Quotes of the day
posted at 11:49 pm on November 12, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
“Ron Paul will take money from Nazis. But he won’t take telephone calls from Jews.”
*
“And the next time he’s tempted to label Rudy Giuliani a ‘fascist,’ perhaps he should pause and consider who actual, self-described fascists are supporting for president.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Ron Paul is a crank and always will be. Im glad he is running as he is draining money from crazies who would otherwise be buying “Loose change”
Let them waste their money on Paul
William Amos on November 12, 2007 at 11:53 PM
Haha, the most interesting part of this, is the fact that there’s a site called “Jewcy”… I see a line of slutty clothes for Jewish chicks where emblazoned across the butt it doesn’t say “Juicy”, but “Jewcy”. And maybe instead of “Hot”, they might say “Schvitzin’!” Alright, I’m all out… just cracked up @ “Jewcy”.
RightWinged on November 13, 2007 at 12:02 AM
The guy has horse blinders on just like the Dems, they only see one straight ahead path, their own. Nothing else matters, truth or reality be damned.
abinitioadinfinitum on November 13, 2007 at 12:05 AM
Did you notice the section called-
Jewciest comments
“I find myself a little turned-off by a guy who dosen’t have a bit more man-hair than most women prefer.-”
LOL
abinitioadinfinitum on November 13, 2007 at 12:13 AM
So basically Ron Paul is a Nazi supporter because he doesnt want to send
millionsbillions in foreign aid to Israel? Yea, that makes sence.But apparently Ron Paul has a “Jewish” problem. What the hell is a “jewish” problem? It has to pertain to something quintessentially jewish I am guessing.
Can anyone answer why we should be giving so much foreign aid, in almost EXCLUSIVELY weaponry, to a country which certainly no longer needs it, as they are lightyears ahead of any of their enemies?? If you answer that, please explain to me why my tax dollars are better spent arming Israel than remaining in my pocket or spent arming myself?
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 12:17 AM
If you keep this up, I’ll have to rework my Roasted Paul-Nuts graphic and send it over.
steveegg on November 13, 2007 at 12:17 AM
HaHa…Jewcy…
RightWinged on November 13,2007 at 12:02AM.
RightWinged:Maybe the Isreal Military stripper chicks
were wearing those clothes you mentioned,as they were
subdoing the Palestinians at the checkpoint.Haha.
canopfor on November 13, 2007 at 12:18 AM
It only comes once a year so we celebrate, party hats noise makers…
Kini on November 13, 2007 at 12:19 AM
I read the whole article. It was not very convincing. Much of the time the author seemed to be arguing against himself and his own final conclusion. If he can’t convince himself, how is he going to convince me?
What I saw at Mike Huckabee’s web site is much more interesting:
Has Huckabee had a Tom Tancredo microchip implanted in his head?
Among other things:
The Governor opposes and will not tolerate employers who hire illegals. They must be punished with fines and penalties so large that they will see it is not worth the risk.
This from the guy who basically said that anyone who did not roll out the red carpet for illegals was un-American and un-Christian.
Has someone hijacked his web site?
MB4 on November 13, 2007 at 12:19 AM
Uh, because it’s surrounded by countries which hate it, with Iran and others wanting to wipe it off the map?
Yes, interesting that numerous prominent neo-Nazis, including Don Black have supported him. The White Supremacist website Storm Front encouraged people to donate.
On August 17, 2007, the US signed an agreement to give $30 billion in military aid to Israel over the next decade. The water project bill contained $10 billion alone. Let’s eradicate the pork, before criticizing aid to an ally under constant threat.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 12:25 AM
Fixed.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 12:26 AM
The New York Sun Blog published “Ron Paul’s Race Problem” on May 16th. One of the subsequent comments, provided by “Ronny” on May 22, said:
I believe that’s an accurate accounting of Paul’s dislike of the IRS, the Federal Reserve and American aid to Israel. In his warped mind they are all a product of an imagined vast worldwide Jewish political conspiracy.
T J Green on November 13, 2007 at 12:27 AM
“Jewish problem”,and “Exclusively weaponry”
Muyoso no November 13,2007 at 12:17AM.
