Thursday, December 15, 2011

More Attacks on Ron Paul

Michael Tomasky at Newsbeat has come out with an attack on Ron Paul, with old charges that Justin Raimondo answered in 2008. Tomasky goes on to call Dr. Paul a “pestilential little locust” and a “Batty old reactionary.” .

What's up with the Tomasky attack. He explained it all in 2010 in a commentary titled GOP wrecking:
As I've written many times, Democrats in general still tend to think that you win political fights by having superior arguments. This of course is manifestly not true. You win political arguments by framing the question the media decide to take up. That means being aggressive in your framing, creating conflict (which the media love), and making sure that reporters will go to the other side and ask them well, how do you respond to this?...
You see, you ignore the response that Raimondo gave, which demolished the charges. You just repeat and repeat the charges, true or not, replied to or not. Frame the question, so that the media focus on that question.

As Tom DiLorenzo points out the Smear Memo has gone out:
The neocons are in a Code Red State of Alert over the fact that Ron Paul is in a dead heat with Newt "I Love Freddie Mac" (and apparently Big Macs too) Gingrich in Iowa. So they are doing what comes naturally to every neocon, namely lying about Ron's political position.
From left to right, from Paul Krugman to Bill Bennett, the government apologists are out in full battle gear in an attempt to stop Dr. Paul.

Here's DiLorenzo with a report with what went down on the Rush Limbaugh show, today:
. . . because Ron Paul is tied for the lead in the polling in Iowa just weeks before the Iowa Caucuses. Like all their neocons today, Limbaugh is completely unhinged over Ron's tremendous popularity. He said today that Ron's supporters are "uninformed TEA Party conservatives" who support Ron's "Waco nut job things" he says about foreign policy (i.e., a foreign policy that defends Americans and not foreigners). And of course Rush repeated the Neocon Lie of the Day that Ron Paul has said that 9/11 was "an inside job." Of course, Ron never said any such thing. Rush is lying, just like his buddy Blackjack Bill Bennett did last night with Hannity.
But, while the state apologists are on attack, the feedback from "the street" is completely different.

A lawyer with an office down the hall from me, who I have always thought of as a bleeding heart liberal, said to me, "You know I kinda like Ron Paul."

The cashier where I get a bagel in the morning brought up Ron Paul. He said that he thought Ron Paul could win.

The people, despite the media attempt at blocking his message, are getting to learn about Dr. Paul, and they like what they see.  This looks to me like the start of a powerful groundswell for Ron Paul, and a roomful of Krugman, Limbaugh,and Bennett with their propaganda machines are not going to be able to stop that.


  1. well, we know what Limbaugh, Bennet and the rest of the negatives is wrong and Ron Paul supporters are very, very informed, it's the others like these guys, Limbaugh who aren't.

  2. I swear, how can people not see how organized and obvious this is. Paul gets decent numbers at the polls and BOOM, you get a bunch of negative media.

    Now that it is becoming clear that he could win both Iowa and NH, they are coming out in full force from the Left and the Right. Now they aren't just going after him, but they're going against anybody that is well-known that has supported Paul. Throw in some outright lies to spin it and the masses will believe it. That's what they think, anyway. Even worse, they are now trying to utilize the internet against him-- this will fail.

    I think that the pundits, the talking heads, the authoritarians, etc are beginning to see something. They are seeing that they are becoming more and more irrelevant and that scares the crap out of them. They're now acting in near desperation.

  3. Better to be talked about than not. Let the windbag blow, he'll run out of puff soon.

  4. A low-blow Ron Paul hit piece "Can Ron Paul Win" is running on Hot Air trying to paint him as racist. Unreal!

  5. So, who the F#$%^ is Michael Tomasky? Screw him.
    If he's an internet guy, we can dismiss him, 'cause internet people are probably already committed to their guy.
    The important crowd are the Boobus Americanus (h.t. Butler Shaffer) who listen to Rush or B.J. Bennett.
    They require serious handholding on the path to enlightenment.
    I say war on Rush and Bennett. Let's make 'em eat their words. I'm thinkin' hard. Need plan. I'll check in later.....

  6. has been down all day due to cyber attack. Gotta wonder who is behind it. Seems that someone is trying to prevent the tea party day moneybomb from happening.

