Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Tue Dec 27, 2011, 08:15 PM Dec 2011

Glenn Greenwald meet Ron Paul [View all]

Greenwald:

<...>

There are many reasons why the media is eager to disappear Ron Paul despite his being a viable candidate by every objective metric. Unlike the charismatic Perry and telegenic Bachmann, Paul bores the media with his earnest focus on substantive discussions. There’s also the notion that he’s too heterodox for the purist GOP primary base, though that was what was repeatedly said about McCain when his candidacy was declared dead.

But what makes the media most eager to disappear Paul is that he destroys the easy, conventional narrative — for slothful media figures and for Democratic loyalists alike. Aside from the truly disappeared former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson (more on him in a moment), Ron Paul is far and away the most anti-war, anti-Surveillance-State, anti-crony-capitalism, and anti-drug-war presidential candidate in either party. How can the conventional narrative of extremist/nationalistic/corporatist/racist/warmongering GOP v. the progressive/peaceful/anti-corporate/poor-and-minority-defending Democratic Party be reconciled with the fact that a candidate with those positions just virtually tied for first place among GOP base voters in Iowa? Not easily, and Paul is thus disappeared from existence. That the similarly anti-war, pro-civil-liberties, anti-drug-war Gary Johnson is not even allowed in media debates — despite being a twice-elected popular governor — highlights the same dynamic.

http://www.salon.com/2011/08/16/elections_9/



Flashback: One person voted against the original Afghanistan AUMF

Barbara Lee
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2001/roll342.xml

Ron Paul voted yes.

In 2007, the House voted to 218 to 212 to Set Date for Iraq Pullout

NYT: House, 218 to 212, Votes to Set Date for Iraq Pullout
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/24/washington/24cong.html

Ron Paul voted no
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll186.xml

In 2007, Ron Paul introduced the Marque and Reprisal Act of 2007

Marque and Reprisal Act of 2007 - Authorizes and requests the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal to commission privately armed and equipped persons and entities to seize outside of the United States the person and property of Osama bin Laden, of any al Qaeda co-conspirator, and any conspirator with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda who are responsible for the air piratical aggressions against the United States on September 11, 2001, and for any planned similar acts or acts of war against the United States in the future.

States that no letter of marque and reprisal shall be issued without the posting of a security bond in such amount as the President determines sufficient to ensure the letter's execution.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-110hr3216ih/pdf/BILLS-110hr3216ih.pdf


Of course when he introduced it in 2001, it was "for the capture, alive or dead, of Osama bin Laden or any other al Qaeda conspirator"

September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001

<...>

(b) The President of the United States is authorized to place a money bounty, drawn in his discretion from the $40,000,000,000 appropriated on September 14, 2001, in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorists Attacks on the United States or from private sources, for the capture, alive or dead, of Osama bin Laden or any other al Qaeda conspirator responsible for the act of air piracy upon the United States on September 11, 2001, under the authority of any letter of marque or reprisal issued under this Act.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-107hr3076ih/pdf/BILLS-107hr3076ih.pdf


Ex-Aide: Ron Paul Foreign Policy is 'Sheer Lunacy'

Ron Paul is not having the best holiday season. First the media discovered racist, anti-Semitic newsletters that went out under Paul’s name in the 1970s, ‘80s and ‘90s. Then the New York Times did a story about the support Paul draws from white supremacists and anti-Semites.

Now there’s former Paul staffer Eric Dondero purporting to describe the ins and outs of Paul’s positions on everything from Israel (it shouldn’t exist) to Hitler (we shouldn’t have fought him) to 9/11 (U.S. authorities may have known about the attacks) to Afghanistan (we shouldn’t have invaded). He calls Paul’s foreign policy “sheer lunacy.”

Or, as the conservative Weekly Standard summarized in hits headline: “Ex-Aide Says Ron Paul Is a 9/11 Truther & Isolationist Who Thinks U.S. Shouldn't Have Fought Hitler.”

