Paul: Gingrich a “chickenhawk”

posted at 10:00 am on January 4, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

At first, I wondered why Ron Paul would spend his morning after Iowa recycling Democratic demagoguery from two presidential cycles ago.  Then I remembered who was talking:

Ron Paul came out swinging Wednesday against Newt Gingrich for calling him a dangerous candidate, dubbing Gingrich a chickenhawk who avoided the Vietnam War.

“I don’t want to fight a war that’s unconstitutional and I’m the dangerous person? You know, when Newt Gingrich was called to service in the 1960s during the Vietnam era, guess what he thought about danger? He chickened out on that, he got deferments and didn’t even go,” Paul said on CNN later in the morning.

“So right now he sends these young kids over there to endure the danger, and the kids coming back, the young people coming back and the ones in the military right now, they overwhelmingly support my campaign. We get twice as much support from active military personnel than all the other candidates put together. So, Newt Gingrich has no business talking about danger because he is putting other people in danger. Some people call that kind of a program a chickenhawk and I think he falls into that category,” Paul said.

Like most of Paul’s arguments, this is an exercise is hyperventilation and contradiction.  First, Gingrich hasn’t sent any “young kids” anywhere; when Gingrich was last in office, it was before 9/11, and he was Speaker of the House, not President.  In fact, between the two of them, only Ron Paul has voted to send “young kids” to war, with his assenting vote on the 2001 AUMF regarding Afghanistan (a correct vote, by the way).  Second, c0ntrol of military policy properly belongs in the hands of elected civilian government, not the military itself.  This attack relies on a rather fascistic notion that only those who have been in uniform can make those decisions, which would invalidate the entire idea of free elections.  Gingrich didn’t break any laws in seeking and gaining those deferments, and it has little bearing on the wisdom of one’s national security policies, unless the presumption is that a flight surgeon from the 1960s has some special national-security insight that can’t be learned through study elsewhere.

However, that’s not the real message from Paul in this attack.  At a moment when he should be taking aim at one of the two front-runners, Paul is wasting time and effort getting personal and nasty with a man he beat by eight points and thousands of votes in yesterday’s caucuses.  That signals a sense of frustration, desperation, and a serious lack of focus from Paul.  Clearly the Paul campaign thought they would win in Iowa and make a case for national consideration; instead, they fell thousands of votes short of both Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney.  Paul could have easily shrugged off Gingrich as irrelevant, had he considered his finish last night a positive development.  Instead, with only a third-place showing and little hope of gaining any traction in the next couple of states, Paul will fade back to the fringe quickly enough.

Update: My friend David Freddoso reminds me that Gingrich voted for the AUMF for the first Gulf War in 1990, but that hardly negates the point above.  In terms of current conflicts, which have been the focus of Paul’s vehement campaigning, Gingrich didn’t cast a vote at all, and Paul voted for one of the two AUMFs in question.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 1:54 PM

21. They’ll act like they supported someone else, then give their I came to Ron Paul testimony.

26. They’ll come to a site critical of Ron Paul and act like they are an undecided type voter looking for facts. After looking at the facts, they’ll then act like the facts don’t exist, or they’ll down play the facts as unimportant, even though they scathe other candidates for the same things. I call this the sincere, undecided, seeker of information tactic.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 1:57 PM

28. They’ll claim people follow the other candidates because the media puts thoughts in their mind and controls them. Almost as if people have no ability to make a choice! Yet if the media had this much power, wouldn’t it follow that the Paulbot making the claim, wouldn’t have the ability to choose Paul in the first place? Long story short, Paulbots can’t accept that the majority of people outright reject Paul, so they have to blame it on the media and the like.

Way to break out of that rut, Truther. Knew you could transcend yourself.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:12 PM

but most likely an outright fraudulent one.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 12:52 PM

And your proof for this is???

Oh, that’s right… I forgot. Those talking out of their arse don’t need proof … they don’t even need citations. The shiite they talk is proof enough.

As I said, I can cite major news sources, repeatedly, that take Politifact’s assertions very seriously. Your ignorance of any contrary proof upsets you. We get it.

Perhaps we should call the “Wahhhhhhhhhmbulence”.

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:12 PM

The blimp didn’t work last time, either.

SD Tom on January 4, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Man, I miss the blimp. :(

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:13 PM

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Yeah, Herr Doktor with his four delegates (or any of them at this point, really) is…well…a fart in the wind, actually.

catmman on January 4, 2012 at 2:16 PM

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Gave you quite a bit of proof earlier in the thread, despite the onus being on the clown making the claim to support it.

You chose to ignore it.

Then you decided to add on some requirement that the proof be reported in news outlets. This speaks to some very strong confirmation bias on your part. Fess up…you want the claim to be true lest your world go into upheaval.