  7. Wow, A new LOW!!!

    Just found out via Lew Rockwell, that David Frum has discovered that Ron Paul is

    I swear to GOD!!!
    Well, that does it for me. RP is out! I'm for the Harriet Beecher Stowe ticket.

    I mean, he actually SAID THAT! He's an eminent pundit, so it MUST be true.

    Money Quote:
    "There’s much to dislike about Ron Paul’s politics, and I dislike every bit of it. (It’s maybe remote from current concerns, but at a minimum, I have no patience for a professed libertarian who openly prefers the slaveholding cause in the U.S. Civil War.)"

    I shouldn't read this crap. It just makes me cranky.

    Still working on my anti-Tomasky campaign. They're spewing more crap than I can keep up with. Still workin' on it...

  8. I am always amazed at the sheer ineptitude of our opponents.

    Toledo, Ohio talk show host Brian Wilson expresses his exasperation at the attacks on Ron Paul by Limbaugh etc. here.

    Ron Paul is simply a strict constitutionalist of the U.S. Constitution. How can these guys smear that unambiguous message while they are simultaneously claiming to be strict constitutionalists themselves? If they have an intelligent and fact-based disagreement, so say and explain. Apparently they don’t and they can’t.

    That is all so similar to the pitiful and deceitful attacks on the Austrians by the Krugmanites. If we’re so wrong, then please calmly and plainly state our position and then explain where it is wrong. If our opponents will never do that, it means that they cannot do it and must rely upon the most dimwitted and pathetic smears. The debate is over and we have won. There is no other explanation.

  9. Here is the transcript of the Rush Limbaugh show that Mr. DiLorenzo references:

  10. I actually like these negative pieces on Ron Paul. They consist almost entirely of name calling and present obviously false or no facts whatsoever.

    They act as an unintentional endorsement for Dr. Paul. If a consistent liar makes a statement P, we can assume that the opposite of P is true. When liars like Tomasky bad-mouth Ron Paul, people will think Paul must be a swell guy.

  11. You see, you ignore the response that Raimondo gave, which demolished the charges. You just repeat and repeat the charges, true or not, replied to or not. Frame the question, so that the media focus on that question.

    As Thomas Pynchon said, "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers."

  12. Thank you David Frum! I once was blind, but now I see!


    @Brian 9:23 AM,


  13. If all the crap that is dished out by talk radio and the rest of the media could actually become useful, America could grow enough food to feed the world.

    But it isn't and we have to try to tune it out while we seek real information, which is becoming increasingly scarce. People live on B.S. or talk radio and the scandal sheets could not survive.

  14. I would just like to say thank you to Brian for quoting my favorite author, Thomas Pynchon.

    Also, the globalists are wetting themselves publicly as they see Ron Paul gaining momentum. I am a recovering neo-conservative and there is nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong with Ron Paul's message, of course that's assuming you value individual liberty.

  15. He is for the people and the foreign Corporate Federal Constitution over those who wish to oppress the rights of individual American State Citizens. We are not born U.S. citizens.

    State Citizens are not United States citizens per U.S. Supreme Court Case of Barron v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore , 32 U.S. 243 (1833).

  16. I hate that bigot and narrow minded ass Rush Limbaugh! Ron Paul is the only one who can get us out of this mess we are in as a country! Everyone else is the same ol s......the status quo doing business as usual!

  17. Ron Paul is like the borgs. The second people get touched by his message (Youtube videos, articles, his brochure), these folks decide to jump ship and go for RP all the way.

    Try it out :)

  18. Dr. Ron Paul has been campaigning since day one about one uphold the CONSTITUTION OF THE USA..That is what He talks about all the time. The elite don't like the Constitution,they are trying to dismiss it..Think for a moment,Who is interested in MARTIAL LAW in this country??? US?? I dont't think so...It is the elite that harbors such ideas,and the having planning it all along.

  19. Ron Paul is right. He's ALWAYS been right. Anyone w/a modicum of logic can see he's the only candidate telling the truth. The only one facing up to the true position the USA is in and how to get straight. When are the people going to take their heads out of the sand?

  20. Any newsletter relying in Justin Raimondo for ANYTHING has to have 25 screws loose.

    I admit, I dislike Ron Paul intensely, although I WILL vote for him if he is the Republican nominee. ANYONE would be better than the socialist nightmare currently in the White House.

