Saturday, December 31, 2011
It wasn't until I was sexually assaulted by a female TSA employee at Reagan National Airport in September on my way to Florida for the Tea Party Presidential debate that I took another look at her vote for the Patriot Act, which created the conditions for the assault. As the risk/benefit can't justify the body x-rays or the pat downs on domestic flights I realized that their are all types of mal-investment. Preying upon fear is just another tactic to justify more government spending. As I live a few miles from the Pentagon, I realized that I had fallen for it too.
It wasn't until I was sexually assaulted by a female TSA employee at Reagan National Airport in September on my way to Florida for the Tea Party Presidential debate that I took another look at her vote for the Patriot Act, which created the conditions for the assault. As the risk/benefit can't justify the body x-rays or the pat downs on domestic flights I realized that there are all types of mal-investment. Preying upon fear is just another tactic to justify more government spending. As I live a few miles from the Pentagon, I realized that I had fallen prey to it too.
Then later in the Attorney General's Presidential debate she said she supported Federal Tort Reform which conflicts with States rights. Before switching I reviewed the allegations against Dr. Ron Paul and found his mea culpa for not reviewing the massive volume of newsletters credible and his view of individuality reflected in his medical practice, his employment practices and his political views no matter the pressure put upon him to pick sides or preferences.
He has worked steadily for a more just environment where ALL Americans can have that opportunity promised in our founding documents.I reviewed old video interviews with William Buckley http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VIvqyrxbL8 (watch all four videos), read his Congressional and campaign website. I was please to find he hadn't passed much legislation. As we are choking on all the laws and regulation Congress produces, his instinct not to add to our burden was refreshing.
Ron Paul's platform proposes the deepest cuts in a manner that, by the end of his Presidency, the private sector will have not only recovered the jobs eliminated but be on our way to full employment.
I applaud his well thought out policy prescriptions in consolidating and streamlining enumerated powers so we have a stronger military with more effective strategic tactics when dealing with real threats. We will have less civilian and military casualties with better relations and business opportunities the world over.
Our debt is our greatest National Security risk and it is already having an impact on our military by China's ease in hacking into military and government databases. Only free markets innovate because the incentive is there.
No government program will ever match the strengths of a free market. The math says we can’t wait another four years to cut government spending. The misguided view that big government can be "fixed" would be a disaster and would continue this horrid slide into poverty and impotence.
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for a more just society where the most people have the most opportunity.
Tea Party WDC
The constant deployment of multiple flaks of the ruling political class daily on Fox and other networks and outlets has gone on for over a week now, with these PR people for the establishment virtually never being asked any follow up questions or challenged on the routine errors on points of fact. Neither the media nor the politicians involved seem to get it -- that their dishonesty and incompetence is precisely the source of Paul's appeal and what is growing his campaign and the organizations he is going to leave behind after him.
So let us revisit the reportorial origin of much of this onslaught, the coverage of Ron Paul's two decades old newsletters, by my friend James Kirchik, formerly of the New Republic.
So as it comes to the hermeneutics of Ron Paul newsletters, here's the funny thing: if you want to believe that Paul, or libertarians, or paleolibertarians, or paleoconservatives, or anti-statists, or people who do not agree with you, or gentiles, or whatever, are all bigots and anti-Semites, you assume, parochially and perspectivally, that this clause is a sneaky aside asserting the guilt of the Jews. Or you could assume that the clause should be interpreted as "even under the most outlandish assumptions, like that some Jews were behind false flag fake Islamic terrorist events" the same outcome follows. Jamie assumes the former; I read it as the latter.
You might adduce as circumstantial evidence all the other bigoted passages that are not about Jews, and conclude that if these people hate the gays (or more precisely, if these people are willing to appeal to paleoconservatives with inflammatory rhetoric about gays), then they of course hate the Jews too (even if they themselves were Jewish). Yes, yes, tell that one to Midge Decter (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-boys-on-the-beach/#).
Jamie also thinks the "Jewish friend" is a fiction. I think I can dig up a number of cranky anti-war Jews on both the left and the right, several of whom trash me on the internet, who think the Irgun blew up synagogues to scare native Sephardic Jews into fleeing Iran or Iraq for Israel, etc., etc. I suspect that the actual authors of these newsletters include a few such Jews, like the late Murray Rothbard. (Indeed we should adopt a Straussian practice when writing about these newsletters: there is the historical Ron Paul, and the Rockwellian/Rothbardian Ron Paul, just as there is the historical Socrates who is not the Platonic Socrates nor the Aristophonic Socrates. Of course, the historical Ron Paul had not yet drank the hemlock and could have sued his followers for identity theft if he had paid more attention.)