Muyoso:”Jewish problem” to me smacks of the “solution”
of WW2.Ain’t going any further.
“Exclusive weaponry”: I hope Isreal is armed to the teeth,
of the weapons from the United States military still hot
coming of the production line.
Isreal is what’s stopping Iran,Syria,Beckaa Valley
from over-running the Middle East.
I couldn’t care less what Isreal does,I support them 100%.
canopfor on November 13, 2007 at 12:32 AM
If we waited until all the pork was eradicated before criticizing something, anything, anything at all, we would never be able to criticize anything, ever, nothing at all. We might as well shut down the whole internet.
MB4 on November 13, 2007 at 12:33 AM
My point being that as long as Congress tries to push through $1 million hippie museums and bridges to nowhere, let’s not worry about sending Israel aid to protect itself.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 12:35 AM
Israel should be able to take care of itself just fine.
From more than five years ago:
U.S. Air Force: Israel has 400 nukes, building naval force
MB4 on November 13, 2007 at 12:38 AM
Good. So as long as it can nuke any country that threatens it, it should be fine.
You don’t support aid to Israel? Next time Hezbullah launches rockets into Israel, it can just wipe out Lebanon, right?
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 12:41 AM
Congress will only stop doing that if, well, well, well, they will never stop doing that!
It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native criminal class except Congress.
- Mark Twain
MB4 on November 13, 2007 at 12:42 AM
In emergencies, as we have done a number of times before.
MB4 on November 13, 2007 at 12:44 AM
Ditto.
Ryan Gandy on November 13, 2007 at 12:45 AM
As in waiting until the last minute, or coming to their rescue when sh*t hits the fan?
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 12:46 AM
Isn’t anybody interested in Huckabee’s apparent 180 degree conversion on illegals?
MB4 on November 13, 2007 at 12:46 AM
They let us know before that.
MB4 on November 13, 2007 at 12:49 AM
Yes, because there are always warnings in advance for an attack on Israel.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 12:56 AM
Now good night.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 12:57 AM
The reason they remain so far ahead, in spite of being surrounded by vastely oil-rich countries whose sole religion commands them to kill non-subservient Jews, is that those countries have learned that as long as America backs Israel that Israel isn’t going away. As soon as America’s support for Israel wavers, the Arab countries will sense weakness and start to prepare their attack.
Israel deserves our support because she is a central part of the overall American strategy for protecting our own freedom: too spread freedom throughout the world.
pedestrian on November 13, 2007 at 12:58 AM
The only reason that there is still a Lebanon or a Syria or
palestinian territory is because of our military aid to Israel. Imagine that if Israel were cut off and was attacked what their response would be. No GPS, no precision
guided weapons, limited satellite imagery, since their enemies set-up on civilian areas the amount of carnage would be biblical in proportion, just for the modicum of self-defense. sorry for the rant, but the simplistic argument that cutting off aid would solve the problems is
cognitive dissonance defined.
vegasbookie on November 13, 2007 at 1:00 AM
@ amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 12:25 AM
I know its a great story and all, surrounded by enemies, needs our help, blah blah blah, but in reality, Israel doesnt need our help anymore. And how can anyone justify giving aid to Israel, a first world country, when there is SO many better things the money could be spent on? WHen there are millions dying in Africa, when there are countries under cruel dictatorships, Israel just doesnt seem important at all. When you look at the threat of violence over there, the REAL amount of deaths in Israel from foreign enemies, it is embarrassing. Over a 6 and a half year period, there were 1113 deaths of Israelis alone. Compare that to say the number of Africans who die of a SINGLE disease per day: 6000. So over the time span where just over 1100 Israelis were killed, just over 13.8 MILLION Africans died of a SINGLE disease. Context is what this is about, NO way in hell should Israel receive another dime of aid.
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:03 AM
@pedestrian on November 13, 2007 at 12:58 AM
Again, a seemingly sound argument, that when put up to both history and facts, falls down like a card house. Israel has been attacked by these “Oil rich” countries quite a few times over the years, and several times before there was any aid from the US. They repelled those attacks fine. Since then, we have given them the nuclear bomb, fighter jets, very sophisticated radar systems, all infantry weaponry we could possibly give them, etc. At what point is enough enough? Why should I be foreced to pay for another country to defend itself, when the VERY ACT of doing so puts my country at direct risk of being attacked? DO you know what kind of lunacy that sounds like?
