Politics The Marginalization of Ron Paul (or How Media Plays Favorites)

Yeah one of the few things I agree with Romney, Newt and Bachmann on is Paul isn't going to be the GOP's guy. He makes a bunch of "it's either this crazy thing or that crazy thing' comments like there's no other options in between and people buy it.

 

Well one things for certain- he believe racists have the right to use his signature on their newsletters... or were they his newsletters? Never got a real answer to that.

 

Paul thinks that the Invisible Hand of the Free Market would correct for businesses that choose to be racist.

Sadly, he seems to forget that this isn't a theoretical concept. We saw what happened when businesses were allowed to discriminate based on race: absolutely nothing. Whites only lunch counters weren't being driven out of business because people were disgusted by their practices. People didn't ride different buses because bus drivers made minorities sit in the back.

Paul may think that the Civil Rights Act stamped on "personal liberty", but sometimes the stupid people need to be told to not be stupid

 

Flavor of the week. Though Rick's a lot closer to being a GOP then Paul. Only about 35% of what Paul states falls in-line with what most GOP'ers want/like.

The GOP is doing everything they can to not nominate Romney. I hope they succeed he's got the best chance in the general of beating Obama.

 

This cycle's been completely different. I still say FLAVOR of the week... or is it Flavour of the weak?

 

No, this time around someone will pick Bachmann as their running mate. Who knows maybe it'll be Paul.

 

Or maybe one of those guys will pick Rue Paul to show they are drag queen friendly.

 

No Paul's too much a maverick to run with.. wait maverick was last year chant... how'd that work out again?
--- merged: Jan 3, 2012 12:53 AM ---

Rue paul... snicker

 

he just got the endorsement from cia bin laden unit chief.

 

I read that. The guy who said "the current state of the U.S.-Israel relationship undermined U.S. national security" just endorsed Paul. Should help with the Jewish vote and put an end to those racists rumors. Maybe David Duke will come out and endorse him next?

 

not sending foreign aid to israel or not wanting to bomb iran is racist now. that's the political world we live in i guess.

maybe he doesn't want the jewish vote if it means getting involved in another 10 year war in the middle east.

 

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/31/progressives_and_the_ron_paul_fallacies/singleton/

I think this blog post outlines some of the reasons one can be appreciative of Paul's presence in the nominee selection process without endorsing the man as a whole. There are a whole slew of issues where Paul is the better progressive than Obama and, in fact, where Obama and those whacky GOP nominees are indistinguishable.

In this regard, I think that the following quote, on choosing Obama over Paul, is particularly telling.

As for a racist past, I don't know if Paul is a racist. I'm going to assume that at the very least he was and that at the very least, he's currently at least as racist as 99% of the people reading this, in that he doesn't spend enough time considering the role that race continues to play in life in America. I find some of these accusations of racism suspect, though, from a political establishment that seemingly had no problem with Robert Byrd, a former klan member and democratic congressperson. The media's attitude seems to be "Hey, look, it's Ron Paul! Let's pretend we care about race issues!"

And on the issue of Israel, you don't have to be a racist to recognize that many of our politicians are more afraid of offending AIPAC - a group representing the interests of a sovereign nation - than they are any of us. If Israel decides to go to war with Iran, this fealty will ensure that so do we, which is exactly what we don't need right now as a country.

 

that pretty much sums it up. i don't understand the level of hate he gets from the right and the left. its far and above any other relevant candidate that i can remember in the past 15 or so years ive followed politics.

 

I would characterize Paul as the most progressive AND most regressive which is why many people just cant relate to him.

While one might support him on a few issues (anti-war, pro legalization), he scares the crap out of those same people on many other issues...which along with superficial issues like his demeanor and age, past statements and associations, his conspiracy theories, etc. makes him unelectable.

Funny how you see his supporters hyping his anti-war, pro-legalization positions but generally, from my experience (here and elsewhere), unwilling or unable to defend his anti-civil rights, anti-regulation, anti-trade agreements, extreme anti-govt, extreme foreign policy isolationism, etc.

He is a nut with a few good ideas (just my personal opinion).

more:
His Iowa campaign director recently touted an endorsement from a minister who thinks gays should be executed.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/ro...t-of-pastor-who-advocates-killing-gay-people/

While he is not responsible for positions of supporters, his campaign certainty should not be bragging about this endorsement....but it might play well with Iowa social conservatives.