made a compelling case and you haven't either. You only get so many chances in life - but not waste them. Future flogging of Ron Paul will be akin to old guy abuse...
Time to find a new talisman, you silly, little Paul bot monkeys!
Appleby| 8.30.12 @ 10:57AM
Jack, my Daddy taught me to avoid people who think "You're an idiot" is an argument; they cause a person unnecessary indigestion. Ron Paul's ideas on foreign policy would get every one of us killed.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 3:47PM
Ridiculous. One of our subs can devastate half the planet.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 4:38PM
Yes, but here's the thing, Einstein...
The nuclear deterrent only works if your enemies think the man in charge has the strength of will to use it...
...Otherwise, it's no deterrent at all.
That's why you and Doctor Ronnie and all the rest of the amateurs in Paul-bot land should leave the thinking to the grown-ups.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 6:51PM
See any "nuklar" weapons used to wipe out Saddam's army? The conventional arsenal we have is only a little more time consuming and nearly as destructive. That's how it's done now.
I know it's always 1938 Munich for you neo cons, but a lot has changed in military technology since then.
Occam's Tool| 8.30.12 @ 3:30PM
Jack, we've already stomped on your face and wiped our feet on your kicked in testicles. Stomp, stomo, stomp, stomp, face, face, face, face.
Von Mises Jr| 8.30.12 @ 8:52AM
A bone of contention discussed on Rush Monday was the Rule changes. Word is coming out of the Convention that Rule 12 is not an assault on the conservative and libertarian factions, but designed to prevent the potential that future delegates may disrupt future nominations as protestors attempted to disrupt the convention. The plea is for unification in defeating Obama and socialism.
JP| 8.30.12 @ 9:27AM
For the life of me, I cannot remember the last time Conservatives or Libertarians disrupted a GOP convention. This rule change makes no sense; if Mitt wins this year he will be the defacto leader of the GOP. If he loses, he's out and the last thing the national Republican party will have to worry about is a bunch of Paulbots.
Von Mises Jr| 8.30.12 @ 9:40AM
I did not condone the Rule 12, but explaining what someone at the Convention investigated and found out.
Code Pink disrupted Ryan's speech last night but unless you saw it on Breitbart, you would not have seen it since like when someone runs on the baseball field, the cameramen are taught not to glorify it due to the copycat syndrome. Here is the video: http://www.breitbart.com/Breit.....RNC-Speech
JP| 8.30.12 @ 9:48AM
I'm thinking more of the political fall-out. The GOP needs to be unified around Mitt/Ryan. This is a rather strange way of creating that unity.
Leave it to the National Republican Party to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory - everytime.
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 8.30.12 @ 10:24AM
"if Mitt wins this year he will be the defacto leader of the GOP."
He is a de facto LIBERAL.
Von Mises Jr| 8.30.12 @ 11:09AM
troll alert.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 4:39PM
If Romney IS a Lib, then you're voti g for him, right?
JP| 8.30.12 @ 9:23AM
I'm not an Ron Paul supporter or groupie. But, I remain disconcerted about how the RNC and Team Romney have run this convention. Everytime I find a reason to support Mitt, he gives me 2 reason why I shouldn't. Like other Conservatives, I will place a vote against Obama, but not for Romney.
It's been a decade since W won. In that time, Conservatives have watched Establishment Republicans make a mess of things. But this is it. If Mitt wins this November and the GOP cannot give the results they promised, the Republican party will cease to exist. Conservatives have had enough. We will simply leave, and the GOP will go the way of the Whigs.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 9:36AM
Fair enough; but here's your choice:
Romney...or Obama.
Do you REALLY have to think about that one?
JP| 8.30.12 @ 9:44AM
I just said I would be casting a negative vote Mitt's way.
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:15AM
JP - RWR showed how it should be done in '76 when he got close but didn't win. He worked hard, very hard for the Ford ticket which did lose. Then when he the primary in '80, the GOP had no choice but to support him, as he had them. That's how you do it.
Romney gives me the willies, too. The floor fight was exactly what I did not need. BUT we of the serious conservative movement must work and help RomneynRyan win. For two reasons: the good of the country and for the good of our wing of the party. Which of course we should continue to grow.
You cannot reasonably expect to win every battle, but you can never, ever, never quit.
Doubt me? Look at the hopeless, useless Left. Their mothership, the USSR, sank in 1989 - all they have is their indomitable will. Conservatives should take a lesson from them, there.
