This article is so convoluted and confused, it’s barely readable.
Glad to see Frum is getting slaughtered in the comments.
define( 'DB_CHARSET', 'utf8mb4' ); define( 'DB_COLLATE', 'utf8mb4_unicode_ci' );
". . . a republic, if you can keep it."
This article is so convoluted and confused, it’s barely readable.
Glad to see Frum is getting slaughtered in the comments.
PAUL: In many ways, it’s a very healthy movement. I’m not one to say, “why don’t you get a bath and go get a job and quit crybabying.” I don’t like that at all. I think that’s a misunderstanding of where the unemployment comes from. The unemployment comes from policy, government policy, and it’s the federal reserve and the business cycle is not a consequence of free markets. That doesn’t mean I think they’re all perfect out there. […]
When spontaneous movements occur in a country, the johnny-come-latelys like to join and redirect the original intent of the Tea Party Movement and the original intent of the Occupiers, so for that reason the political people get involved and they try to grab hold of the message, and I think that’s been the case on both sides.
(dated Octomber 19, 2011, retrieved Dec 9, 2011)
Just days ago, CBS national news printed new details about Department of Justice operation “Fast & Furious.” Internal memos show that agents actually discussed using the operation as a “false flag” to justify taking away the 2nd amendment rights of US citizens.
Congress is currently investigating Fast & Furious. Attorney General Eric Holder has already been caught making at least one false statement under oath.
Gun rights advocates have been asking why Republicans aren’t calling for criminal charges against Eric Holder. Many have criticized FOX News for giving the story little coverage. CBS national news has been breaking most of the new details related to Fast & Furious. Recently Eric Holder yelled at a reporter at an event in DC. He blamed the media for public outrage over Fast & Furious, and told a reporter “you guys need to stop it.”
Today, Texas Congressman Ron Paul became the first GOP president candidate to call for criminal charges against Eric Holder.
Speaking to syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones, Paul called for Holder to be “immediately fired.” Paul went on to say “I think it was criminal,” and called the operation a “false flag.” He said that there needs to be an immediate investigation into Holder himself, and said Holder “deserves charges.”
(Read more)
Despite running a solid 2nd in the polls.
Total Talk %
Romney 18:19 25.36%
Gingrich 13:41 18.95%
Bachmann 11:39 16.13%
Perry 10:19 14.29%
Santorum 9:35 13.27%
Ron Paul 8:40 12.00%
Total 1:12:13 100.00%
Turns Talking %
Gingrich 17 23.29%
Romney 16 21.92%
Perry 11 15.07%
Bachmann 10 13.70%
Santorum 10 13.70%
Ron Paul 9 12.33%
Total 73 100.00%
On Wednesday, Dec. 7, the Republican Jewish Coalition will host a presidential-candidates forum featuring Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, and Rick Santorum. Not invited is the GOP candidate currently polling around third in New Hampshire and second in Iowa: Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas). The explanation:
Paul was not invited to attend the RJC’s candidates forum because the organization – as it has stated numerous times in the past – “rejects his misguided and extreme views,” said [RJC Executive Director Matt] Brooks.
“He’s just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican party and this organization,” Brooks said. Inviting Paul to attend would be “like inviting Barack Obama to speak.”
. . . .
Anti Defamation League National Director Abraham Foxman has a perhaps unintentionally interesting take about Paul, U.S. politics, and Israel:
with the exception of Ron Paul, there is not much difference between the parties
The U.S. is rapidly turning into a police state, as Canada’s Calgary Herald recently pointed out in an excellent op-ed penned by Kris Kotarski.
How dare we condemn human rights abuses in the Middle East when we treat productive members of our own society — frequent business travelers — like drug mules and felons.
The TSA is unconstitutional. Security at the expense of our most basic freedoms is not freedom at all.
I’ve disagreed with some of Ron Paul’s economic views . . . he is the ONLY CANDIDATE who seems to care that our civil rights have been egregiously rolled back over the past decade.
This alone makes him worth my vote. And I can’t in good conscience vote for President Obama’s re-election.

The quick refutation is a one liner: “If Ron Paul is a friend of the elite oligarchs, why is all the lobbying money going to the Romneys, Obamas, and Pelosis of the world?”
Despite a sustained campaign by the Washington media and political establishment to marginalize him, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, is still a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination. That has a lot to do with the support he’s receiving from young voters. In almost every survey and activist straw poll, Paul draws big numbers from voters between the ages of 18 and 29.
The laziest way to explain the counterintuitive phenomenon of youth rallying around the GOP’s oldest candidate is to insist that it’s about kids’ silly college fling with unrealistic libertarianism or that it’s about kids’ affinity for drug use — and more specifically, Paul’s support for legislation that would let states legalize marijuana. This degrading mythology ignores the possibility that young people support Paul’s libertarianism for its overall critique of our government’s civil liberties transgressions (transgressions, by the way, now being openly waged against young people), nor does the narrative address the possibility that young people support Paul’s drug stance not because they want to smoke weed, but because they see the War on Drugs as a colossal waste of resources. Instead, Paul is presented as merely a fringe protest candidate, and the young people who support him are depicted as just dumb idealists, hedonistic pot smokers or both.
One problem with this fantastical tale, of course, is that it insults the intelligence and motivation of young voters. But another, even more troubling facet of this tale is how it uses speculative apocrypha and stereotyping about ideology and drugs to suppress concrete social survey data about the far-more-likely foreign policy motivations of young Ron Paul supporters.
. . . .
The new study tracks how younger voters are now strongly rejecting traditional American hubris in favor of Paul’s more empirical views on foreign policy. For instance, it finds that while older citizens embrace American exceptionalism in insisting our culture is inherently superior, younger voters do not. But the key finding as it relates to Paul’s candidacy has to do with blowback, which Paul frequently discusses on the campaign trail. As Pew reports (emphasis mine):
Two-thirds of Millennials (66 percent) say that relying too much on military force to defeat terrorism creates hatred that leads to more terrorism. A slim majority of Gen Xers (55 percent) agree with this sentiment, but less than half (46 percent) of Boomers agree and the number of Silents who share this view is 41 percent. A plurality of Silents (45 percent) believe that using overwhelming force is the best way to defeat terrorism and 43 percent of Boomers share that view.
These findings have been largely ignored by the media and political establishment. Despite a sustained campaign by the Washington media and political establishment to marginalize him, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, is still a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination.
(Read more)