    But Justin Raimondo has to be the LEAST reliable source outside of the totally unreliable mainstream media. He is not a journalist. He is an ideologue, and twists facts however he sees fit, often altering them all together from the truth.

  21. I have a grass roots indicator of how popular Ron Paul is getting.

    My 12 year old is a well-informed straight A student in all honors classes...and his last period of each day is a sort of study hall in the library. The librarian sometimes leads a discussion on this or that topic.

    This week, the librarian asked the kids 'Who can name three candidates for President?' My boy was the only kid that could name three (yes, I'm proud).

    But what's interesting is he said a lot of kids - who only knew one or two names - rattled off Ron Paul's name. That tells me Paul's name is being discussed at home, one way or another.

    We're in a lakeside suburb, just north of Charlotte.

  22. @Anon December 16, 2011 2:24 PM...

    Can you give us other commenters an example of Justin Raimondo presenting false information without issuing a correction or even an example of him misleading his readers?

    I definitely have differences of opinion with Raimondo but I read him enough that I can't imagine your Tomasky-like comment being written by anyone other than a pro-empire statist* or your run-of-the-mill muslim-hating racist.

    * toss-up between big-gov-evangelical wing and NeoCon-Cheney-Trotsky wing.

  23. Ron Paul 2012
    You can see who knows their bread is buttered by the system by who attacks the US constitution
    and cries for the status quo. I am/was an obamanite but when he never prosected one banker
    or one bushy for war profiteering he has lost my vote to RP but none of those other idiots
    that want to mix religion and politcs.
    Ron Paul is for personal liberty and personal responsability and we could surely use more of that in this country. People that are worried about their SS benefits need to know the truth ,,, you are not going to get them anyway with the status quo they have already been stolen. What you do get will not be worth toilet paper in a few short years. VOTE for
    FAIR money. VOTE Ron PAUL and local banks

  24. What I'm afraid is going to happen is that the establishment is going to figure out that they only way to stop Paul is to assassinate him. And then they will do it.

  25. "First they ignore you, then they redicule you, then they attack you, then you win." I guess we're in Phase 3. Trying to keep the truth from the Internet borg-mind seems like a losing battle to me. You can't even read an article about the Fed these days without comment section being filled with "End the Fed!"

  26. Anon@December 16, 2011 6:53 PM

    Here we go again, with the name calling.

    I don't fit in either category you suggested.

    As for you, branding anyone who criticizes Islam as a "Muslim hater" is quite frankly not very intelligent, not to mention being strictly opposed to Constitutional freedoms provided to us. Are you aware that the White House met this week with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (formerly the Organization of the Islamic Conference), an organization self-described as espousing imposition of global sharia law, to look into ways of "skirting" Constitutional freedoms to outlaw criticism of Islam in the U.S.? Excuse me, but why should Islam be any more above criticism than Christianity or Judaism or any other faith, for that matter? And how could it possibly be Constitutional for the White House and State Department to in any manner espouse a central precept of Islamic law --- that criticism of Islamic theology and/or Mohammed is CRIMINAL AND PUNISHABLE?

    Believing as I do that both of these things are in fact UNCONSTITUTIONAL --- and I would fight to the death to defend our Constitution --- I cannot condone the terminology you adopt.

    People who criticize Islam and Islamic law (sharia) as as American as the rest of us, and within their rights to do so. Or America is no longer the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

    These issues pale in comparison to Justin Raimondo's fabrications. But you broadened the discussion.

    I submit that you are the hater here. Can't stand anyone, not anyone, with ideas that differ from your own. Yes, well. That's not my idea of a good conservative, much less a good American.

  27. The part that really makes me laugh is how these so-called Constitutional conservatives support what the Constitution says about states' rights but at the same time argue that "Abraham Lincoln was the greatest President because he felt that holding the Confederate states as part of the union was more important than allowing them to secede." (Mark Levin, 12/16/2011)

    So I guess if any state follows the proscriptions of the Constitution to get out of an oppressive relationship with Washington DC, they should be attacked in treasonous fashion. That's what Levin was implying with his assessment of a president that deserved conviction for treason.

    In the end, it will be the statists that will get what they want with the Republican Party, which seems to have lost its respect for individual rights.