Gotta say though, you’re back in the playbook:

23. They’ll rant against the Huffington Post when there are anti-Paul articles, and they’ll call it a false source of information. But they’ll reference the Huffington Post if it backs up claims they love.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:16 PM

‘If she thinks we live in a dangerous world, she ought to think back when I was drafted in the 1962 with nuclear missiles in Cuba. And Kennedy calls Khrushchev and talks to them, and talks them out of this so we don’t have a nuclear exchange.

- Ron Paul, Sioux City Republican Presidential Debate

” Dr. Ron Paul served in the United States Air Force as a flight surgeon for several years (1963-1965). While in the air force, Paul reached the rank of Captain. Directly after his service in the air force, Paul worked again as a flight surgeon for the United States Air National Guard (1965-1968).

Hmmmm….the Cuban Missile Crisis was in 1962 and Paul Pot said during the debate in Iowa that he had been drafted in 1962, but his campaign website says that he served in the USAF between 1963 and 1965 then the Texas Air National Guard between 1965 and 1968.

I guess he was a draftee sitting on an imaginary ship in 1962 when Kennedy made that imaginary phone call to Khrushchev to talk him back from the precipice.

Damn, I hate when that happens!

Ron Paul: Unfit For Command

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2011/12/ron-paul-unfit-for-command.html

Resist We Much on January 4, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Look on the upside my fellow Hot Airians. When Ron Paul shuffles off into oblivion again soon, JohnGalt123 will lose its raison d’etre and we won’t have to put up with its insufferably pompous rants.

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Revolutions are about ideas…not candidates…and they spread like fire.

JohnGalt123 is awake. A lot of people are awake. Even this former neo-con is awake.

Do you think that once Paul is dead and gone that we are just going to go back to accepting the candidates that the major parties want us to vote for? Ummm…no. We’ll run ourselves. We already are.

There is a reason that the number of Independents is exploding.

And that doesn’t bode well for either of our political parties, particularly the one with the very forgetful elephant.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Look on the upside my fellow Hot Airians. When Ron Paul shuffles off into oblivion again soon, JohnGalt123 will lose its raison d’etre and we won’t have to put up with its insufferably pompous rants.

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Oh, please, please please!

JannyMae on January 4, 2012 at 2:17 PM

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:17 PM

21. They’ll act like they supported someone else, then give their I came to Ron Paul testimony.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:18 PM

They’ll rant against the Huffington Post when there are anti-Paul articles, and they’ll call it a false source of information. But they’ll reference the Huffington Post if it backs up claims they love.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Point to where I referenced HP, or please man up enough to admit that you cannot.

Not that I’ll be holding my breath…

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:19 PM

News: you are not a special person somehow gifted with insight into the secret workings of the world. Yes, there are powerful and influential people out there, and yes, some of them no doubt would like even more power and influence. That’s human nature and human nature is not in dispute here. But no, there is no cabal of evil Zionist international bankers using the US as a catspaw for Israel. No, Iran is not a persecuted victim of these same evil Zionists. No, the Council on Foreign Relations is not a front group for Bilderberger elites who want to extirpate 80% of humanity and make of themselves our technologically and genetically enhanced evil overlords.

troyriser_gopftw on January 4, 2012 at 2:02 PM

You’re the one casting bizarre theories into this conversation. I don’t know how credible the Zionist driven international banker theory is. Secondly, I think it’s a bit presumptuous to suggest that one group can dominate the entire world. To my knowledge there are competing factions much like the dominant merchant families which emerged during the Middle Ages.

What I do know without a doubt is that there is some type of shadow government behind ours, because it’s blatantly obvious the people are not in control. Doing some basic research confirms this. The American political system is largely the edifice of another organization, which if you believe Barry Goldwater and other notable politicians, is likely the CFR, the offshoot of the Royal Institute of International Affairs.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Point to where I referenced HP, or please man up enough to admit that you cannot.

Not that I’ll be holding my breath…

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Oh, brother. Dishonestly literal much?

Really, you’re not nearly smart enough to display the level of arrogance you are showing.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Troy, I am laughing my ass off in front of my keyboard watching the sands of your artificial reality erode beneath your feet. DENY DENY DENY. I could have a taped interview of Bill Clinton on his deathbed confessing that the entire political scene is one gigantic scam and you would still call me crazy. You’re a true believer down to the bitter end.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Follow my advice: stop thinking you’re Neo in The Matrix and start living in the world–the real world. Step away from your machine, go outside, breath in some fresh air, look around you and know what you are seeing, feeling, and touching is real. Hold onto it.

This is the Internets. None of it is real and very little of it matters.

troyriser_gopftw on January 4, 2012 at 2:20 PM

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:09 PM

John,

Do you still live in Missouri?

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Do you think that once Paul is dead and gone that we are just going to go back to accepting the candidates that the major parties want us to vote for?