DTOM
Houdini| 8.30.12 @ 11:05AM
I wasn't Romneys biggest supporter......but he is the nominee vs. Obama. Anyone that either stays home or votes for the village idiot is simply helping to destroy this country. DTOM you're wasting your fingers trying to convert these idiots. If Romney/Ryan loses, I hope they are as forthright in telling their grandchildren about how they furthered the cause of communism, and brought about the destruction of this country, because they stood up for "principles". The principle before all of us is simply this...Romney/Ryan, where the country at least has a chance at success, or Obama, where there is no chance at all.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 3:31PM
What we have is fascism. You only show how ignorant you are about ideology. I hope you tell your grandchildren you supported the small adjustment in fascism that Romney represents.
So after running the Paul supporters away(which I don't happen to be one), you are ready to blame them if the GOP nag can't make the finish line. Blame shifting is typical of repeat screw ups.
Houdini| 8.30.12 @ 3:39PM
The line between facism and communism is so fine as to be non-existant. I have not singled out Paul supporters per se, I've singled out ANYONE that would consider voting for Obama or those that sit this one out because they didn't get their way in the primaries.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 4:32PM
Then my humble apology is offered, Houdini. However the line between these 2 ideologies is quite stark. It is important to be precise. The failure to understand the difference is how we end up with what we have.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 4:41PM
Your post shows that you know very little about Fascism.
Houdini| 8.30.12 @ 5:58PM
? While fascism generally is opposed by comunism or Stalinism they all have significant ideological simularities. both favor a revolutionary ideology, a class elite and disdain for bourgeois values not to mention totalitarian ambitions. Both have commonly emphasized single party states, non military party armies, secret police, and require total subserviance to the state. While the historical line between the two has been documented extensively in modern times how would one describe so called communist China that has all of the trappings of both communism and private property that one finds in fascist regimes?
aware| 8.30.12 @ 7:17PM
Houdini,
1: communism has as its end the "withering away of the State"/ Fascism elevates the State to godlike status.
2:communism is State ownership of resources, production, and goods/fascism has private ownership(under cronies, yet experts) of these with State supervision through regulation, licensing, and taxes.
There are only 2 systems in the modern world, socialism(Cuba, N. Korea) and fascism(all the rest). China is a fascist oligarchy. All socialist States collapse into fascism.
Fascism adapts to each culture so that trappings of what was remains. Like constitutions. And "parties". And elections.
Communism is an impossibility that cannot exist, which ends up in fascism. You are mistaking Stalinist/Leninism for communism. All non-free market systems end up fascist. No other outcome is possible. Think of fascism as rule by professionals or experts.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 6:52PM
I know a fascist when I see him, Herr Docktor.
Alan Obama Fan Brooks | 8.30.12 @ 10:25AM
"and the GOP will go the way of the Whigs."
That WILL happen.
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:42AM
Sort of like in November 2010?
Talk to us on November 7.
AOFB - here's a fun question for you: the GOP convention has actually shown a lot of rising conservative stars. Please tell us about all of the brilliant rising stars we will see next week at Black Panther Stadium.
Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz?
Charlie Rangel?
Al Sharpton?
Jessie Jackson, Sr, Jr? You pick.
Maxine Waters?
Van Waters?
Valerie Jarrett?
Nancy Pelosi?
Harry Reid?
JOE BIDEN?
C'mon Al show us the good stuff!
Oh I forgot - turncoats Charlie Crist and John Huntsman will be speaking. Didn't they both get beaten and run away? (Kind of like some Paulbots...)
Don't Tread On Me
John Navratil| 8.30.12 @ 4:58PM
DTOM,
Look for Sheila ("two Viet-Nams") Jackson-Lee to be in a red dress in front of a camera somewhere.
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 10:45AM
Well Alan, you WOULD know more about wearing wigs than the rest of us...
Doctor Right| 8.30.12 @ 9:39AM
Did anyone see Jess Watter's interview last night with a bunch of young Paul-supporters?
Watters: "So how would you favor creating more jobs?"
Paulie-Girl: "Ummmm...by making new jobs more available."
These "Kidz fur Paul" have a cult-like devotion to Dr. Ronnie that isn't too dissimilar from the youthful Obama-Zombies of 2008.
Lyndon LaRouche comes to mind, too...
aware| 8.30.12 @ 3:32PM
Mind numbed dolt comes to mind for those who think "government" is the job creator. Like you.
The Avenger| 8.30.12 @ 9:44AM
Let me state plainly that I like Ron Paul, a lot. Let me also state plainly that Romney wasn't my first choice for the nominee. I am somewhat disappointed in some of the shenanigans that happened in Tampa. That said, Obama and the democrats are despicable and dangerous to the country therefore, I will cast my vote for Romney and Ryan. I would suggest that the Paul supporters do likewise. Don't waste your opportunity to change the direction of the country because you are PO'd about some rule changes.
