Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Ron Paul Continues Attack on Rick Perry

Ron Paul's offensive on Rick Perry continues. I just spotted a Ron Paul internet banner ad that reads:"Learn the Truth about Rick Perry." It's paid for by the Ron Paul campaign.

The campaign has forced Rick Perry to do, of all things, release Ron Paul's letter from when he left the Republican Party for a brief period. If anything, the letter shows Dr. Paul's consistency in his principles. Now the Perry campaign has the public and the  media reading the awesome letter.

I have been told that Ron Paul is underestimated as a politician. This campaign has sure reinforced that idea. The advertising campaign has sure suckered Rick Perry into making the wrong move. Score this one for Ron Paul, big time. There is nothing better than your opposition pointing the public and the media to your strengths and your decades-long consistency.

Well played, Dr. Paul.


  1. Washington Times is reporting dr. Pauls new ad "trust" that attacks Perry will air TWICE tonight...NATIONALLY!

    This debate will be huge for the campaign.

  2. I had a feeling yesterday that RP was being his usual genius chess player self after I saw his new Perry ad but before I saw the Perry response. RP was five steps ahead of Perry (and us).

    Will Rick Perry be able to remember if he supported Algore in 1988:

    a) because Reagan was a small government guy; or

    b) because, in fact, Reagan wasn’t a small government guy?

    This puts the issue of the statists' (like Robert Reich) phony historical narratives into play. The entirety of judicial failure to enforce constitutional protections is based upon these phony historical narratives which are taught in law schools.

  3. If this is the worst "dirt" (:-) "they" could dig up on RP, they must really have nothing, because he's gaining momentum and it would be far better, from "their" perspective to nip this "problem" in the bud ASAP.

    That letter is a game changer.

    I've also read that he is underestimated. I saw him on many appearances back in 2007-8, and he is much more assertive, even combative, now. Going negative! And Perry's own negative attack is just about the biggest political blunder possible. Since Perry's response to RP's attack was to produce his old letter, people will read Paul's attack on Perry, and Paul's criticism of Reagan and the Republican Party and how could any seriously open-minded voter not be swayed by his honesty and integrity and (especially) prescience?

    The non-attack ads are also very good. Clever use of metaphor. A movie preview that lets the viewer choose the ending.

    I wonder if someone in the Paul campaign fed the Perry campaign the "incriminating" documents (:-)?

  4. I have to agree with Bob Roddis, I think that the Paul campaign planned this to happen.

    Why would RP run an ad showing that he stood behind Reagan's principles? Well, the first reason is that it is true, he did stand behind Reagan based on his stated principles, but the ad says nothing about Paul's opinion of Reagan after he laid his stated principles aside. The ad was quite clever in invoking the "Paul stood with Reagan, Perry didn't" motif, because conservative Reaganites will eat it up. The Paul campaign had to have known that Perry's camp would pull out that letter, how could they not, it fits the bait. But, unfortunately for Perry, the letter merely showed that Paul stood to his principles and was angered that Reagan didn't. And, of course, the whole concept behind Paul's ad was that Perry's principles, if he even has any, are dog droppings.

    It was a real genius move on the part of the Paul campaign.

  5. Outstanding move by Paul campaign.

  6. While I agree that generally this is a great move for Ron Paul's campaign (after all, he must make bold moves), and it's smart, I wouldn't underestimate the slime-dog Perry.

    Perry has already show, that like Bill Clinton, he is intrinsically adept at the primary rule of improv comedy --- "yes, and...." You can expect lots of variations of "yes, I was a newt, and I got better." We've already seen this with the forced vaccination accusation. He essentially said "yes, I tried to do that, and I was wrong." Like it or not, contrition generally works.

    It's going to be difficult to nail Perry down on his inconsistencies. In his case, it's going to be about quantity, not quality. He'll need to be made to apologize so many times that it will become apparent to the basic ignoramus that Perry is insincere.