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Of course you will. You’ll go back to voting for the liberal/Democrat.

Well, maybe not ‘you’ specifically’ but ‘You’ in the general sense of the average Paultard.

catmman on January 4, 2012 at 2:22 PM

He talks quite positively about the work he’s done with Dennis Kucinich and explains that we should re-investigate 9/11 with a BETTER method of investigating because the government covers up these types of situation.

blink on January 4, 2012 at 2:20 PM

You mean he wants to know who in the Justice Dept and FBI screwed the pooch WRT Atta taking flight training classes? Because I for one sure as hell would like to know that.

Of course, those responsible for acting as fluffers for the Bush Administration might disagree…

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Point to where I referenced HP, or please man up enough to admit that you cannot.

Not that I’ll be holding my breath…

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:19 PM

]

To people who are not in an alternate reality, this is obviously a “general” reference to sources, and you have not been “accused of referencing Huffington Post.”

But that would require you to open that closed mind of yours that takes everything literally…as long as it supports your POV.

That is the point. It’s a general point about the way Paulbots “argue.” Any source that they can use, that appears to support their POV, they will glom onto, as legitimate, and if something else appears from that source, that they don’t like, they will do the opposite. I’ve seen it many times, myself. We all know that if the leader of the Mossad had called Iran an existential threat to Israel, that you would not have been holding him up as an unimpeachable authority the way you were on the other thread. You have demonstrated those tendencies time and again here, for everyone to see.

JannyMae on January 4, 2012 at 2:25 PM

“blah blah blah I have degrees blah blah blah rectal speak blah blah blah knuckle draggers blah blah blah Jewish parts of America blah blah blah sonny boy blah blah blah have a link? blah blah blah Israel tax dollars blah blah blah don’t eat mushrooms blah blah blah”

JohnGalt23

Lord, it’s the same on every thread, and it’s so darn boring!

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Of course you will. You’ll go back to voting for the liberal/Democrat. Well, maybe not ‘you’ specifically’ but ‘You’ in the general sense of the average Paultard.

catmman on January 4, 2012 at 2:22 PM

I’m a Reagan Conservative.

And as the grassroots coordinator in the third largest county in my State, it has been our experience that Paul appeals to primarily disaffected Tea Party Republicans, many independents and some anti-war democrats across all age ranges.

You shouldn’t name-call. It blunts your arguments.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Follow my advice: stop thinking you’re Neo in The Matrix and start living in the world–the real world. Step away from your machine, go outside, breath in some fresh air, look around you and know what you are seeing, feeling, and touching is real. Hold onto it.

This is the Internets. None of it is real and very little of it matters.

troyriser_gopftw on January 4, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Distractions. Distractions. The real world = distractions. The slaves need the maintain the cycle of labor and in their offtime, keep their eyes on the shiny baubles. Such affairs are beneath us. I forgot my lowly place for a second. I’m a mundane who cannot even trace my ancestors back more than three generations!

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Lord, it’s the same on every thread, and it’s so darn boring!

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Groundhog Day. Every day is a new day for the Ronulans with all past refutations forgotten.

Kind of charming, really.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Every conspiracy theorist that I know claims that they are one of a small minority of people that are “awkake.”

I reality, however, they are all people that don’t understand how the real world works. They are naive.

blink on January 4, 2012 at 2:22 PM

To the concepts of Liberty and Constitutional governance.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Third grade level research may suggest this, but you’re naive to the way the world works. Chaos rules supreme – not some shadow government.

Money and exclusive access rules the world. It has throughout time. I could forcefully make you eat Alpo with enough money and access to the government.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM

And as the grassroots coordinator in the third largest county in my State, it has been our experience that Paul appeals to primarily disaffected Tea Party Republicans, many independents and some anti-war democrats across all age ranges. racist, anti-semites like himself.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:28 PM

FIFY

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:28 PM

No one believes you, and that Paul gets support in the primaries from anti-war Dems and so-called “independents” is a giant blinking hint that you’re just determined to ignore.

26. They’ll come to a site critical of Ron Paul and act like they are an undecided type voter looking for facts. After looking at the facts, they’ll then act like the facts don’t exist, or they’ll down play the facts as unimportant, even though they scathe other candidates for the same things. I call this the sincere, undecided, seeker of information tactic.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM

I reality, however, they are all people that don’t understand how the real world works. They are naive.

blink on January 4, 2012 at 2:22 PM

At the very least, Paul supporters can do arithmetic. We can read a balance sheet. And we can see that we are broke. We can see a DoD that consumes >40% of the discretionary budget, and know where the cuts have to come from.

We can see a foreign policy that enables Europeans to maintain their socialist state, and is designed to intrude on Israeli sovereignty at the expense of the US taxpayer at every turn. We can see a GOP establishment to craven to tell those who feed at the trough, both foreign and domestic, that the party is over.