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:08 AM
@ amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 12:35 AM
Seriously I dont want to be insulting, but do you know how . . . to put it nicely, simple minded that sounds? Because congress wastes money on project A, we should let them waste 10,000 times (which is the ratio we are talking about here) that amount of money on something else.
THATS how we should get this country back on track, make excuses for EVERYTHING.
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:11 AM
Wow. I wish I lived in your world. Israel is a nation of 7.18 million people, surrounded by enemies who only don’t attack because America backs it. Don’t fool yourself.
USAID is currently providing support to 47 countries in Africa, including 23 bilateral missions. For FY2008, USAID has requested:
$220 million for its “Governing Justly and Democratically” program, $4.1 billion for its “Investing in People” program, $519.1 million for its “Economic Growth” program, and $376.3 million for its “Humanitarian Assistance” program.
Three countries alone are receiving over $16 million from the US to fight child labor. The US has increased aid by over $1.2 billion over the 2005-2010 era for malaria prevention. That’s increased by, not total.
Last year Bush secretly tripled the amount of aid to Africa. Africa now receives over $4 billion in direct humanitarian aid per year, up from $1.4 billion in 2001.
Then we have Aids support, medical groups going in to help, and the sanctions the US has placed against Sudan.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:14 AM
If we let the Arabs exterminate the Jews, there would be a lot more that 1100 Israelis killed.
The African deaths are indeed a tragedy, but it is in large part caused by corruption, greed, and in the case of malaria, do-gooder-ism in the form of banning DDT. If they granted their people freedom and provided law enforcement support for aid workers, the problems there could be solved quickly.
vegasbookie makes an interesting point that our contributions to the Israeli military allow them to minimize casualties while defending themselves.
pedestrian on November 13, 2007 at 1:15 AM
That’s where we differ. I don’t see supporting an ally with military aid as waste. You apparently do.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:16 AM
I think there is some danger in exaggerating the Ron Paul nut case.
Making him more popular with sexy conspiracies is one possibility but also there’s danger of tainting some of his platform that he has in common with other Republican candidates to the point they can’t go after those issues, just as examples, immigration or fiscal reform, without being associated with the Ron Paul we’ve declared to be completely crazy.
Speakup on November 13, 2007 at 1:20 AM
@ amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:14 AM
Everything you quoted does not add up to NEAR what Israel gets in aid. Nice try though.
@ pedestrian
I agree the banning of DDT was a HUGE blunder.
All I am saying is that if we are paying Israel to just sit there and defend itself, that is stupid. If we are sending them BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars, they should at least be carrying out the dirty-work of this country. I understand that for some reason anytime removing aid from Israel gets brought up, everyone always points to the holocaust and that it could happen again, as if America should carry blame for the holocaust and its tragedies. I just dont understand why America owes all of this to Israel? Why dont any other countries contribute to Israel like we do? Why are we giving away money that can be spent MUCH better here at home to Israel? No one came up with an answer for this at all, only the simpleminded “but Israel is surrounded by enemies blah blah blah.” As if Israel wouldnt be able to defend itself at all, and as if we wouldnt be there fighting to defend them ANYWAY, even after giving them all of the foreign aid, so the argument of foreign invasion is just silly.
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:22 AM
@ amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:16 AM
An ally against what? What are we allied against or for? Israel is a friendly nation, that is it. We have lots of friendly nations here in the US, should we give aid to all of them? Still havent answered why Israel NEEDS the aid, and the ole “they will get invaded” argument is simply silly. The floor is yours.
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:25 AM
It’s in the Bible. If we don’t support Israel we’re screwed. Go with the winner.
Mojave Mark on November 13, 2007 at 1:27 AM
“Nice try”? What, did you catch me in a mistake? Israel is a nation of 7.18 million people that rogue nations surrounding it would like to wipe off the map. Perhaps the nation that hates it the most is likely pursuing nuclear weapons.