Drunken Sailor| 8.30.12 @ 11:29AM
Finally someone is using common sense and rational thinking. Let's get past this battle and then keep pushing Conservatism.
JP| 8.30.12 @ 9:47AM
I think everyone is making too much of the Paulbots. They are a rather small (but spirited) minoirty inside the GOP. Paul is retiring from politics. This is his swan song.
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:44AM
jp;
Did the good doctor ever make it to swan? All I ever heard him do was quack!
HeeHaw!
DTOM| 8.30.12 @ 10:52AM
And this is probably the last time we will have Dr. Paul to kick around.
I'll say this for him:
He does love the Constitution and I admire him for that. I do. And Ike warned us of the military-defense complex.
But if we are not to be old fools then we must follow the excellent advice of Vegetus Renatus from the Roman Empire:
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
"If you want peace, prepare for war."
And Dr. Paul you are supposed to know the Latin!
DTOM
Mistral| 8.30.12 @ 12:38PM
Ron Paul and many of us know that USA has gone well beyond its remit and not only prepares for war but makes it claiming national security. This is the argument of a buffoon - especially when terrorists can attack from anywhere and the national debt is exacerbated exponentially by it. The American military-industrial complex imperative preempts any possibility of peace by its clandestine support of armed factions around the world regardless of the potential consequences. How can you increase national security by aggravating your enemies constantly; by having 190+ foreign military bases at massive cost to the taxpayer and being submerged by ever-increasing debt? How does this promote "democracy" and "freedom"? Answer is not at all because it is not about these two factors in the first place.
Occam's Tool| 8.30.12 @ 3:36PM
DTOM:
I prefer the approach that I was taught in Chicago:
"Remember this Boy,
To Avoid being Beaten and Blue,
It's Important to Do Unto Others,
Before They Do Unto You!"
Dave Williams| 8.30.12 @ 12:37PM
Ron Paul is as relevant as Harold Stassen. Those of you under 30, head to Google :-).
Dave Williams| 8.30.12 @ 12:37PM
Ron Paul is as relevant as Harold Stassen. Those of you under 30, head to Google :-).
John II| 8.30.12 @ 6:36PM
Whoa! Harold Stassen. No need to check Google, and not just because I'm way, way over 30.
I actually saw Harold Stassen in person just a few tables away from where I was sitting at the Athletic Club in St. Paul, Minnesota, almost 40 years ago.
I was having dinner with my parents-in-law and my (future) wife, when my father-in-law pointed him out to me. Even then, my father-in-law was surprised that I knew the name, for it was already years since Stassen had last run for President.
He looked hunched, deeply wrinkled, tired, and old. Actually, he looked like Ron Paul.
And now back to "Last Hurrah" (1958), in which
Spencer Tracy plays an aging, has-been politician who stills has the fire in his belly, but no longer has it in his delivery. Something about idealism finally reduced to cronyism.
Mistral| 8.30.12 @ 12:42PM
To an ecver-sinking American economy Ron's views are very relevant. And to a nation that flouts the national and territorial sovereignty of others his views on the terrible cost of this on America internationally and economically at home, what he has to say is even more relevant.
Occam's Tool| 8.30.12 @ 3:37PM
Mistral:
I do not accept the concept of my daughter in a burkha. Ron Paul, who regularly fellates Hamas members, does. Screw him and the horse he rode in on.
Anyone who endangers my children I oppose.
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 8.31.12 @ 3:33AM
Tell me something Occam. This is off subject but why is it that the Israeli government is pushing for regime change in Syria? Do they truly believe that Sunni Wahhabists will bring more security to Israel than an Alawite led secular Baathist government? Part of the whole reason I have been so adament in supporting Ron Paul in the past two elections is precisely for the same reason you say you oppose him. I have family in the former Soviet Central Asia who would suffer should the US government in all their wisdom decide to overthrow the government there and the Wahhabists gain a foothold. My family is mixed of Shia Muslims and Armenian Christians and Russified Sunnis all of whom could face a firing squad or beheading if the US backed Sunni Islamists in their country like they are supporting in Syria and Libya and other nations.
Mistral| 8.30.12 @ 12:45PM
The Romney traditional flip-flop may come back to haunt Americans again and again if he becomes POTUS. We have just had 4 years of that.
Occam's Tool| 8.30.12 @ 3:38PM
Who cares? Ron Paul is a worthless asshole who supports traitors.