And the knuckle-dragging, warmongering wing of this party seems incapable of even accepting the math.

Math is hard, I guess.

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM

To the concepts of Liberty and Constitutional governance.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM

4. They’ll accuse you of hating liberty, freedom and the constitution, simply because you disagree with Ron Paul’s interpretation of it.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:32 PM

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Who’s name calling?

catmman on January 4, 2012 at 2:33 PM

I’m a Reagan Conservative.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:28 PM

But you’re now crazy.

blink on January 4, 2012 at 2:30 PM

No. Just awake to some very good ideas that we have lost over the last century or so. Reagan started us off anew in the right direction, and then the Bushie’s killed it.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Who’s name calling?

catmman on January 4, 2012 at 2:33 PM

‘Paultard’ would qualify as name-calling, sir.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:35 PM

What makes you say that someone in the Justice Dept and FBI screwed the pooch WRT to Atta taking flight training classes? This should be good.

blink on January 4, 2012 at 2:29 PM

FBI Informant Says Agents Missed Chance to Stop 9/11 Ringleader Mohammed Atta

On the eve of the eight year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, an FBI informant who infiltrated alleged terrorist cells in the U.S. tells ABC News the FBI missed a chance to stop the al Qaeda plot because they focused more on undercover stings than on the man who would later become known as 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta.

But according to the Bush fluffers here, our government never does any wrong.

That’s why Bush expanded our government more than Lyndon Baines Johnson. Congratulations, “conservatives”.

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:36 PM

4. They’ll accuse you of hating liberty, freedom and the constitution, simply because you disagree with Ron Paul’s interpretation of it.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:32 PM

There is a distinction to be made between ‘hating’ and ‘forgotten’.

There is also a distinction to be made between the attitudes of a political party and its adherents.

You don’t sound like you have forgotten, John.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:38 PM

But according to the Bush fluffers here, our government never does any wrong.

That’s why Bush expanded our government more than Lyndon Baines Johnson. Congratulations, “conservatives”.

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:36 PM

I couldn’t agree more.

Keep fighting, JohnGalt. They’ll come around – kicking and screaming – but they’ll come around.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:40 PM

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:35 PM

No it isn’t. Its simply an amalgam. I could just as easily use Paulbot, Ronulan, Paulinista, etc.

So you’re all about freedom and liberty – except when you aren’t?

catmman on January 4, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Every conspiracy theorist that I know claims that they are one of a small minority of people that are “awake.”

blink on January 4, 2012 at 2:22 PM

More Matrix references from the Ronulans.

BohicaTwentyTwo on January 4, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Keep fighting, JohnGalt. They’ll come around – kicking and screaming – but they’ll come around.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:40 PM

No chance!

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 2:43 PM

here is a distinction to be made between ‘hating’ and ‘forgotten’.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Yet, I have seen dozens of different Paultards,™ accusing people who disagree with them about Ron Paul, of “hating liberty” and “hating the constitution.”

If you want to generalize, then you are opening yourself up to that tactic being used against you.

The numbered list that JohnTant posted of the way Paultards™ behave has a great deal of truth to it, in my experience, and I’ve been arguing with those people for many years now.

JannyMae on January 4, 2012 at 2:44 PM

And the knuckle-dragging, warmongering wing…

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM

See, there it is again! B-O-R-I-N-G!

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Please, those organizations don’t have nearly enough consensus to accomplish anything.

blink on January 4, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Really? Every presidential candidate in both parties since 1940, with the exception of Barry Goldwater has been CFR members or CFR approved. Reagan (forced to take Bush Sr. as VP by GOP heavyweight donor David Rockefeller and acquiesce his cabinet selections) and the later Bush 2 loaded up his cabinet with CFR members. Obama has done the same (Geithner, Summers, Sunstein, etc).

Even Hillary Clinton spoke glowingly of the influence and approval of the “Mothership”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfpgl6NqF0I

Now you don’t find that entire segment bizarre? Hillary lauding the fact that it’s convenient to be in such close proximity of the Council so she can be “told what we (the U.S. government) should be doing.” It sounds much more than a simple think tank. The mask slipped in this clip.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 2:47 PM

racist, anti-semites like himself

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM

In a face-to-face conversation, I doubt you would be making that keen observation.

No one believes you, and that Paul gets support in the primaries from anti-war Dems and so-called “independents” is a giant blinking hint that you’re just determined to ignore…After looking at the facts, they’ll then act like the facts don’t exist…”

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:31 PM

So you are saying that the figures I quoted you from the supporter database that we keep ‘don’t exist’? Okay. You can be satisfied with that if you would like. :-)

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:47 PM

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:40 PM

You’ve just lost all credibility, because I have never seen anyone — not ANYONE– here on HotAir make the claim “our government never does any wrong.”