As Pedestrian says:
Unfortunately, Israel doesn’t have that choice.
And, again, America’s support stops more attacks on Israel.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:28 AM
You’re joking, right?
We do to many, if not most. Thing is, they all aren’t surrounded by people looking to wipe them off the map.
Why is it “silly”? Because it’s not the answer you’re looking for?
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:29 AM
@ Mojave Mark on November 13, 2007 at 1:27 AM
You love the us vs them mentality dont you. I understand the feeling of wanting to support the good side to fight the evil side etc, but its getting a little annoying. We have given Israel to be VERY conservative a HUNDRED BILLION dollars in aid since WWII. That is a HUNDRED BILLION dollars in aid, more than to any other country.
On another note, you bring up the fact OVER AND OVER again that they are surrounded by “rogue” countries which want to kill them etc. Do you seriously think that if we cut off aid today, that Israel would fall? And why do you think that if we cut off aid, we would be UNABLE to assist them if attacked? And why do you assume that Israel would let Iran get ahold of nuclear weapons? And even if they did, what leads you to believe that Israel wouldnt respond in kind with nuclear weapons if attacked?
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:35 AM
May I ask whom you support, muyoso?
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:36 AM
@amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:29 AM
Its silly because its a SIMPLISTIC overview of the situation. Its like you thihk this is a video game with two sides and only two possible outcomes.
Have you ever sat back and wondered what it must look like from “the other side”?? Where the richest and most powerful nation in the world is throwing cash at your enemy, and not just cash, but weapons. Do you see the parallel to the entire Cuban missile crisis? A foreign super power on the other side of the world was handing weaponry to a much smaller country right in our backyard for no other purpose than to kill Americans. What was our reaction to that?
I used to agree with your point of view about Israel, about how it was important we protect them to maintain stability in the middleast. Then I came to the realization that our very act of supporting them is probably the leading cause of instability in the middle east. We have no reason to even be wasting out time in the middle east other that for their oil.
As for your contention that none of our other allies are surrounded by countries that want their destruction . . . uh, Taiwan - China, South Korea - North Korea, Tibet - China, India - Pakistan.
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:43 AM
@ amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:36 AM
I am a suporter of Ron Paul and Fred Thompson. I agree with Ron Paul on more issues I believe, especially on reducing government and trying to focus ourselves more on the USA then policing the rest of the world. Thompson I see as a much more suitable candidate for President, has a lot of character, love his speaking style. Dont agree with him on a few issues, but agree on a majority. I guess Romney is ok, havent looked at him too much. Guiliani is an embarrasment to the republican party and I hope he gets caught in a bathroom tapping his foot somewhere. How about yourself?
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:46 AM
The Cuban Missile crisis? Israel’s surrounded by countries that want to wipe it off the map. It’s attacked by terror groups, and receives threats from Iran - a nation pursuing nukes, defying Security Council Resolutions, and responsible for deaths of U.S. troops in Iraq.
The Middle-East’s been in turmoil for over 1,000 years. Iran and other nations hate Israel and want it gone because it exists.
Oh, here we go…
Interesting. I didn’t say “none of our other allies”. I said “they all aren’t surrounded”. As in not all of them are surrounded.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 1:48 AM
Someone posted a link a few weeks ago to a documentary that showed that Israel’s destruction of Iraq’s nuclear factory was made suddenly possible when we cancelled delivery of then-state-of-the-art planes to Iran and instead sent them to Israel. That raid was essential in us disarming Saddam in both the previous and current wars with Iraq. The recent raid on the Syrian reactor will likely prove equally beneficial to us at some point in the future. If they do a similar raid on Iran, it will only happen in one of two ways: immense amounts of assistance from the US or through the use of nukes.
pedestrian on November 13, 2007 at 1:49 AM
OH believe me, I have no love for any Arab country and I wish we could just erase that whole region off the map as its an embarassment to humanity, but to write off Israel as not causing any of the turmoil is a little bit nonsensical.
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:51 AM
@ pedestrian on November 13, 2007 at 1:49 AM
I am FINE with assurances and sharing of intelligence, I just dont understand why we have to hand them weapons and cash.
