Friday, May 13, 2011

Neo-Cons Drag Out New Horse to Go After Ron Paul

The Hill's Bernie Quilgley says that Lew Lehrman could be the "dark horse" Republican presidential candidate.

Quigley tells us to think of Lehrman as the "thinking man's Ron Paul". This would seem an odd way to contrast Lehrman from Dr. Paul, since Dr. Paul is a medical doctor and has written more books than most likely all the other presidential candidates combined. Many of Dr. Paul's books delve into the intricacies of economics and quote such heavy weights as Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard and Freidrich Hayek. Anyone buying Dr. Paul books with the discussion it contains about the thinking of Mises, Rothbard and Hayek isn't likely to be a non-thinker who is going to follow up a Ron Paul book with a Dr. Seuss, Cat in the Hat, book.

But the oddity of championing Lehrman over Dr. Paul goes away when you realize Quigley is talking code. You see, Lehrman was on the Board of Directors of that wonderful, now defunct. organization that Bill Kristol ran, Project for the New American Century. You know, that group that wanted to do that real cerebral thing and bomb the hell out of most of the Middle East. Other cerebral members of PNAC  included Don Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz. Bottom line, Lehrman is an insider.

Lehrman was also an investor in George W. Bush's very curious Arbusto Energy, which means, on top of it all, Lehrman is probably CIA.

Lehrman as a replacement for Ron Paul is like going to a five star restaurant and ordering filet mignon and getting as a replacement a hot dog with a stale bun and no mustard. The insiders are getting real desperate if they are trotting this horse out.

12 comments:

  1. What do you have against Cat in the Hat?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Speaking of horse and sausage, they keep grinding up the most disgusting stuff and wrap it inside the same old casing as if we wouldn't know any better. The political meatpacking industry is hazardous to your health!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Its even worse than that, it a picture of filet steak with a dribble of gravy and beef stock smeared on it.

    If they aren't promoting the exhausted old Reaganite nostrums that were betrayed years ago they were the ones who did actually betray them years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Political Terrorists will not allow someone like Ron Paul to be president. I am shocked that they allow him to be a Congressman.

    ReplyDelete
  5. you just can't keep passing gas without sooner or later being smelled out

    ReplyDelete
  6. @ Anonymous 6:50 pm

    Ron Paul is allowed because he is the provided avenue for our brand of dissent. Unfortunately, his political future makes it more of a cul-de-sac from our perspective.

    I recall reading that JP Morgan had the vision to propose that all opposition formations or revolution movements be co-opted or controlled as early as possible, sometimes even pre-conceived if possible. I am not saying that Dr. Paul is anything other than what he appears to be. But he doesn't necessarily have to be to be useful either.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If Ron Paul were elected President, I would loose Public Housing Assistance which is worth $500; Foodstamps, $180, Social Security Disability, $675 cash, Medicare medical, vision, psychiatric, services and related prescriptions which is very very valuable. Worst of all there would be no more financial postings or bible prophecy posting on the EconomicReview Journal.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "If Ron Paul were elected President, I would loose Public Housing Assistance which is worth $500; Foodstamps, $180, Social Security Disability, $675 cash, Medicare medical, vision, psychiatric, services and related prescriptions which is very very valuable"

    Stop whining, welfare queen. Just because -you- consider it to be valuable doesn't mean it is to the people taxed to finance it, nor does it mean its sustainable. Grow up and realise the world doesn't revolve around you.

    http://youtu.be/pNWXhLrvrZo
    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guest-post-recovery-self-sustaining-heres-test

    "Worst of all there would be no more financial postings or bible prophecy posting on the EconomicReview Journal."

    The Bible's full of crap anyway. Nice trolling if that's what you're up to, though.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ron Paul’s Libertarian political philosophy of less regulation on industry is just what the old super rich banking families want. It is as naïve to think that big business will work for the good of all society if we reduce regulations as it is for Marxists to believe that workers will work hard for the collective good without monetary incentives.

    ReplyDelete
  10. If he's part of PNAC then he's intellectually a traitor to freedom.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @Anon 3:08

    Then why don't the banking and corporate elites finance Ron Paul's candidacy? Why do they always support the big government Republicans and Democrats? Why does corporate media marginalize and smear Ron Paul?

    Ron Paul doesn't want to reduce regulations, per se. He just understands that the market is a far more honest and austere regulator than any government agency. Right now, the corporations self-regulate, literally -- as in, they write the regulations! Government regulations = protection, subsidies and bailouts for big business.

    Big business doesn't like the free market.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Ron Paul’s Libertarian political philosophy of less regulation on industry is just what the old super rich banking families want. It is as naïve to think that big business will work for the good of all society if we reduce regulations as it is for Marxists to believe that workers will work hard for the collective good without monetary incentives. "

    Does it hurt to be this stupid? The old banking families are the ones that -push- for regulations because they can absorb their costs and write them. Asserting something is "naive" - whatever that means - when you yourself entertain a very naive belief isn't very promising.

    ReplyDelete