Yet “Mr. Galt” is the first person to accuse people of pulling stuff out of their anal cavity? If you didn’t agree with “Mr. Galt,” then you would undoubtedly see him for the dishonest “debater” that he is.

JannyMae on January 4, 2012 at 2:48 PM

In a face-to-face conversation, I doubt you would be making that keen observation.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Try me! I’ve been asking Paul fans here for a while now what sort of mental and moral gyrations do you have to go through in order to throw your unreserved support behind a man who makes and supports bigoted and anti-semitic statements and who accepts the support of white supremacists. Haven’t got an answer yet.

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 2:51 PM

There is a distinction to be made between ‘hating’ and ‘forgotten’.

There is also a distinction to be made between the attitudes of a political party and its adherents.

You don’t sound like you have forgotten, John.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:38 PM

So because I don’t agree with the approved Ron Paul interpretation, I’ve “forgotten” what liberty and freedom are?

An interpretation, btw, that is flawed. For instance, Paul is fond of saying things like “Under the United States Constitution, there are only three federal crimes: piracy, treason, and counterfeiting. All other criminal matters are left to the individual states. Any federal legislation dealing with criminal matters not related to these three issues usurps state authority over criminal law and takes a step toward turning the states into mere administrative units of the federal government.”

So yeah, those statist losers who wrote and passed the Judiciary Act were all acting against the Constitution.

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 2:52 PM

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:40 PM

You’ve just lost all credibility, because I have never seen anyone — not ANYONE– here on HotAir make the claim “our government never does any wrong.”

Many here seem to live by that very attitude in regard to foreign policy…or at a minimum, live by it when their party is in power.

Kids, have a nice day. :-)

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Now you don’t find that entire segment bizarre? Hillary lauding the fact that it’s convenient to be in such close proximity of the Council so she can be “told what we (the U.S. government) should be doing.” It sounds much more than a simple think tank. The mask slipped in this clip.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Dick Cheney is a CFR member. You’re telling me Dick Cheney is an operative in the service of a one-world government conspiracy? That he lies awake at night scheming of ways to advance his group’s insidious agenda? That Hillary lies next to him while he does it?

Wow. I can’t erase that horrible image from my mind. Make it stop.

troyriser_gopftw on January 4, 2012 at 2:52 PM

In a face-to-face conversation, I doubt you would be making that keen observation.

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:47 PM

I met Herr Doktor in 2007. Shook his hand. Didn’t have a ‘conversation’ with him, but found him to be a small, disagreeable person.

I don’t doubt for a minute the guy is exactly as Trafalgar stated.

Anyway, I don’t need Trafalgar. I can read Herr Doktors own writing and hear his own voice.

All the evidence I need. My personal experience simply confirms it.

catmman on January 4, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Yes, people that read Hot Air think that the federal government is completely competent and great at what it does. That’s an awesome strawman!

blink on January 4, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Oh good! So pointing out that overthrowing Iran’s democratically elected government helped to cause the Iranian Revolution isn’t anti-American. Or pointing out that stationing troops in Saudi Arabia and bombing Iraq helped al-Qaeda recruit suicide bombers used on 9/11 isn’t blaming America.

Good to know. Thanks.

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 2:57 PM

So you are saying that the figures I quoted you from the supporter database that we keep ‘don’t exist’? Okay. You can be satisfied with that if you would like. :-)

bmowell on January 4, 2012 at 2:47 PM

You really don’t see a problem with a GOP candidate who gets primary support from Dems and independents?

Really?

Guess we’re now heading toward:

27. After looking at said facts about Paul, they’ll try turning it on its head and say that the facts actually put Ron Paul in a positive light. This is actually similar to the tactic above where they mimic said content but use it to advocate for Paul. They’ll go so far as to say said facts make Paul look good, even when the facts clearly show Paul stands for a environment that would allow for states to have slaves again. If a page had a real photo of Ron Paul raping a baby, the Paulbot would say, “Well that puts Paul in a positive light. It just shows he wants to keep the child protective services busy.”

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Still waiting for someone to post a Ron Paul accomplishment.

(On another thread Logboy mentioned Paul’s billions in pork for his own district. There’s also his 9/11 trutherism, racist back story, antisemitic back story, his distortions of conservatives’ policies, his ineffectiveness in congress. Let’s put those aside for the moment.)

What are Ron Paul’s accomplishments?

shinty on January 4, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Hey, it took a lot of wrangling and leadership to pass his one bill to sell the custom house in Galveston!

cptacek on January 4, 2012 at 3:03 PM

blink on January 4, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Careful blink, you’re going to get called a knuckle dragger, or worse still…sonny boy!