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:53 AM
Mucho.
MB4 on November 13, 2007 at 1:53 AM
In each of those cases, the aggressor has the bulk of their population impoverished, so the amount of aid needed is much smaller. If you looked at how much we spent defending Western Europe it would dwarf what we spend on Israel.
pedestrian on November 13, 2007 at 1:58 AM
@ pedestrian on November 13, 2007 at 1:58 AM
That we defending Western Europe from a better trained, better equiped, more technologically advanced enemy. Of course we spent more. Israel isnt even threatened by a set army, at least not yet, more like a rag tag group of guys who fire some missiles aimlessly towards “da jews”. I think the situations were a little different.
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 2:03 AM
Yes. I know what you mean.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 2:08 AM
Indeed.
amerpundit on November 13, 2007 at 2:11 AM
There is a major flaw in the Ron Paul logic of: “Israel can defend itself, it doesn’t need out aid”
they are a very small country, If their enemies decide to attack after we no longer back them, all it will take is one Nuke Hit and the country and its military and arsenal will be gone, it’ll be a situation in which whoever hits first, wins.
jp on November 13, 2007 at 4:13 AM
for a real doosey, check out this out from the Cult Leader:
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst090207.htm
jp on November 13, 2007 at 4:25 AM
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 1:25 AM
do a little research and see for yourself the benefits that come from Israel. its the only free-market country in that region. the science and technology that comes from that country is amazing. necessity the mother of invention. we support them and reap benefits from it.
palefaced on November 13, 2007 at 6:42 AM
Ron Paul doesn’t support giving money to Israel and he is somehow an anti-Semite? That is kind of like when liberals call anyone who doesn’t support reparations for slavery a racist. There is only a shade of difference between many of the usual suspects on this blog and the usual suspects over at HuffPo and DKos. You are as intolerant of differing opinions as they are. Using the “But I am right” defense is the same one they use. That is what it boils down to - you can give reason after reason why we SHOULD support Israel and others can give reason after reason why we SHOULD NOT support Israel, but in the end - it is a difference of opinion with both sides believing the evidence that they gave makes them more ‘right.’
King of the Britons on November 13, 2007 at 7:26 AM
And the first person to come to Ron Paul’s defense is… MB4.
What a shocka!
Buy Danish on November 13, 2007 at 7:59 AM
We support Israel because they are are a free country NOT because they are Jews! The Paul supporters seem to be suggesting that we support them because they are Jews.
I find it hypocritical to embrace Fred Thompson, (the terrorist supporting traitor who also lobbied for dictators and other various scumbags. He funnels campaign cash to his son and authored McCain/Feingold) and in the same comment reject supporting a country that is a ally.
csdeven on November 13, 2007 at 8:02 AM
muyoso’s world….
Gary Cooper leaves town before the train arrives and lives happily ever after.
Limerick on November 13, 2007 at 8:26 AM
Actually, the Paul haters are suggesting that Paul doesn’t support giving aide to Israel because they are Jews. That is the implication behind this entire thread.
King of the Britons on November 13, 2007 at 8:33 AM
I’ve always hated the argument that Israel “causes” the instability in the ME. The Muslims of the ME are an instable people and would cause horror and tragedy all by themselves, left to their own devices. (As they manage to prove on a daily basis over the course of centuries.)
Israel contains 1/10 of 1% of the land mass of the ME - a minuscule scrubby portion (out of which they have miraculously produced vast wealth!). Yet, the Muslims begrudge them even that. The Palestinian problem is entirely self-made - they already have their own damn country. It’s called Jordan. Unfortunately, the Palestinians have for so long insisted upon acting like rabid beasts that their own people build walls to keep them out. The only people on the face of the planet that are forced to put up with them are the Israelis.
One nuclear strike on Israel would devastate the nation. They cannot allow it to happen. They have been attacked repeatedly by much larger and better equipped forces than their own - they’ve had to become better armed and better trained - a worthy goal they’ve accomplished. I fail to see how anyone can downplay the threat to Israel. They live in a constant state of terrorism, with national leaders from around the world swearing to bring about their annihilation. They have to take every precaution and every pre-emption at their disposal.