Houdini| 8.30.12 @ 3:41PM
Gee OT, how do you really feel about him.
William R| 8.30.12 @ 8:08PM
You're the only fuggin traitor here boy. Your loyalty is to a foreign country
John II| 8.30.12 @ 4:38PM
Guys! Can't we all just pull together and be nice to one another until after November 6?
[ The combatants stop, and all look in silence at the little twerp pleading for cohesion; they look at one another, and then look back at the twerp: "Aw shaddup!"]
Seriously, I been listening to this conservative muttering about Romney for weeks now, and after deep and sustained reflection ( as many as 25 seconds) it's occurred to me that my own voting pattern 1968 has been almost uniformly negative. I almost always vote AGAINST the candidate whom I regard as the bigger jackass:
1968-- against Humphrey
1972-- against McGovern
1976-- against Carter
1980-- against Carter
1984-- FOR Reagan!
1988-- against Dukakis
1992-- against Clinton
1996-- against Clinton
2000--against Gore
2004--against Kerry
2008--against Obama
2012-- against Obama (but FOR Ryan, with hope springing eternal . . .)
That strikes me as a conservative pattern of voting, driven by a conservative sense of the human condition.
In more than four decades of voting I've only made one exception in the case of Our Ron, and I hope to live long enough to make another in the case of Our Paul.
And now back to "Pork Chop Hill" (1959), in which the liberal Republican Gregory Peck leads a squabbling company of troops against a common foe: the Commie renegade.
aware| 8.30.12 @ 7:25PM
Today marks the 150th anniversary of the Second Manassas(Bun Run for you semi-literate Yankees). On this day in 1862 Hood's division led Longstreet's crushing attack on the miscreant Pope and sent the hated invaders scampering back to Mordor on the Potomac.
Ironically, Pope was another Republican that made promises he couldn't keep.
Marco2| 8.30.12 @ 8:39PM
I will never understand why it makes a difference whether that wizened old turd has 150 delegates or 300 delegates when it took 1144 to nominate the candidate. I will never understand why the party allowed that wizened old turd the high profile and free media attendant to his being allowed upon the REPUBLICAN PARTY debate stage. Never again should the participation of such a self-aggrandizing jerk be allowed unless there is a prior agreement of same to support the eventual nominee. Rand Paul appears to be a normal human being, good and welcome. Old turd and Paulbots, goodbye and get lost.
threeleafclover| 8.31.12 @ 1:36AM
One problem Rand Paul has mistakenly "corrected" - or looks like it. What happened to the puffy bags under his eyes and the decidedly different look in the the mid section of his face. Looks life a poor "bleph" and a chemical peel that won't heal. Think Kenny Rogers. Also, that little topknot of curls looks like a cheap perm.
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 8.31.12 @ 3:27AM
I think the chasm between devoted Ron Paul supporters and those who support the mainstream of the GOP and Mitt Romney cannot be mended anytime soon because to those who truly believe in Paul's message there is very little difference between Romney and Obama. With a few exceptions on the left only Ron Paul supporters have been consistant in their opposition to US military intervention under both Republican and Democratic presidents. They have been unwavering in their view of the Constitution as a contract between the government and the people that limits the governments powers regardless of which political party is in power and they have been active opponents of the Patriot Act and the Patriot Act II because they are unconstitutional. As a union man I do have disagreements with Ron Paul on economic issues, but he's an honest man and I believe an honorable man and he's devotion to a Constitutionally limited government is principled and to be respected. I do not know if I will be able to say the same about Rand Paul. I think Rand will walk closer to the mainstream GOP when his father is gone. I hope I'm wrong but that's my prediction.
Carroll | 8.31.12 @ 4:06AM
"Having established his bona fides as a mainstream Republican, he then dipped into his father Ron Paul’s kit bag -- calling for defense cuts and offering a libertarian attack on homeland security."
Carroll | 8.31.12 @ 4:07AM
...Thanks
Mistral| 8.31.12 @ 10:29AM
Anyone with an ounce of sense understands that US foreign policy is dictated by economics. The Saudi Arabian alliance including the petrodollar, has meant massive spending power for the Saudis overseas particularly building mosques, inside which we find a strong wahabbi mohamatenism. This coupled with the massive US debt makes US weaker than ever in the face of the religion many of you dislike.
Occam T beware.
Mickle | 9.4.12 @ 3:41AM
And yes I said Curious George; Clint Eastwood's speech has them so disturbed because it was a knockout punch: it's now OK to ridicule Obama, the absurd cipher who occupies the office.