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Who has exclusive access? Many people have access AND money. And they don’t all have the same interest. Often this is because people with access and money want to make THEMSELVES more money. In other words, they are after their own self-interest. This is why consensus is rarely achievable and why CHAOS rules.

I think the nature of the system is eluding you. There is series of hierarchical gateways which constitute our society. For example, let’s say you’re an industrialist who invented a revolutionary microprocessor and you wanted to gain access to valuable markets in Western Europe? How would you proceed to get your product to those markets since you don’t have contacts in the EU? Would Intel and AMD object to you essentially putting them out of business with a vastly superior product?

This is the sordid element of the world you’re neglecting to confront. This is where the CFR and it’s invaluable connections comes in. You don’t necessarily have to be a power mad globalist to want membership in this exclusive club, but it ENHANCES your business to do so. And at the end of day, self-interest and profit is paramount. So you have this incredible hub of influence drawing together individuals & organizations of varying agendas into a force of significant power, simply because of the lucrative benefits it bestows.

BTW Look at the CFR’s jaw-dropping corporate list. Any company worth their salt is a member. Coincidence?
http://www.cfr.org/about/corporate/roster.html

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 3:07 PM

I already dared them to challenge me in math and financial analysis. They’ve been quiet about that ever since.

blink on January 4, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Sort of like I challenged them to explain the mental and moral gyrations they have to go through to support a self-professed anti-semitic bigot. Not a peep.

Trafalgar on January 4, 2012 at 3:13 PM

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 3:07 PM

30. Shawshank redemption words. They love to use difficult sounding words, that sound like they may have been used in the movie Shawshank Redemption (or The Matrix!!). Chances are if you see them using words that sound big, they saw them in a movie. They might say you’re a Luddite or myopic, or hey, you name it!

JohnTant on January 4, 2012 at 3:13 PM

Yes, troyriser_gopftw. Didn’t you know that all of Cheney’s and Hillary’s actions are all part of one concerted effort to advance the narrow agenda of the CFR? Didn’t you know that Cheney and Hillary are always fighting on the same side?

blink on January 4, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Is it conceivable Chelsea Clinton is, in reality, the love child of Dick Chaney and Hillary Clinton? Could Chelsea Clinton’s recent, mind-numbing media appearances be part of an even greater plot to deaden our collective senses–’softening us up’, so to speak, for our eventual passive, nonresisting integration into the New World Order?

My head hurts.

troyriser_gopftw on January 4, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Speaking the truth about Gingrich is still the truth even if it applies to every candidtae except Perry and Paul. As a former military pilot I( can tell you flight surgeons are vital to our national defense.
Can we make a wager that the the author never wore the uniform either? Either you did your duty or you didn’t. If you didn’t serve, you didn’t. If your reason was good enough for you then, you can live with it now. We don’t have to shut up. Why do you hate free speech? It was purchased with the blood of my American brothers and sisters.

borntoraisehogs on January 4, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Dick Cheney is a CFR member. You’re telling me Dick Cheney is an operative in the service of a one-world government conspiracy? That he lies awake at night scheming of ways to advance his group’s insidious agenda? That Hillary lies next to him while he does it?

Wow. I can’t erase that horrible image from my mind. Make it stop.

troyriser_gopftw on January 4, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I wouldn’t say that they see eye-to-eye on every issue but on the big issues they agree. To many high level CFR operatives, the concept of the nation-state as well as the pesky U.S. Constitution are outdated models which need to go the way of the dodo. Such antiquated ideas get in the way of maximizing profit, advancing worldwide goals, and indoctrinating our civilization to be more efficient and docile. We’re chattel. That’s what Cheney and Hillary Clinton believe us to be in their heart of hearts. We’re simply too dumb and savage to fulfill the ‘glorious’ destiny they have charted for mankind.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 3:20 PM

Hmmmm.

Served honorably in the US Armed Forces.
Successful OB/GYN practice, which delivered 4000 babies.
Author of at least one NYT #1 best-selling non-fiction book, with multiple appearances on the top ten list.
Elected to Congress twelve times. Serves as Chair of an important sub-Committeee.
Raised five successful children, one of whom now sits in the US Senate.
Frankly, I’d say, compared to much of the rest of the field… life well lived!!
JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 12:15 PM

forgot to add “sponsored ONE bill out of more than 600 that became law”

cptacek on January 4, 2012 at 3:22 PM

“The GOP had better not marginalize Ron Paul and his supporters after this, because Ron Paul and his supporters understand that a lot of Americans are war-weary and we are broke. And he has reached these constituencies who are very concernced about the solvency of the U.S. and he has proposed solutions with his austerity measures that he’d like to see implemented. So the GOP had better listen to what these Ron Paul supporters are saying. They better work with them.”