In his 2,100-word piece, posted at RightwingNews.com, Dondero says he held several campaign and Capitol Hill posts with Paul from 1987 to 2003. At his own website, LibertarianRepublican.net, he said he was revealing much of the information for the first time. “Much of what I have to say will not please the liberal media hacks. Though, the Ron Paul diehards will find much objectionable, as well,” Dondero wrote.

http://news.yahoo.com/ex-aide-ron-paul-foreign-policy-sheer-lunacy-144730256.html


106 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Glenn Greenwald meet Ron Paul [View all] ProSense Dec 2011 OP
"anti-crony-capitalism"! HOLY SHIT! joshcryer Dec 2011 #1
Insane, isn't it? n/t ProSense Dec 2011 #2
+1000 nt abelenkpe Dec 2011 #3
He is for cutthroat capitalism not crony capitalism Bjorn Against Dec 2011 #56
No, crony capitalism means capitalism where cronyism furthers business. joshcryer Dec 2011 #63
No, that is capitalism but not necessarily crony capitalism Bjorn Against Dec 2011 #68
Nah, I know he thinks ideologically that Laissez-faire doesn't mean crony-capitalism... joshcryer Dec 2011 #73
While your first paragraph may be true, but Ron Paul does not see it that way Bjorn Against Dec 2011 #75
I don't think wall street CEOs "see it that way" either. joshcryer Dec 2011 #76
And if Paul doesn't get the nomination, he'll be gunning for Gary Johnson frazzled Dec 2011 #4
Because he's right on foreign policy. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #87
Would you have supported Pat Buchanan for president because of his foreign policy? frazzled Dec 2011 #90
I support the republicans throwing him Buchanan as a candidate, yeah. AtheistCrusader Dec 2011 #91
Kicked and recommended. TheWraith Dec 2011 #5
If you read the article . . . markpkessinger Dec 2011 #81
He opposes Obama's drone policy arely staircase Dec 2011 #6
Not to mention he thinks gay people deliberately spread AIDS to straight people. nt TheWraith Dec 2011 #7
Meaning he shouldn't even be a doctor arely staircase Dec 2011 #12
Krugman said it: ProSense Dec 2011 #8
Ron Paul is the poster boy for crony-capitalism. Anyone who says otherwise... joshcryer Dec 2011 #15
Funny how many liberals either don't know arely staircase Dec 2011 #16
Many liberals overlook his stance on voting/civil rights, which again proves that Melissa Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #21
Don't forget his anti-choice, anti-woman views Merlot Dec 2011 #30
And nowhere in the modern world has Austrian economics actually worked. No way, no how. n/t Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #20
Where does Greenwald say that? Puregonzo1188 Dec 2011 #13
In the article posted above arely staircase Dec 2011 #19
That's quite a leap of logic. Puregonzo1188 Dec 2011 #38
perhaps a bit hyperbolic, but not a great leap of logic. nt arely staircase Dec 2011 #89
Please see post #26 because Greenwald is right. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #28
So ProSense Dec 2011 #31
Paul is not anti-corporatist. joshcryer Dec 2011 #44
Duh. But you won't convince them by calling them idiots. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #49
I don't sway anyone to vote any way I want. joshcryer Dec 2011 #65
Given his stance on Osama, he's only against targeted killing... joshcryer Dec 2011 #14
And not once has Greenwald said that any of his anti-democratic record is irrelevant. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #29
Do ProSense Dec 2011 #34
I'm looking for the stat on young voters in your link and I don't see them. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #42
I ProSense Dec 2011 #43
So far, I am only seeing it in San Francisco and Oakland. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #51
Yup Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #103
Thanks ProSense. Scurrilous Dec 2011 #9
But, he thinks Manning is a patriot!!! He MUST be good... msanthrope Dec 2011 #10
What is the point of cherry picking a random paragraph from a four month old article on how the Puregonzo1188 Dec 2011 #11
Here ProSense Dec 2011 #17