I don’t begrudge the aid we send to Israel. I would rather cut-off funding from other so-called useless back-stabbing allies before cutting one red cent to Israel. So, start bitchin’ about all aid we send to decrepit and useless Europe, the insane Arab nations, and the corrupt Latin nations, then we’ll talk about Israel later.
Redhead Infidel on November 13, 2007 at 9:06 AM
So, if I read you (muyoso) correctly, you have no problem with foreign aid in general. “WHen (sic) there are millions dying in Africa, when there are countries under cruel dictatorships,… ” If you are suggesting foreign aid for these things, you therefore seem to have no problem with foreign aid to our enemies or to other countries and entities who are indifferent or marginally hostile to us. Your only problem seems to be giving foreign aid to Israel. Is that correct, or do you object to all foreign aid and were just using poor Africans and AIDS as a rhetorical foil and don’t really want to help anyone?
Oh, and what about the “cruel dictator” line? Surely you aren’t suggesting military action to depose such thugs? Or maybe we can ask them nicely to just step down? Buy them off with foreign aid? Let’s put that aside for a moment….
If you are correct and we do give all this money to Israel against our (the United States’) interests, why do we do it? Why does this continue? How can the population, voters, and politicians not see this? What is the root of the blindness to one’s own welfare? I am curious as to your answers…
Mark E. on November 13, 2007 at 9:07 AM
The point is that Paul accepts money and support from anti-Semites. Reputable candidates would eschew those kinds of help.
csdeven on November 13, 2007 at 9:10 AM
“Compared to those folks in Congress, I’m just an amateur. And the thing about my jokes is that they don’t hurt anybody. You can take ‘em or leave ‘em . . . . But with Congress, every time they make a joke, it’s a law. And every time they make a law, it’s a joke.”
– Will Rogers 1935
Now stop quoting Twain, he sucks.
srhoades on November 13, 2007 at 9:11 AM
Redhead, I couldn’t agree with your last paragraph more.
Frankly, I’m so much less concerned about the aid that we give to Israel than the aid we give to other countries. Especially considering that most of them spend their time opposing the US at every turn (voting against the US in the UN, etc..) It’s not just now, from this Administration. These countries have been doing it for a very long time. In the 90’s when India was the 5th largest recipient of US foreign aid, India voted against the US 80% of the time in the UN. That’s just one example.
Now, my personal opinion of the UN is that it’s useless, but it stil makes me wonder why we continue to send our tax dollars overseas sometimes when I see the global sentiment about our country is so bad. And yet we give and give and give.
serpentineshel on November 13, 2007 at 9:17 AM
I’m willing to give Paul the benefit of the doubt on support for Israel. He does not support foreign aid in general, so his views on Israeli aid are simply an extension of his philosophy. I disagree with him, but he’s consistent.
Paul does have a problem, though. One that is nicely encapsulated in this paragraph from the story:
If you’re already on record calling the Israel lobby “the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort,” then it’s a really bad idea to take money from Nazis.
Slublog on November 13, 2007 at 9:30 AM
Ron Paul would accept money from the devil himself, if he hasn’t already. That alone should tell you what kind of amoral individual Ron Paul is. That his supporters make excuses for this just shows you that his supporters are even mess ethical and amoral than he himself is.
In this respect Ron Paul and his followers remind me of Adolph Hitler. In the late 20’s and early 30’s Hitler gathered his support from the dredges of German society. Those which no ethical moral German politician would be caught dead being supported by.
For Hitler it was Germany’s racists, communists, anarchists and socialists. Strange how those are the same groups that support Ron Paul in American politics today. Those whose political and ideological views have disenfranchised them from the political process because their political and ideological views are repugnant to moral and ethical people.
I cant help but wonder how long before America has it’s own Ron Paul inspired Kristallnacht.
doriangrey on November 13, 2007 at 9:48 AM
What on earth is he doing in the Republican party? He is completely out of touch with Republicans. His support comes from independents or extreme left types.