–Sarah Palin

Abby Adams on January 4, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Palin didn’t say “so we should vote for Paul.” She said “we should listen to his supporters.” Big divide, there.

cptacek on January 4, 2012 at 3:23 PM

blink on January 4, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Was the Iranian revolution any worse than the direction Iran was headed anyway? The country has had elections for decades.

It held elections, that we then helped to overthrow. Which the fanatics then used as a rallying point to overthrow the dictatorial Shah, and hold our embassy hostage.

You want to overthrow sovereign governments in the name of US interests? You can do it. Just don’t go crying when the natives fight back.

It IS blaming America unless you explain what should have been done instead. It seems as if you really do HATE the American way of life because you seem to support $8 per gallon gasoline which would ruin it. But maybe that’s what you want.

Okay. So in the end, it was all about oil.

And here I was at least willing to give the Bush Administration credit for being woefully idealistic about spreading democracy to the Middle East. Now you go and admit that it was simply craven protection of oil interests… just like the Left likes to accuse you of.

Once again, congratulations.

JohnGalt23 on January 4, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Speaking the truth about Gingrich is still the truth even if it applies to every candidtae except Perry and Paul. As a former military pilot I( can tell you flight surgeons are vital to our national defense. Can we make a wager that the the author never wore the uniform either? Either you did your duty or you didn’t. If you didn’t serve, you didn’t. If your reason was good enough for you then, you can live with it now. We don’t have to shut up. Why do you hate free speech? It was purchased with the blood of my American brothers and sisters.

borntoraisehogs on January 4, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Funny, you don’t read like a former military pilot. Former pilots are not typically dyslexic or quasi-stream-of-consciousness illiterates. Further, I don’t think anyone has questioned the value of flight surgeons to our national defense. And who here hates free speech? And that bit reading, ‘We don’t have to shut up’? lolwut? Who’s we?

troyriser_gopftw on January 4, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Membership in a local business association can help with your business, too. That doesn’t mean that the local business association is wielding power from behind the scenes.

Being a former boy scout can provide one with networking connections, too. That doesn’t mean that the boy scouts are wielding power.

Wake up, Dude.

blink on January 4, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Are you familiar with the Hein Hettinga episode?

http://www.keepmilkpriceslow.org/hein-hettinga-in-glenn-becks-book/

In 2003, a dairy farmer named Hein Hettinga had a craaaaaaaaazy idea: he wanted to undercut his competitors’ prices. Now, I know what you’re thinking, “Glenn, that’s not crazy…businesses lower their prices all the time!” Not in dairy farming they don’t. See, dairy farming is still governed by a system of regulations set up in the 1930s to protect the thousands of small farmers who ran small dairies and made their living by selling raw milk.

But look around — is that really still how the industry operates? Dairy farms now often have thousands of cows and major corporations (Dean Foods is the largest with $12.5 billion in annual revenues) are involved in every step of the process. Despite that, regulations that guarantee a set price to farmers who participate in federally operated regional pools remain on the books.

Those regulations meant trouble for our friend Mr. Hettinga. His competition hated that he had driven down prices by twenty cents a gallon at Costco (which, according to a Costco senior vice president, was creating a snowball effect as competitors were also forced to slash prices). So those competitors set out to shut Hettinga down.

With lobbyists being paid millions by Big Milk, politicians were more than happy to scratch each other’s backs and crack down on Hettinga’s tyrannous plan to save consumers money. Congress passed a bill forcing Hettinga to pay into a regional “pool” run by the federal government — the Senate voted via unanimous consent (which means there was no roll-call vote) and the House passed the bill by 13 votes. Representatives who voted against the measure found an email in their inbox the next morning expressing “disappointment on behalf of the members of the International Dairy Foods Association for your vote.” It added a thinly veiled threat: “We will be letting our member companies and their employees know of the outcome.”

Hettinga estimates that he has to pay up to $400,000 a month into an Arizona dairy-farming pool — a sum that, ironically, will go to help his competitors. In late 2006 he filed a lawsuit against the government, claiming that the new law was unconstitutional because it was a Bill of Attainder (see our Constitution chapter for more on that). The case was dismissed, but, in April 2009, a U.S. Court of Appeals reversed that decision, meaning that Hettinga still has a fighting chance.

“I had an awakening,” Hettinga, who was born in the Netherlands, told the Washington Post. “It’s not totally free enterprise in the United States.” Unfortunately, he’s right — and allowing our government to rush through more regulations now (that will likely still be on the books 70 years from now) will only make that lack of free enterprise across all industries even worse.