He's not "holding up" anyone. He is making a clear factual observation of Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #32
You ProSense Dec 2011 #37
Yes. It is a fact that Romney is RUNNING as the ultimate job creator. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #45
So ProSense Dec 2011 #47
Dude, Bush negotiated SOFA. The terms of which required Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #53
Well, ProSense Dec 2011 #55
If you believe ANY REPUBLICAN would have pulled out of Iraq, you're fucking nuts. TheWraith Dec 2011 #61
That's precisely the position Boehner took on things. Robb Dec 2011 #84
Wow, out of the entire article Ron Paul is mentioned in a single sentence. Puregonzo1188 Dec 2011 #35
Well ProSense Dec 2011 #40
Thanks for clarifying your position. Puregonzo1188 Dec 2011 #54
Well, ProSense Dec 2011 #58
You've read my posts. And your OP never mentions Ron Paul is a lunatic racist. Puregonzo1188 Dec 2011 #69
So ProSense Dec 2011 #71
No that's not my issue and you know damn well it isn't. Puregonzo1188 Dec 2011 #72
So Greenwald is a Paulite? MineralMan Dec 2011 #18
Nope. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #33
No. I recommend you read the article in it's entirety. Puregonzo1188 Dec 2011 #52
Greenwald jumpeth ye sharke jpak Dec 2011 #22
You should send this to Greenwald. WilliamPitt Dec 2011 #23
Sigh DonCoquixote Dec 2011 #24
More on Ron Paul: ProSense Dec 2011 #25
Apparently, unlike Greenwald, you do not understand the word Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #26
Oh ProSense Dec 2011 #27
He's never claimed that Paul is anti-war and he has not bought into Paul's bullshit. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #36
Stop reading the article and engaging with what it actually says. Puregonzo1188 Dec 2011 #39
Hmmmm? ProSense Dec 2011 #41
Yes. Because that is exactly what Ron Paul is doing. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #46
Ron Paul ProSense Dec 2011 #48
As are all the other Republican candidates. Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #57
So ProSense Dec 2011 #62
Yes I am saying that Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #70
+1. Robb Dec 2011 #59
And don't forget ProSense Dec 2011 #66
I think some who support Paul seem to want to forget those inconvenient little truths. Jennicut Dec 2011 #96
This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Dec 2011 #83
Leave Greenwald alone!! Robb Dec 2011 #86
This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Dec 2011 #88
Careful, you might hurt my internet feelings. Robb Dec 2011 #97
k & r girl gone mad Dec 2011 #50
Good article by Greenwald quinnox Dec 2011 #60
I agree, that is a good article by Greenwald and I would highly recommend for anyone to click Uncle Joe Dec 2011 #92
The Greenwald fanclub will ignore this, amusingly, Robb Dec 2011 #64
It's kind of delicious, in a sadistic sort of way... joshcryer Dec 2011 #67
+1...nt SidDithers Dec 2011 #77
I heartily endorse this post for the usage of the term "batshittery" MilesColtrane Dec 2011 #78
Ignore what? Hissyspit Dec 2011 #95
I don't trust Ron Paul any farther than I can spit. Makes no difference to me what Zorra Dec 2011 #74
Greewald's been dipping into the holiday liquor a bit too much lately n/t MrScorpio Dec 2011 #79
K&R thanks Prosense SunsetDreams Dec 2011 #80
K&R Whisp Dec 2011 #82
exactly, SunsetDreams Dec 2011 #85
Ron Paul is a repugnant racist. Faygo Kid Dec 2011 #93
Well done, excellent OP Spazito Dec 2011 #94
It's a good thing Greenwald never endorsed Ron Paul. n/t Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #98
one of these days glenn will stop huffing glue. until then folks... dionysus Jan 2012 #99
Yup Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #101
Kick. Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #100
A favor ProSense Jan 2012 #102
Greenwald needs to remember that progressive does not equal libertarianism. ncteechur Jan 2012 #104
Greenwald just isn't much of a Democrat. MjolnirTime Jan 2012 #105
I really like Paul's anti-militairsm, anti-war-on-drugs, anti-surveillance-state stuff. Vattel Jan 2012 #106
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Glenn Greenwald meet Ron ...