Friday, December 30, 2011
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Michelle Branch Joins Kelly Clarkson In Supporting Ron Paul, Infuriating Fans
Santorum: flavor of the weakDecember 29, 2011 by Don Surber
Yes, I do mean that Rick Santorum is the flavor of the weak — as well as the week. Here is the thought bubble for the American conservative today:
Herman Cain crashed. Michele Bachmann crashed. Rick Perry crashed. Herman Cain crashed. Newt Gingrich crashed. Ron Paul — oh, good gravy, you lost me at hello. Who is left for conservatives? Rick Santorum. Really? That’s it? The guy the homosexual fanatics so hate that they made up a sex act just to smear his name in Wikipedia and on Google? Well, I suppose he beats a flip-flopping millionaire from Massachusetts.
And so the new polls show Rick Santorum has tripled his support — which was at 3% so he’s now in double digits. Via Real Clear Politics:
PPP poll of 565 likely Republican voters in Iowa on Monday and Tuesday: Ron Paul 24, Mitt 20, Gingrich 13, Perry 10, Santorum 10, Bachmann 11, Who’s it 4.
CNN/Time poll of 452 likely Republican voters in Iowa last Wednesday to Tuesday: Ron Paul 22, Mitt 25, Gingrich 14, Perry 11, Santorum 16, Bachmann 9, Who’s it 1.
Rasmussen poll of 750 likely Republican voters in Iowa December 19: Ron Paul 20, Mitt 25, Gingrich 17, Perry 10, Santorum 10, Bachmann 6, Who’s it 4.
Insider Advantage poll of 452 likely Republican voters in Iowa December 18: Ron Paul 24, Mitt 18, Gingrich 13, Perry 16, Santorum 3, Bachmann 10, Who’s it 4.
So what can we conclude?
Ron Paul and Mitt Romney each have a hard core of 20%-25% of the vote. Conservatives make up a majority of the Republican voters but they are split among Newt Gingrich (don’t ask why he’s considered conservative), Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann.
But let us not overstate the importance of Iowa for Republicans. Four years ago, the results were — Mike Huckabee (34%), Mitt Romney (25%), Fred Thompson (13%), John McCain (13%), Ron Paul (10%), Rudy Giuliani (4%), and Duncan Hunter (1%).
Iowa got it right in 1996 and 2000, the previous two contested Republican contests, but blew it in 1988 — Bob Dole (37%), Pat Robertson (25%), George H. W. Bush (19%), Jack Kemp (11%), and Pierre DuPont (7%).
Iowa also blew it in 1980 — George H. W. Bush (32%), Ronald Reagan (30%), Howard Baker (15%), John Connally (9%), Phil Crane (7%), John B. Anderson (4%), and Bob Dole (2%).
So Iowa blew it in 3 out of the 5 last contested Republican races. Four years ago the guy who eventually won the race finished 4th in Iowa.
Robert Stacy McCain (who saw the Herman Cain revival two months before it began) is in Iowa and has been watching Rick Santorum’s campaign for signs of life. Rick Santorum has hit all 99 counties of Iowa but he has no money. On Tuesday, Robert Stacy McCain reported:
The apparent collapse of Gingrich — at least insofar as it involves conservatives in Iowa — will be one of the big stories to keep watching. Multiple sources confirm the lack of organizational “ground game” for Newt here, but the key questions are, “How far will he fall?” and “Who will benefit most from Newt’s losses?”
Another sign the beneficiary might be Santorum: “Huck’s Army” founders Alex and Brett Harris today endorsed Santorum.
Today I had a long conversation with influential Iowa talk-show host Steve Deace, who remains skeptical of Santorum’s Cinderella potential. Listening to Deace’s analysis, I’d say the unreported story is this: Perhaps the real reason Steve King didn’t endorse Santorum yesterday is not only King’s longstanding friendship with Bachmann, but also that redistricting has given King some new territory that includes a lot of fired-up Ron Paul supporters. The last thing King needs is a bunch of fanatical Paulistas backing a primary challenger against him next year.
There are layers and layers of complexity to GOP politics in Iowa, and I don’t pretend to understand it at more than a superficial level. But I think the situation here is a lot more volatile than most people realize.
Me? So far the conservative darlings have been loud of mouth and short on money and organization with the exception of Rick Perry who has the money and the organization, but his foot keeps using his mouth as a shoe. I would really like to say Rick Santorum is the Great Pumpkin who will rise out the patch and lead us to victory on November 6, 2012. I really would. But he lacks the spark and has failed to attract much of a following. There are plenty of young conservatives looking to latch onto a campaign to be the next Karl Rove. I don’t see one attached to Rick Santorum.
You need more than having the right positions. You need charm and leadership skills. He is surging only because conservatives have nowhere left to go.
So here is my prediction: Santorum finishes third or even second, and we will get a big hullabaloo about Santorumentum. He raised $1 million in a day! (While Barack Obama raised $200 million in the last 91 days.) Then Rick Santorum will crash in New Hampshire because he has no organization. That leaves South Carolina where Governor Nikki Haley already is a Mitt Rider.....
read the rest at link above