What’s the morale of the story? Mess with the profit potential of the big boys and they will sic Congress on you. This happens every day in America.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 3:31 PM

‘We don’t have to shut up’? lolwut? Who’s we?

troyriser_gopftw on January 4, 2012 at 3:27

Screamingfist is that you? You should use yoyr Freeper handle here too so people don’t waste their time reading your apologia.

borntoraisehogs on January 4, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Do you think we live too well in America? Do you WANT to see our quality of life knocked down several pegs?

blink on January 4, 2012 at 3:34 PM

You nor I have any control over this progression. That ship has sailed a long time ago. Do you really think that the U.S. with only five percent of the world’s population can continually utilize 25 percent of the world’s total resources ad infinitum, especially with our place as the world’s de facto reserve currency being set upon shaky ground? The party is almost over and if we had been vigilant this could have been all avoided.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Once again more Hotair from Ed regarding Paul. Paul was referencing Newt’s SUPPORT for the wars and a generally interventionist foreign policy.

Paul is not JUST in this election to win. He has to change people’s minds. And his way of doing it is to remind people of the costs, the constitution and how in 2000 Bush had his own foreign policy views.

Me? I’d probably do it a bit different. But that’s too bad, I’m not running. If I were running.. at this point I’d constantly be talking about the debt and jobs. But Paul is too intellectually honest and deals 100% straight with people. He wants people to know exactly where he stands so that they will learn or understand his concepts and concerns.

He’s not in this JUST TO BEAT OBAMA.

What good does it do us if we beat Obama with a progressive who won’t cut spending, but rather will increase government revenue? In fact I heard Gingrich say this to some Iowa newspaper editorial board – He did not want to raise taxes he wanted to raise government revenue. Paul would rather slash government spending than raise revenue because he does not want government bigger.

So if we elect a Gingrich to BEAT OBAMA – THEN WHAT?

Paul, unlike every other candidate is not running because of ego. He’s not running just to be a mirror of our own wants and desires. He’s running to change people’s opinions to what he thinks is the right way to go. And after reading and studying these issues – I think he’s right on these issues.

If we want to have a society that won’t collapse due to financial concerns and erode its liberties – we must change our warfare and welfare state. All our problems of debt stem from the welfare and warfare nature of our country and until those two things are restrained nobody will stop what’s coming.

fatlibertarianinokc on January 4, 2012 at 3:47 PM

Great. Tell us what “big issues” Cheney and Hillary agree.

- Gun control. Cheney wanted the assault weapons ban reinstated and was opposed to the decision rendered in Columbia v. Heller. Hillary is already salivating about this small arms treaty coming down the pike that Obama is looking into.

- Keynesian spending. Cheney famously quipped deficits don’t matter.

- the validity of the New Deal Programs. Cheney stated

“Let’s see what Rick Perry does as he develops through this process. I certainly don’t believe it’s a Ponzi scheme,” Cheney said of Social Security. “It’s a program that a great many people depend upon.”

He added, “I think it’s a very important program, we do in fact want to preserve it for future generations but we have a lot of work to do on Social Security and other entitlement programs like Medicare.”

- An aggressive foreign policy. They are virtually identical in their projection of American power throughout the world.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 3:51 PM

This brings to mind “Starship Troopers” where a similar, and similarly wrong headed, fascist label is thrown around carelessly.
…18-1 on January 4, 2012 at 10:33 AM

I’m back on pg1 so I don’t know if what I’m writing has been already covered. I’d be amazed.

I love that movie. I do think it was some kind of fascism. It was a one world society based on discipline, indoctrination, physical education…(WIkipedia definitions of fascism). I assumed it was 1 party rule.

The critique of starship troopers is that it promoted fascism. I don’t think that’s right. It just imagined that a one world fascist state might arise if we were in a multi planet war with space bugs.

BoxHead1 on January 4, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Screamingfist is that you? You should use yoyr Freeper handle here too so people don’t waste their time reading your apologia.

borntoraisehogs on January 4, 2012 at 3:35 PM

No, I’m not ‘Screamingfist’ although I did have a freeper account years ago. JimRob banhammered for calling some neo-confederate, Stormfront types very unkind things. No great loss.

I strongly doubt you’re a former military pilot. The requirements for the job are quite stringent. One of those requirements is intelligence, another is basic literacy.

troyriser_gopftw on January 4, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Pitchforker, tell me your plan to replace the Federal Reserve. Or are all Ron Paul supporters deliberately silent about this issue?

blink on January 4, 2012 at 3:48 PM

A basket of competing currencies to choose from or perhaps an electronic gold index. Nations must be forced to live within their means. Secondly, the purchasing power of the common citizen shall not be manipulated.

Pitchforker on January 4, 2012 at 3:54 PM

All our problems of debt stem from the welfare and warfare nature of our country and until those two things are restrained nobody will stop what’s coming.

fatlibertarianinokc on January 4, 2012 at 3:47 PM

Changing our the warfare nature of our country may cause bigger debt problems than we have now.

blink on January 4, 2012 at 3:50 PM

How so?

fatlibertarianinokc on January 4, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4