At least have the honesty of admitting you’re not a right winger. Take example from Lieberman.
rEVILution…
AlexB on November 13, 2007 at 9:48 AM
Good job Ron Paul. You do a great job of smoking out the insecure paranoid sheep. You won’t win, and that is a good thing, but you do provoke the real blinder boneheads out to expose their tunnel vision.
Keep it up| It makes for fun reading on Hot Air.
saiga on November 13, 2007 at 9:56 AM
I thought Hitler was anti-communist–at least anti-Marxist. Also, by the time he rose to power Hitler had authored Mein Kampf and had articulated clearly anti-Jewish positions. It seems a stretch to compare the rise of the Nazi party to RP’s isolationist policies or fringe campaign contributors.
RP should give the money back. His campaign is going to have these types of problems as it tries to transition from insurgency to mainstream. Ultimately, he won’t be able to get the GOP nom. My guess is that it will be hard for him to stop the charge in February or to resist the siren song of media attention through November 08.
dedalus on November 13, 2007 at 10:45 AM
Completely agree. There are some bad characters flocking to RP. However, RP’s position on aid to Israel is consistent with his fundamental conviction that the federal government should be smaller and take care of Americans before foreigners.
dedalus on November 13, 2007 at 10:53 AM
@ Mark E. on November 13, 2007 at 9:07 AM
I am against all foreign aid in general. If we must give aid to foreign nations though, I see no reason why Israel should be at the top of our list. That is what the African example is all about. There are MUCH more deserving candidates who could be MUCH better helped with our money than Israel The reason we support Israel so fervently is that there is a MASSIVE jewish lobby in Washington DC who gives MASSIVE amounts of money to candidates who suuport Israel. Having worked for the Majority Leader of the House for years, I saw what affect a visit to the Congressman had on his voting record.
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 11:32 AM
Is that like the “exclusive” barbie doll at Wal-Mart?
You mean like the Aryan nations? Nation of Islam?
jdkchem on November 13, 2007 at 12:01 PM
And Buy Danish is tap, tap, taping again. What a shock!
MB4 on November 13, 2007 at 12:45 PM
Huh? Are you serious? It makes more sense to give money to corrupt dictatorships who have starved their own people, than to give money to the only freedom-loving democracy in the Middle East?
Money sent to Israel is money well-spent, as they support our goals and act as a resident deterrent. Besides, are you aware that almost all of the billions we send is required to be spent on American-built weapons? So if nothing else, it helps American high-tech employment.
Most of Africa, on the other hand, is actually harmed by our aid. We send money and it gets siphoned off by the dictator or local politicians/thugs. We send medicine and that allows the dictator to spend nothing on medicine and more on bribes or his Swiss retirement account. I have tremendous sympathy for the starving masses, but sending money is stupid — good intentions count for zilch, only results count.
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 1:24 PM
@ Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 1:24 PM
Seriously splashman, is it a requirement to smash your head into a wall thirty times before posting on this website?
I am sure the only way of sending Aid to Africa is through handing dictators money, yep, gotta close my mind to any other options. You’ve convinced me. Screw the starving Africans, its their fault with their corrupt governments anyway.
Facts:
Israel is the 16th wealthiest country in the world
US aid to ISrael is 1/3 of all foreign aid from the US
Israel comprises .001 percent of the worlds population
The US has given $139 billion in aid to Israel
What does this translate to? This means that the U.S. government has given more federal aid to the average Israeli citizen in a given year than it has given to the average American citizen. THAT is ridiculous.
Money sent to Israel is NOT well spent. What are these goals of ours that they represent? And are you seriously saying they act as a deterrent? If anything, their very presence is a catalyst for violence in the middle east, which of course if not their fault, but be honest for christ sake.
And your contention about the weapons being American made, you dont see a problem with us sending BILLIONS of dollars worth anually in weaponry to a single Middle Eastern country? You dont see how that might make some of the other countries surrounding Israel a little uneasy? And you dont see how stopping the flow of weapons might calm things down a bit?
muyoso on November 13, 2007 at 2:46 PM
Thanks for the numbers. I didn’t know they were that high. Your other points are well-made.
dedalus on November 13, 2007 at 3:11 PM